Temperatu-res may have dropped dramatically, but London is warming up for a year of celebrations, as only the British know how. Despite the gloom of recession and the icy winds, guns have been booming from Edinburgh Castle, Hyde Park and the Tower of London to mark the start of the Queen’s diamond jubilee celebrations. These will culminate in a long June weekend packed with public events to commemorate her accession.

All of this pomp and show will be followed, perhaps rather tamely, by the Olympics. But given the loyalty to this Queen, and her popularity (and despite the Republicans creating a fuss), I would safely say that her diamond jubilee celebrations will arouse much more emotion, and far less criticism than the Olympics.
The 85-year-old who is now the longest-serving living monarch ever, came to the throne on February 6, 1952, but her coronation took place on June 2, 1953. Some time ago she celebrated 60 years of her marriage to Prince Philip — and so the 60 years of her reign are complete now, both within and without her palace. Another Queen, interestingly, who was able to reach her diamond jubilee was Victoria, in 1897.
Queen Elizabeth’s longevity might have her immediate heir, Prince Charles, chafing at the bit, as he awaits his turn to be king, but many feel that after her it should go straight to the current prince of hearts, William. Prince Charles might feel slighted, but the Queen has been a public relations success, throughout her life, unlike most of her family. Yet she has borne with their foibles and gaffes with a spectacular stiff upper lip, making neither her displeasure nor her irritation known, not even when films and TV shows have been made about events in her life.
Thus far, there has been little opposition to her diamond jubilee blitz, which might not be as earthshaking as the royal wedding. Yet, it promises to bring out the best of the British. In a country which is suffering an economic pounding, waving the British flag and sailing flotillas down the Thames, revives pleasant memories of the empire.
So the next few months promise many exhibitions, concerts and parties, but the one I am looking forward to is the river pageant which, according to the advance publicity, will be staged on the Thames and will be the most magnificent “since the reign of Charles II”. There is already a crazy scramble to get the tickets — so an advance warning for anyone who wants to attend the multiple festivals, it might already be too late to buy the tickets.

The UK can be peculiarly schizophrenic. On the one hand, it loves its tradition and culture, remaining in love with an 85-year-old monarch and, on the other, it has scant respect for older women per se, who often complain that they are becoming “invisible”.
The obsession with remaining young is almost pathological, and few women would confess they are not affected by it. One apparent impact has been that older female presenters are barely seen on TV these days. This actually led to a landmark age discrimination case led by former TV presenter Miriam O’Reilly. Now a public acknowledgement that perhaps television needs to do more to remove its image of being sexist and ageist comes from none other than Mark Thompson, the director-general of the BBC. As the chairman of the industry body that looks into fairness and representation “of every kind”, Mr Thompson had a survey conducted which stated the obvious: after a certain age, most women get a “radio” face and are quickly replaced by younger women who are more attractive, but possibly “less qualified”. A start has been made by bringing back former anchors — such as Annika Rice (53) — to mainstream programming. But as someone remarked, TV only represents what is happening in the country. If men wield power and influence, can you expect anything else?
And hang on, I haven’t seen an older Asian woman on the BBC or elsewhere either! Come on, girls, time to make a case about that?

They say that revenge is a dish best served cold, but in the present case it might have become too hot to handle. When the former wife of a straying minister allegedly wanted to wreck her husband’s new-found happiness by spilling the beans on a driving offence he had committed, she might not have imagined the ramifications.
The marital dispute has now snowballed into a governmental embarrassment, but it also shows the fairness of the British law where a Cabinet minister has had to resign over a speeding offence. Yes, unbelievable but true! After eight months of investigation by the Essex police (that’s how seriously they take speeding offences!), the case now goes to the trial court.
The charges are that in 2003, the minister for energy, Chris Huhne (who has just quit), had asked his then wife, a respected economist, Vicky Pryce, to accept his penalty points as he did not want his driving licence revoked. She apparently did so happily, but when her husband walked out on her last year, she decided to speak about it. Possibly, she felt it was time her husband had a speed limit on his personal life as well!
Now that “perversion of justice” has come back to haunt them both, not only has Mr Huhne, who claims innocence, lost his job, but Ms Pryce might also have to suffer punishment, as someone who was party to an illegal act.
This could happen only in Britain, a country where Cabinet ministers resign not over pornography but over a speeding ticket. And no doubt, as the personal turns political it will provide many more headlines for the tabloids.

The writer can be contacted at kishwardesai@yahoo.com