Return to Africa.

This coming May I will be returning to Nairobi with a team of people to do open heart surgery on children there. This will be my third such trip having been before in 2007 and 2008.

My role will be to help set up an improvised Paediatric Intensive Care Unit on ward 4b in the Kenyatta National Hospital and to care for children following their heart operation.

The picture above was of first impressions taken by me in 2007 when we very first arrived on the unit we were to use. The electric bar fire was an improvised attempt at an incubator! The hurricane lamp was the emergency lighting. The ventilators were pretty good though. The monitors were clunky old Hewlett Packard monitors which I recall using twenty years ago - they're outdated but effective. Lab facilities were pretty minimal so we had to rely on our own clinical judgment a lot. It was a real privilege to be part of this whole enterprise organised by MEAK (Medical & Educational Aid to Kenya).

During our time there we did over twenty operations. My proudest moment came last year when I improvised a means of giving peritoneal dialysis to one of our patients with my own homemade brew of dialysis fluid! He was very ill and went into acute renal failure. The advantage of taking a dinosaur like me along is that I remember how we used to have to do things here 15-20 years ago.

We fly out on 15th May and return on 24th. If I can I'll try and post a couple of blogs describing our adventure there - but the photos might have to wait until I'm back in the UK!

Jars of Clay! Just Jars of Clay!

Last night at St Helen's we had our 'Annual Parochial Church Meeting' at which William Taylor and a number of others laid out the vision for the church over the next ten years. The venue is pretty sizeable but even so it was packed out!

The numbers on the electoral roll at St Helen's are currently 895 people - although I am sure that many more actually attend our range of services. This makes us one of the largest churches in London despite having lost a significant number of people in recent years to our various church plants around the city. We have a thriving Mandarin speaking congregation and on-going work among other communities within London. St Helen's continues to support work in the French speaking world and Sub-Saharan Africa. But William was very clear to emphasise that the continuing growth of the ministry here is not down to our abilities. It is the power of God's Word alone - it has to be - because we are just jars of clay! It is in our very weakness that God's power can shine through.

By God's grace our vision is to see 20 gospel hearted churches planted by 2020. We also want to develop a French speaking congregation from among the many such people based in London.

There is also a plan to beef up our 'Digital' ministry. The whole internet social networking thing is a vast new area we need to grow into. Our web page gives the impression that St Helen's is all about programmes rather than people and we hope to redress that perception by drawing on the individual stories of the people within our church family. So watch this space!

After the public business was wound up there was a brief meeting of the PCC - the Parochial Church Council - of which I am now formally a member. It is a real privilege to be part of this 20-30 strong group especially with such a fantastic strategy in place. It is comforting to be reminded that it is in our weakness that God's power will be demonstrated - I am very conscious of my own inadequacy, but I'm sure I'm not alone. Jars of Clay! Just Jars of Clay!

Latest on the Gym front!

Today I had a good run; 3.45km in 20 min! I also did some 'core' muscle exercises to help my back.

I would like to get to a point where I can run 10 kilometres comfortably again.

Cherry Blossom Snow.

Our lovely cherry blossom tree has slowly shed its petals.

Floating pink blossom gently fluttering down like snow on a warm spring breeze.

Daniel for Adults!

Today William Taylor continued his new series of talks on the book of Daniel. Last week we looked at chapter one and this Sunday we covered chapter two. What I find enormously encouraging is how faithful God is to his promises. Great empires come and go, nations rise and fall but God remains constant and those who put their trust in him are secure.

The great statue which depicted a whole sequence of mighty empires is ultimately overwhelmed by a rock not cut by human hand and the remnants of these empires are blown away like so much chaff in the breeze.
Where is babylon now? In a room belonging to the British Museum! In my own life time an empire like the Soviet Union - which seemed such a monolithic power at the time - vanished overnight. The recent financial crisis is a warning to us that God doesn't owe the west anything either. The veneer of civilisation we naively think is so secure is anything but. All such confidence is vanity.

Thank God that he stays true to his promises though. Are you going to build on the rock or on something else?

C.S. Lewis "The Most Reluctant Convert".

After paying an extended visit to "the dark side" with my recent readings about Stalin's Russia it has been a real JOY to read something which refreshes my soul.

David C Downing's biographical account of CS Lewis's journey to faith has been a real encouragement, not just because it's a great story but because there are nuggets of spiritual insight that resonate with any believer.

I was particularly struck by Lewis's struggle with self analysis - something most sensitive people are troubled by. Lewis's initial loss of faith arose when he realised that he was not being "sincere". Later (p132) he came to the realisation that one cannot "enjoy" and "contemplate" at the same time. You cannot be both unselfconscious and selfconscious simultaneously. To contemplate one's sincerity at prayer (for example) is not to be praying. Consequently such self analysis becomes self defeating. The key seems to be to enjoy the moment and not over-think your own personal significance within it. Lewis calls this 'fussy self attentiveness'. That is an absolutely brilliant insight! I say this as someone often guilty of the same pointless introspection!

I've always been impressed by Lewis's attack on "chronological snobbery"; the conceit that one's own era is superior for no better reason than it comes later. This is the arrogance that fed the Modernist totalitarianism that Lewis confronted in the mid 20th century. Perhaps it will take 50 years for our present day 'chronological snobs' to be unmasked and people then will stand aghast at how our generation was taken in by our own ideologues! The lesson of history is clear; when we abolish God we find we also abolish Man!

Prior to his conversion Lewis had written a couple of obscure books of poetry. His faith in Christ fired up his creativity. He became a prolific writer of the most diverse range of subjects; apologetics, children's stories, science fiction etc. People will still be reading Lewis when the Pullmans of this age are long forgotten. Of course these others will have a momentary notoriety but the things that last touch us with truths that transcend the momentary and remind us of our deeper humanity.

This is the lovely Helen working on her water colours. Today is our 14th Wedding Anniversary.

The caption on the 'Matt' cartoon about today's Budget speech......

"How is it possible to be both alarmed AND bored at the same time?!"

RCN Consultation on

Assisted Suicide.

The Royal College of Nursing in the UK is presently carrying out a consultation among it members to see what the consensus of professional opinion is about 'assisted suicide'. So if you are a member and have an opinion on this topic you have until 22 May 2009 to send your views into the RCN.

One of the worrying aspects of this so-called "debate" is how the pro-euthanasia lobby frequently misrepresent the issues in the media and not infrequently caricature people who object to euthanasia as motivated by ill-will or sheer ignorance.

For example; the case is often put forward that it is accepted 'custom & practice' for patients to die in pain and that they are subjected to unwanted medical interventions. These commonly accepted fallacies are repeated so often and so authoritatively that the innocent public are unduly influenced by them. It is no surprise that public opinion is moving towards euthanasia but the fact is they are faced with the phoney "false choice" argument ie 'do you want your loved ones to die in agony, yes or no?' Who in their right minds would say anything but 'no!' given that proposition?

I have worked in children's and adult's critical care for more years than I care to remember and I can honestly say that I do not recognise the caricature of our profession.

First up, it is NOT acceptable practice for patients to be in pain - that is not acceptable and there is no excuse for it. If the disease process is such that pain control foreshortens life then so be it - that is not euthanasia or assisted suicide - that is effective pain management. This is exactly the same legal situation as someone dying as a consequence of any other medical treatment aimed at controlling the disease process.

Secondly, everyone has a right to refuse medical treatment. All interventions require informed consent. No one has any intervention "forced" on them - indeed to do so is a criminal offence! (There are some legal exceptions of course - when the mental capacity of the patient may be in doubt - in which case there are legal procedures to be followed). In my experience it is more often the case that family members insist on medical interventions when the professional consensus is that further treatment is futile.

Thirdly, the withdrawal of treatment is not euthanasia or assisted suicide. The purpose of medical treatment is to enable the patient to make a recovery. If the consensus of opinion is that no such recovery is possible then active treatment may be withdrawn and the disease process allowed to take its course.

None of the above are the cause of any ethical or professional dilemma! Okay? Clearly the truth does not suit the pro-euthanasia lobby's arguments which is why they resort to caricature.

When the pro-euthanasia lobby stress the 'pain' people are suffering we must of course exclude physical pain because that can and should be adequately treated. I suspect the 'pain' they refer to is existential pain - the pain we will all have to face at some time in our lives as human beings living in a fractured world. How far do you really want to push the limits of state sanctioned suicide as a cure for this? It is no surprise to me to hear that people who are physically healthy but feeling depressed are being offered suicide at a Swiss clinic. Given everything I have said above about the reality of pain control and informed consent and withdrawal of treatment I do not see where the pro-euthanasia lobby is attempting to take society except down the same route.

Oh! And no I am not motivated by ill-will!!!

ps there is a video about this RCN consultation at http://www.policyreview.tv/embed239/882

Our Cherry Blossom Tree!

Lesbian Vampire Killers!

So the Lesbian Vampire Killers aren't lesbian after all.

They're Lesbian-Vampire Killers.

That clears up a lot of confusion here.

Thought for the Day.

Giles Fraser, the vicar of Putney in London, was giving this morning's "Thought for the Day" on BBC radio 4's "Today" programme. He took issue with those Christians who emphasise the significance of the Cross. He said that such an emphasis "left the resurrection 'with nothing to do'!" It seems rather self evident to me that you cannot have the resurrection without first having the cross and actually, when you think about it, the cross gives profound meaning and significance to the resurrection.

But Giles clearly has an issue with the Cross as "all about violence and retribution". In a way, that is not unusual, many people (such as Steve Chalke etc) find the atonement concept outrageous. They will say that it is fundamentally unjust but I think what they actually baulk at is the neccesity of the Cross. Human nature is not so bad that any atonement is neccesary; which is a Humanist worldview rather a Christian one.

For Giles the Cross is an example of Christ sharing in humanity's suffering... please do not misuderstand me, that is perfectly true and I am not denying it, but while it is the truth and nothing but the truth it is not the whole truth. Jesus himself said that his death would have a much richer, far deeper meaning than that, the Cross is not a later theological construct as some allege.

The thing is what really struck me was that Giles sounded so angry about it all - there was some venom in his delivery that astonished me. But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised because he was in the unfortunate position of proposing a poorer and shallower theology than the one he was attacking. Or maybe he was deliberately trying to be provocative.

No doubt some of my fellow Evangelicals might be considering penning a robust counter-attack. I hope that they will do so graciously in a way that will speak to him rather than merely confirm his preconceived ideas. We need to respond with grace if we are to defend the Gospel of Grace.

I notice that Giles Fraser also had a column in the Guardian newspaper on Saturday attacking the Cross in pretty much the same terms as Steve Chalke did a few years back when he described it as "cosmic child abuse". (Incidentally the media seems to have given a fair wind to this particular theological stance hasn't it?) Obviously it is difficult to gauge the tone of a written piece but, again, Giles does seem to be a very angry man.


The fact that an innocent party is punished in my place IS unfair and unjust. But this is an act done in the context of Trinitarian Christianity (it will make no sense outside such a worldview!) God willingly takes on HIMSELF the punishment rightly due to me. That is indeed unjust, but God is a God of Grace.... and grace is not about getting what I deserve - quite the contrary! Not only do I not receive what I do deserve, but I also receive what I do not deserve in exchange (the righteousness of Jesus himself!) and I have all the privileges that come with it. [God's Riches At Christ's Expense!]

One day we will all face God; are you going to front up to him and demand justice? Or like me you may not have such confidence in your own righteousness in which case you, like me, will not be asking for justice but asking for mercy and grace!

Blooming Blossom.

Good Friday is the Best of Days!

I went to the Good Friday service at St Helen's this morning. There was a short talk by Mark O'Donaghue who described Good Friday as the best of days. Of all the days marked in the Christian calendar today's is not one the world has sought to commercialise like Christmas or even Easter and yet for the Christian it is a day commemorating something amazing.... the day Jesus made 'the Great Exchange'. Jesus willingly took on himself the punishment due to me and in exchange I was given his sinless standing before God!

During the service we had a series of readings and hymns and a solo all of which were very moving.

In the eyes of the world the Cross represented the most ignominious of deaths and yet, as is always the case with the Gospel, appearances can be deceptive. As Jesus dies the curtain in the temple is torn in two - the barrier that ceremonially separated a holy God from a less than holy people is split apart. The centurion, a representative of all of us who are foreigners to the things of God, perceives something astonishing in this death "Surely this man was the Son of God!"

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ps

12th April 2009. Easter Sunday, the very best of days!

Check out the St Helen's Easter Films at www.st-helens.org.uk/easter/

Russia.

I've always been intrigued by the history of Russia having recently read books about Catherine the Great & Prince Potemkin and Robert Service's "History of Modern Russia".

Latterly I have completed "The Whisperers" by Orlando Figes and "Absolute War" by Chris Bellamy.

For whatever reason I have been fascinated by the war on the Eastern Front between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union during the second world war. (Of course from the Russian perspective it was the Western Front!) The sheer scale of the conflict and its ideological nature between two equally odious totalitarian regimes makes it utterly unique in modern history. "Absolute War" as a title reflects the total nature of this staggering theatre of war; it was a battle to the death of two peoples, two giant economies and two ideologies on a scale never before witnessed.

A quarter of the entire Russian people (as opposed to the other Soviet peoples) are said to have perished in the war so it is not surprising that "The Great Patriotic War", as the Russians call the 1941-45 conflict, still casts a huge shadow over the Russian psyche and probably explains why the Russians are still very sensitive about national security. This scale of casualties of young men caused a major demographic shift; in some towns women outnumbered men by two to one and in some places it was as much as three to one! This altered demography was such that it would not correct itself within one generation but would take several.

The war on the Eastern Front has been well documented from the German perspective but it is only in recent years that the old Soviet archives have been opened up and their contents studied in depth. This has turned up some surprises such as the fact that the Soviet generals detested each other with a passion! There are intriguing hints that the Russians were preparing for a surprise attack on the Germans in 1942 had they not been beaten to the punch! "Absolute War" also casts doubt on certain commonly held fallacies; I had always thought that the Battle of Kursk in 1943 was the largest tank battle in history but according to Bellamy it was no larger than other encounters and was much more ambiguous in its outcome - it sounds like the protagonists traded blow for blow, but maybe the important point is the Russians could afford the losses where the Germans couldn't. Certainly the Germans perceived the battle as a defeat and perhaps that is what really counts.

In Alan Clark's "Barbarossa" there is a fascinating account of the 'sniper duel' in Stalingrad between Vasily Zaitsev and a German officer sent to eliminate the Russian ace - this was the storyline of the movie "Enemy at the Gates" - interestingy Bellamy could find no evidence of such a duel ever having taken place. Also there is no evidence for the suggestion put about by Beria that Stalin had a nervous breakdown when the Germans invaded in 1941. Speaking, please note, after Stalin's death in 1953 Beria said that the dictator was reduced to a catatonic state by events but Bellamy demonstrates that Stalin actually worked tirelessly throughout those initial calamitous days and indeed made some ultimately war winning strategic decisions, such as evacuating the industrial economy beyond the Urals and away from German interdiction. Stalin may have been many things but he wasn't stupid or indecisive.

An interesting question is 'why did the Russian people fight so hard for Stalin?' The reality is they didn't. The Nazis regarded the Slav people as 'untermensch' who were to be eradicated or enslaved; whatever illusions the Russian people might have had of the German army as liberators from the Stalinist regime were quickly dispelled as the Nazis imposed their brutal rule. The "absolute" nature of this war became self evident. It is also a curious fact that even the Gulag prisoners felt that they had a stake in the war-effort and believed that they had a valuable contribution to make toward their Motherland's ultimate victory. Prisoners released to fight on the front line would find, paradoxically, a sense of personal freedom and liberation even in the fiercest fighting. At least here people could be their true selves and didn't have to lead a double life as they might have to in civilian life sloganising in public but being someone else in their private thoughts.

The book is a great stonking read marred in places by some ghastly typos; instead of "lend-lease" there are several lease-lends and even lease-lands! There is also at least one reference to the Soviet Black Sea Fleet which logically ought to read Arctic Fleet. Despite these defects it is well worth a read.

"The Whisperers" is about private life in Stanlinist Russia when there was a concerted effort by the state to eliminate the notion of the personal and substitute the communal as a basis to society. To that end communal apartments were created with shared facilities and family life discouraged by means of quickie divorce. Children were to be raised by the state rather than being "indulged" by families into "bourgeois" thinking that they are uniquely loved, thus causing them to become "egoists". The window this book gives on a gigantic social experiment is breathtaking and has a lot to tell us about our own age as it too engages in a massive social experiment which jettisons the family and society atomises rather than becomes more cohesive.

Where "Absolute War" looks at the big scale "Whisperers" looks at individual stories and is heart rending in its ability to communicate the sense of personal loss as the Messianic state machine arrests and deports to the Gulags innocent, uncomprehending people. School children raised by the system to idolise Stalin and who find role models in the likes of Pavlik Morozov (who betrayed his own father to the state) become obsessed with denouncing 'class enemies' and fuel the paranoia indulged in by Stalin. Wholesale arrests and deportations on a quota basis crush individuals and ruin lives but this human sacrifice serves the Stalinist 'Five Year Plans' by providing slave labour for a crash programme of industrialisation. The enterprising peasant culture is overthrown in favour of farm collectivisation.... resulting in famine. I believe that Christianity gives value to the individual but given the collective mentality of the Soviet state the highest 'good' was that the state was served; all other considerations were secondary at best and more likely to be considered suspiciously deviant. Individual justice was 'bourgeois' and outdated in this Modern Age and a failure in food production could only ever be explained in terms of 'sabotage' - the state's farm collectivisation policy could not possibly be wrong by definition. Enterprising, prosperous peasants were denounced as 'Kulaks' (tight-fisted) and were persecuted - thus driving the 'work ethic' out of Russia's agricultural system. Even Kulak parents might consider their own values as outdated and would abdicate responsibility for their children to the state in a vain attempt to help protect them, but the collective presupposition was such that relatives, including the children, of 'enemies of the people' were just as guilty by association. These children would attempt to conceal their tainted biographies and become model Soviet citizens ever fearful of being unmasked. Whole people groups - Volga Germans, Chechens, Crimean Tartars etc - could be condemned in toto.

The persecution is not confined to the countryside, any problem (real or supposed) within the new industries is rationalised as sabotage by 'enemies of the people'. The most pathetic tales are those of die-hard Communists who find themselves denounced and yet who connive in their own downfall as a way of still yet serving the state! One daughter despairs of her Communist father who is released from the Gulag after many years and who still thinks that the system is just, "you can't talk to a believer!" she says.

The title of the book "The Whisperers", refers to the privately spoken thoughts of everday people in Stalin's Russia and refers not just to the victims point of view but also the many people who make whispered accusations to the secret police. Most of these remain unrepentant to this day and are still convinced that those they caused to be arrested, tortured, imprisoned or shot were indeed 'enemies of the people'. (How else can they live with themselves one might ask!). The police state provided ample opportunity to cause the removal of the irkesome neighbour, a love rival or the occupant of a job one coverted. The system either crushed you or corrupted you. Many individuals brutalised by years and years spent in the Gulag system find that they cannot make the transition back into normal family life again. Yet some relationships prove more resilient. "The Whisperers" is a haunting, heart rending read but well worth it.

In case anyone is under the illusion that Stalin deviated from a gentler version of socialism which might have prospered had Lenin not died in 1924 (only seven years after the Russian Revolution) please refer to Robert Gellately's "Lenin, Stalin & Hitler: Age of Social Catastrophe"! Stalin merely built on Lenin's legacy, he didn't pervert it.

A sensitive man like the poet Konstantin Simonov, who wrote the famous poem "Wait for Me", has a dubiously upper class pedigree and so remodels himself as a proletarian by putting himself through a 'factory school' and consciously suppresses any reservations he has about the regime. Perceived injustices are dismissed as mere bourgeois sentiment; as such he makes an interesting case study of how a sensitive man turns himself into a thorough-going Stalinist. You might think that this may have little to tell us - but from a Christian perspective it is all very familiar Romans chapter 1 territory, how people suppress the truth and are destroyed by what they idolise. It is telling that those individuals who do retain their humanity are those who have an alternative mental framework from which they can draw moral values critical of the all pervasive Messianic state ideology. Only those who had a moral compass of their own could avoid being sucked into the accepted values of their dominant society. Tellingly the odious phrase 'you can't make omelettes without breaking eggs' is a constant refrain of those state functionaries who try to rationalise their own part in wholesale injustice.

It is interesting that Simonov appears in both these books; during the "Absolute War" he was a correspondent reporting directly from the front-line. As the Red Army crosses the eastern borders of the Third Reich Simonov joins in the call for vengence to be visited on the German people in the form of murder, rape and pillage: events described in Antony Beevor's book "Berlin: the downfall 1945" as the German 'holocaust'. Please note these events were not spontaneous acts by unruly soldiers, this was a 'top down' directive promulgated as a patriotic duty! Simonov has misgivings about the vengence policy but again rationalises and suppresses these reservations as bourgeois sentiment and writes the neccesary articles for the army newspaper. As a Christian both these books describe a reality which chimes with the Christian worldview. "Evil" is not perpetrated by in-human 'monsters'': evil turns out to be a very human trait indeed. (I would argue that the word "inhuman" is the most mendacious word in the English language!). Current liberal conceptions of "evil" fall drastically short of the mark; for the present day Humanists all evil has to be 'other' than human! (If only it were that simple!) Yes, we do have our own ideologues don't we? People who try and make reality fit their worldview and "otherise" evil as something remote from themselves.

Perhaps the ghastly nature of Stalinism seems obvious now but in the mid 20th Century many Western intellectuals and trend setters looked on the Stalinist state with profound admiration and saw in it the way of the future. The horrific realities of life within the Soviet state were dismissed by gullible onlookers as western propaganda. In my own lifetime, after the "Khrushchev Thaw" was replaced by Leonid Brezhnev's reassertion of Stalinist principles, and when the Soviet state once seemed a permanent feature on the world stage, I heard many people speak out in defence of the USSR as a force for good. Lenin described such people as "useful idiots". Humans have a capacity for self delusion and our cultural elite are certainly no exception. Given that humans look to themselves for salvation there is no reason - no reason at all - why history should not repeat itself!

Philosophy of Care!

It is not unusual for our Paediatric Intensive Care Unit to receive patients from all over the UK, we are a centre for some highly specialised cardiac surgery, but we have just had a patient flown down to us with a relatively common cardiac condition called 'Transposition of the Great Arteries'; this tells us that (as at today's date) there are few childrens' intensive care beds available nationwide. There are other PICUs which were a lot closer! Certainly our unit has been horrendously busy in recent weeks and I'm sure we are not alone.

When I first started working in PICU, nearly two decades ago, I recall having a conversation with one of our consultant intensivists during which I suggested that a referal we had received could not be accepted because our unit was at capacity. He replied, "Peter, there isn't a 'St Elsewhere' for this kid!"

Up until that moment in time I had had the naive notion that the state would always provide. If we couldn't take this child then another unit somewhere else would. I had a vision of an all wise, monolithic system that planned and made provision for all eventualities. How wrong I was. No "system" works, not really.

In so far as any system functions; it is down to the good will of individual people. If individuals have a 'jobs-worth' approach to their work then no system will serve its intended purpose. I recall this same consultant having to battle the system to get our "Retrieval" service up and running; we had to start on a shoestring budget and prove that it served a purpose.

At the "Saline Nerve Child Hospital" our philosophy is always to try and make room for any child who needs intensive care - we will be loathe ever to say that "we have no beds" when the 'Emergency Bed Service' phones to ask what our 'bed state' is. We will bend over backwards to find a way of creating a bed for a child who needs PICU - it's a philosophy of care I feel comfortable with.

In Praise of Kilometres!

This year I am trying to make a concerted effort to stay fit. Before I did my back in I got pretty good at running but since 2006 it has been difficult to get back into the swing of things again. Anyway as a belated New Year's resolution I'm heading down to the gym at Guy's Hospital on a regular(ish) basis. I've been a member at The Fitness Centre since 1991 and used to get there at least once and usually twice a week. The peak of my accomplishments was to run 10 Kilometres in under 50 minutes - I'll let you be the judge if that is respectable for a middle aged man or not!

Then in 2006 I was laid low with sciatica for months and never really recovered that level of fitness. Anyway I'm determined to fight back. The gym is only small and unpretentious but I like it; especially on a morning when its quiet. The sub has just gone up to £24 per month so I have an incentive to get my money's worth now!

Aren't Kilometres great? Unlike Miles, which are a pain to do, I can pound away on the treadmill at a fair old clip - double figures on the speedo and see the distance covered click by at an encouraging rate. I'm converted!

Ten minute run at 10.8kph covered 1.78k. Okay that's my baseline - I'll keep you posted!

Weight 91.3kg... not bad, not bad at all!

Parochial Church Council.

I received a phone call the other day asking if I would consider joining the PCC at St Helen's; in reply I said "Power!.... Power at last! ...Ha Ha Ha! power! power!! power!!!....... HA HA HA!" or words to that effect.