Despite the parliamentary Easter recess there’s been no let up in the turbulence characterizing our socio-political sphere, events (or non-events) scrambling for media attention. That is, if complicit media aren’t instrumental in the increasingly common cover ups. None of this is good for our mental health – it’s one thing for ‘stuff’ to happen but it’s quite another for the government to be so reactive and incompetent that we can’t trust them to deal effectively with any of it. The latest shocking example is the situation of Brits holed up in Sudan as fighting between rival factions intensifies around them. Witnesses have spoken of other nationals being helped by their embassies but of course, nothing from the UK’s own – reminiscent of the exit of Afghanistan and our Foreign Secretary staying put on his beach holiday. Except now, several days later, we hear that one family interviewed by the BBC has been put ‘on a list’ by the UK embassy, though they don’t know what this means. I’m certain we all reassured that Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, who so far has been singularly unimpressive in that role, has cut short his visit to New Zealand in order to attend to the Sudan crisis. It seems so far all he’s done is to agree a statement with his French counterpart – no sense of urgency. The media keep featuring Alicia Kearns, chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, but where are Cleverly himself and his junior ministers?
Yes, Dominic Raab’s failure has continued in subsequent roles recently fighting for his political life following the investigation of and delivery of the report on allegations of bullying against him. And he’s likely to lose his Surrey seat at the next election. The time which elapsed between delivery of KC Adam Tolley’s report on Thursday and Raab’s resignation on Friday morning rather suggests that the PM gave him the choice of resigning or getting sacked, even though Raab was initially adamant that he wouldn’t go. The report is described as ‘stinging’ but in an effort to reframe this humiliating situation Raab has resorted to attack strategy, suggesting the report is flawed, that in any case it absolved him of all but two of the allegations and, most appallingly, that the problems had only resulted from his own desire to ‘drive reform’ ‘at pace’ and set challenging standards. We certainly saw him pursuing high standards during the Afghanistan exit and the other two ministerial posts he’s had to leave. ‘Dominic Raab has faced more ministerial fluctuations than most: sacked, demoted or resigning from three government jobs’. Civil servants and many others have expressed anger at Sunak’s weakness in effectively allowing Raab to set the media agenda in this way and at Raab’s description of the investigation as a ‘Kafkaesque saga’, blaming ‘activist over-unionised civil servants’ blocking government and ‘targeting ministers’.
Citing the ‘support’ he’s allegedly received, it’s been sickening to witness Raab playing the victim card when he’s been the perpetrator. ‘Above all, a lot of ministers now, are very fearful that the direct challenge that they bring fairly squarely in government may leave them at risk of the same treatment that I’ve had’. It now looks as if Conservative HQ has instructed MPs to post cheerleading tweets defending Raab, trying to massage the story into one of hardworking ministers trying to introduce reforms but being impeded by politically motivated civil servants.
What seems clear is that so many in the commentariat (and in society generally) don’t understand bullying and the damage it can inflict on both mental and physical health. It’s not a matter of whether the alleged perpetrator intends to cause humiliation and harm, but how it’s experienced by victims, and we can be in no doubt from accounts that Raab caused significant distress wherever he’s worked and there’s no excuse that he would have been unaware of this. The High Court ruled in 2021 (cited by Tolley, pages 10,11,12) conduct can be bullying “whether or not the perpetrator is aware or intends that the conduct is offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting” but we’re still hearing Raab apologists spouting about ‘intent’.
Another key factor is that it took Dave Penman, General Secretary of the senior civil servants union (FDA), to point out to the BBC that the process itself was flawed: it’s highly improper that Raab (but not the civil servants) was allowed access to this report in advance of its publication so he could put his case first and to even write a Telegraph article seeking to exonerate himself. Such a process automatically puts the civil servants who cannot speak up at a disadvantage. If it wasn’t so serious what’s been almost amusing to observe is Raab’s anger at civil servants frustrating his (mostly appalling) plans for ‘reform’ – it doesn’t strike him that they could be deeply disturbed at this government’s ‘direction of travel’, including human rights ‘reform’, hence their perceived need to undermine it.
We now hear of plans to politicize the Civil Service: the Service always was an intended to be politically neutral, but in a clear attempt to prevent what they see as obstruction, Conservative peer Francis Maude is drawing up ‘radical plans to bring in more “politicisation” of Whitehall by allowing ministers greater powers to appoint their own civil servants – including some with overt political affiliations’. This is deeply alarming, not least Maude’s naivety or deliberate cynicism and it echoes the growth of controlling tactics employed by fascist regimes in the past : ‘It is perfectly possible to preserve impartiality and, indeed, improve continuity while allowing ministers more say in appointments…Without material adjustment, there will be more cases like Raab’s when frustrations boil over…We need a much more robust culture, with less groupthink, more rugged disagreement, and the confidence both to offer challenge and to accept it’.
So then Sunak had to decide on a new Justice Minister and Deputy PM, although he didn’t have to appoint a DPM. Not an easy job given the increasingly shallow pool he has to fish in, but no time has been lost, it seems. Sunak appointed the clone-like Oliver Dowden, who has inexplicably (what is wrong with these people?) just beenreadopted as the Conservative Candidate for Hertsmere, and Alex Chalk (who he?) as Justice Secretary. It seems that one of the reasons for the Dowden appointment was his role in ‘coordinating the government’s response to the strikes’. NB, not resolving the strikes. The ‘response’ has just been refusal to negotiate with the unions.
We’re told that, as a former lawyer who has prosecuted and defended clients in a range of cases, from terrorism charges to fraud, Chalk’s appointment satisfies the demand of some Conservative backbenchers that the role should be occupied by a lawyer. Good to know that Sunak is once again listening to his vociferous backbenchers but this appointment again demonstrates the paucity of the potential field of candidates. Quite a reshuffle as Michelle Donelan will be going on maternity leave soon, necessitating new Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Chloe Smith) and ditto Julia Lopez, who will be replaced by Sir John Whittingdale as a minister of state jointly in the Department of Culture and Department of Science, Innovation and Technology.
This might feel enough work for one weekend but Sunak will still be digesting the news that he is also under investigation himself for failing to declare his wife’s shares in a childcare company which would have benefited from measures within the 2023 Budget. Sunak said he did declare them but there’s no proof because the register had not yet been published, a year since the previous one. Some commentators have said this looks Sunak look quite like Boris Johnson, aloof and believing the rules don’t apply to him. ‘He also failed to declare an interest when prompted during his appearance in front of the parliamentary liaison committee last month. On the face of it, this seems to breach parliament’s code of conduct, which states: “Members must always be open and frank in declaring any relevant interest in any proceeding of the House or its committees.” The electorate often sees the Tories as the party of the rich, for the rich. By not coming clean straight away, Mr Sunak will have cemented that view’.
The BBC’s political editor, Chris Mason, once again showed his Tory colours by downplaying the revelations: ‘On the Richter scale of these things, it feels like a rather minor tremor. Think a few loose roof tiles rather than anything much more’. The trouble is that these aren’t the only ‘loose roof tiles’: the very foundations of the Tory government edifice are crumbling by the day, one scandal following hot on the heels of the one before.
It’s shocking and humiliating for this country (it’s not just about him) that he hosted a Good Friday Agreement gala dinner in Belfast this week when under investigation. Not only that – thereports relating to BBC Chair Richard Sharp (which sound as damning as those in the Raab report) will soon land on Sunak’s desk. One person briefed on the draft findings by Adam Heppinstall KC said the criticisms made it ‘probable but not certain’ that Sharp would have to resign. Neither the Raab nor the Sharp fates should have ever been the PM’s decision to make, especially given such a conflict of interest in the latter case (Sharp had been Sunak’s boss at Goldman Sachs) but that’s the current arrangement. Absurdly, the BBC can’t cannot remove its own chairman, who is appointed by the government on a four-year term and Sharp will only leave if he either voluntarily resigns or if the government pushes him.
Surely a reason why the role of BBC Chair should not be a political appointment (we’ve seen endless Tory bias during recent years, evidenced most recently by collusive presenters’ gaslighting of union chiefs when they should be pressuring ministers to get round the negotiating table with the junior doctors, nurses, teachers and all the others taking industrial action. Last week the government got a shock they complacently were not expecting, that the RCN had turned down the pay offer they’d balloted on and will now organize more strike action, and worse, this could be coordinated with that of other health unions. This leaves the NHS in a frighteningly dangerous state but instead of faulting the intransigent government, the Tory BBC at least repeatedly attacks union representatives for ‘putting patients’ lives in danger’). Said one tweeter to the Today programme: ‘In his piece re the health dispute Amol Rajan described NHS being ‘plagued’ by strikes. This description runs counter to impartiality, appearing to lay the blame at the door of health unions rather than an intransigent government that has overseen chronic underfunding’.
The Royal College of Nursing has now accused the government of bullying because it has resorted to legal action in order to prevent an imminent nurses’ strike. ‘The formal legal challenge marks an extraordinary escalation of a dispute over the planned strike days’…Steve Barclay said: ‘Following a request from NHS Employers I have regretfully provided notice of my intent to pursue legal action to ask the courts to declare the Royal College of Nursing’s upcoming strike action planned for 30 April to 2 May to be unlawful.’ Barclay is going for a double whammy because it also contains a threat to nurses’ professional status and ability to work: ‘This legal action also seeks to protect nurses who could otherwise be asked to take part in unlawful activity that could in turn put their professional registration at risk and would breach the requirements set out in the nursing code of conduct.” Double whammy and nonsensical own goal because what will he do with so many nurses not allowed to work besides the existing workforce crisis? It’s shameful that the government is incapable of managing its responsibilities, so resorts to the blunt instrument of the law to bludgeon people back to work.
All last weekend and the days which followed we saw one minister after another on the airwaves, especially Jeremy Hunt and Greg Hands (fresh from the local elections campaign trail and much foolish tweeting) parrot that the offer to junior doctors was ‘fair and reasonable’. Apart from the fact that junior doctors’ pay has declined in real terms by 26% over 15 years, and MPs have benefited from a 40% increase in recent times, the repetition of such a sound bite becomes meaningless after a while. Perhaps the most risible thing, though, was the performance of Greg Hands on BBC1’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, during which it was clear that he’d scrawled text all over his hands. Afraid of forgetting the script?
As if we hadn’t seen enough scandal in recent years, we’re now hearing about yet more sexual misconduct cases from the business lobbying organization, the CBI, some commentators believing this organization is finished. Despite drafting in a former staffer no doubt as a ‘safe pair of hands’ DG, the CBI has seen the need to suspend its activities until June in the wake of numerous members quitting. These include high profile companies like NatWest, John Lewis, Accenture, Arup, Aviva, BMW, Fidelity International, Jaguar Land Rover, Kingfisher, Phoenix Group, Sage, Tesco and Virgin Media O2. At least the CBI is confronting its problems, unlike the government, but it also begs the question, featured in the media, as to where else these organizations can go. One commentator suggested other bodies like the British Retail Consortium and what about the Institute of Directors? Maybe we just don’t need so many organizations of this type – and perhaps we could do with less business lobbying across the board since we’ve seen it lead to so much corruption.
With things as they are, it’s no surprise that mental ill-health is in the news again. Longstanding underinvestment in NHS services and the faulty way services have developed haven’t even kept pace with steady demand let alone the massive rise in recent years. ‘Mental health issues are becoming the new pandemic with some 6.5 million of us now using antidepressants, up a million over five years. The number of adults reporting a disability has risen by a third in the last decade. The number of children and young people accessing NHS mental health services has surged by 25 per cent in the last two years. Something is going deeply, profoundly and expensively wrong. Our sick note phenomenon is such, now, that the expected cost of paying those on health-related benefits has risen by £8 billion in just four months. The biggest single complaint behind new claims is mental health, and the proportion of successful claims has hit an all-time high. More are now on incapacity benefit (and its successors) than at any time under Labour. So the Tories have recreated the problem they once dedicated themselves to solving.’
Disappointingly and predictably, Nelson doesn’t get that interventions like CBT are of limited use to people with complex issues and those who want to get to the roots of their problems, which CBT does not. And, crucially, he doesn’t ask himself why so many are feeling this strain: for many personal issues will be hugely impacted by the wider sociopolitical context of corrupt and incompetent government (nothing is working), the cost of living crisis, the daily difficulty of getting anything done or resolved and the common phenomenon of hopeless and/or bullying bosses in the workplace. ‘There is so much that can be done. Mental health problems are far from unsolvable: techniques like cognitive behavioural therapy are widely practised and have a strong record of success’. Quite some over-simplification and a particularly dangerous idea is for the DWP to get their own therapists (ahem, doesn’t he know that ‘wellbeing practitioners’ and workforce coaches have been working in job centres for some time?) because therapy should never be tied to an economic agenda.
Drilling down into children’s mental health, there’s the shocking finding that ‘a quarter of a million children in the UK with mental health problems have been denied help by the NHS as it struggles to manage surging case loads against a backdrop of a crisis in child mental health. Some NHS trusts are failing to offer treatment to 60% of those referred by GPs, the research based on Freedom of Information request responses has found’. Besides the children themselves and their families, this situation must be very difficult for GPs and striking that the information had to be elicited via FOI. Trusts have raised the bar at which patients qualify for help so they could be quite unwell and still get no treatment. ‘Former children’s commissioner Anne Longfield said long waits are resulting in only the worst crises being prioritised. She has heard repeated stories of children who had attempted suicide failing to be offered support because they did not meet a threshold of multiple attempts’.
Needless to say, we get the usual bland statements from the DHSC, which don’t actually address the urgent issues: ‘We’re determined to do everything we can to support children and young people with their mental health, no matter their background or location…We’re also working closely with NHS England to introduce new access and waiting time standards for mental health services, ensuring quicker access to high-quality care across the country’. The cynicism of it: introducing new targets won’t ensure availability of treatment.
Just as the media continue trying to whip up ‘excitement’ about the Coronation (one radio 4 ‘news’ programme being exclusively about this event and the monarchy), polls show most Brits don’t care about it. Only 24% care ‘a fair amount’, 9% say they care a great deal but the majority doesn’t care. So many people I know are going away in order to avoid this Coronation ‘fever’, although much of this is confected. Republic CEO Graham Smith was very good value on the above ‘news’ programme, giving articulate and undeniable arguments as to why the monarchy is an outmoded fig leaf which needs to go. The myths around monarchy and its justification really need challenging, eg it brings in a lot of revenue via tourism (it’s actually difficult to find evidence for this and numbers of visitors to the UK have declined significantly following Brexit anyway), and the idea we ‘need’ it for our British identity is a very flawed one. In 2023 we can’t rely on this obsolescent prop to bolster what could be argued is a questionable sense of identity based on inequality and vacuous ceremony. It was interesting to see that Waitrose have marked down their Coronation branded cakes and scones, rather suggesting they’re proving less popular than anticipated.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1758203/king-charles-coronation-yougov-poll
The latest Coronation gimmick, a new crown emoji, has been introduced (we’re told) in a ‘fresh attempt to modernize the Firm’. Oh dear, excruciating. It comes up automatically on Twitter but I wonder how many will choose to use it in texts and WhatsApps etc. But if you really want to get into the spirit of it, a magazine column has supplied some ideas of items which could well find themselves taken to charity shops at some point in the future. These range from a King Charles mug (£23), to a Coronation teapot (£75), a musical biscuit tin (£35) and a light up cushion (£25).
On a positive note, we regularly hear about efforts to preserve the natural environment, often led by communities rather than officialdom. A good example of the latter, though, is the news that meadows at 100 historic sites across England will be restored to help put back some of the 97% which have disappeared since the 1930s, a project headed up by English Heritage. One of the best things this time of year, though, is the ‘purple haze’ effect experienced in bluebell woods, especially in quieter locations as opposed to public parks, I find. They are late flowering this year because of the cold and wet spring so far, and I’m told they will be at their best next weekend. At a National Trust site yesterday, I was interested to learn from a companion that despite the Trust only planting the native variety, Spanish ones were present and so also were hybrids. I admit to not minding – I find any bluebells a real tonic!
Politics and mental health - the missing link? 