Bollocks, Mark, as (sadly) usual. The world is not coming to an end because the warden of the filmmaker's college and the Scottish National Party didn't find the skit funny.

It does seem like the sort of thing Monty Python would have done, but you're way off the mark in your assessment that they would have sided with the politically correct in this case. In fact, just saying "Python" and "politically correct" in the same sentence is ludicrous. They were equally adept at lampooning every social class - viz. the "Upper Class Twit of the Year" skit, the "Gumby" (spoof of working-class Northerners) character, and the "Judean People's Front" in The Life of Brian (poking fun at middle-class revolutionary wannabes).

Also, if the BBC is so "holier than thou" and politically correct, what do you make of characters such as Vicky Pollard on Little Britain?

I never said that the world was coming to an end; I simply said the reaction on the part of the school's dean and the SNP was ridiculous, which it was. And how ridiculous it makes British society seem, which it does.

The fact is, you're not going to find one politician in Scotland or anywhere else in Britain opining that the short was funny, which it was. Even if he or she was saying what everyone else is thinking, the sensationalist press in this country will tear them apart and make them seem like they said they wanted to make chav-hunts official policy.

I suppose you're right about Monty Python, though I certainly don't consider the "Upper Class Twit of the Year" skit to be un-PC. It's very PC in that it lambasts the rich. (But I appreciate it because I've never had any love for fox hunters.)

And as for Little Britain's Vicky Pollard, it's funny you mention that character because I remember reading something in all the papers recently where some dole agency or teen health "professional" or whatever said that teenage mothers are not a bunch of Vicky Pollards and that the very suggestion this character of Vicky Pollard initiates is insulting and demeaning. Which pretty much backs up my argument that unless you're willing to accept everything and anything in this country, you're going to be seen as the worst thing since George Bush.

From what I could see it's as much of a lampoon of the upper class toffs as it is of the british kevin federline wannabes.

Was anyone photographed in mock school uniform, with a toaster cord around their neck, school pants around their ankles, begging to be beaten with a cane wielded by an older man dressed in a mortar board, headmaster's cape, fishnets and suspender belt?

No? Oh, sorry ... I'm not talking about the shenanigans at the annual Conservative Party conference ... I mean at the college.

Nuh? Well what's everyone complaining about then?

Sounds like a bit of fun to me, and chavs are the targets of a bit of bile in the UK, and deservedly so in many cases as they fall niocely into the soccer hooligan mould and cause a bit of strife. Their idea of a good night out is 20 pints, a vindaloo with chips or a kebab and a punch-up. Mark forget to mention that they ruined the Burberry label in the UK, where it was born, by insisting on wearing burberry check baseball caps and shirts whilst hurling bottles and insults at soccer matches.

And chav isn't an acronym. It was being used when I was at school in England in the 1960s, at that time as a perjorative form of address between those regarded to have been occupying the lower runs of the socio-economic strata.

I'll back up the dread man: it's bollocks, and a story largely manufactured by the media. Most people in the UK wouldn't give a rat's.

I've only just seen the video , which was made by pupils at my old school. It seems to me the only thing they did wrong was to post the thing on YouTube, for the politically correct were always going to work themselves into a delicious lather of indignation, as of course happened. I'm sorry the Warden of Glenalmond felt he had to apologise for it - I can't believe he really meant it.