A house that is divided
Trevor Ellis, Chalkhill Road, Wembley, writes:
Tony Blair said: “I want to renew faith in politics through a government that will govern in the interest of the many, the broad majority of people who work hard, play by the rules, pay their dues and feel let down by a political system that gives the breaks to the few, to an elite at the top increasingly out of touch with the rest of us.”
The electorate gave him a mandate to deliver on his policies and by the summer of 2003, the novelty of Blairism had begun to fade.
The “war on terror” arguably sealed the fate of Blair and the government that was supposed to deliver a “better Britain.”
The man that seemed to be focused, sober, serious, and even pure in heart, showed the electorate that charm can prove to be a double edged sword, leading to disillusionment, disappointment, and a loss of trust.
Jeremy Corbyn came forth with the 2017 manifesto entitled “For the many, not the few”. It, of course, proved to be uninspiring unlike the manifesto 20 years earlier that failed to deliver on its policies, which the Conservative opposition used to their advantage.
Sir Keir Starmer published an essay ahead of Labour’s party conference in Brighton. With all due respect to Sir Keir, I cannot help but laugh at the thought of the shadow cabinet that has been floundering through the wilderness since 2010, being compared to “bricks and mortar”. The phrase “a house divided, cannot stand” applies to the shadow Labour cabinet.
When former shadow chancellor John McDonnell publicly announced that Sir Keir Starmer’s proposals to change how the Labour leader is elected are “disastrous”, that alone suggests that Labour is preparing for failure rather than victory.
I acknowledge the “victory” at the dispatch box between the shadow deputy Angela Rayner and the deputy prime minister Dominic Raab as she took full advantage of his poor judgement in the way he handled the retaking of Afghanistan by the Taliban.
However, winning at the dispatch box doesn’t guarantee victory at the ballot box. Boris Johnson (arguably) bluffed his way to victory in December 2019.
Two years later, the nation is fretting over increased fuel costs, while Boris Johnson stood up in the UN and spoke about the benefits of “being green”. The destruction of the planet shows the distinction between the love and care from planet earth (from which we all benefit) and the lack of appreciation we show in return.
Yes, despite the “showy speech” from Boris Johnson about “being green” the planet under the rule of Blair, Cameron, May and Johnson has become polluted in more ways than one. A manifesto based on “bricks and mortar” policies won’t begin to address one man-made problem, let alone all.
It would be better for political parties to be humble and admit that the country is heading for disaster, rather than pretending to have the answers when the past 20 years have taught us they don’t.
Politicians are fallible just like the ordinary people they were elected to serve. Disillusionment, disappointment, frustration, injustice, want, confusion and even despair are to be expected in democratically led countries.
If that isn’t true then please explain why we are still waiting for a “20 Britain” 20 years after it was promised by a former leader of the Labour party?
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here