Iain Norman Macleod and #Krazy

[John Upham]

I'm disappointed that #Krazy has not today broken the record of 30 days set by Iain Norman Macleod for the shortest term as Chancellor of the Exchequer on July 20th 1970. An opportunity missed.

[Roger Lancaster]

Unfortunate phrasing, John. The record wasn't "set" by Iain Macleod - he had a heart attack and died while in office.

[John Upham]

Unfortunate phrasing, John. The record wasn't "set" by Iain Macleod - he had a heart attack and died while in office.

Would "created" be better than "set"? Are you saying INM was not responsible (albeit not deliberately) for the record? I am grateful, as always, for your advice.

I agree that he (or anyone else) didn't organise Norris and Ross McWhirter (and Roy Castle) to validate the record.

[Roger Lancaster]

"Are you saying INM was not responsible (albeit not deliberately) for the record?" Yes, I think sensitivity indicates a distinction between someone setting a record through Iongevity, as in the case of QE2, and someone setting a record through dying quickIy, eg John Kennedy as a short-Iived POTUS

[Kevin Thurlow]

And Ian Mcleod was I believe well-respected, even by his opponents.

[John Townsend]

He was also a top bridge player, the author of Bridge is an Easy Game. I'm not aware that he played any chess, though.

[David Gilbert]

Iain McLeod was a professional bridge player (and by all accounts a bit of a playboy) who helped the Acol bidding system catch on. He was Minister of Health when Professor Sir Richard Doll presented his evidence of a causal link between smoking and lung cancer. During the press conference Iain McLeod chain smoked throughout! As Jeffrey Bernard might have said, “he was a character!”.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Science sometimes moves slowly - an early suggestion that smoking was bad for you was published in 1602. https://www.cancercouncil.com.au/news/a ... f-smoking/

Scientific American did publish a brief piece in about 1880 I think (I read it somewhat later) saying the same thing.

Ironically, the new Chancellor (or maybe Hancellor...) believes in homoeopathy (somewhat alarming when he was Health Secretary...) I hope he doesn't have weird financial ideas as well. Yes, well.

[David Gilbert]

As Jeffrey Bernard might have said, “he was a character!”.

I just found this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgRv3a0-1Gg from the Old Vic - probably the best thing I've ever seem at the theatre.

[IM Jack Rudd]

"Are you saying INM was not responsible (albeit not deliberately) for the record?" Yes, I think sensitivity indicates a distinction between someone setting a record through Iongevity, as in the case of QE2, and someone setting a record through dying quickIy, eg John Kennedy as a short-Iived POTUS

John Kennedy wasn't a record, mind you - that honour goes to William Henry Harrison, who died a mere 31 days into his term. (James Garfield, Zachary Taylor, Warren Harding and Millard Fillmore had also had shorter terms than Kennedy's, and Gerald Ford would go on to do so.)

[NickFaulks]

John Kennedy wasn't a record, mind you

I don't think that was really Roger's point.

[Joey Stewart]

I'm pretty sure he has broken the record of being the shortest lived chancellor this century, although it seems somewhat hypercritical of Truss to throw him under the bus like that when only a week ago she was in full support of the budget.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"I just found this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgRv3a0-1Gg from the Old Vic - probably the best thing I've ever seem at the theatre."

When I worked at Waterloo, we did occasionally venture to the pub opposite the Old Vic, and were treated on one occasion to the sight of Peter O'Toole enjoying lunch. Shall we say, he seemed well suited to that part...

[Roger Lancaster]

John Kennedy wasn't a record, mind you

I don't think that was really Roger's point.

It wasn't really my point but, but for any centenarians who can remember Harding's death in 1923, the shortest US presidency in living memory.

[Joey Stewart]

John Kennedy wasn't a record, mind you

I don't think that was really Roger's point.

It wasn't really my point but, but for any centenarians who can remember Harding's death in 1923, the shortest US presidency in living memory.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... 141%20days.

Looking at this Wikipedia list there are perhaps less then 20 people alive in the entire world right now who would remember, they would realistically have to be in the 110s to actually have any recollection of that event since for most of them it would have required reading international news which I don't expect was easy to get your hands on in 1923