The big joke about all this is you have to edit his speeches, not to make him look bad, but because they’re filled with barely coherent, dementia addled nonsense.

I sincerely hope that BBC lawyers will refer him to “Arkell v. Pressdram” response.

And this is why there was no point in resigning in advance. It gets you nothing.

It’s taken him six years to even realise his speech was edited? And even then only because it was on the news?