14th July 2022
One of the current leadership contenders for the governing party said – aloud – that something or other “needs to become a little less about the leader and a lot more about the ship”.
One ship that comes to mind given the dysfunctional antics of the governing party is the (literally) fabulous Ship of Fools.
But from the perspective of Whitehall, the more obvious ship is the Mary Celeste.
Last week – only last week – we had mass ministerial resignations that left at least one government department with no ministers in the House of Commons.
Whether government departments actually require ministers to be in place absurdly became a matter of practical concern, rather than for academic speculation.
But now, even the ministers who are in place are not turning up to having their policies scrutinised.
Yesterday:
This morning we were due to be questioning the Home Secretary, Priti Patel @ukhomeoffice. She declined to attend our session.
Our Chair, @DianaJohnsonMP has written expressing our disappointment.Read both letters here: ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/uI5LiOz87I
— Home Affairs Committee (@CommonsHomeAffs) July 13, 2022
And today:
@DominicRaab has postponed his evidence session that was scheduled to take place next week.
We have asked him to reconsider his decision so that we can question him on the Bill of Rights before recess.
Read our letter➡️https://t.co/CB57JODFVr pic.twitter.com/5xKagsvUEs
— UK Parliament Human Rights Committee (@HumanRightsCtte) July 14, 2022
So, if you were to wonder whether any specific minister has resigned, the only answer is that attributed to Dorothy Parker on the death of Calvin Coolidge:
“How can they tell?”
Current ministers just do not seem to care any more.
And as this blog as recently averred, infantile “culture war” politics are not about policy, but a substitute for policy.
They are easy things for the media to ask about, and easy things for certain politicians to resort to, and are thereby useful for both the media and the politicians as an alternative to discussing anything actually useful.
And such “culture war” politics seem not to be “cutting through”:
Key takeaways from this (mainly Conservative inclined group)
-terror/fury about economy, about winter to come.
-short shrift for ‘culture war’ issues in that context: “what’s that got to do with me?” Sole focus cost of living
-desperate to hear about policies to deal with it. https://t.co/2dsjhV8ARb— Lewis Goodall (@lewis_goodall) July 14, 2022
It appears that the (supposed) wedge issues were Westminster bubbles, all along.
What a surprise.
*
And so we have this general emptiness where policy – and politicians – should be.
This void is not because of any lack of issues that require urgent policy attention.
Such issues are legion.
It is because there is a deepening and widening disconnect between politics and policy.
Like Benjamin Disraeli’s “two nations”:
“between whom there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other’s habits, thoughts, and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets; who are formed by a different breeding, are fed by a different food, are ordered by different manners, and are not governed by the same laws.”
Disraeli posited that this described the rich and the poor; but it could now describe the gap between those who dominate politics and the media and those who do not.
The problem is that those concerned with politics and the media are not interested in the grunting, gruntful hard work of actual policy-making.
The concerns of those charged with making policy are not with the slog of policy formulation and implementation.
We had until recently photographs of packed cabinet meetings, with ministers and others “who attend”:
But from a policy perspective, that same table may as well be empty:
*
We are now half-way through this Parliament, with a government with a substantial majority, and we are reduced to empty departments and absentee ministers.
And – given the shallow nonsense of the current leadership contenders about tax-and-spending as well as culture wars – there is little prospect of a new Prime Minister changing the course of the ship of state, so as to close the gap between politics and policy.
In the words of the eminent jurist Marwood:
“We are drifting into the arena of the unwell. Making an enemy of our own future.”
Brace, brace.
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome.
One might be forgiven for thinking that this was the inevitable result of developing a class of professional politicians, the members of which are even more driven by and concerned with short-termism than their constituents.
And of course the appeal of easy answers to hard questions. Except the hard questions are now so complex and multi-faceted as to be verging on the incomputable, not just the “very hard”.
When the going gets tough, the weak get going.
One small plea…
Please don’t use the expressions “class of … politicians” or “political class” or derivatives. I realise that it seems to have crept in to the vernacular, but it is both specious and egregious in that it implies that a politician – in this specific context a member of the House of *Commons* is somehow “better” than those they serve.
Every single elected official, every single civil servant, every town, district, borough and county councillor, all of them, are public servants to you and I and the rest of the electorate. They are there and many are paid by us to carry out the administration of the country on our behalf.
When we allow the MSM to use the term “political class” they create an “apartheid effect” – a degree of apartness, implying that MPs are somehow separate from those they serve. To risk bluntness in the search for brevity: they work for us, not the other way around.
I suspect that if we were collectively a little better at keeping them in their place that much of the malaise we see in Westminster – the sense of entitlement, the pomposity, the “one rule for us, one for them” mentality, would be far less prevalent.
Yes, yes, I’ll see myself out…
I meant “class” in the set-theoretical use or sense. Certainly no connotation of “quality” was intended!
The contact and connections between the “governed” and “governing” (and those who want to be “governing” or who write about what the “governing” do) has never seemed shakier in my view.
It’s terrifying reality because the “governing” classes can’t be brought to account or changed without a massive social and political upheaval. No-one (including me!) has the time or energy right now to cope with such an upheaval when all most of us really want are solutions for very urgent, terrifying problems.
Very well put !
If we all felt like that then we’d be stuck with the Tories for ever. Nothing would change or improve. We must have hope.
There really is no such thing as the governing class. We plebs aren’t excluded, anyone keen enough and active enough can work their way up a political party’s ranks to become a candidate. There are some rather entitled people in politics but most MPs are ordinary people like you and me. I don’t agree with my MP, he’s an ERG member, but he’s a good person and a good constituency MP.
Very well said. Despair is too easy!
And as “nature abhors a vacuum”, what are we heading towards in terms both of democracy and leadership?
Excellent point.
My first thought was Bartleby the Scrivener. Ministers are simply deciding that they Would Prefer Not To.
I should begin by saying that I am based in the ‘affluent south’.
I saw my mobile hairdresser today. She’s a young-ish woman, her works takes her around our community, and she has young children in the local school. So she’s constantly meeting people from different age groups and backgrounds – and has the time to chat with them.
We also chatted – and it was interesting. Her views about all the leadership contenders were scathing, but her view of the current government far more so. And it’s the view she’s getting from the many people she’s meeting.
“Out of touch” would be the summary. But, add into to that: arrogance, self-serving, and other negatives. People are desperate to be properly heard by the politicians, yet are feeling abandoned. And the ministers are now even abandoning their responsibilities. [Yet we keep paying them.]
It was Penny Mordaunt’s speech you were quoting. The government does need to stop self-obsessing because there’s an awful lot in the real world that requires their attention and, more importantly, their action.
Imagine how my conversation might have gone if I were based in one of this country’s areas of high deprivation.
I believe that there is a growing feeling of frustration within the public at large that politics in the UK is not working. It is not working and it is out of touch with the realities that people are living with. Listening to some of the Tory Leadership candidates and it is clear that their pitch is not aimed at the people of this country, more, they seek to appeal to their own political class. This applies in a much wider context to the daily experience of people living in the UK. The political class provide no answers. This is a very dangerous situation.
Perhaps nit surprising, given whom they are trying to persuade to support them at the moment.
Listening to some of the Tory Leadership candidates and it is clear that their pitch is not aimed at the people of this country, more, they seek to appeal to their own political class.
With some justification, perhaps, since their constituency for this particular campaign is their fellow MPs (& later, maybe, their national party membership). The ‘people of this country’, unfortunately, aren’t getting a say.
I have to say that my local MP is not of that behaviour. But then he is not of the current governing party either.
I can understand if a former minister (i.e. any who actually went through with a resignation) would demur if asked to attend a committee and answer questions.
But for Patel or Raab to do so when they have remained in post is, frankly, just insulting.
Both need to be censured – and the Committee’s in question must have some form of censure authority to keep ministers from being so outrageously arrogant. If I failed to attend a scheduled meeting without prior contact to the Chair, then unless I had a completely legitimate justification (not “excuse”), I would expect to get a warning. If I made a habit of it, that warning would become written, right before I would get terminated.
Time to give Patel and Raab written warnings, methinks.
According to Wikipedia, Penny Mordaunt the “daughter of a former paratrooper, states she was named after the Arethusa-class cruiser HMS Penelope.”
Also, according to Wikipedia:
“She was torpedoed and sunk by German U-boat U-410 near Naples with great loss of life on 18 February 1944. On wartime service with Force K, she was holed so many times by bomb fragments that she acquired the nickname “HMS Pepperpot”.”
Of course, Penelope was the Queen of Ithaca, the daughter of Spartan King Icarius and Naiad Periboea.
Penelope is known for her fidelity to her husband Odysseus.
Of the two Penelopes, I think I would have plumped for saying I was named after the Queen of Ithaca who was the equal of her husband in bravery and intellect.
Middy Mordaunt’s Walt(er Mitty) level burnishing of her naval career has been rather peppered with shot since she started talking about it to, well, emphasise her martial skills and leadership.
A sailor, it would appear with no experience of being a member of a crew of a seagoing vessel.
“Left hand down a bit, Chief.”
“Left hand down a bit, Mr Phillips …”
“Everybody down!”
Penny Mordaunt was born in 1973. The first appearance on television of the popular character Penelope Pitstop was in 1968. As the latter’s compatriots might say, go figure.
Why would someone born in 1973 with no obvious naval connection be named after a WW2 cruiser? It’s not as if the name wasn’t in general use. I suppose we should take her word for it. Her own website doesn’t mention it though. Like all the candidates she likes to wrap herself in the flag so dating her naval connection back to her christening is convenient to say the least.
Is there not a case that select committees should have greater powers than to simply ask for people & papers? The power to compel attendance might come in handy every now and again.
As a party they appear to be rudderless and up the creek without a paddle . Do they need the Royal Navy steaming to the rescue in the form of special able seaman Mordaunt or will they be sunk without trace? What larks!!
A general election can’t come soon enough!
Acting Sub Lieutenant Mordaunt, please!
Thank you for writing this understated yet searing piece.
A quibble: You write: “The problem is that those concerned with politics and the media are not interested in the grunting, gruntful hard work of actual policy-making.”
I fear that this falls into the trap set by those who seek to sabotage the entire political system by tarnishing all politicians with the same, negative brush. If people begin to thing they’re all the same, none of them care, then they will stop participating in the political system at all. This actually benefits those whose grip on power depends on discouraging political participation.
Right now, the problem is not with a generic, across-the-spectrum, “those concerned with politics and the media.” It’s with a very specific subset of the political class: The Conservative Party, and their
supporters in the press. There are plenty of opposition politicians complaining about the Cost of Living, COVID-19 risks, the environment, and other massive policy issues. The lack of seriousness is emanating from one party in particular, and unfortunately they happen to be in office.
I beg to differ in that the English Labour Party, too, is having difficulties accepting reality.
We have 1.3 million unfilled vacancies in the UK.
A UK record.
Labour’s answer to that is to encourage the 100s of 1,000s of over 50s who have left the labour market to go back to work.
Of the 8,979,800, aged between 16 and 64 estimated as economically inactive at the end of 2021:
1,235,100 were retired
47,300 were discouraged.
The only credible significant answer to our growing labour and skill shortages is a reform of our misfiring immigration system which has contributed to the growing number of unfilled vacancies whilst bizarrely producing record levels of (im)migration.
But then we are back to talking about Brexit and the benefits to employers and business of Freedom of Movement.
And that way, madness lies …
I mean sure, Labour’s policies aren’t perfect and I’m sure there are policy lacunas. But there’s no serious comparison to the untethering of the Conservatives. It ain’t the same freakin’ ballpark, it ain’t the same league, it ain’t even the same freakin’ sport.
110,000 of those 1,300,000 unfilled vacancies are in the NHS.
There are not the people in the UK to fill those jobs let alone take up the extra 8,500 specialist posts in mental health services that Sir Keir Starmer QC has pledged to create if Labour wins the next General Election.
There are Leave voters saying they voted for Brexit on a false prospectus.
Labour appears to be hoping to win the next General Election in the same way.
There is just one small problem with that approach, people, let us call them experts for sake of argument, in the NHS know that Starmer is making a pledge he cannot honour in the context of Hard Brexit.
A point they have made to Sajid Javid about his promises to solve the serious understaffing within the NHS.
And other experts, in the armed forces, in business and so on know that the pledges Labour is making to them about staffing and job creation are equally undeliverable in the context of Hard Brexit.
And the General Election is a long way off …
I think between now and then that word is going to get out into the public domain that some of Labour’s biggest pledges are as credible as a promise to Get Brexit Done.
It’s rather early to start fighting the next General Election but you can guarantee the Conservatives will make equally unfulfillable promises. They will also deploy their usual tactic that no matter how badly you think we have done it will be worse under Labour. I don’t think the latter will work this time. The Conservatives have lost all credibility and two more years of policy free messing around will not improve that.
The fantastic stupidity of the current leadership campaign promises are a sure sign things won’t improve. Sunak is likely to win most MP support so they are all jockeying for second place knowing the membership don’t like Sunak. Whoever is up against him will win.
I’d go one further and say a specific subset of the Conservative Party. I’m a Labour member, but I know of Tory backbenchers who work on select committees and such, just getting on with the job of scrutinising legislation and government departments. But as you say, we’re stuck with that subset being the one in charge.
True. There were once people like Dominic Grieve, Kenneth Clarke, David Gauke, Anna Soubry and Phillip Hammond in the party. Unquestionably ‘Conservative’ as we once understood it, but now non-existent in the parliamentary party. The must still be a fair few of that ilk in the CCPs, but one wonders what influence they have.
Among my extended family, the prevailing opinion is now that all politicians are as bad as each other and there is nothing to choose between them. I believe that this point of view has been engineered deliberately by the people in the media and in Westminster who would most benefit from it.
There is a lot of analysis about this in the US context. The Republicans in particular have an enthusiastic ‘small government’ ideology. So when they are elected it is in their interest to create legislative deadlock. When they do so – by outwardly filibustering or by more veiled sabotaging of legislation – that lends support to the idea that government is ineffective. It’s quite pernicious. The solution is better civics education, so that the attitude that seems to have taken hold in your extended family can be prevented from arising or shaken off.
Perhaps someone should start some kind of law and policy blog which draws attention to the way the behaviour of certain politicians tarnishes the whole class.
All this bracing is doing no good for my back or my mental health.
Pity the ship isn’t The Titantic. I’m reminded of the expression moving the deckchairs on the aforementioned ship
Many songwriters/artists have also been inspired by the Ship Of Fools metaphor, as covered well here: https://litkicks.com/FoolSongs/
I don’t know even half of those listed, but the World Party one resonates most strongly for me. ‘You will pay tomorrow…’ Indeed.
As for the non-appearances of Patel and Raab. Is it really any wonder that superficial performative politics produces politicians who – knowing their time in post is now almost at an end – decide they can now no longer be bothered to perform?
I’m not excusing them, of course. I just find it hard to be surprised any longer by the rudeness and inadequacy of Johnson era appointments.
It’s a Zombie Parliament, seemingly populated by anyone Boris Johnson could persuade to take the job as he hurried to form a new government to keep him in position instead of having to resign as PM. People who had resigned over their sudden realisation they had no confidence in Boris Johnson quietly moving back into position under him again. Where’s the integrity in that? How can they not have confidence in him yet serve in his government?
Thank goodness for the British Civil Service which actually runs the country otherwise we’d be in a terrible mess. The problem is there’s no accountability if the ministers can’t be bothered to attend committees. Parliament is about to go into recess when there would be little accountability anyway, but it’s a terrible look and shows a total lack of respect for Parliament and a focus on the greasy pole many are attempting to climb.
And that, in large part, is why we have an apolitical Civil Service – It’s the only continuum we have in our fractious, partisan political scene.
And for added relevance:
Brace, brace indeed. We are at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe, where Boris’s land of make-believe has created a distortion in space-time. Once he is no longer there to keep the illusion going, it will collapse because none of the contenders will be able to emulate his style. But what will fill the void? One shudders to think. Pray that commonsense prevails at some point, if only to prevent the return of The Troubles.
I recently returned to England after many years in the USA. We decided to return home after the Americans elected a president who was not to our taste.
Since we have been home, I have been fond of observing that ‘at least British politics is still **about** something’ whereas American politics became entirely tribal about 15 years ago. You are Red Tribe or Blue Tribe and nothing else matters. How you vote is entirely determined by which tribe you belong to. The Red Tribe in particular has become entirely successful by pushing The Culture War to the top of the agenda and neglecting all serious policy issues.
Seeing the various manifestos of the various Conservative Party leaders makes me think that Britain — or, at least, England — is now on the same path. The best one can say of the leading candidates is that they are keeping their heads down and saying nothing that might hurt their chances, exactly as the best of the Republicans did in the Obama years. Most of the candidates seem to be committed to fighting fake culture wars, exactly as the worst Republicans did so successfully in America.
I fear for our democracy. American democracy is already doomed.
Agree. I’ve never felt so hopeless about British politics. Starmer’s sales pitch is that he’s not as disgusting a person and politician as Johnson is and as the next Tory leader is likely to be.
Rather than choose (and pay) the less disgusting of two ghastly candidates, I’d rather leave the post empty until somebody worthy of filling it can be found. The Italians managed to last quite a long while without any government being in charge, so perhaps we might be able to do the same (at a pinch).
While I don’t think Keir Starmer is the bee’s knees, I don’t think he is remotely disgusting.
I agree. He was dealt a bad hand, with querying Brexit unmentionable as it would alienate too many voters, a bunch of extreme left-wingers getting out of hand and a government with a massive majority and a PM who doesn’t see any need to observe convention. Now he’s having to work out a pragmatic approach to Europe, with the main necessity being gaining the trust of other Europeans towards Britain, which will take years. I can’t see what he could have done substantively differently.
I can understand these ministers refusing to turn up to answer questions just now, especially on these particular subjects. They don’t want to tie their hands by keeping on reading from their current script. They would probably wish to signal their availability to serve a new PM, and potentially agree a new script. After all, this present lot of ministers are in place largely because of their willing compliance to the script.