David Mitchell on the Westminster Consensus

Posted on

I have already blogged on the Westminster Consensus today.

David Mitchell wrote about it, without using the name, in the Observer today, saying:

But ultimately, Reeves wasn't boring because of her presentational failings, because she lacks Churchill's or Bevan's or Russell Brand's charisma; it was because nothing she says seems to matter. Nothing any politician says on TV nowadays seems surprising or important, unless it's a gaffe. However dull the speaker, an audience will sit up and listen if what's being discussed might change their lives. But if the words are old and much repeated, even beautiful singing can be less interesting than a hard chair.

And that is the problem. Far too much of what is being said at Westminster means nothing to most people.

And that's why politics is not just boring but risks appearing irrelevant.

That of course will be the subject of another Venn diagram.


Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:

You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.

And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:

  • Richard Murphy

    Read more about me

  • Support This Site

    If you like what I do please support me on Ko-fi using credit or debit card or PayPal

  • Taxing wealth report 2024

  • Newsletter signup

    Get a daily email of my blog posts.

    Please wait...

    Thank you for sign up!

  • Podcast

  • Follow me

    LinkedIn

    LinkedIn

    Mastodon

    @RichardJMurphy

    Twitter

    @RichardJMurphy

    Instagram

    @RichardJMurphy