12 July 2018
A Poodle Called Rufus
Even politicians need friends.
By J R Thomas
Hot news from Westminster is that our now ex-Foreign Secretary has ordered a homburg hat, stripy trousers and a large box of finest Cuban cigars. And adopted a standard poodle called Rufus. Boris has always closely identified with WLS Churchill; his book of Churchill’s life published four years ago is a well-written romp through the life of the great man. Indeed, any reader who attended Boris’s lecture on WSC at Imperial College will remember a magnificent evening implicitly inviting the audience to compare and contrast the then Mayor of London and Britain’s twentieth-century hero.
You might think that for one who has made such a careful study of a previous life of which middle age was spent in political adversity, Boris has failed in one key point. Not just the previous lack of poodles (Churchill had a succession, all called Rufus) but in the public demonstration of principle, where Mr Johnston has not done well. Winston spent eight years in the political wilderness, almost a lone voice warning of the dangers of appeasement of Nazi Germany. Boris has, perhaps, been seduced by the blandishments of high office as Foreign Secretary, with a life-style and exposure which is undeniably attractive, but which for two years succeeded in Mrs May’s objective in having the Leavers’ loudest voice confined within her tent.
Not any more. Now the lady is in danger. Boris is outside the marquee and able to speak without the restraints of cabinet collective responsibility. He will be remembering that Churchill made sacrifices in expectation of being proved right, to gain his just reward. Churchill loved political power and the control of a great ministry; indeed if he had been offered the Foreign Secretaryship by Chamberlain in 1937 he would have been greatly tempted to take it. But temptation was not strewn his way and in 1939 there is no doubt that having maintained his position of principle was an enormous advantage. Boris, whatever happens next, is always going to be accused of being a trimmer, a politician willing to compromise for power and first class travel. He would (and no doubt will) argue that he has accomplished much influence over the Brexit process by using his bulk to influence matters from within the cabinet (his bulk, incidentally, is increasingly Churchillian – that part of the metamorphosis at least is going well).
It is very tempting to draw parallels with events eighty years ago. There is indeed a Neville Chamberlain cast to Mrs May, a stubbornness, that tendency to surround herself with loyal appointees and ignore advice and ideas from elsewhere, a lack of political spark and imagination. Most of all, there is a lack of any real negotiating skills (though at least Chamberlain’s supporters were able to claim later that he needed to buy time for strengthening Britain’s military). Both seem to think that the essence of negotiating is to accept the other side’s position and then chip a bit back. Mrs May could be described, pace Chamberlain and Birmingham, as a good mayor of Maidenhead in a bad year, a competent administrator and no more. But this is not 1938, there is no threat of war, times are different, and if history does repeat itself, maybe this time is the farce repetition.
One way in which times are clearly different is the detachment of politicians from the electorate, at least in the two main parties. It is perhaps more astonishing in the Labour Party, where the northern heartlands are Leavers to a fair extent, and yet their party leadership, already far removed from the middle-of-the-road Labour Party with its roots in Methodism and trade unions of the last century or so, is fairly strongly Remainish. (We leave on one side the party leader, whose true beliefs on European integration are not clear to us and maybe, not to him.) The Tory Party has long lived with the activists in the regions who have been much less keen on the European adventure than the party leadership, and had somehow managed to struggle along until Mr Cameron had the bright idea of escaping his political fix via a referendum. (The urges within Europe to federalism would probably have led to a great conflict in the party anyway at some point, so Dave probably just accelerated things.) But to a cynical party leader, or one that believes democracy should swell up from the roots, there is a wonderful opportunity to dish the other party, by becoming wholeheartedly for Leaving. One suspects that most Tory MP’s would welcome that with some greater or lesser enthusiasm, at least as a route to holding onto office and their seats; and the constituency parties would deal with the strongly Remain orientated, such as Ms Soubery and Ms Morgan, and Mr Clarke.
In 1938 the country was strongly on the side of the government, a Tory administration with a large majority. Churchill was regarded as a has-been, full of rancour, and with little support. It was only the resignation of Anthony Eden as Foreign Secretary in 1938 (maybe we are looking for our historical parallel in the wrong place) that brought Winston any open political support, and only in the summer of 1939 did Winston’s standing start to improve.
Brexit is not like that. History does not repeat itself exactly. Bexit is a popular cause in much of the country, and another referendum, a suggestion oft made by Remainers, would probably produce a similar result to the last, perhaps a bigger majority to leave. Politicians are a profession unpopular with the citizens they represent, and growing more so. A settlement of Brexit along the lines suggested by Mrs May’s compromise agreed at Chequers and then so rapidly unagreed after, would further weaken their standing. Boris is far from the only campaigner for “Leave”, indeed was a late entrant to the circus, and there are strong candidates to lead the Leaver cause – and soon, perchance, the Conservative Party. Certainly Boris has more of a grasp of political history than most modern politicians, but there are strong figures much more able to unite the party and even the country. Mr Gove since his disastrous leadership bid a year ago has become a much more subtle and low key operator and has built many bridges in the party. Jeremy Hunt, who replaces Boris (it is a sure sign of Mrs May’s desperation that she has forced his move from the Health Secretaryship where he has been so committed) says he has converted from Remain to become a firm Brexit supporter and has proved himself a unifying and competent character. He could be one of the few potential leaders who would also have voter appeal in the country. Jacob Rees-Mogg, another of the few MP’s with a real grip of political history, might be our real Churchill in all this – he at least has the suits – but denies any hunger for the front benches, and probably has more power where he is, as leader of the Tory Leave group.
We talk as though Mrs May is on her way out. At the time of writing she seems firmly still in the saddle. But how long will she stay in it? The Tory Party always has an eye on winning the next election. They won’t win it led by Theresa – her opinion poll ratings reached new depths on Monday this week – and her Chequers settlement will, remember, be only her opening shot in renewed negotiations; the closing position will be weaker still. If she finds a number of her colleagues walking their poodles in St James’s Park, it will be time to take the hint – and go walkies herself.
