The editor of The Spectator, Matthew d’Ancona, is not what you would call a combative journalist. I tend to feel that the Spectator, while still a highly readable publication these days, has tended sometimes to tag along a bit too tamely behind the Cameron/Brown consensus, although the magazine retains its robust elements, not to mention that entertaining if rather self-parodying old card, Taki.
What the Spectator thinks of Gordon Brown may not count for much outside the Westminster village of media/political junkies, but I reckon this ferocious column by d’Ancona about the government’s repulsive behaviour over the recent EU Constitution, sorry, Treaty, represents quite a shift. Whatever respect that d’Ancona used to voice about Brown has disappeared. I have never read anything so sharp by d’Ancona before. The trouble is, that it has taken far too long for the truth to dawn on even supposedly cynical media commentators that Brown is not a man of honour or principle. The mistake is to think that because he is Scottish, dour, unable to do the Blairite Dianaesque rhetoric, that he is therefore somehow more ‘solid’ or ‘honest’ than the actor-manager that he replaced. The truth, alas, is quite different. Brown is just another machine politician.
Whilst his admission, or late realisation of the sheer treachery of Mr Brown’s actions, and of all our parties, is late, it is still welcome.
I am a 18yr student at college in the UK, and I log onto my laptop everyday, and become ever more horrified by our Government’s actions against the people, its snuffling of our money, its stifling of our liberties and its treachery on fundemental issues like allowing an Enabling Act to go through with their consent.
I could have told them that years ago, when he used to turn up every other night on the BBC’s Reporting Scotland, droning on about the latest Thatcherite plot to oppress the workers looking like some caricature of a minor East German offical.
I feel sorry for anyone coming round from a 20-year coma: “And who’s Prime Minister now? No, come on, seriously. Stop pulling my leg. You’ll be telling me Alistair Darling’s Chancellor next…”
Trinketization
I am a little bothered by the description ‘political junkies’. To me it conjures a whole series of associations that could be fun – Hunter S Thompson on the campaign, William Burroughs fighting the control, but really in the end it just seems like an insult to junkies. They have more integrity than politicians.
Trinketization
Some excellent writers in the Speccy – Deborah Ross, Jeremy Clarke, Theodore Dalrymple, Tamzin Lightwater and of course Taki, to name just a few of my faves.
The only thing that bugs me about the paper is the ‘huntin’ and shootin’ brigade’ and all the young fogey waffle about Lords and Ladies and ‘what a delightful claret I imbibed the other day while dining at the Duke of So and So’s at his Scottish estate’ stuff. I think the ‘pop’ critic is in his mid-forties.
Nonetheless, an excellent read. I’m glad Ancona seems to have gotten a bit more forthright abou the Salinists.
I recall commenting a few months ago that Charles Moore was the only reason I still read the Speccie. But it’s improved a bit since then. Deborah Ross has grown into the role of film critic (frankly, I found her “I don’t know much about films but I know what I like” attitude grating at first, but in fact she does hit the nail on the head most of the time), Theodore Dalrymple has returned, Alex James has proved remarkably entertaining for the bass player out of Blur (it is the same Alex James, right?), the new tech/Web column is rather good (if short) and they’ve toned down the Style and Travel section (and dropped the cringe-making “You’ve Earned It” tag – no, I haven’t; I’m practically skint and I buy the Spectator for the writing, not because it looks good in the East wing bathroom).
They should still ask Mark Steyn back, though.
The real mystery here is why Gordon Brown insisted to push this treaty through Parliament in the face of widespread public opposition. Is it perhaps that he suffers from a personality disorder that will brook no dissent whatsoever, even if it comes from a huge majority of the electorate; or is there something in the treaty that is of inestimable value to the interests of the UK? If it’s the latter, I’m still waiting to hear what it is.
Or perhaps there is something in the Constitution/Treay which renders future votes unnecessary.Remember this document requires Gordon to put allegiance to the EU above that of his Monarch and his country.
Yes now the E.U. is to have its own “legal personality” (i.e. be a state in its own right) changes to its Constitution will not have to be sent back to national Parliaments to be ratified – because it will be nation itself, and a rather certralized ones.
As for why Brown is not having a vote – same reason as so many other “member state governments” he would lose.
“But why accept the thing at all”.
Now there is the interesting thing.
Politicians would rather have “influence” (even mythical influence) over something big than have to take responsiblity for judgments over a smaller thing.
Partly they prefer big things to small things – big conference, lots of flags and so on.
And partly because if they are not really in charge any more the weight of responsiblity is lifted from their shoulders.
All the perks of office – with no hard choices to make.