Although it seems our politics and public life are always in a state of rapid churn, they can hardly have been more turbulent than during these last few weeks. We’ve had the local elections, during which some ‘local’ Conservatives disingenuously resorted to green branding, the Coronation, progress through Parliament of the Illegal Migration Bill and further unhappiness with the Metropolitan Police, all against a backdrop of continuing transport, teacher and NHS strikes. The Tories did predictably badly at the elections, losing over 1000 councillors and a number of key councils – it got me thinking that a journalist could write a useful article on how things go when the Council changes from Conservative but still retains a high profile Tory MP, as has happened in Hertsmere (Oliver Dowden). An example of this is the Tory MP for Monmouth and Welsh Secretary David T C Davies, who seems to use his weekly column in the Abergavenny Chronicle to lambast the local Labour administrations.
The election results have cast an unflattering light on PM Rishi Sunak, who, rather than questioning his overall strategy, has illogically doubled down on his ‘five priorities’ and continued to parrot them out during every interview. His robotic performance and extravagant choices of transport, not to mention failure to rein in the rebellious wing of his Party and globe trotting predecessor Liz Truss, have raised serious questions as to his fitness for the role. ‘A lot of senior Tories have echoed this “steady Sunak” narrative if only for want of any other tale to tell themselves. We now have evidence from “real votes in real ballot boxes” to tell us what the country thinks. And the answer is that voters are not swallowing Mr Sunak’s sales pitch…. Voters are not going along with his attempt to present himself as somehow detached from the deep damage that his party has done. That’s not his only problem. He’s yet to make any tangible progress on the five-point plan that he produced at the beginning of the year’. And he’s seen as having no vision.
‘For decades, the Tories have perfected the psychological trick of displacing their own negative traits and failures on to their enemies, a device known as projection, often an unconscious process but very deliberate in this case. ‘It’s Sunak’s only hope of staying in power’ opines one commentator. Pathetically, it seems that without genuine strength and heft, the only way the Conservatives can justify themselves is to create a narrative that they represent the ‘real’ Britain and have to constantly do battle with those seeking to undermine it, including the ‘woke, trade unions, civil servants, Brussels bureaucrats and many more. And this is how so many get taken in: ‘Not only does the persistence of an “enemy within” or “new elite” exonerate the Tories’ failures in government – implying that actually existing Conservatism has never been tried and so justifying the seizure of more power – but it also implausibly places the wealthy Tory elite and the proverbial “man on the street” on the same side, jointly opposed to this undemocratic foe’.
It’s this kind of cynical and sinister narrative which led to the ‘we’re all in this together’ mantra when we are nothing of the kind. But hey, if Tories can persuade people we’re all fighting an enemy the real enemy can just carry on regardless. ‘The result is confounding: a ruling class that refuses to take any responsibility for ruling, an elite that enriches its chums while calling their opponents self-serving, a vandal that imagines itself the victim…. But while the Tories may mourn Britain’s decline, so long as they remain in power, they seem happy in their unhappiness, confident that there will always be someone else to blame, someone else to suffer the consequences’.
One example of Conservatives’ dissatisfaction is party members in Surrey unrepentantly voting for the Lib Dems in the local elections. Although Sunak hasn’t himself gone in heavy on culture wars, they see he’s done nothing to rein in the extreme rhetoric coming from his colleagues on a daily basis when people are struggling with the cost of living crisis. ‘And his apparent inability to personally shape his government trickles into his stance on the economy and immigration, according to these blue wall voters, who think the party had “made fools of themselves despite having so many chances” to restart’.
And now Sunak has a fresh attack from right wingers in the form of the Conservative Democratic Organisation and its conference this weekend in Bournemouth, which brought together Boris Johnson supporters even though Johnson himself didn’t attend. You can be sure, though, that he would be orchestrating things behind the scenes. It’s yet another example of defensive organisation dynamics, Tories believing they still have a saviour. Former Home Secretary Priti Patel is amongst senior Tories who spoke at the conference, saying how the current leadership has damaged the party, how they haven’t listened to the grassroots and how they’ve resorted to ‘more state control, more spending, and more taxes’, diverging from what she calls Conservative values and, crime of all crimes, ‘they took down a vote-winning political giant’.
Deluded or what? They insist they’re not a Johnson revivalist organisation, just want to make the party more accountable to the rank and file. Right, except most of the main speakers were noted Johnson supporters, including Nadine Dorries and Jacob Rees-Mogg. A sceptic tweeted: ‘What strikes most forcibly is the juxtaposition of ‘Conservative’ and ‘democratic’ in the CDO title. An oxymoron if ever there was one! There’s nothing ‘democratic’ about Tories they have systematically eroded our democratic rights over their 13 miserable years of malign misrule’. Apparently there were quite a few empty seats at this absurd shindig, so Sunak may not feel too threatened by them, but it’s a nevertheless a significant indicator of the splits and bitterness within his Party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65579691
Far away from the UK, a disingenuous Jeremy Hunt is desperately trying not to lose face on the G7 stage by saying, despite the latest inflation figures (which won’t yet show the impact on mortgage costs of the latest interest rate raise), the UK economy is growing much faster than could have been expected. Extraordinary that he expects people to believe this when the economy only grew by 0.1% during the first quarter yet shrank by 0.3% in March. Despite the fibs we often hear about the UK being ‘the fastest growing economy in the G7, G 20’ or whatever, the fact is it’s at the bottom of the G7 league, behind Germany, France and the US.
We’ve long known that theGovernment is deluded as to how we’re seen on the world stage: the German newspaper Die Welt for one sees ‘a nation in steep decline’, due to austerity, galloping inflation, poverty and a broken public services. But some take refuge in ‘nostalgic visions of British greatness’ (aka last weekend’s Coronation). As this weekend the government seeks (as it did with the Coronation) to use Eurovision in order to deflect from bad news in every quarter, one of the first things visitors will encounter is the rail strike: welcome to world beating Britain.
And talking of the Coronation, where do we even start? A BBC Director of News was on Radio 4’s Feedback programme responding to criticism of the BBC’s excessive and sycophantic coverage of this hugely extravagant pantomime on which so many have been anaesthetized and seduced into taking seriously. I believe he’s mistaken to contend that ‘news’ reporting (which did reluctantly include the republican protests) and the ‘ceremonial’ (which focused exclusively on the pomp, ceremony and process) should be separated when in reality they are inseparable. It’s nothing short of absurd and embarrassing that a country in the state this one’s in should spend £250m on this unnecessary event when so many are unable to afford to eat and when Charles could have paid the entire bill himself. It seems that a good number of royalists have not educated themselves about the Royal Family’s finances and about their interference with the legislative process, both of which have been shrouded in secrecy and do not show them in a good light. And myths are endlessly paraded unchallenged in the media, eg the royals bring in a lot of tourism income (no evidence for this, mainly supposition) and we must stick with the monarchy because we don’t want a politician as president, etc. We do not have to have a politician (could be a ‘national treasure’) so that defuses that argument. If we must have a monarchy, it could be one more akin to those in other European countries, which cost far less and whose members are far less entitled and do not stand on ceremony.
Because of the unsatisfactory nature of our constitutional monarchy, there were politicians mixed up in this, for example ‘Lord President of the Council’ Penny Mordaunt, who was dressed in a strange nun-like blue costume and carrying the reportedly very heavy Sword of State. What was striking before, during and after the event was the amount of coverage of arcane ceremonial roles, some of which had been shared between just a few families for centuries, the minutae of detail on robes and headwear symbolizing this or that and the faux mysticism underpinning the whole business. Totally out of place in the 21st century. The adjectives ‘exciting’ and ‘proud’ had to do a lot of heavy lifting last weekend. But also striking was how tired and glum Charles looked throughout, making no change even for the commemorative photographs. Moreover, quite a few don’t believe Charles and Camilla can pull this off, having nowhere near the dignity, gravitas or stature of Queen Elizabeth . It was noticeable how ‘white’ the Palace balcony looked, a large group (what happened to the ‘slimmed down monarchy’?) from which Princes Harry and Andrew were excluded. Although we knew this in advance it seemed far less reasonable in Harry’s case than Andrew’s. And now Charles has released a photograph of himself with his two heirs, Princes William and George, capturing in one shot privilege and entitlement set to last decades.
I thought the most incisive coverage was by Polly Toynbee and Nesrine Malik, who both cut right through the pretence underpinning this event. Polly alluded to ‘the homemade sign that may have captured the mood of many read simply: “Don’t you think this is a bit silly?” Oh, but this is what we do so well! We invite the world to see us in our lavishly gilded splendour; parading the largest military display for 70 years, as the commentators boasted over and over, so that no visitors would guess our army is a fifth of its size at the last coronation.
The greater the pageant, the more there is to disguise the emptiness of its meaning. All hail to Ruritania at its most gloriously silly!…. The phantasm of monarchy and golden orb strives to keep alive dreams of supremacy we should have let go long ago. All the paraphernalia and regalia, spoon, glove, bracelets and the magic ring that is the “covenant sworn this day between God and king” left the man in the oversized precarious crown looking, well, a bit embarrassed’.
Nesrine Malik usefully drew attention to the cynical narrative being reinforced, one of control and inequality: ‘We have the worst of both worlds: the royal family gives us nothing, and we in turn legitimise it, give it meaning and audience and pay, through subsidies and tax exemptions, for its ability to wow us. The monarchy does provide a service, but not to us. It is to an entire system of political decline and economic inequality that cannot withstand closer scrutiny, and so it must be embellished and cloaked in ceremony…. And so frippery and force combine to make a political position – support for the monarchy – seem like the natural, sacred default. Much like the ceremony itself, which depicts kings and queens as ordained by God and not the people, the purpose of branding these political positions as “traditions” and “ways of life” is to stop us contemplating another way of life’. What says it all is that it was reported that money for food banks was diverted to pay for this extravaganza.
Surely the worst own goal, though, was the appalling conduct of the Met Police in preventing lawful protest and roughly arresting 62 Republic supporters including its head, Graham Smith, who was held for 16 hours. Only four were charged and since then the police seemed to have rowed back and apologized but it gets worse: the police also arrested and held for 13 hours an Australian royalist who just happened to be standing near the protesters, and Met new broom Mark Rowley consistently failed to appear in public to defend these actions, clearly sanctioned by both the government and royals themselves. The fact that Republic had been liaising with the Met Police for months beforehand might make future protesters think twice about such a considerate strategy. The Guardian’s John Crace draws attention to the recklessness of only just having rushed through a draconian Public Order Act, giving no time for the police to prepare officers.
‘Move along. Nothing to see here. Of course you have a right to peaceful protest. Just as I have a right to arrest you if I feel like it. So it would be a good idea for you to move quietly behind this grandstand so that the BBC cameras can’t film you. Not that they would. They know their place. Besides, they will never do another royal event if they do. So move along quietly. Is that a Velcro fastener on your jacket? A belt round your waist? Planning to lock on, are we? Then you’re nicked. God save the king’.
Needless to say, Tories, police representatives and royalists were falling over themselves in the media for days afterwards, clutching at far-fetched straws to justify this disproportionate police action, even saying that the protesters could have caused the horses to bolt and that protesters shouldn’t be allowed to ‘disrupt’ the ‘enjoyment’ of this important occasion: cause them to actually think, more like. So protesters were demonized while footage of the Mall on Sunday showed the whole area strewn with rubbish left behind by ‘well wishers’, which would have cost thousands to clear up.
I’ve long wondered about this so it was gratifying to see Simon Jenkins write a piece about the oft-quoted notion of royal ‘service’: what do they actually mean by it because it seems that their idea bears little relation to what most of us would associate with the term? ‘… the word “service”, which the king and Prince William invoked so often, sounded like marketing executives toying with a new brand. This has to be better defined if it is to be more than a performative cliché…. Heredity is indefensible as a basis for high office, but it can survive if legitimised by consent. A king should indeed enjoy popular support, or he is nothing. But the question remains: is this popularity more safely guaranteed by unobtrusive moderation or by great congregations of soldiers, golden coaches, screaming jets, pop stars, bishops and God? …. I lost count of the references to God, but there was no mention of parliament or democracy’. As time passes, it will be interesting to see how King Charles’s idea of ‘service’ manifests itself – he keeps being lauded for his work setting up the Prince’s Trust and for his environmental concerns but these stem from many years ago and he surely needs to demonstrate ‘service’ in a different way now he’s ascended to the throne.
Meanwhile, the BBC, which was also criticised for lack of impartiality when reporting on the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee and the funeral, again attracted the ire of Republic, whose head, Graham Smith, recently wrote to David Jordan (BBC director of editorial and policy standards), saying the BBC is not holding the monarchy to account, especially when support for it has declined markedly in recent years. ‘The evidence suggests the BBC not only fails to be impartial, but makes no attempt to be impartial or balanced and, most shockingly, openly colludes with the palace in its coverage. It should be a source of deep shame for all those involved that, instead of such fearless reporting, we have insipid, vacuous and dishonest coverage from a BBC that is fearful of public opprobrium and palace influence. The result of the BBC’s failures is that the coverage serves the interests of a shrinking minority who could reasonably be called royalists. In doing so, they do a disservice to the whole nation’. Needless to say, the BBC’s response was as defensive and dismissive as usual. ‘We believe our reporting is fair and duly impartial, and BBC News always seeks to reflect a range of viewpoints in our Royal coverage’.
It’s concerning that now the cost of living crisis has almost been normalised in the media and besides ministers and others insisting that their inadequate pay offers to strikers are ‘fair and reasonable’, the Bank of England’s chief economist, Huw Pill, recently urged us to accept that we’re getting poorer. Pill said that ‘we all have to take our share’ but such people still don’t seem to understand that such messages are nonsensical and unjust when they themselves are doing so well. We are definitely not ‘all in this together’. Besides good salaries and pensions, most of them also have considerable private investments, often revealed when a conflict of interest emerges. Left wingers say Pill represents a buck-passing Establishment that has given up and that we need more State intervention, such as a wealth tax and price controls on essentials.
As was clear long ago, this government only seems capable of short-term, reactive and sticking plaster type non-solutions to deep-seated problems. There’s never a grasp of the big picture. Being increasingly aware not only of the NHS waiting list but the crisis in general practice, the government’s latest wheeze is to ‘free up’ 15m more GP appointments over the next 2 years by recruiting pharmacies to take on more responsibility. The government had promised 6000 more GPs when there nearly 1000 fewer but in addition, numerous pharmacies have closed altogether due to shortage of staff and others have had to reduce their hours. Of course there’s also the serious concern that pharmacists are not trained to spot or diagnose conditions, including whether a UTI can be classed as ‘uncomplicated’ so patients could end up going round the houses and coming back again to the GP, during which valuable time has been lost. Of course this is going to add to the anxiety many patients feel about their health, not knowing if and when they will get help. ‘Prof Kamila Hawthorne, chair of the Royal College of GPs, said the plans included positive steps, but none that were the silver bullet needed “to address the intense workload and workforce pressures GPs and their teams are working under’….. GP shortages now top 4,200 and will double to 8,800 by 2031, according to the Health Foundation’.
A new term has been coined to express what many of us feel about this country in its current state: ‘countrybarrassment’. Emma Beddington describes her feelings on viewing the UK through the eyes of her French in-laws: ‘Sometimes it takes an outside perspective to appreciate how bad things are….. It’s all part of a wider spiral of countrybarassment: there’s so much here you can’t stuff in a cupboard and hide from visitors. Rivers running with shit; eight food banks in the supposedly prosperous city where we live; visiting musicians refused entry at the border; school groups no longer able to visit; a country seeking to breach its obligations towards refugees under international law, and to ignore European convention on human rights interim rulings. Like the house, it feels like a personal shame: how have we let it happen? Why aren’t we out on the streets, like the French?’
Finally, an interesting article in The Times by Harry Wallop discusses how ‘the hotelification of offices is all the rage’ as a way (instead of hectoring) to lure people back to the workplace, with perks ranging from fruit to fluffy towels. But the one proving popular (ahem, taking the biscuit?) is a revival of what some of us are old enough to remember – the tea trolley – as evidenced by the unmistakeable tinkling of cups and spoons as it makes its way through the floors. This ritual largely disappeared during the 80s but now it’s apparently seen as a ‘fun, retro concept’, harking back to the pre-Starbucks era when the rattle of its wheels would be a signal to down tools and stop for a chat. Wallop reckons this development will be more successful than other interventions from bosses, like bingo nights and wine tastings. Let’s see…. interested to hear about examples. Bring back the trolley!
Politics and mental health - the missing link? 