I share my house with two teenage sons. For reasons that may not be wholly surprising, I suspect that they have an above average political awareness for people of their age. Mealtimes (and we sit down together very day) involve lively exchanges of views (and a lot of, usually dark, humour).
On Thursday evening we were discussing the success, or otherwise, of British prime ministers from Macmillan onwards. Some time was spent on Major, not least because of his problems with his own party. I explained those he described as ‘the Bastards' And then I hardly need to point out that those very same Bastards, and their heirs, are those now ruining this country. We have moved from those seeking to undermine the credibility of the government from the sidelines bringing down their own party, to those with the same views now seeking to run government.
The conclusion was, perhaps, inevitable. They destroyed Major, and the Tory party in the 90s. And now their own inability to respect rules is destroying the country that they are supposedly seeking to govern.
And that was before the Cummings scandal broke, and yet it is, so very obviously, a part of this larger narrative. Leona Helmsley once said that taxes were only for ‘the little people'. It is now very obvious that the members of this government think that the laws, rules and guidance that they provide are for those very same ‘little people', who are anyone but themselves, and those that they know.
It is a deeply unfortunate fact requiring acknowledgement that modern conservative politics is based on contempt. The range of those who suffer that contempt is wide: from immigrants, to those on lower pay, to anyone in government employment, to the disabled, to those who care in any way about others; all are the subject of disdain. They are ‘the little people'.
Cummings has very clearly revealed that.
But the whole Brexit campaign he ran was based on that as well.
As were his campaigns to make himself leader of the Conservatives, with Johnson his glove puppet with notional power.
There is, though a problem for these Tories. And that is that whatever people feel about ‘them' (as in ‘us and them') in authority they do not like to be treated with contempt. So ‘them' have to appear to treat ‘us' with respect, even if they very clearly don't actually hold such opinion.
And Cummings has transgressed that rule.
So too have all those deeply obsequious ministers who have queued up to defend him done the same thing, and made profound fools of themselves in the process.
A competent government might recover from such a debacle. But we have not got a competent government. We have what is, I have no doubt, the most incompetent government of my lifetime. It is one that I would genuinely worry about if left in charge of a town council.
The Major years indicate what happens next. His government did not fall even though Major called ‘the Bastards' out in 1993. He struggled on to 1997, ever more ineffectively. But a new Labour leader used that period to prepare the policy that swept a corrupt, broken and deeply disliked Tory party from office for thirteen years.
In that period Major won a party leadership election. I suspect Johnson will not: long before he has to face the ignominy of that he will have quit, having proven beyond doubt that he never was fit for the office that he craved since childhood. But I see no chance of his successor, whoever that might be changing his party's fortunes. There are pivotal moments in politics when credibility is lost. I suspect we're living through one this weekend.
Johnson's government has lost whatever authority it had, despite his majority. Those who have stood by him have lost theirs in the process. There is so little talent in their party that there is no chance of them all being replaced in another government. The stain will last in that case. And eventual demise looks to be inevitable. But we must suffer the agony of waiting until that happens.
And in the meantime another question arises, which is will Labour use this time wisely to have what Blair was never in position of, which is a plan for the truly radical transformation this country now needs?
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:
I suspect the answer to your final question is no. I suspect that if Jeremy Corbyn or anyone prepared to put forward a transformative Programme was leader of the Labour Party then the media would not have released these stories about Cummings but feel free to do so because there’s an alternative government that is perhaps more safe for the establishment available.
I’m glad someone else said it first.
It’s inconceivable to me that Starmer would do anything to challenge the way things are. He is as much a dedicated follower of the status quo as any Tory. I doubt there would be any substantive difference in the way the New New Labour party would run the country. Hopefully they would turn down the mendacity of the government’s attacks on society and the economy but that’s as much as I could imagine. I think they would be more like competent adults than a bunch of reckless teenagers but I can not imagine a break from the reigning ideology of service to neoliberalism.
I’m sorry to say that speculating that the current Labour party could do something transformative or even have the capacity to conceive of transformation is optimism to the point of fantasy, with all due respect.
Corbyn was a bit left and his cohorts were proposing a shift back to stuff that was considered quite normal in the Seventies, insofar as I understood it, and the outrage at that even within his own party was confirmation of how far neoliberalism is entrenched.
I am completely staggered that anyone could think a Starmer government would be like a Tory government
That is ridiculous
It may not deliver all I would want – we do not know yet
But this claim is absurd
Give the guy a chance for crying out loud. He at least looks prime ministerial and capable of appealing to enough folk to win an election. He’s calm, intelligent, thorough, and he cares.
I doubt he will go for such an overtly transformative economic agenda as Corbyn, but I hope for the best – especially given the current crisis – it may in fact provide perfect justification and grounds for a transformative agenda that might otherwise be dismissed as fantasy economics. But if the middle /upper middle classes are suffering from an economic depression, that will create a fertile ground for a new economic epoch.
You offer no real substance to your claims that he would be the sort of cliche ‘Red Tory’ you paint him as.
But let’s look at the other options for the electorate. In the Tories we’ve had Chancellor after Chancellor of fiscal conservatives. Osbornomics chasing a ruinous surplus. Then ‘Spreadsheet’ Phil believing and pursuing much the same. Then briefly Sajid ‘I definitely didn’t rake it in at Deutsche Bank in the build up to the GFC’ Javid, who banged on about balanced budgets.
The only reason Sunak is deficit spending at the moment is because TINA. There really is no alternative. But we know we’ll be told like children sooner or later that we “must pay it all back”.
Then the only other viable electoral option (and that’s a BIG stretch of the imagination) is the Lib Dems.
They’ve just released a blow-by-blow account of their painfully predictable self-destruction in the build up to the last GE. They’ve postponed their leadership election to next year, but their co-acting leader is Ed Davey. A man just as tainted by the sins of propping up and enabling the Coalition as, if not more so than, Jo Swinson. He looks the bookies’ favourite. He was banging on about “fiscal rectitude” just before the last GE. A constant 1% surplus was the solution! A hackneyed Osborne plan to show any one with half a brain that he hasn’t a clue.
So there you go. I personally believe that Keir Starmer is the smartest, most thoughtful and most incisive of this awful pool (primordial soup?!) of talentless careerists. I think he understands that smart public investments essentially pay for themselves. He can see that this works in other modern, comparative economies. And he will nail his colours to the mast to talk this up, rather than shy away from it.
Hey, it may well be blind faith. But a decent, sensible Labour party is, for me, the only realistic route to solving the massive challenges that face us now, not least the environmental reckoning we are only bringing forward with our complacency and recklessness.
But, yeah, I’m sure he’s just a Tory, as you say. Based on his political career so far I’ll have a stab at his make-up: 23% Maria Caulfield, 17% Ben Bradley, 36% Iain Duncan Smith and 24% Christopher Chope.
Sound about right?!
Richard, Starmer is not left wing but a red tory, and yet you are staggered by people who say is not. I watched a labour mp – shadow minister for police refusing to condemn Cummings for his trip on Sofi Ridge show this morning and i turn the tv off in disgust. That is red toryism at its stupidity, Starmer and Co are propping up the tories and not even remote criticizing them with any vigor, i have no faith in starmerism and nor should you. Also a lot socialists have and are being kicked out the party for no reason other than they were socialist, one labour member was kicked for being just that. Well that is what the excuse they gave, also the leaked report on the red tories doing their best to lose two elections has not been acted upon. In other words Starmer is more bothered about the leak than his party hq undermining labour to lose two elections. Starmer is not supporting renters and wants them to get indebt as well, total red tory terrority here. He is a neoliberail at heart.
Darren
I’m sorry – but thyat’s wrong
And the reason why Labour can hold its fire is readil apparent
When your opponent is digging their own grave you don’t interfere
There is literally not a reason for Labour to interfere and politicise this when the Tories are in self destruct mode
Sorry – but I am not really taking part in claims of this sort
And I stress, I am not in Labour. I amsimply objectively observing. Maybe that helpos
I am cerytain Starmer is not all I want – but to claim he’s a Tory is absurd
Richard
I’m inclined to agree with Graham. As Richard points out, there’s no talent in the Tories with whom to replace the existing cabinet, so, that given, perhaps in the interests of maintaining a stable status quo the plan is to replace them, when possible, with amenable talent from Labour. Politics, eh? Should we expect an election soon?
I am sorry Richard but it was the Remainers who treated the majority as the “little people.” Calling anyone who voted for BREXIT a fascist, racist or plain stupid.
The academics and champagne socialists championing their own agenda that they know best with their pointless degrees and that they are just better people as a result (I say this as someone with qualifications including a Masters).
Even now the remainers use any opportunity to reinforce this message.
It is quite unbelievable.
Politely, that is completely crass
You are the one who decided to bring the BREXIT issue back into this debate accusing the Conservative Party (via Cummings) as demeaning the “little people.”
Can you not accept that the Remainers were equally as guilty at this during the debate? You included.
No, emphatically not
We did not lie
We did not abuse
We offered clear argument
And we were right
As time will tell
And there was nothing whatsoever contemptuous in that
And so I am not going to apologise for something not done
Mate, you only have to watch the (see below) montage video of Nigel Farage (using his overly generous media platform) constantly offering up Norway as a model for the UK BEFORE the referendum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kgAPwqhoHo
(Please don’t come back at me about his rebuttal of Anna Soubry at the beginning. It was obvious to all it was a slip, and you can see how he immediately jumps on it, talks loudly over a woman and utilises the strawman logical fallacy to move the goalposts. It’s pathetic playing to the gallery.)
And then suddenly, once a deal was on the table he changed his mind and conveniently could not recall ever saying this (the video emphatically proves he’s a compulsive liar).
A CLASSIC BETRAYAL NARRATIVE contrived and manufactured up by the man himself.
But now apparently we Remainers are guilty of betrayal and obstinance?! Pull the other one!
Given Cumming’s belief in eugenics his contempt is probably not surprising. However, what is scary is how he proposes to use it.
https://bylinetimes.com/2020/05/15/8bn-nhs-health-data-plan-tech-arm-set-up-without-oversight-official-watchdog-reveals/
https://bylinetimes.com/2020/05/14/whitehall-analytica-the-ai-superstate-part-1-the-corporate-money-behind-health-surveillance/
https://bylinetimes.com/2020/05/14/whitehall-analytica-the-ai-superstate-part-2-is-covid-19-fast-tracking-a-eugenics-inspired-genomics-programme-in-the-nhs/
Starmer is a NuLabour apparatchik, it will be Triangulation to the rafters and ‘How can we rebuild the Northern Wall’. There will be no room for anything radical, it might scare the horses.
We’ve seen that with the SNP here in Scotland. They fail to take on the deeply Unionist MSM because they are scared of scaring too many horses. They could be so much more radical and have deliberately failed to take measures which would improve our lot under Devolution.
They have thrown their members and people in the wider Yes movement under the bus without a second thought at mere hint of some Unionist confected scandal. It is beginning to grate. The Holyrood elections next year could result in a new set of Yes MSPs they do not control which will embody the conscience of the Yes movement and they will have to look at them across the chamber every day. It is sad that this is necessary, but it is.
I always hope for better
There’s gonna be a lot of disillusioned unemployed working and middle class folk ready to kick off in the streets before too long.
Cummings’ actions here are an absolute piss take. People have sacrificed seeing their dying love ones, missed funerals, let their businesses go to the wall, stayed indoors by themselves for weeks. And then Cummings just does what he wants.
Best part of this was how the papers kept their powder dry on his additional daytrips until after the Cabinet came out defending him on the basis of a ridiculous argument and a pack of lies.
They’ve now completely exposed themselves for the contempt they hold for our intelligence.
Stitched up like a kipper. Classic Dom
There is the well-known story of the Tory grandee running through the litany of Tory leaders: “Winston, Anthony, Harold, Alec, Heath, Margaret, Major,” he recited. First names for all but Ted Heath and John Major. They were not “true Conservatives.”
The current PM is “Boris,” a true Tory. Cummings is known by his surname, so, not a true Tory. He is therefore expendable, more-so than Boris, whose time for the visit from “the men in the grey suits” is not yet upon him.
Watch who in the Cabinet is referred-to by his or her first name, that person is BoJo’s probable successor.
As with the mayoralty, Johnson desperately wants the office but just as desperately doesn’t want to spend any effort to do the job. Unfortunately this time he has not surrounded himself with enough reasonably competent people to do the work for him. I can’t see him soldiering on for five years. Brexit is “done”. Time to spend time with his new young family?
Go on then – who’s next? Surely not Priti or Alok or Grant or Jacob? Definitely not Raab or Gove or Williamson or Hancock. Rishi then?
The man who came second – Hunt
Coincidentally I too was recently evaluating our PMs via the UK Parliament YouTube channel. Fascinating stuff. It was almost 23 years to the day that Tony Blair held his first PMQs, exhibiting a degree of intelligence, energy and flair that millions hoped would finally lead the nation towards a permanent era of progressive politics – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MryC6qC3FYA
‘The overall result of the election ended 18 years of Conservative government, in their worst defeat since 1906, a defeat which left them devoid of any MPs outside of England …. Labour’s victory, the largest achieved in their history and by any political party in British politics since the Second World War, led to the party’s first of three consecutive terms in power …. The Liberal Democrats’ success in the election …. both strengthened Ashdown’s leadership and the party’s position as a strong third party, having won the highest number of seats by any third party since 1929.’ (Wiki).
Because of the insane FTPA the Tories will almost certainly be in power for another 9 years, which gives Labour (and others) adequate time to plan and then topple this iniquitous bunch of dangerous incompetents. While no fan of ‘New Labour’, I think Keir Starmer could be the right person at the right time, bringing some logic and stability to a chaotic situation. The immediate effects of Brexit – which will be milked by the ERG & its supporters – are still an unknown with regard to the electorate. While a lot of socio-economic damage can and will be done in the meantime, it will nevertheless be the (unfortunate) basis for change when it comes. Shift happens!
I’m only posting this as I was reminded how radically the political landscape can change in a relatively short period of time, offering both hope and despair depending on which side of the fence once sits. While at this moment in history it’s not looking good for progressives, one must remain realistically positive and continue the fight at whatever level one can. So, once again, thanks Richard for providing this dynamic platform which sends daily ripples out into the wider stream of political debate.
I know the implausibility of a Labour gov’t
But we have a long time to go and a heck of a lot to go wrong…
People really do not like incompetence that costs them jobs and lives
It does seem a pivotal moment…. we just need to hear from Boris that “Cummings has my full support” to know that it is all over for Dom.
Beyond that, I am slightly disturbed by the tone of the comments so far. It seems as soon as we start to explore what the future looks like “after Boris” that we revert to Corbyn/Blairite or Remain/Leaver tribes. In 1992 divisions on the left allowed the Tories another 5 years. We must not let that happen again.
It is true some Corbynista are Trotskyites, some Blairites are Thatcherites; some Remainers are arrogant, some Leavers are racist. However, tarring all members of another tribe with the same brush is very destructive.
I did not vote for Corbyn as Labour Leader but I respected the Party’s choice. He came closest to winning when he was relatively unknown but the more the public saw, the less they liked him (encouraged by the hostile media). As the best hope of unseating the Tories I was prepared to overlook his shortcomings but his time as Leader is over and we all owe the new Leader the courtesy of our ideas/support. I have participated in their policy forum – I hope my thoughts find fertile soil but only time will tell – but this is the way to contribute to debate rather than slagging off the other tribe.
I voted Remain. While we were a member of the EU I was content to try and accommodate “Eurosceptics” by accepting the myriad opt-outs that the UK had to allay their concerns. So, I do expect Leavers to try and accommodate my concerns now that we are out of the EU and try and use our transition period constructively to reach a future arrangement that offers the Remainers something of what they want.
This “winner takes all” attitude will only make us all losers.
Hear, hear
I didn’t vote for Starmer, and I dislike his record, but I did decide to give him a chance. I have to say that he hasn’t started particularly well: prioritising landlords over tenants, declining to support teacher’s unions, his response to the leaked report on the party machinery deliberately throwing the 2017 election and doing everything in their power to undermine the twice-elected leader, and the seemingly resurgent purge of anyone who even simply expresse support for Palestine on spurious grounds. The very fact that so may of the commentariat speak of him in glowing terms speaks volumes of the degree of threat he’s perceived to pose to the existing order. I’m still a member for now, but the clock is ticking…
As far as this government holding the little people in contempt, this has been going on for a long time. It was back in 2003 during the Iraq war that Jack Straw had requested a talk with our top man on chemical weapons. David Kelly was wheeled out and Jack Straw, on learning that Kelly only earned £60k pa, asked wasn’t there anyone more senior he could speak to. Things haven’t improved since then and as Simon Tisdall asks in the Observer today, where is all the anger?
All the anger has been dissipated by an unholy mixture of UKIP and a split Labour party undermined from resentment within by its own Right wing and lack of vision and understanding of fiscal power by its Left.
That’s where all the anger went.
The real problem is the stupidity of the electorate. People will re-elect Boris whatever he does (conpare poll numbers for Trump holding up in the 40’s). We have to face up to the implications of this – hard Brexit, erosion of civil liberties, re-imposition of austerity, eventual fragmentation of the UK. Happy days.
I do not agree that he will be re-elected
I doubt he will be leader
I think your analysis of the state of the Tory Party and its government is spot on. Unfortunately I fear that the agony of waiting for this government (led by whoever) passing on may be longer than we would hope for, arguably a legacy of the transformation New Labour ducked so we’re stuck with first past the post and it’s resident demons. There are two reasons why the agony may be prolonged:
– Labour has irrevocably lost its power base in Scotland. The Tories could lose every seat in Scotland and still get a majority of sorts in a General Election. Labour can’t. And the experience of last Autumn tells us Labour isn’t good at working with other parties to keep the Tories out of power.
– The Labour Party isn’t where it was in 1993, it’s where it was in 1987. Too many in the party are still prioritising arguing over its navel over fighting the Conservative government (echoed by some of the comments to this post). Until all Labour’s guns are trained on the Tories there’s always a fair chance they’ll take the opportunity to slip past danger while everyone’s distracted by a family punch-up.
” the experience of last Autumn tells us Labour isn’t good at working with other parties to keep the Tories out of power.”
Disagree. Starmer is shrewd and smart. Corbyn, for all of his good points, I think put principle ahead of all else. We can’t make assumptions about the ability of the party under Starmer being able to work strategically with other parties based on Corbyn. There were also many activists screaming for exactly that type of cooperation that fell on deaf ears.
I think Starmer will win the next election – possibly as a coalition. But the public will be sick of the Tories by then.
He may well have to work with the SNP
Very pithy comment seen elsewhere: ‘The government that hated Britain’
When people start to think that…
Someone mentioned the SNP being less than radical. I commented on this the other day and I think the same argument applies to Labour. It boils down to “don’t scare the horses”: our own horses in our grand coalition and the other horses grazing nearby looking to see which way the wind is blowing before moving one way or the other.
It seems to me that Labour will never be truly radical until they embrace PR.
Right now it’s the Tories who are radical, first with Thatcher pushing neoliberalism and financialisation and now with Johnson/Cummings with their don’t give a toss about anyone or anything, except for their own privileged group and privileged backers.
And thanks to FPTP we have them for another 5 years with an unassailable majority. Maybe then they will be thrown out and we’ll have another “dictatorship” with an unassailable majority or maybe they’ll be returned to power.
A PR vote could produce a very different kind of parliament and maybe more people would actually vote. It would be worthwhile for more to vote Green or LibDem (or Brexit Party). Modelling by the ERS under the d’Hondt system suggested the Tories would have 77 fewer seats. A hung parliament could have produced a coalition of left-leaning parties, dominated by Labour, but a Labour party that would have to take account of possibly more radical proposals from Greens, LibDems & SNP. And there would be less likelihood of the new policies being reversed by the next government.
The ERS’s preferred PR system might produce something a bit different and more reflective of how people voted. Of course, when Scotland goes, then it would be very different.
For me, the key to more radical policies of fairness & equity require PR, not a radical Labour Party, which seems no more than wishful thinking at the moment.
I very much like this, and for me the continuation of FPTP has been one of the fundamental drivers of my desire for Scottish independence: nothing good can be achieved under that system, whose sole purpose is to entrench power and diminish accountability. When I vote in Scotland, I feel my vote counts: apart from 1997, I can’t evr say I’ve had that feeling in UK elections (and subsequent events showed that even 1997 was an illusion…)
IMO, the SNP’s best years have always been when they’ve been a minority government and have had to seek consensus. Proponents of FPTP characterise that as ‘weak government’ but I disagree: look at the SNP’s achievements in that first adminsitration of 2007, where they either achieved or laid the round for a considerable transformation of Scottish government.
There appears to be some truth in this….
I have no problem with cooperation
This is the guy that pushed a winner takes it all no holds barred politics. Seeing him whining about fairness is embarrassing. I am embarrassed watching it. It is frankly just unmanly. He should go and preserve some self-respect.
Still this is the guy who ran “Klute”. I am afraid that joke may be lost on southerners but Peter stringfellow described it as probably the worst nightclub in Europe and he knew about such things.
“what Blair was never in position of, which is a plan for the truly radical transformation this country now needs?”
People easily forget this now, but actually Labour’s 1997 manifesto was seriously left-wing, and actually would easily be mistaken for a ‘Corbyn-ist’ one, and many of the senior players were very much to the left of the party – think Claire Short, Robin Cook, Mo Mowlam. I’ll agree that it wasn’t as ambitious as the 2019 manifesto, but then again there wasn’t the perceived need to the same degree as now.
Have you a link?
I think this is it http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml
Thanks to you and others
http://www.labour-party.org.uk/manifestos/1997/1997-labour-manifesto.shtml
Maybe you could kidnap Starmer and over the course of a week shift his economic thinking! Any chance of doing less dramatically.
Who knows?
I think between the two sets of revelations about Cummings (beautifully planned and executed timing by Pippa Crerar and co), Johnson’s train wreck of a press conference appearance yesterday and the number of ministers who unthinkingly leapt to Cummings’ defence immediately after the first part of the story broke there are a significant number of senior Tories whose credibility is absolutely shot. To my knowledge (and I am the opposite of an insider when it comes to such matters) eight Tory MPs have already publicly stated that Cummings must go, and least one other has supported them without actually saying the words for himself. The comparison the springs to my mind about Johnson and Cummings is with Tsar Nicholas and Rasputin. I suspect that they will continue to brazen things out for today but Cummings will be gone tomorrow morning and Johnson before much longer.
I hope you are right
The people Starmer has surrounded himself with in Shadow Cabinet is what worries me about Starmer. This of course could be a Wilson esq manoeuvre though. He could jetson the likes of Streeting and co in government.
Its the hope that kills