Spike Milligan Read online

  I really was very remiss in not having the tree listed Grade II when it was completed.

  Presently the tree is surrounded by a monstrous fence some 12–14ft high and it looks as if the tree is being prevented from escaping when in fact the tree is literally entirely in my hands, no one else seems interested least of all Jocelyn Stephens who promised to get money from English Nature.

  Anyhow thank you for trying and now thank me for trying.

  Warm regards,

  Spike Milligan

  Sir Jocelyn Stevens

  Chairman

  English Heritage

  London W1

  9 July 1997

  Dear Jocelyn,

  As you did bugger all to save the Elfin Oak perhaps you could help by having it listed a Grade 2 monument.

  Warm regards,

  Spike Milligan

  Sir Jocelyn Stevens CVO

  The Chairman

  English Heritage

  London W1

  27 August 1997

  Dear Jocelyn,

  Thank you for your letter. Let me put the story like this; I first approached you with a book of photographs of the Elfin Oak, which was in a miserable state, and I asked if you could help and you took the book and you mentioned that you might be able to help through the organisation English Land ‘They’ve got lots of money’ I left it at that and nothing much seemed to be happening and I thought it would be better if I did something which I did, I got Paul Getty to contribute £15,000 and Paul McCartney to contribute £15,000 I then went to the Byam Shaw School of Art and asked if some of their students would help do the modelling and painting etc on the tree and from that someone formed the Elfin Oak Trust, it wasn’t me. If you say you helped, none of the Trust ever passed that message or the information on to me so there it stands.

  I note your comments about my saying ‘English Heritage did bugger all’; well if you did, all very well and I am grateful for it, then why weren’t you at the inauguration.

  Warm regards,

  Spike Milligan

  P. S. I will ask you again, is it possible to get the Elfin Oak listed as Grade 2.

  HM The Queen

  Buckingham Palace

  1 June 1995

  Your Majesty,

  Could you consider, when the present Master of The Queen’s Musick retires, the composer Wilfred Josephs. He really is a superb composer and has been far too long not recognised in the country.

  I am enclosing a programme showing his tremendous output and also his biography showing his awards.

  Can you please use your office as Queen to suggest him to the committee that choose the Master of The Queen’s Musick.

  Spike Milligan

  5

  Hammering at the Door

  Right Hon. Margaret Thatcher

  Member of Parliament for Finchley

  House of Commons

  Westminster

  16 December 1970

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  As my representative in Parliament I am making the following appeal to you.

  I live at 127 Holden Road. The whole road is, in fact, private residences with back gardens. I received information, and the situation is that they have now pulled down nos. 113 to 125. Needless to say, I thought that the buildings replacing them would be flats running along the lines of the present buildings, but no, the development includes building blocks of flats half-way down the back gardens, plus a garage even further down. This, of course, used to be known as ‘back building’ which used to be frowned upon by the very council which now agrees to it. The whole character of street will be lost, and also the privacy of my garden, and even motor cars will be driven through the back gardens which used to be places of refuge. I would like you to give me your opinion as to whether this is an agreeable situation, or whether my objection is valid. I have contacted the people living in Holden and to date forty of them have replied agreeing with my objection.

  I am asking you as my representative in Parliament what course I must take to get this ‘back building’ stopped.

  I would appreciate a speedy reply.

  Respectfully,

  Spike Milligan

  Mrs Margaret Thatcher

  The House of Commons

  Westminster

  1 February 1971

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  I don’t think I have made it quite clear what my objections are. I am not objecting to flats being built on the sites of the houses already demolished. I am objecting to the flats being built half way down the back gardens, where there were never any buildings previously. Therefore, we have a situation whether the character of the street has been ruined as far as private gardens go.

  I am objecting to them building flats in the back gardens not along the line of the original buildings (though even that, of course, will break the character of the street by its modernity).

  I have objections from 50 people living in Holden Road, about building back gardens, and when the post clears I will be getting objections from other people around the back of Holden Road. If the majority of people in the area concerned are objecting to back garden building – surely you, as MP for Finchley, should do something to represent these people’s wishes.

  Sincerely,

  Spike Milligan

  Mrs Margaret Thatcher

  The House of Commons

  Westminster

  9 February 1971

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  Reference your letter of 25th January, yes they have turned down the plans, but not on the basis of building flats half-way down the gardens. They are only objecting to the style of the buildings so the objections that I and 50 residents of Holden Road have lodged still remain unanswered – that is, not only building flats on the lines of the original buildings, but also building in the back gardens as well.

  In the light of this, my request to you still stands. As MP for Finchley, I am asking you to present the objections of 51 people in Holden Road to the Council to the plan for building half-way down the garden.

  The Council already know the residents’ objections but have not answered the protest letters. The Council represents the public locally but they have decided not to deal with this problem as they have not answered the letters. We are asking you to register our protest to them as the MP for Finchley.

  I hope this is clear this time.

  Respectfully,

  Spike Milligan

  P. S. But for the GPO strike, I would have had many more objections from people living in the roads around the area of Holden Road.

  Borough Planning Officer

  London Borough of Barnet

  London N3

  23 February 1971

  Dear Sir,

  Reference your letter of the 19th January, 1971 none of the points laid out in your letter state whether or not you are allowing buildings to be built in the back gardens.

  Therefore, I ask you a straightforward question: if the design and construction all meet with the Council’s approval are you willing to allow buildings to be built in the back gardens of what were 113–125 Holden Road.

  Respectfully,

  Spike Milligan

  P. S. You can telephone your reply through to my Manager between the hours of 10-00 a.m. and 5-00 p.m.

  Mrs Margaret Thatcher MP

  House of Commons

  Westminster

  5 March 1971

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  I have got the Council to answer the question ‘Are you going to build in the back gardens’, and as I predicted the answer is yes, they are going to build in the back gardens.

  Therefore, no matter how many plans they reject, for the proposed redevelopment the final one will still include buildings in the back gardens.

  As I have said, most of the people in the road objected to this, and when the postal strike is over, I am certain all the people around the back will also object, so it is no good putting our objections to the Council because they know about them and are igno
ring them.

  Therefore, I am asking you as my MP representing the people to place our objections to the Barnet Borough Council and ask them whether they are, in fact, ignoring our objections.

  I do hope you can do this for us, as you are the only person to whom we can go.

  Respectfully,

  Spike Milligan

  Mrs Margaret Thatcher MP

  House of Commons

  30 March 1971

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  Thank you for your letter and thank you for representing my objection to the Council, but what I would like to have from you is an opinion as to the fairness of the planned buildings in my road. I think as my Member of Parliament you are allowed to express an opinion on behalf of your constituency, and I think it is within your powers to say (a) you agree with their grievance or (b) you do not agree.

  As I have told you, the Council are allowing a massive development right in the middle of Holden Road. Anyone with any consideration for environment would at least consider starting the development at one end and gradually working along, but to put it right down in the middle destroys the whole environment of the road.

  As I have told you, not are they doing that but they are building half way down the garden and garages right at the bottom. Now I have solicited almost 100% objections from the people living around the development: this means the majority of your constituents object to the plans being allowed by the Council. Therefore I am asking you, are you backing our objection or are you just passing it on and remaining neutral?

  I shall be glad to hear as soon as possible as to what attitude you intend to take.

  Sincerely,

  Spike Milligan

  Mrs Margaret Thatcher MP

  c/o House of Commons

  6 April 1971

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  You keep avoiding the issue of whether you support my application and the residents. Quite obviously you wish to remain neutral. In this respect it’s a great pity.

  As to the local enquiry, might I say it’s not being held to decide whether they should build in the back gardens or not: this has already been decided, so I don’t see any point in coming along to that enquiry. It’s a very sad day when your own MP cannot support you and the residents in a perfectly legal claim. I hope you have a conscience.

  Respectfully,

  Spike Milligan

  Mrs Margaret Thatcher

  House of Commons

  13 April 1971

  Dear Mrs Thatcher,

  Thank you for your letter of the 5th April regarding the objections of the local residents and myself, as to the buildings in the back gardens. When I wrote to you asking for your help, I did not write to you as a Minister, I was writing to you as our Member of Parliament for Finchley.

  In this case, we have the residents who have a justifiable grievance in which it would appear that the Council are not interested and so far the Minister for the Environment has done nothing, and, therefore, I ask you again, not as a Minister, but as the Member of Parliament for Finchley to help us.

  If we cannot get help from our own Member of Parliament, where can we go? Is this a democracy or a bureaucracy.

  Surely, first you are a human being and have feelings about right and wrong, and therefore as the elected Member of Parliament, you should be concerned with things that are right and wrong in your own Borough. I am appealing to you for help in trying to get a Public Enquiry. Now, it’s no good telling me they are having a Public Enquiry, this I know; but the Public Enquiry is not being held to hear the objections of the local residents about buildings in back gardens.

  Therefore, I ask you again, can you help us please. I can’t believe that absolutely nothing is being done to help the local residents put forward a justifiable complaint.

  Sincerely,

  Spike Milligan

  [What an incredible woman. Why didn’t she just tell him to sod off?]

  The Superintendent

  Police Station

  Harrow Road

  London W2

  19 April 1972

  Dear Sir,

  I want to report an incident.

  On Sunday 2nd April, 1972, at approximately 4.30 pm. I witnessed two women and a man with a Great Dane dog – the dog defecated on the pavement.

  I followed the people who went to Queens Mews.

  I wrote to the Westminster City Council and they told me I should report the incident to the Police.

  As the streets of Bayswater are polluted excessively by this disgusting habit I do hope we can prosecute.

  Respectfully,

  Spike Milligan

  Inspector Haines

  Harrow Road Police Station

  London W2

  16 May 1972

  Dear Sir,

  Milligan versus Dog Shit Case Number 2

  On Sunday the 7th May at about 11.30 am. a large black dog defecated on the pavement, I called the creature and said ‘Come here Darling’, and saw that its label bore the address – Burnham Court, Moscow Road, and the dog’s name was Liz. A fitting Royal name for a debasement of the Royal city.

  Would you please prosecute?

  Sincerely,

  Spike Milligan

  Memorandum

  Norma Farnes

  Spike Milligan

  31 May 1972

  Inspector Haines from Harrow Road Police Station called in to see you today regarding the letter you sent him: ‘Milligan versus dog shit case no. 2.’

  He personally is going along to Burnham Court to see the owners of the dog Liz. And give them a warning. He said he thought it best to go and give them a warning without prosecuting first. Because you would have to go to court and give evidence, and he thought it best to give them a warning. However, if you want to prosecute will you contact him.

  Memorandum

  Norma

  Spike

  23 June 1972

  Inspector Haines from Harrow Road telephoned regarding Dog Shit No. 1 and Dog Shit No. 2.

  He has been and warned both of these people.

  He said what about Dog Shit No. 3 !!

  The Rt. Hon. Michael Foot MP

  London NW3

  2 August 1983

  Dear Michael,

  I write to you on the occasion of you relinquishing your position as Leader of the Opposition. Needless to say, I was sad that the Party never made it through the Election.

  Even though by nature I am labelled as a clown, I now know at the age of 66, I have been gifted with perspicacity, to read pretty clearly the emotional state of the people of this Island; on the strength of it I know we can gain a victory.

  It would be madness to go to the next Election with an identical Manifesto, what I must say, and I beg you to think of this deeply, this is no longer a purely political fight.

  Growing up all around us has been a colossal environmental change, and a complete shift in the emphasis of the thinking of the working class. Briefly they now should be called the Consumer Society, they are completely dissatisfied. They see all the perquisites being hurled at them by the capitalistic world – in other words they want to be mini capitalists.

  While the world of politics from 1900 has gone on its quasi Victorian way, a new and colossal problem has loomed up which has put unbearable pressure on the world of services, i.e.

  Question: Why does a man with a rupture have to wait two years before he gets into hospital. The accepted political answer for that is ‘We do not have enough hospitals’. Wrong. The answer should be we have too many patients/people.

  Likewise, crowded trains, crowded tubes, traffic jams, even nowadays the motorways, and always the antique political answer – build more and bigger. In other words the political answer we are looking up our own arse for the answer.

  I notice that hospital doctors are working 18 and 19 hours a day, sometimes going three days and nights without sleep (from my own experience), hence the level of medical efficiency has dropped in humanitarian terms. This is evident by
the increased number of patients suing doctors and hospitals.

  We definitely do need a stabilised population. This would not entail anything morally wrong, it could be carried out in a highly intelligent way, as Mr Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore is doing.

  At the moment all politicians are bursting a gut, pointing in all directions as to what the problem is; but never pointing it towards the nigger in the woodpile, and that is population.

  I realise this is an entirely new phenomenon, which politicians have never dreamed of, or prophesied, and are therefore intelligently and emotionally disinterested in it.

  If this was pointed out to the working class as a whole, that their lifestyle would benefit more by restricting families to two (again as Lee Kuan Yew has pointed out) they are not stupid enough to revile this.

  It will show a deep desire by the Socialists, at the fountain head, to show concern about the welfare of children even before they are born, and showing your concern for the future of families that might outgrow their own financial situation.

  The small sum of this is my complaint about the traffic jams, when I realised I was never enlightened on this problem and, therefore, had four children. I now know I could have given two a better life, than I could have given four; and regarding traffic jams, they all have a car, which means I have put four cars on the road in front of me. I am saying I have made my own traffic jam. So, we make our own traffic jams, hospital jams, crowded beaches jams, crowded airport jams, and as a result of all this, people are becoming de-sensitised, they don’t know what tranquility and quietude is anymore.

  I can add to this an endless list, but do believe me there should be a place in the Manifesto for what I have said. If we don’t do it, one day, one party will, by sheer force of numbers.

  Going along with all this is the horrendous cruelty to the world of animals, battery farms – was there ever a greater obscenity.

  Reduce numbers and we reduce the pressure on all of us, it’s common sense, except it has never been put in a political manifesto, and it’s time we did.