I was the only Brain the listeners could Trust

The Agreeable World of Wallace Arnold

I'M delighted to see the old Brains Trust back in action, even if they insist on putting it out on the dread goggle box at some unearthly hour. It was always the most civilised of programmes. Ah, memories, memories! Would you allow me a short toddle down Memory Lane - or are the trees in Memory Lane at present occupied by the unscrubbed and uncombed as they protest about this, that and t'other?!

In 1948, when first I joined the original Brains Trust, I was by far the youngest member of the panel. But what I lacked in years I more than made up in sheer common sense. The regular panellists at that time were, you may remember, Dr Julian Huxley the zoologist, Mr Kenneth Clark the art historian, Professor O E M Joad the philosopher and, to offer us a tantalising glimpse of the ladies' point of view, Miss Diana Dors.

We all had our catchphrases, of course. Professor Joad's, for instance, was, "It depends what you mean by...", whilst mine was "Well, this certainly gives us something to chew on". Like so many of my subsequent broadcasting catchphrases, this one seemed to "catch on" like wildfire with the man on the Clapham Omnibus. Before long, the phrase "Well, Donald, this certainly gives us something to chew on" could be heard echoing in workplaces and living-rooms the length of the land, accompanied, as often as not, by hoots of affectionate merriment.

But my position as First Apprentice was not to last long. It was only a matter of months, alas, before Professor Joad found himself convicted of fare-dodging, after an anonymous tip-off to the police . He was consequently removed from the show's line-up, affording me well-deserved promotion. From that day on, I couldn't help noticing that Kenneth Clark looked notably shifty, perhaps terrified that the powers-that-be might be informed of his lifelong addiction to armed robbery and judge it incompatible with his duties as a panellist. Incidentally, before the year was out, Clark was banged up in the clinker, following a tip-off to the police leading to the discovery of a sawn-off shotgun beneath his BBC cushion. The source remains a mystery to this day, but take it from me the informant was acting in the best interests of the listeners, who deserved better.

Throughout these ructions, I was at hand to offer the young, radical point of view, reflecting the younger generation's winning mixture of searing iconoclasm and burning idealism. I vividly remember one example. "Mr E Thomas from Crawley writes in to ask, 'Should we feel inclined to worry about those worse off than ourselves?'" posited the doughty Chairman, Donald McCullough before turning to me: "Wallace?"

"Well, Mr Chairman" I replied, "This certainly gives us something to chew on". I then paused for the laughter at home to die down before continuing, "But on the whole I would say - if you'll forgive the colloquialism (!) 'No - not on your nelly'. The only thing to make those who feel worse- off feel even worse is the feeling that they are regarded as worse-off by the better-off. So my advice to Mr E Thomas from Crawley is that the most charitable act of all is to suspend one's charity until those who might need it have learnt to stand on their own two feet! Next question please, Mr Chairman!"

Capital! By now I was regarded as the show's leading exponent of robust common sense, and the second most popular Brain in the Trust. Alas, after an anonymous tip-off from Broadcasting House ("Here's something to chew on, officer..." said the mystery voice), the self-proclaimed king-pin Dr Huxley was detained by police on charges of breaking and entering. Though he claimed never previously to have seen the jemmy secreted in his brief- case, he was summarily removed from the show. Distressing news indeed, but somewhat offset by the knowledge that I was now in the top position, never to be dislodged.

And so to today. On Monday, you will find me making all the running as a special guest on the new Brains Trust. I have heard it said that Dr Jonathan Miller possesses extraordinary intelligence, but frankly I have only ever found his brain fair-to-middling. And sad to say, the discovery of an offensive weapon about his person halfway through the show may prove disastrous for his future career. For what is the career of one bad apple in comparison to the smooth-running of an agreeable dialogue between civilised people? Discuss.