Water pollution – what could be more boring than that ? Regional Development
The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer
I only heard of this film having recently read a book on Peter Cook and Dudley Moore, despite the dated sexual-comedy and innuendo and Peter Cook’s awful wooden and staccato performance it could still be a forerunner for House of Cards and definitely has enough plotline to be a parable for current political times.
The film starts with Rimmer played by Cook as a young exec at a dysfunctional polling company. The early speed of the film is like a never completed Carry-on, even the coach load of staff being sent to Nuneaton to undermine Ronnie Corbett’s poll on religion is sub-carry on genre.
Rimmer moves into the political world and becomes the Tories great white hope. HE starts to help Tom Hutchison, the Tory leader a cross between Harold Macmillan and Ted Heath (I remember the depression and play a piano). RImmer hires a rent a mob from the Faculty of Applied Violence under the leadership of a Tariq Ali type figure complete with “ Oh Che forgive them they know not what they do “ line. The hecklers and interruptions are planned to provide maximum response from Hutchison. When a genuine heckler interrupts it appears to all go wrong before the onset of his own induced tears wins the audience over.
Rimmer also meets the Labour party Prime Minister an obvious pipe smoking northern Harold Wilson figure and convinces him that he needs more television exposure , so he makes multiple broadcasts on a daily basis.
Rimmer then convinces the Tory “Eric” to make a nonsensical lunatic speech, modelled on Powell’s Rivers of blood to create what may be the first acknowledged political dog-whistle. The strong message will be heard by the voters even though Hutchison will distance himself from the messenger. Perhaps the most prophetic aspect is that the speech is televised but there is no audience, something familiar to modern political performance. It leads to Hutchison’s memorable line “ I will act…on matters of principle I’m acting all the time”.
Rimmer is then offered Erics seat at the next election ( the constituency of Budleigh Moor ), and when the PM makes a complete hash of a live TV broadcast with stuck autocue and ripped backdrop ( we are led to believe Rimmer planned this ) the election victory is assured. The TV coverage of election night is a forerunner of the rather ridiculous election night coverage we still receive with over analysis and interpretation of everything from the around the globe at a ridiculous pace.
Rimmers climb doesn’t stop there though, as the new Chancellor he runs rings the rest of the cabinet, securing an emergency gold supply through threatening germ warfare on the Swiss ( the film plot gets quite odd at this point so I may have that wrong ).
The new PM stands on an oil platform with the gold in the air only to lose his balance, with a little help from Rimmer and fall to his death. Rimmer as new PM wishes to share power and establishes a National Poll Board where the public are consulted on every issue through a referendum and emergency tele votes. The country eventually rise up and demonstrate against this democracy, blowing up post boxes and the like. Rimmer then holds the last referendum for some time, making himself President.
There are a host of British comedy greats in the film but Arthur Lowe’s performance, a sub-plot in itself is by far the best. Lowe begins as an incompetent and bumbling manager at the polling company, months behind completing work and who gets a punch in the face in his first scene. He is then reduced to menial and ridiculous tasks before pawning all his furniture. He ends the film, the lone sniper about to shoot Rimmer when he mysteriously“falls” from the window!
Asked in the spirit of Christmas what gift they would leave for each other under the Christmas tree, Mr Corbyn said he would give a copy of Charles Dicken’s A Christmas Carol for his counterpart. Mr Johnson offered a copy of his Brexit deal or a pot of damson jam for the Opposition leader
One of the remarkable features of this second “Brexit election” was that the Conservative party totally hoovered up the Brexit party. Maybe Farage foresaw this, maybe it was his strange local radio intervention with President Trump (who would have thought it!) but when the party withdrew from half its seats it opened up Boris Johnson to lead team Brexit. It was as close as a merger you could get without a formal agreement.
The election was noticeable for some of the candidates who didn’t stand. Not only the great Faragster but some of the others and the reasons behind it weren’t all straightforward. First step forward Keith Vaz, the original “cloud” politician (as in under a cloud). He’s been under suspicion since before some first time voters were born. That’s incredible, and even more so that he’s only now calling it a day. The scandal-father of the house has had some impressive scrapes. Who can forget his support for Salman Rushdie back in the 1980’s? Well obviously Keith could as he then led a march to ban Rushdie’s book! He was censured in 2000 for failing to register donations and was involved in the Hinduja citizenship affair, yet oddly, unlike Peter Mandelson, he didn’t lose his job. He went from denial of receiving money to denial of receiving gain to just simply blaming his wife. He did stand down for health reasons in 2002 while also facing a bunch of standards complaints and rather oddly claiming someone was hassling his mum, only to later admit they weren’t.
He helped a billionaire avoid deportation for fraud charges, then his life just got weirder and weirder. He claimed $173k in expenses including the costs of a London flat despite living 45 minutes away. He may have voted for counter terrorism legislation in exchange for a knighthood, was called a crook of the first order by paid lobbyists and then when he couldn’t top his performance he became Jim a washing machine salesman who had unprotected sex with male prostitutes and offered to buy him cocaine. On a more serious note he was accused of bullying by staff.
Are there any odder non-candidates? Well there are plenty of vile racists, exposed from previous or recent social media postings. Antony Calvert, a Conservative, was one who stood down after an awful joke about Col Gadhafi in 2009. Gideon Bull (Labour) stood down after realising shylock may be a racist’s term. Kevin McNamara a Lib Dem managed to be found out for a 2009 tweet where he used the “n” word – and again he stood down. He wasn’t the only Lib Dem to stand down. Tim Walker stood down in Canterbury to prevent a Conservative victory, not a bad idea but the party didn’t agree and hastily stood another candidate in his place! The conservatives managed to top that trick – twice. Charles Elphicke, currently charged with sexual assault and in and out of the Tory party was replaced with ….Natalie his wife. Andrew Griffiths who resigned as a Minister after sending sexual text messages to constituents (not as part of his canvassing I assume) stood down for Kate Griffiths his “estranged” wife. Nick Conrad at least managed to be sexist, suggesting rape victims should keep their knickers on. And Dudley North, a place not a person, where the Brexit candidate stood down just because he could!
One of the best lines in the campaign came from the Lib Dems, who generally had a terrible campaign. On the week in Westminster they talked about “the greatest free trade deal in the history of this planet “– as if there is scope for comparative analysis? The Lib Dems were contorted on the idea of Article 50, wanting to revoke it but then acknowledging it could only happen if they formed a majority government – so the real policy was a second referendum.
Radio 4 was a little odd during this election, including the wonderful comment that with his soapbox and speaker John Major was the first hipster politician. I think Oliver Baldwin with his chickens may have been but whose arguing.
There was a wonderful debate on the World Tonight, also on Radio 4 where David Willets, former head of Mrs Thatcher’s policy unit praised the reverse in corporation tax cuts. It all seems like economic differences in tone – are we entering a new consensus on Tax? If so what will our new Butskellism be called? Javdonald perhaps or Macvid?
But what of those odd individual contests. Dominic Grieve, an ex-Tory MP was standing as an independent. The Lib Dems gave him their support but the Tories chose Joy Morrissey (no not the BNP campaign slogan) an American born actor as their candidate. She grew up with posters of Regan and Thatcher on her walls (I sincerely doubt this) and was a teenage competitive chicken breeder (I sincerely want to doubt this) before working for IDS.
Boris’s videos. It’s a mark of how this election is being fought in a whole new space that the Tory campaign has centred around the loveable TV character “ Boris “. This is best illustrated through the two campaign broadcasts that are bordering on political character cannibalism. The first is a kind of low budget Guy Ritchie comedy affair. “ Eer Bowis tell us about Bwexit eh wat a larf “
Then there’s the Love Actually spoof. Now I say spoof but I haven’t seen the film so can only assume that the creepy thing is somehow meant to warm the cockles. I would ring the police but who knows.
Perhaps Boris is just post-buffoonery. We accept and expect a certain level of mock indignation, exasperation and stupidity and therefore discount it from the transaction. Whether its hiding in a fridge ( which in reality was a refrigerated room rather than a small kitchen appliance ) or discussing how to put jam and cream on a scone or even the illogical “ Oven ready deal slam it in the microwave “ we don’t expect anything higher, more logical or to demonstrate any capability. But people still love him and come and talk about foreigners and dog shit and jellied eels. He truly is, as Peter Hennessy observed, busking it. His lowlight may have been confiscating a journalist’s phone, his high point ….well that his trick kept working.
Then as if we weren’t squirming and embarrassed enough along came Gove. It seemed that Gove and Angela Rayner had a twitter stoush over Stormzy (what is a Stormzy cries every High Court Judge). Stormzy had advocated that people register to vote and that he was supporting Jeremy Corbyn. This spat came to a head when Gove tweeted a Stormzy lyric “ I set trends dem man copy “ for which he was chastised by many particularly for what was seen as a twitter equivalent of “blackface’. And if Gove wasn’t then Daniel Hananan tweeting “ Big man ting” certainly was. This was followed up by Jacob Rees-Mogg tweeting “Fuck the Government and Fuck Boris “[1] Stormzy later retorted that it was the equivalent of Pob trying to hang out in the Bronx. No he didn’t, Pob in the Bronx would be funny. Stormzy saw it as a way for Gove to push rappers back into their lane, not speak of politics just entertain. Gove was the random pop up man for the election and performed as the Tory hit man on many occasions, whether it was turning up for debates he hadn’t been invited to or just being a plonker on Twitter he no doubt earned a post-election promotion.
The chaos of Question Times under 30’s special (the audience not the panel) was the entertainment spectacle of the decade if not of all time. Nigel Farage told the audience he couldn’t apologise for the truth and said the audience was full of bile and prejudice – nice touch. Angela Rayner just shouts out at random times the Corbyn bingo card, as other speak she shouts “ Bedroom Tax” “Austerity” “ Alistair Darling “ even the Poll Tax gets a shout out. The SNP ask her to apologise for Alistair Darling having said he planned cuts after the 2010 election. What an odd request.
Then we get onto meat consumption which leads to the famous sausage nationalisation question. The highlight of the election, indeed of any election ever held, for me. Prior to that though Farage had said meat arguments were false arguments and the token tory, Robert someone said we should try “small things “. It’s unclear if he is advocating a micro diet or eating insects. It hopefully not advocacy of mince pies, for an SNP candidate is reported to the police for handing out mince pies.
The campaigns most surreal moment though was the revelation that Jeremy Corbyn couldn’t be trusted because he said he watched the Queens Christmas speech IN THE MORNING! Any stiff upper lipped true brit knows it is shown in the afternoon. How dare he! The usual subjects were apoplectic and enraged. This was worse than the standard he’s a terrorist sympathiser line often trotted out.
The polls consistently pointed to a Conservative lead, the question was never whether Labour would win but could the Conservatives lose. The nightmare scenario for Boris and co was that they would end up with a slim or non-existent majority and need a further coalition or minority support party. There seemed little chance of any of the parties supporting them without some form of major concession either on the process ( Lib Dems ) or the content of the deal (DUP) and in some ways this was the Brexit schism of the Brexit election ( not the 2017 Brexit election but the 2019 one ) . It seemed plausible that a small majority would pass the withdrawal agreement but be able to do little else forcing the need for another election on the direction of the post withdrawal agreement world. It would be wrong to think either of the major parties offered a clear vision on what that would or could look like.
[1] One of these tweets didn’t happen. You decide.
Seedy lists of party apparatchiks appointed by power hungry party leaders & insulated from any democratic pressure for 15 yrs? No thanks.
All good things must come to an end
“I felt that, in order to be a minister, you effectively have to have a lobotomy and lose all sense of independence.
We can be conscious in the decisions we make as much as possible, but I don’t think you can wag your finger and tell people ‘you’ve got to eliminate your pollution footprint’, because that would require people to live like monks.”
His party SUPPORTS A WEALTH TAX on FAMILY JEWELLERY.”
Of course I regret the portrayal of the campaign,”
In 10 years’ time,” he mused in 2000, “I might be an eco-terrorist. But I’ll take the most effective path, whatever that is.
I do not need a career in this world,”
“I’m hoping to do a Leicester City and zoom in from behind to win.”
I’ve never sought to hide who I am. I was dealt a very good hand and I’ve always tried to play it well.”
“I can think of… I can’t think of a favourite, though I love the whole… I love almost everything about Bollywood,”
“I love the atmosphere, I love the colour, I love the excitement. I want as much colour as possible here in London.”
“I’m going to stop you there because most people have a route, I have two routes … I want to answer this one, most people have a route or two routes and they become like an extension of the body and you use those routes, not for ethical reasons, but because it is the only way to get around London without being late for meetings.”
“You are being a charlatan on this.”
I could just go to the horse races and take lovely holidays,” he admits, “but I have some strong views and I want to make a difference.”
Keeping Britain out of the euro calamity is my father’s legacy,
“A Conservative who is not also in his heart an environmentalist cannot legitimately be described as a Conservative.”
“The two million or so residents who live beneath the Heathrow flight path are accustomed to the noise. However, they are right to feel that any expansion would represent an unacceptable broken promise.”
“Politics colours everything, and anyone who wants change is necessarily political. As an environmental campaigner more or less since I left school in the early ’90s, I have always been involved in lobbying, campaigning and pushing for changes.”
“Leonardo DiCaprio is a rare phenomenon. Whereas for so many celebrities an interest in the environment is a fashionable accessory, for DiCaprio it is a thread that runs through everything he does.”
” smaller and smaller men are moving across narrower and narrower stages “
For those civil servants who were going to be called on to man the bunker and keep British government functioning there would have been a sense of doom and disaster and no doubt a little sense of injustice at the situation the world had come to. Whether it was to create a sense of normality or just a British sense of fair play – these civil servants were also told to take a packed lunch, wear informal dress, send mail via a PO Box and take a book to read. Quite how the end of the civilised world as we knew it was to impact we fortunately never found out – but Peter Hennessy’s Winds of Change at least lets us understand the formalities that would have accompanied it.
Hennessy brings alive the world of the early 60’s as British politicians grappled with two issues, which formed a subset of a rather larger and at times existential issue – what is the role of Britain. They were challenged with the big idea of joining the European Community and at the same time challenged with reducing their Empire at a rapid rate.
The attempt to join Europe, failed at this time of asking. It brought some marvelous debate though , with Derek Walker-Smith rambling on the sovereignty of the Holy Roman Empire, Michael Foots wonderful point that Britain wanted to join the West European Football League so long as the games resembled Cricket. Harold Wilson privately called the application “a cold douche”. Speaking afterwards Richard Wilson noted that ” We always go into our big decisions as if under anesthetic, only waking up many years later wondering ” Did we really mean to do that ?”” The current day parallel is obvious.
The negotiations managed to get zero duty on Tea,cricket bats and polo sticks but only a suspension for desiccated coconut and a slowing down of the tariff for pepper. The serious discussion on the continent of being flooded with eggs and bacon and ruining the continental breakfast was a premonition that 70’s and 80’s Spain saw come to life.
Of course De Gaulle ( who we are reminded traveled everywhere with vials of his own blood ?) said no.
We discover that Selwyn-Lloyd gave his black Labrador “Sambo” to chequers and the dog was distraught that the first cabinet meeting post-night of the long knives his former master didn’t appear.
Britain’s European entrance was juxtaposed with its exit from empire. Hong Kongs civil servants were trained by watching meetings of the Stepney Borough Council ( the so called Devonshire courses ).
Hennessy writes in a wonderful style, Macleod ” herbivorous policies defended in a carnivorous way ”
The shadow of nuclear catastrophy, either by design or accident hung over the world and the Cuban missile crisis gave the Prime Minister diarrhea. One of the reasons Hennessy rejoices is that had the global war been triggered in 1963, Cliff Richard may have been considered the highest form of pop music that the country would ever attain. Cuban brought its own bizzare afterthought. Leyland buses, made in Lancashire had taken an order for 10m pounds of buses and 1 million in spares. LBJ was distraught and offered to personally recompense the company if the order was scrapped. Alec Douglas Home pointed out that ” buses dont pose a nuclear threat to the US ” but LBJ wasn’t listening.
The book covers the bizzare transition from Macmillian to Home to Wilson ( met by the Oh Jeremy Corbyn of its day – Wilson yeah yeah yeah !). One hopes Hennessy continues these volumes they are mental gold.
Gove’s speech is getting rave reviews. I don’t rate it as highly as Michael Foots one under similar circumstances but that’s for another day.
The political mess and chaos of Brexit still seems to have a long way to run. Quite whether this is a Corn Law moment remains to be seen, will the plates shift that much. I still doubt it. The moment for the political classes to represent the pro and anti European agenda was any time over the last 50 years. Now it just seems too late.
Yet there are glimpses that this seems possible. You cant really see how a post Brexit Jacob Rees Mogg ( who now wants to shut Parliament down ) can sit in the same party and Government as Teresa May. But then look at Michael Gove. One of the so called brains of the Brexit campaign. The man who talked up freedom and control is now talking of the dangers to primary industry from no deal. There was never talk of “deals” in 2016. The Chief Brexiteer is now arguing for a new customs union with everything that comes with it. Mogg is content to have a WTO free trade arrangement, Gove wants to start the process of closer economic ties with the rest of Europe. We know how that ends !
The Parliamentary debates have been providing entertainment and punch ups galore. The ERG bloc who tried to remove Teresa May before Xmas laughably fell in behind a confidence vote in her Government. They may have clipped her wings, but clipping the wings of a Dodo is hardly a task with much reward or benefit.
May’s biggest challenge is keeping the Government majority intact. The DUP have taken a mind boggling stance, where they smash things to pieces, put the pieces back together then retreat to find a bigger hammer. Then put the newly bashed pieces in a kaleidoscope in the dark ..then bash it some more. Northern Ireland voted to remain and some sort of deal that was close to a customs union / single market would no doubt have great appeal to the only land border in the UK. For the DUP the border is an issue of faith. The tension this puts on the fractious Union is obvious and the DUP prop up the Government.
Oddly Mays best way out of this may be a General Election. Her unpopularity in Westminster may not be such an issue in the country at large. If Parliament wont pass her deal but the public vote for her the authority and end point are cleaner and more straight forward than the idea of a Second Referendum. The election might have shades of 1918 or 1922. Its hard to see how a Second Referendum doesn’t lead to a Third.
Which leads to Jeremy Corbyn. For the opposition the challenge is just as great as for May. The European split doesn’t sit neatly in Labour and the only positively and clearly pro EU party in the Liberal Democrats have hardly surged since Brexit.
Planning for the No Deal Brexit have been beyond parody. An Ealing version of Britain ( but remember Passport to Pimlico doesn’t end well for the Brexiteers ) . While the planning is centred around a shipping company with no ships and a take-away menu for its charter. No doubt the Brexit movie will be phenomenal, but the reality seems a little grimier. Whether its stockpiling drugs, slaughtering 6 million sheep or queuing for hours at the port it all feels like a strange kind of liberation. There will though be Cheese and Onion Crisps. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-q3KvfmTJM
The main issue with Brexit though hasn’t changed since 24 June 2016. The EU can never and will never accept a deal that can in any way be in the UK’s favour. Perhaps May could have played a longer or shorter game, but whatever the rules were rigged. Without serious reform the EU will punish the UK for its cheek at leaving and will do all it can to make sure no one else would ever try it.
But then what ? Will the political landscape be changed ? Life goes on so to speak. Issues like Trade or Agricultural Policy are things most of us have never spent much time thinking of. Suddenly they will dominate the landscape for years. The consequences of these changes are monumental, whether we, or the policymakers understand them. Then there is the Irish Border. Back into our political lexicon with a vengeance. Many of us had hoped it had gone away. The return of a patrolled, governed border. Northern Irelands other major party, Sinn Fein are silent in the Parliamentary debates. Ironically many see the Brexit debate, even with Sinn Fein’s abstention , as potentially accelerating a united Ireland. Irony comes in all shapes and sizes.
Brexiteers now seem like Jane Austen’s Emma having finally completed her trip to Box hill. For her whole existence she had wanted to venture out to see somewhere and something different. She realises there is risk and that her Father is advising against it. Yet when she is there, not only does she realise the event is not going to be as successful and spectacular as she hoped but her own actions undermine the very idea that it could be a success. Having longed for Sovereignty, the Brexit brigade now seem to find that that involves making decisions and taking choices. Many of which seem to make things worse and worse.
And perhaps the most British response to preparation for No Deal has now occurred. A trial traffic jam in Kent. We are practicing what would happen in the event of lorries being held up for bureaucratic reasons. Oddly one of the driving reasons for leaving the EU was silly regulations and red tape. Now look at us. Practicing queuing. Of course its hard to believe no one can forecast what a traffic jam might look like. The act of undertaking a practice seems to be part of the theatre of getting people ready for the collapse that will follow.
Somehow it feels like Brexit chaos is only just beginning. I hope I am wrong.
David Willetts resigned as Paymaster general on 11 December 1996. Paymaster general is a Treasury position, it was a merger of the paymaster of forces and other roles including Treasurer of the ordinance ( which sounds like a rubbish star wars baddy ) . Other holders include
Bliss was it to be alive in the Dawn Primarolo held it for 8 years
David Plunket ( a name that could easily get the wrong paternity test sent to him )
Charles Churchill – Winnies cousin
Arthur Henderson held it for a few months during the great war, Neville Chamberlain before he found peace. Geoffrey Robinson held it during his wonderful time in office ( I kid you not his memoirs are the best book about early new Labour you will ever read or need to read ) and little Ben Gummer proving eating infected beef doesn’t hold you back.
But I digress
Willetts ‘ made an ass of himself’ according to Roy Hattersley.
Willetts had tried to stop a committee investigating Neil Hamilton and cash for questions. His note of the meeting with the Chair of the members Interest Select Committee became a priceless memory of the Major debacle. He called the chair ( Sir Geoffrey Pinstripe Smith ) muddled and wanted him to exploit the good tory majority on the Committee.
“ He wants our advice “ noted Willets. No I didn’t proclaimed Pinstripe. Well according to Willetts he wants as in he lacks or needs it. Not that he requests or desires it. Jokes abounded about poor Mrs Willetts being told David wants her.
Willetts was accused of dissembling which is posh tory for lying and he resigned his post shortly after.
He then went on to write the excellent best seller ‘ Blairs Gurus’ in which he attacked John Gray, Will Hutton,John Kay,Frank Field,Simon Jenkins,Andrew marr, Peter Mandelson and David Marquand. It was a later broadway sensation and the film version was nominated for 2 oscars.
There can never be enough study of the ideology and thought of the confused and chaotic British 17th Century. The role of women in this process is often neglected. Twenty years ago or so Hilary Hinds wrote a book which for me was a showstopper in terms of my thinking on the 17th Century – “ God’s Englishwomen” she illustrates how women had to circumvent the male dominated religious paradigm they operated within to get their point across. In the terms of Hinds book she demonstrated how women could relay thought through the process of revelatory dreams was seen as ok , but simply having an idea was not. Fast forward 400 years and consider the treatment of women politicians and maybe not a lot has changed.
So its an early xmas present to find Manchester University Press have published another great looking book on 17th century thought this time focusing on Women poets of the english civil war. If the interview below is anything to go by it should be a great read, and if I’m lucky enough to get a copy I will no doubt post a review.
The Truth About Trump, Michael D’Antonio (St Martins Press,2016)
During the reconstruction of the building that would eventually become Trump Towers, workers destroyed two art deco friezes. There had been on going debate about the value of the friezes and Trump had agreed to donate them to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Facing criticism for having broken this earlier agreement, the Trump organisation were coming under increasing public pressure. Enter John Barron who defended the decision based on economics. John Barron was vice-president of the Trump organisation. However, his existence was not a physical one, Barron was a construct of Trumps imagination played by none other than Donald Trump. It may have been a shield, some form of protection or a way to throw legal threats and deal with rumours. But it was Trump pretending to be someone else. Trump also employed the services of John Miller, another character of his imagination, to inform the press of Trumps dating history with celebrity women. Michael D’Antonios book “The Truth About Trump” contains this story and many others about the odd world of Donald Trump up to November 2016.
In reading the book you are never quite sure that Donald Trump really exists. Or perhaps its which Donald Trump exists. Trumps relationship with reality is difficult to comprehend. D’Antonio sees the Trump performance as similar to a slightly off-beat comedian. His slow dead beat delivery chipping away an insult at a time. Whether its potential rivals for the Presidency, potential Mrs. Trumps or just his business rivals, the combination of over the top insult, innuendo and fear mongering have been consistent for decades. This has accelerated in recent years with Trump taking to social media for additional delivery. His Twitter storms are referred to as “shitposting”. An inoculation against the facts and perhaps even against reality. The benefit for Trump in doing this is that he always leaves one foot on the edge of the post. The character of Donald Trump might say these things but the real man is somehow hidden a little further away. Maybe though this is the real man, and D’Antonio leaves enough pointers for us to understand that the irrational, inconsistent and at times insulting behaviour is part of Trumps truth.
Examples abound. Trump’s business activities form the main part of this book. Trumps debt funded and ego fuelled deals rarely make commercial sense. It perhaps explains also why, as someone who was overly keen to ensure the media reported his wealth in billions, when he applied for a gaming licence in 1982 he could only demonstrate cash assets of $400,000. His empire was heavily indebted with insufficient available cash. The solution for the Trump organisation was to continue doing deals, to free up some more cash to prolong the inevitable payback. When in the early 1990s this all started to go horribly wrong for Trump he managed to bluff and bluster his way out of it. His Taj Mahal resort-casino went bankrupt and with it a number of his other ventures. As part of the arrangement with creditors Trump continued to receive $1 million per year for use of his name on the complex. In trying to salvage something from the continued operation of his businesses, the creditors avoided lengthy court processes. They also allowed Trump to ride to a position of power from his corporate disasters. He reduced many of his own liabilities but retained a significant asset base. His major financial restraint was a $450,000 per month expenses allowance. In exchange he walked away from over half a billion dollars of debt. Or as he later said” You have to be strong enough to not pay”.
None of this stopped his image of being a success. A winner as he often calls himself. Trump didn’t feel constrained by just being a business man he became something of a celebrity. Brand Trump expanded itself beyond real estate, it was a lifestyle, a statement, a monogrammed gold plated high interest junk bonded one. Like his business deals though the personality needed to do further deals to fund the ego. Not content or able to just be the promoter of Trump steaks (and who would) he needed to go further. Leading a successful television show takes him further. As does his almost comical “invasion” of a Scottish coastal town to build a golf resort. Sadly, it was not comic for those on the receiving end of the abuse and bullying that went with it.
However, niggling away was the idea of the biggest promotional deal he could possibly do. Run for President. Having looked at it in the late 80’s, though not in a serious way, he returned in a more serious manner for the 2000 election and the possibility of being the Reform Party candidate. He offered the party “a business mans eye for the bottom line” just as his organisation posted a $34.5-million-dollar loss for the last 3 months. Timing in politics can be everything. Much of his exploratory campaign was built around negative comments about other contenders. D’Antonio lists many of them. Too many to repeat. He managed to turn the campaign though into a book and speaking tour. His campaign eventually ended but not after extensive promotion of Trumps assets.
His 2011 attempt to gain momentum for the Republican nomination was backed by what is now becoming an all too familiar Trump trait, racial ignorance. Trump led the “Birther “charge. A name he rejected on the grounds that being a “Birther” seemed to imply anyone who questioned the Presidents birth details was an idiot. You can judge this statement for yourself. Trumps version of Birther was something else though. It wasn’t that Obama was born overseas (though he didn’t accept this entirely) it was that Obama had a secret. The secret may be that he is a Muslim, maybe something else. Obama, according to Trump, went to a school where no one remembers him and gained an education on the back of being a poor student. Of course it may just be that Trump didn’t like having a non-white President. Though different versions of Trump may have had different views. Trumps campaign ended when he decided to film another series of “The Apprentice”. It wasn’t over though. His 2011 testing of the waters included some strong stuff on Mexicans, and on foreign leaders laughing at America. His next attempt would, to use a quote from a Trump book “Think Big and be paranoid”.
Sadly, we all know where D’Antonios book is taking us. The 2016 General Election win for Trump built on his concepts of thinking big and paranoia. He advocates violence, exploits racial tension, seems comfortably misogynist and creates a climate of fear around immigrants, Muslims and Mexicans. He wants global trade and local news to be on his terms. Trump makes a political deal with those left behind, the unemployed, the Birthers, the white supremacists, climate change deniers and many more. As with his commercial deals there’s too much inherent debt and their wont be enough ability to pay all these political creditors. When the inevitable payback comes what kind of deal will emerge? Will it be more elaborate than the original? A bigger wall? More Walls? Will it cut deeper? What we do know is Trump doesn’t like to lose out in these arrangements. In avoiding Trumps political bankruptcy, we may all feel the pinch.
But are these images of Donald Trump that D’Antonio shows us our real issue to deal with? D’Antonio is certain that Trumps characteristics are known even if the characterisation is murky. The bigger question is what are we going to do about it?
Political bag carriers and gatekeepers have a new patron saint. Step forward Alyssa Mastromonoca. The inside cover of her book claims “ if your funny older sister were the former deputy chief of staff to President Obama, her behind the scenes political memoir would look something like this …” and with that she nailed it.
Mastromonaco writes in a fluid style and takes us all over the place, not just in a geographic sense but in her own world as well. She’s open and honest about herself ( there is no such thing as too open and honest ) and takes you inside the world that seems both exhilarating and frustrating at the same time.
If you ever find yourself undertaking a job like this ( even if its for a small place local body politician ) you will benefit from Mostramonaco’s guide as to how to explain your job. Don’t go into detail just say it slowly, in hushed tones and with some inclusive hand gestures.
The human side of the book is wonderfully self-deprecating and funny. How could fighting the urge to need the toilet whilst waiting to meet the Pope not be both ? How could you possible end up married when your first date is gate-trashed by Jim Messina ?
Behind this though are some more serious points. She is put down in the press mainly as a scheduler because, well hey she’s a Woman. And the stress and strain of the job remind me of Stephanopolousis also wonderful insider memoir. They burn them out in the White House. It may not be intentional, it may be it craves a certain type. Not just funny older sisters who pretend to be hedgehogs. And even if you don’t share her love (obsession) with lists, you’ll still find something wonderful in this book.
Who Thought This Was A Good Idea ? Alyssa Mastromonaco, twelve books,2017
There never seems to be a situation in British Politics that we haven’t been in before. In 1974 Harold Wilson was given the opportunity to lead a minority Government. Of course Wilson had been in opposition in February 1974, however like Teresa May Harold Wilson was confident of passing a Queens speech. Wilson did not seek agreements with any of the minor parties, and it is likely none would have been keen to do so. The Queens speech was set for 12 March. Wilson understood that his tenure leading a minority administration was likely to be short, and that much of the manifesto commitments wouldn’t be enacted. However, he also didn’t want to table a mini queen’s speech. Indeed, Wilson wanted to act big and put much of the legislation down even of it wasn’t going to get passed into law. The electoral cycle continued! (and Teresa May seems to be following by tabling a 2 year Queens Speech). Most of the Cabinet expected another election by the end of the year.
Heath as leader of the opposition warned that they would seek to defeat the government on the speech and force Wilson out of office. Wilson was adamant that he would seek a dissolution if this occurred.
The Civil Service though gave Wilson quite a lot of duff advice. Robert Armstrong advised that if Wilson lost a confidence vote the Queen might send for a senior figure to form a Government ( Jenkins/Whitelaw) . Armstrong and Crowther Hunt (his Minister at the Cabinet Office) argued against resigning in the event of defeat. Indeed, Crowther Hunt wrote the first draft of a note to the PM on the train into work on the morning of 15 March.
Crowther Hunt saw 2 alternate courses of action if a Conservative amendment was carried. Alternative A was to simply ignore the vote and Alternative B was to call a confidence vote. If defeated in the confidence cote Crowther Hunt advised Wilson stay put and ask for a dissolution. He then uses some fairly dated commonwealth examples of the risk the Queen would have in saying no. Namely that if Heath couldn’t form a Government (which he couldn’t) there would need to be a dissolution anyway. Crowther Hunt thought the Queen would be acting constitutionally improper to call for say Whitelaw or Jenkins to try and form a Government, given the accepted practice of electing party leaders. Crowther Hunt thinks the only way the Queen could refuse would be to call a Round Table Conference to seek all-party agreement, but even then he sees it as a precursor to dissolution.
Crowther Hunts memo then gets the Armstrong tinkering and is slightly expanded for Wilson. Armstrong adds 2 other alternatives as a subset of the defeat on a vote of confidence, namely forming a “broad based” Government and advising the Queen to appoint Heath as PM. These are then instantly dismissed as not being what Wilson is interested in. Armstrong though doesn’t give up, he adds a paragraph that says the Queen would be looking to avoid another election and that she might take soundings amongst good Tories. She would be reluctant to so so with Labour as it “would be hazardous in the extreme”. Crowther Hunt notes his view that the Queen wouldn’t call someone else to form a Government but Armstrong is less certain. Perhaps he’s hoping rather than being rational? There’s even a suggestion that the Queen might then enter into a complex game with Wilson testing his nerve around the dissolution versus a Whitelaw style Government. Wilson would need to consider his position in relation to the “Government of National Unity” a favourite idea for many in the early 70s.
4 days later Armstrong came back with a confession. After being pressed by Crowther Hunt on the precedents Armstrong realised he had cocked up. His understanding ( i.e. advice) to not resign after losing a vote on an address was based on a misunderstanding. He was using the precedent of Peel being defeated on an amendment in 1834, who didn’t resign on that but on a later defeat on an appropriation resolution (supply in modern DUP terms). Defeat on the amendment have been seen as confidence after all. His draft note on this claims both he and Crowther Hunt believe this doesn’t change the earlier advice. The final note only relies on Armstrong being confident on this manner.
The actual speech featured a youthful Neil Kinnock as one of the 2 star opening turns, Nigel Lawson wondered if Zetland might declare UDI and the ever popular Dennis Skinner wondered of the Liberals had gone off streaking.
In the end Heath didn’t call for a division on the speech but instead the amendment to the vote was defeated by 295 to 21 with the Conservatives abstaining. On 18 March.
References
Harold Wilson FINAL TERM THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT 1974-1976
kuneblog 