Westminster Watching

For keen ‘Westminster watchers’ one of the most interesting of recent events has been the questioning by Tony Blair and his supporters of the direction that Ed Milband is leading the Labour Party. For a decade Blair dominated the political scene. He was fortunate in taking over as leader at a time when the Conservatives had been in power for fifteen years and a change at the following election was almost inevitable but, nevertheless, once in power he kept his Party, perhaps against its better instincts, on the Common or Centre ground and, as a result, won another two elections. Now Miliband, perhaps because he is naturally someone of the Left, is pulling his Party in that direction and the polls indicate that the Opposition’s lead – which is almost inevitable in mid-term – is slipping.

In part this is, no doubt, a reflection of the fact that they have no alternative economic policy. Voters can immediately see that a policy of ‘we’re in debt and have borrowed too much so let’s borrow some more to get out of debt’ just doesn’t add up. We all know that if we ran our household budget on that basis things would only get worse. 

Parliament is both a workplace and, at the same time, a theatre. The theatricals can be witnessed every week at Prime Minister’s Questions and the workplace day in day out. This week, for example, you may well have seen a glimpse of PMQs on the TV news but the chances are you won’t have heard much about the debate on  Accident and Emergency waiting times, the role of reservists in the regular army, childhood obesity and diabetes, plug-in vehicles policy, or the effect of the weather on upland sheep farmers. These were just a small selection of debates from the last week – and that’s just in the two main debating chambers. Elsewhere committees, all-party groups and many others were busy trying to persuade or cajole government into a change here or a u-turn there in order to bring about what they are debating or campaigning about.

Sometimes visitors can drop in at Westminster and see an all-action bloodbath between the party leaders – though not this week as PMQs wasn’t all that exciting – and other days a polite exchange of views about the European Commission’s Fourth Railway Package – a subject debated last Thursday, and a well-mannered series of questions to Transport department ministers – another of Thursday’s sessions. Whenever constituents contact me to arrange a visit to Westminster it’s usually a Wednesday they want; to be there on for the Cameron v Miliband show but tickets are limited and allocated on the basis of each Member getting two tickets three or four times a year. So when arrangements for constituents to visit last Thursday were put in hand I explained that it might not be all that exciting. What I didn’t know until the day before was that it would be Prorogation Day and with it another of Parliament’s quaint rituals.

It’s the State Opening of Parliament in reverse but this time with no Queen, no Prime Minister, or any other leading players such as Maltravers Herald of Arms Extraordinary and all of the other weird and wonderful characters who appear for that event. Nevertheless Black Rod marches from the Lords to the Commons, has the door slammed in his face and once he gains entry politely commands that the Commons, that is the ‘Knights, Citizens and Burgesses in the Commons assembled’ to attend Her Majesty’s Commissioners (the leaders of the various parties in the Lords) to hear Her Majesty’s message and to hear the Royal Assent being granted.

It is noted that: My Lords, in obedience to Her Majesty's Commands, and by virtue of the Commission which has now been read, We do declare and notify to you, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons in Parliament assembled, that Her Majesty has given Her Royal Assent to the several Acts in the Commission mentioned; and the Clerks are required to pass the same in the usual Form and Words.

Then, after the name of each new Act of Parliament is announced one of the Clerk’s bows to the Commissioners, turns towards the MPs and says La Reyne le veult – the Queen wills it.  

We could of course dispense with this quaint ceremony and life would go on but we would lose some of the colour and gaiety that we all need and also we would lose the history of why we do things this way. Why do we slam the door in the face of the Queen’s Messenger? Why do we announce Royal Assent in Norman French? Why do all three parts of the legislature come together to take part in this little ceremony? and so on.................

Speaking of ceremony and ritual I was fortunate enough to be to attend Margaret Thatcher’s funeral service at St. Paul’s when we heard the traditional words of the King James Bible and the Book of Common Prayer – so much more dignified than the more modern versions. The Church of England and the military together know all there is to know about ritual and ceremony and can always be relied on to put on a dignified and uplifting event – and, as ever, they did not let us down.   

The Thatcher Years

This is particularly interesting in the week of Margaret Thatcher’s death. As has been made clear by the comments from the more thoughtful of her political opponents, she changed the political landscape.

Whether or not you admire, regret she was ever in power, or perhaps even despise her, it is a fact that she did indeed change not only the Conservative Party but the Labour Party as well and her influence is still being felt across the political spectrum.

The politicians who I most admire are those who achieve real change; to do so at any level is extremely difficult; not only is the “system” against you but, more often than not, a large part of your own party will be opposed.

Generally speaking, despite always critical of those who hold power, we don’t like change and one of the important functions of the political process is to do just that – manage change.

The world is much more complex than ever before and change is coming ever faster.

But returning to my opening theme of “class and politics” what Lady Thatcher achieved above all else was to broaden even further the Conservative Party’s appeal to include more of the aspiring working classes.

After 18 years of Tory Government, many transferred their loyalty to Tony Blair’s Labour Party and, remember, he even had to change the party’s name to show how it had broken with its past and was prepared to take forward the “Thatcher Revolution”.

It is undeniable that the Thatcher governments presided over a period of massive change, much of which was particularly painful for those parts of the country that were reliant on heavy industry such as steel, shipbuilding, car production and, of course, mining.

The problem was that what could and should have been a period of more gradual change had to be compressed into a much shorter time. That’s because a series of weak governments had ducked the issues making the whole process more painful.

What is undoubtedly true is not just that she showed such determination to restore Britain’s place in the world but that the great majority of the British people recognised that it was necessary and stuck with successive Tory governments.

It’s equally noticeable today that the vast majority recognise that, though the medicine is horrible, we have to fight once again to balance the nation’s books.