Today has been rather a strange day if only because our by now established routines have been disrupted somewhat. Thursdays are the days when I normally get my shopping done but today we had no 'sit' carer allocated to is because it was the agency's Christmas 'do' and all of the staff were expected to attend. Our sit function has now been moved to Friday when I am sure the supermarket will be heaving but at least we are getting a sit services from the agency. After breakfast, I pushed Meg down the hill and the weather was cold but not too unpleasant. Once inside Waitrose, I needed to buy two separate kinds of milk and I also treated ourselves to some more 'stollen' which to my mind is much nicer than Christmas cake. Meg and I quickly consumed the stollen I bought last week and we hope to replenish supplies tomorrow, Then it was up the hill but there was a cold and icy blast which made the journey really unpleasant. Then we regaled ourselves with some soup and eventually, after watching some news programmes, thought about lunch was quite a specialised quiche which I cooked with some spaghetti hoops and green beans. I had my lunch just before the carers paid the midday visit to Meg, after which she had her portion. In the afternoon, we took the entire collection of Christmas cards that we had received and went through them carefully one by one.
We are not too far off the shortest day - and the longest night of the year. Normally, I look forward very much to getting 21st December behind us because I can then tell myself that it is getting lighter and lighter by a tiny smidgeon each day. But the coldest night of the year is often in late January or even mid-February. This afternoon, after Meg and I repaired to our main (traditional) sitting room, we watched a 'Private Eye' review of the year 2024 which was quite entertaining. 'Private Eye' is an interesting periodical not least because it survives by employing hardly any staff or journalists at all. What happens is that investigative reporters come back to their newspapers with stories of juicy scandals but often the sub-editors are wary of running a story lest it run foul of the legal process. Having uncovered a scandal and then discovering that the story had been 'spiked' (literally out on a spike in newspaper offices which is what happens to stories that cannot be published) the journalists in frustration telephone Private Eye who then publish the story willy-nilly. Of course, Private Eye used to be sued regularly but they could rely upon the generosity of the public and sometimes other wealthy donors to pay the fines. Very occasionally, the 'Eye' does win a libel case but it expects to lose these cases quire regularly and devotes about a quarter of its revenues to pay the fines handed out by the courts.
One of the greatest reform to how Parliament works have been the Select Committee, often staffed by very knowledgable MPs who can grill witness, civil servants and ministers. About twice a year, the Prime Minister is asked to appear before a Liaison Committee which I think is staffed by the chairs of other committees and is consequently quite a high powered body. Defiant and across the detail, but uninspiring and a little spiky at times, is how the PM navigated his first Liaison Committee appearance. The 90 minutes of intense questioning by committee chairs was not a source of much festive cheer as Keir Starmer joylessly ploughed through the session – taking on topics from temporary housing to global stability. From Number 10's perspective it will be considered a success, with hours of preparation meaning he avoided any nightmare moments before Christmas. From the MPs perspective, some appeared frustrated at Sir Keir's refusal to admit mistakes and his defence of unpopular policies. Another theme was his government's ambitious targets and the lack of obvious roadmap to achieving them - primarily on growth, defence spending and immigration. His answer was always to blame what he inherited from the Conservatives and to insist that he would meet his goals given time. A particularly illuminating moment came at the end, when he was asked three times by committee chair Meg Hillier if he had any regrets looking back on his time in office so far. The reply, after some pressing, was 'no' - displaying a level of stubbornness and inflexibly that will either drive or ultimately destroy his premiership. This is an interesting observation to make. Evidently, no Prime Minister would want to see themselves portrayed as constantly vacillating, changing their minds on policy and thereby appearing weak and indecisive. But Keir Starmer seems to have got himself into a position (with withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance to pensioners, the row over inheritance with farmers and finally the 'Waspi' women) where there is a very clear case to be made for at least looking again at issues to try to defuse them. Starmer's categorical refusal to examine the cases on their merits but to stick rigidly to their first position does not, to me, look like the hallmark of a strong Prime Minister. Admittedly, there are tremendous political difficulties in even half admitting that one might have got things wrong but the politics is fundamentally an art rather than a science and there are ways in which can refine a policy whilst maintaining the principle involved. I have the feeling, though, that these three issues are going to stick in the minds of many people for a long time to come and it is probably the case that the political cost of sticking to one's original position gets higher and higher. One can almost see the next Tory manifesto being written and there are important elections looming ahead in the Spring on 1st May, 2025. Some 2,240 councillors across 1,968 wards will be elected in 32 Councils, including all 21 County Councils, 10 Unitary Authorities, and 1 Metropolitan Borough and these will be the biggest test of public opinion since the general election held earlier this year. One of the great unknowns at this stage is whether 'Reform' armed with a war chest of money from Elon Musk could help to give the Tories the bloodiest of bloody noses. But this oddities of cash heading towards our shores will probably be declared 'legal' if it comes from a subsidiary branch of a British company. But a clear case of buying political power and influence and subverting the democratic process seems to be unfolding before our eyes.
© Mike Hart [2024]