Viewers of Laura Kuenssberg’s present TV series ‘State of Chaos’ may have trouble recalling many of the incidents she presently narrates.
Because we were never told of them. The open warfare between ministers, the accusations of ‘liar’ and ‘traitor’ between cabinet colleagues. Yet now in hindsight we are permitted to see it all, Ms Kuenssberg watching it unfold, seemingly cheering on Boris Johnson in his antics, while we the viewers were left with the feeling that we were only spectators in the theft of our own country.
If a journalist is there to report, then anything but the truth and the whole truth means an editorial decision has been made to hide what’s going on from the public. For what reasons we can only conjecture. But a hint of the real chaos was in that extraordinary lack of editorial judgement which saw Kuenssberg interview Boris Johnson in the apparent intimacy of a mocked up late-night bar, with the prime minister supposedly spilling the beans over a cocktail. This was a man who was lying to his colleagues and Kuenssberg knew it. But we were not permitted to. It was transpontine in its vulgarity and reduced the future of this nation to a cheap burlesque show.
*
Tens of thousands of EU supporters descended on Westminster last Saturday. Then after a nice walk in the sunshine exchanging selfies with friends they went home feeling pleased with themselves, ready for the ritual denunciation of the media for not covering their day out, and the endless dispute with right-wing yahoos on social media over numbers.
But isn’t it a definition of madness to go on doing the same old thing and yet expecting a different outcome each time? We know such a march isn’t going to get much media coverage, for good reasons and bad. The bad lessons are why Bylines was set up: much of the media fail to represent any but the right-wing status quo.
The good reason though is that the march wasn’t very compelling news. There have been lots of such marches, and Westminster sees marches every day of the week. What’s different in news terms about this one? Just that you, dear reader, happened to be on it.
Long ago your correspondent learned that you can’t tell hacks what to cover. You can only understand what they want to write about and then provide it – but on your own terms. So, where were all the political hacks on Saturday? Not in Westminster, but in Bournemouth at the LibDems annual conference, all of them desperate for a story. Shouldn’t the march organisers have anticipated that, and used it to advantage? Yet through some astonishing ineptitude they failed to spot it.
So, imagine that the march was held in Bournemouth instead. The town has never seen a march of 40,000 people, ever. Police reinforcements would have been called out. Civic leaders would have expressed alarm. Every hack would have reported it. Every snapper would have photographed it.
Until the left stops whingeing, finding new expressions of faux outrage and instead becomes more professional and prepared to leave its comfort zone for a cause, then nothing will change.
*
Incidentally, it seems that Keir Starmer banned all Labour MPs from attending the march. Naturally they all obeyed.
*
One’s domestic staff put down the mop this week for long enough to declare that your correspondent had been a little hard on Keir Starmer last week, so this week it’s Mr Davey’s turn. Our man declared only a few days ago at the LibDem conference that voters aren’t interested in rejoining the EU. This in spite of the polls suggesting that over 60% would jump at the idea.
Mr Davey’s brusque and untrue dismissal of what he clearly thought was an impudent (and certainly unhelpful) question from a member on the party’s policy on Brexit exposes the panic at the heart of LibDem policy and puts them on a par with Labour.
Last week Pecksniff wrote of the importance in politics of controlling the narrative. But Messrs Davey and Starmer are terrified of the narrative, far too alarmed ever to want to control it. And while they won’t even discuss it, Brexit will prevail.
*
It is not only over his MPs that Keir Starmer exerts control. As we have discussed before, it is difficult to find a Labour member who is prepared to speak against the party’s position on Brexit. But one experienced party worker says:
“I feel miserable about it. But also, we can’t just go back to 2016-17. That conversation is done for now. I hate to say it, but Starmer is right – *we can do better than where we are now, even with the deal we have.”
It is only fair to note however that, whatever mind control Keir Starmer holds over his membership, Mr Davey does not enjoy the same omnipotence. He got through his party conference, but on the ground in this region, Pecksniff’s experience is that the LibDems are much more sparky about the EU than their leader.
*Readers of EAB’s series ‘Our Place in Europe’ will already know that this is nonsense, but that’s the party line
*
Ed Davey has the unfortunate face and build of a rugby union tight head prop rather than a party leader, and it is easier imagining him bawling the song ‘Zulu Warrior’ in the club bar than making a statesman-like address to the nation.
But if he were to do so he would at least probably become better known than his present unfortunate anonymity. In a word cloud from the public’s being asked what they think Ed Davey stands for, the leading contenders were ‘Don’t know’, ‘No idea’, ‘Not sure’, and somewhat less prominent: ‘Liberal’.
By any measurement this is catastrophic. His absolute refusal to talk about the most important issue of the age probably has something to do with that.
*
Only last week, Pecksniff was wondering what’s up with Priti Patel (Witham). She had been behaving oddly: apparently taking an interest in her constituency, for example, making remarks on the proposed Wethersfield refugee centre which were lacking her usual venom and bloodlust.
But now it becomes clear. Dame Priti Patel (for it is she, now) thought it best not to cover Princess Anne in the usual bile just before her investiture. The gong was granted by Boris Johnson in his resignation honours list, for “public and political service”. Dame Priti had dressed as the sugar plum fairy for the occasion. (My dears, can you imagine what Anne will say about that dress over gin afterwards?)
The fact that our Priti only got Anne to do the business may reflect some antipathy at the Palace, of course. After all, getting her is only slightly better than getting that bloke down the pub.
Dame Priti will now move on to Manchester, where she will gratefully attend a black tie gathering of the Boris Johnson fan club, aka the Conservative Democratic Organisation, at the opening of the Tory party conference. Begin as you intend to go on, no doubt. Now La Patel has her gong, she can spend the conference kicking lumps out of the prime minister.
*
Somebody unkindly called Nadine Dorries and her unseemly attempts to fight her way into the Lords: “more steerage than peerage”. One wonders what the wags will have to say about Witham’s finest?
*
Pecksniff has frequently carried tales of the Tories sending out party propaganda under the guise of being a bona fide newspaper, but here are the LibDems doing it too. And hardly for the first time. But then, your correspondent recalls pulling the same dodge many years ago for Labour.
The difference is probably that, until recently, the disguise has been to get people to read it, which may be considered legitimate. However, when the content is deliberately misleading or outright lies, then it seems reasonable to make a different judgement.
*
On the question of party political publications, this week the Pecksniff residence was blessed with a newsletter from the Greens, all about their Waveney Valley candidate Adrian Ramsay, who also happens to be the party leader. There is no question of the Greens hiding their identity here, but presumably they feel they may have less baggage than the others.
The memsahib was surprised to receive the publication, however, since Pecksniff Towers is not in the Waveney Valley constituency, so it is possible the Greens may need to check their boundaries. The party makes claim to being the party able to beat the Tories, and we can confirm that the figures quoted are correct: they have been checked by EAB’s own Stephen ‘Numbers’ McNair.
Boundary changes have made calculations complicated, but the figures shown are taken from accruing the previous votes in each ward which will now make up the new constituency. They show the Greens with 43% of the vote, Tories on 33%, Labour 11% and LibDems 9%.
*
Brandon Lewis (Gt Yarmouth), of whom it is often said, has apparently spent £10,000 on public relations to improve his image. It would be fascinating to know what image Mr Lewis thinks he has that needs changing. The wide boy second hand car salesman, that one? The rude and indifferent constituency MP? Or the in-it-for-himself chancer?
*
Colchester Conservatives have announced that their prospective parliamentary candidate is James Cracknell, the former Olympic rower. He replaces Will Quince, who is one of the many Tory MPs to announce he will not be standing at the next election. Mr Cracknell has no local connections, but dismisses claims he has been parachuted in.
But he shows promise. We must keep an eye on him. His first press interview seemed slightly off-piste, not least because he admits to have voted against Brexit. Did his party know, we wonder? Perhaps yes, but the lure of celebrity was too strong for them.
*
On Thursday the Greater Cambridgeshire Partnership met to make decisions on the hugely controversial Cambridge congestion charge and decided not to go ahead.
Earlier this month the GCP joint assembly said it would not scrutinise the revised proposals due to the drop in political support.https://t.co/CQvXN9j80c
— Hannah Brown (@HannahBrown901) September 28, 2023
It seems leading figures in the LibDems broke ranks and came out against the scheme, which tipped the balance in the party. Labour gratefully concluded that it could not go ahead without LibDem support, so the congestion charge plan is no more.
One gets the impression of a sense of relief that it has come to this, since (unmentioned) is that the plan in its present form didn’t have public support either. Demonstrators were present at the meeting.
That however doesn’t mean there aren’t many who are seething at the botched outcome of what at least was seen as a partial solution. So, nobody is happy.
Pecksniff has pointed out previously the error in beginning any such scheme as a technical project and only adding the politics later. The public has always been antagonistic about the scheme, since they felt they had only been allowed in halfway through: usually a terminal mistake.
*
<<< Previous Pecksniff’s Diary
