Brexit: I want my life back

I must admit that I have not yet looked at the 1,260 page legal text of the agreement between the UK and the European Union or even the summary document.   Boris may says its an extra Christmas present, but it is one I could live without for now.

For four-and-a-half years I have been answering media queries on Brexit.  I agreed to be media point man for our Comms Office over the festive period and was hoist with my own petard.

For example, on Christmas Eve I had to deal with an enquiry from a national newspaper about alleged attempts by President Macron to rule Europe.  At 8 pm I had to go live on France24, although fortunately not to deal with any suspicions that Macron is a shape shifting lizard.   At 5.30 am on Christmas Day, my phone rang again.

So I am quite looking forward to getting my life back.  If I was a MP or a member of the upper house, I would vote in favour of the deal on the grounds that a thin deal is better than no deal at all.  (BTW, congratulations to my former student Vernon Coaker on his peerage, but it does need reforming).

I did vote for remain and I actually campaigned in the north of England.  Invited to be the warm up act for Ken Clarke by Skipton's MP, I encountered an audience full of UKIP supporters.   The first question asked was why was I a waffler?  (Less so than some academics).  The second was how much the EU paid me.  (Nothing).

When Ken came on, a man walked on to the platform, pointed his finger at Ken and said 'You are a traitor to the country, Mr Clarke.'   Needless to say, Ken was not in the least bothered and gave a lively speech with some good jokes.

Having seen the EU close up sitting on a technical committee and as a research leader, as well as organising a MPA class in Brussels for many years, I have a lot of concerns with its decision-making processes.  Reforming them is a monumental effort.  If reform was possible, we wouldn't have had a dysfunctional and expensive Common Agricultural Policy for so long.

Nevertheless, I am sceptical about the possibilities of a new special relationship for the UK.   The idea of the UK sitting at the heart of three overlapping circles of the US, Europe and the Commonwealth doesn't wash any more.  I persuaded Andrew Gamble to write an essay for Political Quarterly on Brexit and the 'Anglosphere': https://politicalquarterly.blog/2020/12/15/after-brexit-the-anglosphere/

For me it's goodbye to the EU not au revoir.  We could only be readmitted on tough terms.   However, I see that a petition on a referendum to rejoin has started.

What I would find much more of a blow is the end of the union with Scotland which is a real risk.  As someone of Scottish descent in the direct male line and a graduate of a Scottish university, I would feel I was losing part of my identity.   More significantly, an England without Scotland could well be a less pleasant place.

As Anand Menon points out, we could be in for a very interesting debate about deregulation versus an interventionist state: https://ukandeu.ac.uk/a-deal-is-done-but-what-happens-now/?fbclid=IwAR233hWOYZ7dgLCE0MB6uc5HXmDOIeCtgDMqlHjSGnSx1oHHS-4QlIZpB0g

How to be an effective minister

Based on interviews with former ministers including Ken Clarke and Alistair Darling, this report for the Institute for Government looks at what it takes to be an effective minister and whether they have sufficient preparation for their roles: Ministers Reflect

From hero to zero

When I appeared on Rory Bremner's panel in his pre-election show at the Warwick Arts Centre, a questioner from the audience asked us to name a politician who seemed to better than the rest or words to that effect. I named Vince Cable and got a ripple of applause from the audience.

As Enoch Powell remarked, all political careers end in failure and, for all his skills on the dance floor, Vince Cable's reputation has taken a nose dive. He shouldn't have made such remarks to strangers, particularly when he was taking decisions in a quasi-judicial capacity.

If he wanted a war on Murdoch, he has lost. It will now be very difficult to stop the BSkyB takeover. News Corp are even thinking of challenging the reference to Ofcom through judicial review.

Nevertheless, Vince has got off relatively lightly. The Conservative right would have liked Ken Clarke moved into the business portfolio to stop him being 'soft' on criminals. As it is, David Hunt who is a through-and-through Cameroony has got additional powers.

One of the paradoxical consequences of these events (including similar stings carried out on lesser Liberal lights) may be to give a boost to the morale of Lib Dem activists who thought the party was abandoning its principles. They can now be reassured that there is some evidence that ministers are fighting their corner in government.

It should also be remembered that when there is a one party government personality clashes and differences over policy arise between ministers. There is, nevertheless, something in the argument that a party that has been out of office for a generation was ill prepared for the responsibilities of government.

DC comes close to backing Lib Dem candidate

David Cameron has come close to backing the Liberal Democrat candidate in the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election, wishing him well. 'Obviously in a coalition you always wish your coalition partners well,' the prime minister commented. Actually, I am not sure you do. Meanwhile the Conservative candidate has been damned with faint praise by senior Conservatives, being described as 'a very good candidate'.

It is likely that Labour will hold the seat, but what is of more interest is relations between Conservatives and Lib Dems in the Coalition Government. Right-wing Conservatives are increasingly suspicious that David Cameron likes being in coalition with the Liberal Democrats because it reinforces his liberal Conservatism.

Tabloid fury has been directed at Ken Clarke for daring to suggest that it may not be a good idea to incarcerate more people for a longer period of time, particularly in a fiscal crisis. That's undoubtedly what the public want, but whether it is good penal policy is another matter. California went down the road of an incarceration state, creating a powerful lobby in the form of the prisons industrial complex until federal judges recently told them to free large numbers of prisoners.

Back in the 1950s and 1960s the Liberals and the Conservatives did electoral deals in towns with two seats like Bolton and Huddersfield. They gave the other party a free run in one of the seats, shutting out Labour. They could do such deals again in the future, but they would offend the social democratic wing of the Lib Dems and the right wing of the Conservatives.

In which case it would be open to the free market wing of the Liberal Party to break away and run without Conservative opposition. It happened after 1931 and for a long time the National Liberals (at first labelled as Liberal Nationals) had their own whips in Parliament although they supported the Conservatives. In 1947 the two parties merged at constituency level and after the 1966 general election they were so few in number that they had give up their room in the Commons to the Liberals.

The big society

This was the unifying theme of David Cameron's speech to the Conservative Party conference. The implication was that this was the way forward which would enable the country to withstand the cuts in public expenditure necessitated by the budget deficit and take us to the sunlit uplands beyond.

The 'Big Society spirit' was mentioned more than once, as was the notion that 'your country needs you'. The prime minister used the example of the 100,000 people who had volunteered for the Olympic Games as evidence that additional volunteers were available. He attacked the notion that 'if government takes care of this, we won't have to'.

Citizenship was more than a transaction - although citizens have been increasingly encouraged over the years to define themselves as consumers of public services with certain entitlements, not least by New Labour. In other words, this idea has become quite embedded. This is not to say that it should not be challenged, but it's a perception that will be hard to dislodge.

It was noticeable that the attacks on Labour got the loudest applause in the hall. He managed to define Labour, in terms of the views of Ed Balls, as opposed to aspiration and there was a neat dig of Neil 'we've got our party back' Kinnock. Ed Miliband was more or less a non person, which is probably the way to play it for now. The prime minister's defence of the union also went down well with the audience.

The comment that we were geared up to fight old wars did not sound like good news for the Navy or the RAF. It seemed to me that there was a clear endorsement of Ken Clarke's refreshing approach to criminal justice issues.

It was interesting that two references were made to football, the last World Cup and the hope of holding the 2018 one in England.

I didn't think there was much that was new in the speech, but probably there didn't have to be. It was an attempt to define Cameron's distinctive approach and brand. There is such a thing as society, but it's different from the state (Sam Cam's idea originally) and it needs to be an active and engaged society. I don't think it is just cover for the cuts, but I'm not fully convinced either.

Interesting how much the cameras focused on Sam Cam during the warm up video and at other times. But she was looking very glamorous.

'I hope you don't think I wrote this rubbish'

Some years ago Private Eye published a brilliant front cover in which the Queen was reading the speech from the throne and the speech bubble contained those words. Of course, the Queen has to read the speech with an air of studied neutrality.

The Duke of Edinburgh seemed to be very interested in how Our Ken, dresssed up in his mediaeval clobber, would walk backwards down the steps from the throne, but in fact he executed it in an exemplary fashion, surely qualifying him from a grant from the Ministry of Silly Walks (oops, it became a quango under New Labour as the Pedestrian Locomotion Organisation or PLO and has become a victim of the first round of cuts).

I actually became aware that the speech was about to take place when I was having a coffee with a colleague (to discuss business) and a number of Chinese students started pointing excitedly at the television scheme. I therefore missed the appearance of the cap of maintenance which the political journalist Alan Watkins always used to talk up. One wonders how compatible the role of the cap in relation to the Established Church is with the Queen's reference to the welcome she would extend to Pope Benedict later in the year.

The speech was a relatively long one and contained a number of measures, although some of these were bills (the referendum on AV) and others were proposals, i.e., white or green papers (Lords reform). Overall, there were no big surprises, particularly given that the speech and its theme had been leaked (will this be the first 'leak enquiry' of the new Government)?

The Queen's list of forthcoming visits came after the domestic legislation proposals and it is interesting that the one reference to climate change came after this at the start of the 'international' section.

The one proposal that gives me most concern is the bill to make police authorities more accountable. This seems fine in principle, but mayoral elections have thrown up some unusual individuals, most notably in the case of Doncaster which has an English Democrat mayor. If was a professional police officer, I would have concerns about being accountable to an individual with no prior experience of public life or policing practice. It could well happen in a low turnout election.

Finally, I understand that 16 MPs have not yet sworn in (or affirmed). Five of these are Sinn Fein, but among them is Jo Swinson, the Liberal Democrat MP for East Dunbartonshire. More about Ms Swinson later.

Dave or David, Nick or Nicholas?

Given names often cause problems. I happen to have a Welsh one which gives people a lot of problems. I shortened it from 'Wynford' years ago. (There used to be a Welsh televison broadcaster called Wynford Vaughan Thomas who was a kind of sidekick to David Dimbleby on state occasions: I am not named after him!)

It is becoming increasingly common to call politicians by their first names as celebrity culture takes hold. It all started with the last London mayoral election when it was 'Ken' or 'Boris' or sometimes the affectionate 'Bozza'.

In private before the election David Cameron used to say 'Call me Dave!' But now he is prime minister, we must refer to him as David. But why is it Nick rather than Nicholas? I was talking with a colleague yesterday who specialises in culture and the media and she suggested that 'Nicholas' was a child's name.

Obviously it's 'Ken' Clarke as he is so blokeish. William Hague tried to be blokeish as opposition leader, but never shortened his name to 'Bill'. Just as well now that he is Foreign Secretary. George Osborne changed his first name from Gideon which was a smart move. I suppose one could shorten 'Theresa' to 'Tessa', but 'Theresa' sounds better for a Home Secretary. Incidentally, I have met her and I think that she is both very pleasant and very sharp. Choosing distinctive shoes is a smart branding device.

On the Labour benches, it's 'Ed' rather than 'Edward' Miliband. But David Miliband is not 'Dave'. I think he should become 'Dave' now to enhance his populist appeal. I knew their father slightly and I have to say that he is one of the few people I really disliked and not just because he was a Marxist. I actually find Ed a lot smarter and more likeable than Dave and it appears they are going to stand against each other for the leadership. Whether Yvette Cooper will stand against her husband remains to be seen, but she is smarter and more likeable.

Ken: Dave could have to raise taxes

Shadown business secretary Ken Clarke had admitted that the Conservatives may have to raise taxes if they win the general election. He did not rule out an increase in VAT. He also said that Dave Cameron was having 'a struggle' to get his message across: Ken

From one point of view this is welcome honesty about what is needed to balance the country's book.s Without tax rises it would be difficult to start to deal with the deficit without cuts in public services that would be unacceptable to many voters. However, it does give some potential ammunition to Labour as VAT is a regressive tax.

In terms of Dave's message, which he started rolling out with a speech to his party workers in his constituency yesterday, the polling evidence would seem to suggest that voters are fed up with Gordon Brown and Labour, but do not yet feel confident about Dave and the Conservatives. Indeed, in some respects the Conservatives have been falling back, although the upcoming series of launches may help them to seize the agenda.

Conservative workers in key marginals seem to be quietly confident without being in any way complacent. It is in these seats that the election will be decided.