Thursday, 12 December 2019

Yet another Christmas posting…

I’m writing this Christmas message rather earlier than previous years, but not because I’m becoming more efficient.  Far from it.  Had I left it – and the design of the cartoon accompanying it – till the usual date, it would have been after the election, and of course I'd have missed the Christmas post.  As it is, I write not knowing how it’s going to go.  Logic of a kind says we face the appalling prospect of five years of a hard right majority government (though who knows – his promised constitutional reviews may have banned elections in five years’ time).  Some polls are suggesting the gap is closing, and widespread talk of tactical voting may give me some reason to stay up beyond ten o’clock on election night. 

But either way, this has been, without doubt, the least inspiring, most cynical, general election in my lifetime.   There really is little for anyone who is trying to be satirical to add to what has already been said, and that’s just by the politicians.   Some highlights (or should that be lowlights) for me include Nicky Morgan’s insistence that the fact that 19,000 of the “promised”  50,000 extra nurses are already in post and would be retained nevertheless meant there would still be an extra 50,000.  Then there’s Swinson’s apparently sincere conviction that she was a genuine candidate to be prime minister.  Or the mysterious, and entirely welcome, disappearance of Rees-Mogg. But, to be even-handed, there’s Corbyn’s insistence that he, alone in the country, watches the Queen’s Speech in the morning, before it’s been broadcast.  And while we’re on the subject, the bookies are offering odds on whether she mentions Prince Andrew: this year if she mentions an ‘anus horribilis’, we know who she’ll be referring to.

And I haven’t even referred to Johnson yet.  Self-evidently a narcissistic buffoon, there is actually nothing amusing about him.  His lying has reached Trumpian proportions, to the point where it actually ceases to be lying as we’ve always understood it, now resembling what POTUS’ press secretary called ‘alternative facts’.   And the same approach to evidence and facts affects those who support him (or some version of his cause), who dismiss anything they don’t like as ‘fake news’.  The social media universe was flooded with apparently evidenced reports that the dreadful picture of the boy on the floor in a Leeds hospital was an invention from Momentum.  Even McLuskey couldn’t stoop to that.

There are moments when I genuinely fear the consequences for this country if Johnson’s sorry crowd get a working majority.  I used to conclude these posts by hoping the next year would be better than the previous one, though last year I changed that, wishing next year even shittier, in the hope I’d be proved wrong.  Sadly I wasn’t so I’m not risking any wishes at all for next year: let’s just keep fingers crossed that it’s not as bad as it might be.   

Thursday, 5 September 2019

No gunpowder – but treason and plot?

Johnson’s decision to silence parliament may be slightly more sophisticated than Guy Fawkes’ attempt.  But his attempt to constrain parliament’s ability to his government under review reflects his complete lack of legitimacy, as prime minister, and as champion of a no-deal Brexit. He presides over a minority government, support reduced by his hypocritical decision to remove the whip from his opponents. That he is only prime minister thanks to the votes of some 90,000 members of the Conservative Party hardly bestows great legitimacy. 

He’s attacked those seeking to rule out a no-deal departure for thwarting democracy by preventing the fulfilment of the ‘will of the people’.  But even setting aside the imperfections of the referendum (excess expenditure, the interference by a foreign power, lies on the bus etc), its result does not really represent the ‘will of the people’ in the way he suggests.  It certainly provides no mandate for a no-deal departure: Gove, Farage, Fox and others spent the campaign telling us how easy it would be to leave the EU with a terrific trade deal in place.  But it’s worse than that: despite a reasonably high turnout (72%) only 37% voted to leave – meaning therefore that 63% didn’t.  At best, the referendum offered a snapshot of the views of 72% of the electorate over three and a half years ago: and it’s a very different electorate today.  Since then almost two million people have died, and more importantly almost 2.3 million young people have attained voting age.  These now form part of ‘the people’ whose ‘will’ needs to be respected.  But since the polls suggest that there’s a substantial majority of remain voters among this group, Johnson is of course reluctant to seek their views, or indeed the views of any who oppose his no-deal Brexit obsession.   

He’s now belatedly pursuing an election as the only feasible way to secure his no-deal departure.  Meanwhile he and his government continue to show contempt for parliament through the action to prorogue, contempt symbolically demonstrated by the arrogance of Rees Smug during the recent debate, arrogance of which I’m sure Nanny would have disapproved.

Monday, 18 March 2019

Arlene Foster: undercover campaigner for a United Ireland?

OK so this post was supposed to have gone up on St Patrick's day, but better late than never...

According to this morning’s paper, the ten sectarian throwbacks who make up the Parliamentary DUP are trying to decide whether to reverse their previous concerns about the effect of the backstop on Northern Ireland and support May’s Brexit deal.  Ever since, in the wake of May’s unnecessary – and from her point of view, disastrous – decision to call a General Election in 2017, the less than magnificent ten have shored up her government, and together with the Raving Loony Rees-Moggsters, have wielded a veto over the whole Brexit process.  This was in return for a bribe from May (to the tune of £1bn), which, in the existentially cynical world of Westminster politics ranks up there among the most cynical.

We have heard a lot recently about the damage a second referendum would do; the Prime Minister said recently that it would ‘…damage social cohesion by undermining faith in our democracy.’    What about the threat to democracy the DUP’s privileged position in the power structure represents, given its status as a beacon of representative government?  Improbably, it’s no exaggeration to say that the future of this country is in the hands of these ten people (along with other Brexiteer ultras in the Provisional Wing of the Tory party), which is deeply disturbing when you examine the democratic credentials they bring to the debate.

In the 2017 General Election, the ten amassed between them approximately 296,000 votes – which represents about 0.6% of the British electorate.  The first-past-the post system brought them their ten seats (out of a total of 18), with just 36% of the vote.  Never mind that they count for less than 1% of the electorate, they don’t represent the views of Northern Ireland on Europe either.  The DUP are of course hard core Brexiteers; but in the referendum, the people of Northern Ireland voted 56%-44% to remain.  In their ‘negotiations’ with May, they really speak for no-one. Respect the will of the people – but not in Northern Ireland evidently.

The prospect of a no-deal Brexit has led to concerns about the possibility of a return to the Troubles, and a threat to the Good Friday agreement.    It’s not yet clear if the recent spate of bombs received in the UK and apparently sent from the ‘IRA’  actually represent some first steps towards a recurrence of the Troubles. 

But quite separately from that, a number of observers, on both sides of the (currently soft) Irish border, have speculated that a no-deal Brexit could lead, ultimately, to a United Ireland, firmly in the EU.  What a spectacular irony that would be – if Arlene Foster’s hard-line tactics led to the realisation of her worst nightmare! 

Lá sona Naomh Pádraig,* Arlene!

*In case you hadn’t guessed, happy St Patrick’s Day

Wednesday, 19 December 2018

It's Panto time!

It’s panto time

Amidst the gravity of the five day Brexit debate the House of Commons got into the Christmas spirit by staging another Westminster pantomime.  After her distinctly unamusing prologue the Prime Minster invited cabinet members to explore their political futures by making a pitch for her job.  Gove, Raab, Javid – and a few ex-Ministers like Johnson – in effect asked ‘where’s my political career’, to be greeted by catcalls from around the House of ‘It’s behind you’.  Then as the debate proper got underway, MPs from across the House rose to declare ‘We’re leaving the EU.’  At which point another Honourable Member would rise to respond ‘Oh no we’re not.’  I’m tempted to record the appearance of Mesdames Leadsom and McVey as the Ugly Sisters but that’s not acceptable in this day and age.  So perhaps there is a role in Vaudeville for Gove and Johnson…

Like many I have been puzzled by the exact meaning of this year’s May trope, replacing last year’s ‘strong and stable’: the new one is ‘very clear’, or some variant thereon.  Then I realised it’s actually a synonym for ‘mendacious’.  Listen to any of her recent speeches and you’ll see what I mean.

I’ve finished the last two years’ Christmas posts with the hope that the next will be an improvement, but it hasn’t worked, so let’s try: hoping that next year is even shittier. You never know, it might work.

Friday, 23 November 2018

Quomodo aliquis Jacobum Rees-Mogg victimam saturae facere potest? *

Latin epithets seem to have become the norm on SIC – two in a year.  But then there is no shortage of those around us who insist on harking back to what they argue was a happier past.  And prominent among them is Jacob Rees-Mogg.   He’s often portrayed as a figure of fun, which admittedly is very easy to do – the Member for the 18th century (though an earlier pre-Reformation century might be more appropriate), pictured as a 10 year-old reading the FT, openly affectionate about his Nanny.

Yet, underneath the self-satirising image there lurks a dangerous force in British politics.  His selective grasp of theology is well-publicised – opponent on religious grounds of abortion under any circumstance (even after rape) and gay marriage, but apparently unconcerned about the First Beatitude (blessed are the poor).  He has consistently voted at every opportunity for reductions in welfare benefits, and for stricter enforcement of immigration rules – including supporting a tighter asylum regime.  He’s generally opposed any increase in taxation rates for the better off.

Of course just now he’s best known for his obsessive support for Brexit and his role as chair of the self-styled European Research Group (European Myths Group might be more accurate).  What the ERG and other shady right wing fringe groups (such as the Institute for Economic Affairs, and the inappropriately named Tax Payers Alliance) are really after isn’t just 'taking back control' for its own sake, but as a step towards destroying all the employment, consumer and other protections that membership of the EU provides.  And beyond that, some of their member share close ties to the US healthcare market, and see Brexit as a route to replacing he NHS with an American two tier system (great if you can afford the fees, non existent if you can’t).  As Polly Toynbee revealed recently (Hard right brexit) Raab, the recently departed Brexit secretary (who couldn’t support the treaty he negotiated) published a number of papers proposing an extreme right-wing policy agenda, including radical reductions in the number of government departments, welfare cuts, reduced employment protection, and an end of equalities legislation.

So yes, if you have trouble with free movement, do think of Rees-Mogg – he makes me shit anyway.

* How do you satirise Jacob Rees-Mogg?