Was I the only one who was completely gobsmacked last night when Diane Abbott said on 'This Week' that she was a fan of Chairman Mao despite the fact that it had just been pointed out to her that he was responsible for the deaths of millions and was one of the world's most brutal dictators?

Diane's logic was that he was still essentially good because he ended feudalism. Hmm.

Diane Abbott has tabled an Early Day Motion to condemn Boris Johnson’s use of language.

The public meeting used to be the way for politicians to get their message across, but increasingly - through the 20th century - it was replaced by the soundbite on the broadcast media.  In many ways this was a bad development (though undoubtedly the 6 o'clock news reaches more ears than the biggest of public meetings).  Today, new developments in the media - particularly the internet and the existence of 'blogs' - opens up new possibilities.  It can, indeed, bring the public meeting back into focus and bring it to a bigger audience.  The website 'Youtube' has primarily made headlines because of its potential copyright breaches of pop music videos, etc.  But the site includes home produced videos of all sorts of things and that is increasingly including political videos.  Sometimes that includes short films and documentaries that individuals have made to push for a particular cause.  At other times, it is home videos of speeches at public meetings.  It is this development that might represent a renaissance for the public meeting.

I include a selection here.  They are mainly from anti-war demonstrations.  Of course, one thing about public meetings is that they are of the moment, and watching them back sometimes a month later you are a surreal and unintended audience.  But we can make a great deal of use of this technology in the future.  When we talk about what happened at a meeting, why not include part of that meeting itself.