From the desk of Roland Rocchiccioli – 27 February

I am salivating in anticipation of The Queen’s Jubilee Platinum Pudding competition!

AN official component of The Queen’s Jubilee celebrations, the pudding competition is open to all-comers over the age of eight, and will be a hard-fought battle.

Coronation Chicken (originally Poulet Reine Elizabeth) was created for The Queen’s Buckingham Palace Coronation Banquet on 2 June 1953, by Rosemary Hume – the founder of the famous Le Cordon Bleu cookery school. Eight years after the Second World War, England was still on food rationing and Coronation Chicken was a sensation.

With a curry mayonnaise base, it is still sold in London’s Oxford Street Marks and Spencer Food Hall – which is one of the great food displays in the world.

My Aunt Mary was a wonderful cook (she made the most delicious pumpkin cake), and, as a treat, she cooked Coronation Chicken for me whenever I asked. It remains a favourite to this day.

Hopefully, like Coronation Chicken, and Escoffier’s pêche Melba, the winning Platinum Pudding will be a mouth-wateringly delicious recipe which will live-on in gastronomic history.

Before you fire-off an email, hastily written in rage, you need to consider, seriously: How would it read in a court of law?

Social media in its various forms has given everyone – the good, the bad, and the ugly – a megaphone to the world – which is not necessarily a good thing. Vox populi is important. The voice of Bob and Betty Basic deserves the same consideration as that of the great thinker; however, both, if they are to carry any influence, must be considered, and the argument balanced.

Previously, it required some effort to voice one’s opinion. The letter had to be written, the envelope addressed and stamped, and the item posted.

Sadly, now it is too simple. Anyone sitting on their fat backside in front of the television, smoking and drinking coffee – and generally feeling angry with the word – has only to lean-over, dip their fingers into the well of keyboard vitriol, and hey presto – without a moment of serious thought a disparaging message has been sent, regardless of the consequences.

Words carry with them chain reactions, like a stone which is thrown into a pond.

The great Persian poet, Omar Khayyám (1048 –1131) wrote, “The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line.”

The depth of your outrage notwithstanding, you are, at law, responsible for your words, however unintentional the consequences. Vicious, verbal assault is antisocial and could, in certain circumstances, lead to an apprehension violence order.

As a general rule of thumb, it is wise to leave the provocative messages to stew awhile before sending them into the ether. Often times, when the surge of uncontrollable outrage has abated in the clear light of another day, you may be less inclined to be so strident. It is possible, with civility, to make your point both loudly and clearly.

Whether directly or indirectly, deliberately insulting other people reveals more about you than it does about the recipient.

The written, unflattering comments relating to the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, and made by the former NSW Premier, Gladys Berejiklian, and Deputy-Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce, are deeply regrettable. They serve only to diminish their official capacities; add nothing to advance the national discourse; and reflect poorly on the character of the writers.

“Caution is preferable to rash bravery” – Henry 1V part one.

Roland can be contacted via [email protected].