Question: “Why did Peter Hain do quite so badly in Labour’s Deputy Leadership contest, notwithstanding the amount he spent?” Answer: “Because he is a deeply unattractive prig.”
Category: Uncategorized
Will sorry be enough?
Many years ago one of my best friends, just called to the Bar, was stopped by the police in Battersea for jumping a red light on his Honda 50. Asked if he had anything to say, his answer, later read out by a humourless policeman to the South London magistrates, was, “It’s all right officer, it’s a fair cop. You’ve got me bang to rights. Will I do time?”. Peter Hain has been slightly less forthcoming but he has said sorry. In the wonderful world of New(ish) Labour, saying sorry is, it seems, all you have to say. Well this is the case if one of the Work and Pensions Secretary’s ex-bag carriers, the MP for somewhere or other in Wales, is to believed (interviewed on Radio 4’s PM earlier this evening). Apparently we are all meant to admire Peter Hain’s openness and the fact that he has owned up to being less than scrupulous about his record keeping. It is not very impressive, but still sufficient to earn him the continuing support of that pillar of rectitude, Gordon Brown. What is perhaps even more suprising is the amount Hain spent. Alex Barker wrote in this morning’s FT that “Labour figures have been at a loss to explain how Mr Hain spent so much in the deputy leadership campaign – he significantly outspent all of his rivals – while losing so badly. He came fifth in a race won by Harriet Harman.” Even if he did outspend the others, together they must have wasted a great deal of money on a contest for a non-job . . . and these are the people who govern us.
A new Renaissance? You have to be joking
If you want more on the context of arts funding, you will do no better than read William Skidelsky’s post, Britain’s New Renaissance in First Drafts and then read Mary Wakefield in Coffee House on what should go on the Fourth Plinth in Trafalgar Square. To which I would only add that having seen the new designs (and what is there at the moment) it is less a new Renaissance and more straight back into the Dark Ages.
Mad and bad
So said Samuel West at the Equity meeting yesterday, attacking Arts Council England’s proposals to cut funding to the arts; and Peter Hewitt, chief executive of ACE is reported this morning as feeling that he had been ambushed by the vote. His reaction, and the management blather he speaks, perhaps point up the real problem: indifferent leadership and a signal failure of imagination. Better is the more considered view of Sir John Tusa, on Radio 4’s Today Programme, “This is a painful transition, probably not a very well-managed transition, but I suspect it actually has to take place”.
A Dismal Science
See Paul Hodkinson in Legal Week this morning. The LSE has “included law in its annual list of non-preferred subjects for undergraduates”. He reckons that this risks having the legal community up in arms. I doubt it. Those of us who have the misfortune to practice law already know that his assertion that law is a ‘dismal science’ is all too true.