14th September 2022
Over at his substack, the estimable political journalist Adam Bienkov sets out why he thinks it is a bad thing that normal politics have been suspended.
There is a great deal of force in what Bienkov says.
But.
I want to put forward an alternative view.
The run of day-to-day politics has certainly been paused, but politics operates on a number of levels.
And at a deeper level, what is happening at the moment is politics of a more fundamental kind.
We are reminding ourselves of the institutions of the state and the arrangements of our constitutional order – and the role of the Crown as the most important organising principle in our political system.
This is a good thing for our polity, and it should be done from time to time.
Yes: the timing could be better.
But the timing will never be perfect – there will always be some crisis or controversy.
A period of such reflection is not necessarily a conservative thing.
It may well be that the contemplation of our monarchy – about what it has been and what it may become – will lead people to consider or accept change.
Such thoughts are rare in the hustle-bustle of daily politics.
And so in this way I do not see what is currently happening as the political life of the nation being put on hold, but a continuation of politics by other means.
*
The sentiment above is a general one – and it would be applicable at any time.
But there is also a particular reason why the current pause in day-to-day politics is to be welcomed.
Our current politics is characterised by the “3 Ps” – populism, polarisation, and post-truth.
This is especially the case after the downfall of Boris Johnson and the rise to power of Elizabeth Truss after a leadership campaign in which the candidates necessarily had to appeal to partisan supporters.
A break from – and a brake on – such a manic political trend is healthy.
And given the circumstances of this pause – marking the death of someone who, on any view, was a committed public servant – the contrast with certain recent leading politicians is stark.
*
We have an energy crisis and a cost-of-living crisis, and we have a war in Europe and an ongoing climate emergency.
All of these need to be addressed, all of them are urgent.
But we may also be having a broader political crisis – a crisis of legitimacy and accountability.
And, if so, that also needs addressing, for that also would be urgent.
*
Reminding ourselves that there are other parts of the constitution than what Johnson misused or disregarded is a good thing.
Such moments should be rare in any political system, but they should happen from time to time.
And this is not necessarily a monarchist notion – for what it is worth, I am a non-militant republican, opposed to the hereditary principle.
Normal political activity will resume soon enough.
But this short time out from day-to-day politics is good for us, and it good for our politics.
***
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.
I love a good bit of pageantry, me. But what we have seen for the past week has had precious little to do with constitutionalism. The “accession” presentation was just that. It was a matter of course. There was no power in the room except that of the king.
And of course, with a break from day-to-day politics, we have also seen a simply chilling break from the right to peaceful protest and freedom of expression.
And an awful, awful lot of soldiers. Other less democratic nations will be so jealous.
Or put another way: A billionaire died, and people took time out from waiting for urgent medical procedures to clap and cheer the tax-free passing of wealth from one family member to another. Apparently without any sense of irony.
Has it stopped, though?
The leak about the obesity strategy suggests that politics is business as usual, even if not in the constitutional sense.
It’s what worries me: with no real business to undertake, these idle hands may be just what the Devil is looking for.
As a state event, this is structurally designed meta-reflexivity to reinforce continuity. All rebellion/panic “on hold”.
Is there any evidence that our politicians are taking advantage of the break in normal business to do any reflection?
It strikes me that there is not one jot of evidence of that, and a great deal of evidence of politicians saying nice things about our late monarch and about the importance of monarchy, whether they believe them or not, because that is what is expected of them, and because the backlash if they did anything else would be horrific. Plenty of the three Ps in play.
Nor is there any sign that they are taking advantage of the lull in hostilities to find better ways of doing politics or of resolving the many ills of the country, including the cost of living crisis.
On whether or not there is any evidence that politicians are using the opportunity to reflect on the nature of leadership and the values that are appropriate to public life .. I share your scepticism.
But ordinary people sure are reflecting on those things, and these are days that will still be quite fresh in memory at the next General Election.
Likewise, it’s been gratifying to see London-based political commentators struggling to comprehend the degree to which Scotland is a thing, a country, a polity, or, as they used say when selling a job lot at auction in Aiberdein, ‘aa they things’.
I disagree that ‘on any view’ Elizabeth was a ‘committed public servant’. Sadly this is one of many absolute statements floating around about what ‘we’ think of the monarchy.
If the overall balance of what you do does not serve the public, I personally don’t think you can be seen as a public servant. Being the figurehead of British colonialism; keeping her enormous wealth, landownership and multiple palaces to herself; getting herself excepted from hundreds of laws including equalities legislation, inheritance tax and climate laws; hushing up accusations of her son being a paedophile; and clinging onto her role beyond the point she was physically capable of consistently exercising it doesn’t seem like public service to me. Nor does all that harm get outweighed by the ‘good’ of her political and religious ‘duties’.
Secondly her carrying out her ‘duties’ also reinforced her personal power and position. As we don’t know her, we can’t ascribe either the motive of a sense of public duty or the maintenance of personal power or another reason to her carrying out her ‘duties’; if we can’t be sure of the motive, we can’t state that it was to serve the public.
The Queen was undoubtedly a devoted & hardworking public servant & deserving of respect for her profound sense of duty.
There were compensations though.
I do not see any genuine reappraisal or thoughts on our constitutional arrangements except from very few people. It seems we are just required to assent & bow.
Meanwhile in the background, civil servants are sacked & measures are taken without scrutiny or accountability.
So I am not so sure this hiatus is such a good thing
The Queen no longer has any need for any employees. The new King can take them on, but thereby has no need for his existing employees. And so on to the new Prince of Wales etc.
What do you suggest as an alternative to some being declared redundant? Keep them on with no duties but full pay?
And how can that be reconciled with the proposed slimming down of the Royal Family? Do you propose instead that it be extended?
“The Queen was undoubtedly a devoted & hardworking public servant & deserving of respect for her profound sense of duty.”
“Undoubtedly?
Oh, I beg to differ. C L covers off the main objections to that notion being stated as fact eloquently, but here’s a little thought experiment for you:
Name one thing ER did which tangibly, materially impacted positively on your life in any way.
(“She waved at me and I felt special” doesn’t count.)
The fact is that all she did – all she ever did – was tacitly support the status quo, and play the games that furthered that end: because it was in her interest to do so.
She did literally nothing whatsoever to improve the lot of the public at large.
By any rational measure, she failed dismally as a “public servant”.
She served only herself, and people like her.
With the greatest respect I think this is wishful thinking on the part of an averred constitutionalist. I doubt that the constitutional aspects of last Thursday’s passing have intruded into the thoughts of but a fraction of our politicians even though I’ve obviously no evidence for this.
Coming after the period of governmental stasis that occured during the Tory leadership election and with, among other things, businesses on the verge of bankruptcy with no mechanism in place to fulfil the pledge to protect them from energy price rises and the funding of support for households due to come from huge amounts of borrowing as opposed to a windfall tax, it should be all hands to the political pump imho.
It will be interesting to see what japes our leaders have got up to whilst the nation grieved. As we are distracted by the tax free transfer of wealth from Brenda to Charlie we have yet to understand how the billions that will flow to power our nation will be repaid, and by whom.
I think the more pertinent question is to who.
By the way the transfer of wealth is from Brenda to Brian, shurley?
I agree with you general point, and had thought something similar (though less well expressed). If it weren’t for the major economic crisis that swirls around us, and the worries this provokes for both businesses and individuals, I’d applaud it, but fact is that – after two months of no government – we desperately need active government.
The bigger question, however, is whether the new government really ‘gets it’, because if they don’t, War, Covid and Brexit will bring the country absolutely to its knees. Like many, I feel conflicted: we really need a change of government, and that may have to come the historical way, i.e. through revolution [I’m not advocating bringing out the tumbrils, by the way!], but it’s really time for the People to voice their anger before too many of them die of the deliberate neglect of successive governments.
Unfortunately, I’m not confident that this will happen as there are still – let’s call them idiots, for the sake of argument – who are calling for the return of King Boris.
Before Brexit, I hadn’t appreciated that my country contains so many masochists, and also how uninformed many of us are about current events and politics – and unwilling to confront their ignorance. Perhaps minds will have become more inquiring as they/we have come face to face with the passing of power, both political and monarchical.
Setting aside the merits or otherwise of this enforced break from normal political activity, surely it cannot be a good thing to have such a break just at the point in which the new Government is making numerous appointments and who knows what decisions are being taken without any form of Parliamentary scrutiny or comment. Speaking personally, I am greatly troubled by the practise that has begun under Johnson of the evasion of Parliamentary scrutiny of the executive by any means possible. The passing of HMQ is of course a solemn occasion, but I do not trust the motives of actions of our current Government in the times we live in at present.
I remember the great John Arlott, poet and cricket commentator, arguing passionately that politics was inevitably part of sport because sport is part of life, and life cannot be divorced from politics. Saying that something is non-political is in itself a political statement.
That applies in spades to the death of the monarch. Monarchists are having a field day in propagating the virtues of monarchy, to the detriment of the case against monarchy, at just the time we should be having serious discussion about its future. The extended mourning period helps them enormously.
Three days might have been tolerable and I would have tried to put up with keeping my feelings to myself.
With all due respect to her late majesty and her grieving family we have otherwise performative mourning and an exhibition of inequality. Millions spent on pagentry while people go unfed, cold and terrified of the future.
Meanwhile, the Truss government decides clearly insufficient benefits will not be increased, unpopular fracking given license and bankers bonuses be uncapped. A period used to conceal rather than reflect.
Precisely.