Andrew MacDougall: Change is heading for 'Drowning Street'
Andrew MacDougall: Change is heading for 'Drowning Street'
But, all things considered, probably not that much change.
By: Andrew MacDougall
If your pitch to voters is that Britain needs protection in dangerous and uncertain times, it’s probably best to first show the voters that you can protect yourself.
For example, if it’s raining, you might want to consider demonstrating the good sense to wear a raincoat. Or carry an umbrella. Or if, say, you are the prime minister of an entire country, with an events team at your disposal, you might want to consider erecting a tent of some sort, something that can keep you dry without ruining your visuals.
Or you can be Rishi Sunak, the beleaguered British prime minister, and stand out in the pouring rain, unprotected, and get drenched as you state your case for more time to be the country’s leader, evading the storm only when re-entering the house you will surely be vacating after voters have their say on July the 4th.
To be fair to Sunak, it’s not easy to predict the weather in London. Nor can you always control the timing of events. But when it rains all of the time where you live and you do absolutely control the timing of events, as a British prime minister does when calling an election, it’s unforgivable to be unprepared. There’s a reason most Brits keep an umbrella nailed to their hips, and it’s not style.
And if you think this is to make a mountain out of a molehill, you should check out the front pages of the U.K. papers on the morning after the election call. “Drown & out,” blared The Mirror. “Drowning Street,” chortled another broadsheet. “How long will (Sunak) rain over us,” chirped in a key regional title. Each headline was accompanied by a grim looking Sunak soaked to his whippet-like core. The presentational details matter, especially when you’re putting yourself in the shop window.
Then again, to expect anything more from a Conservative movement that is running on fumes after 14 turbulent years in power is to put hope over experience. It’s been a draining (nearly) decade and a half. There was the austerity and economic uncertainty of the coalition years. The referenda —Scottish and EU — that choked off most debate on other issues in the middle part of the last decade. And then came the double act of COVID and Ukraine, a compounding whammy that hammered supply chains and put up energy and other prices, prompting the worst cost-of-living crisis in generations. It would have been enough to test any leader’s mettle, which is probably why the Conservatives have had five prime ministers during their stretch in government, including three in 2022 alone.
Which brings us to the “Trussterfuck,” those glorious 49 days in which then prime minister Liz Truss tried to defy economic gravity in the wake of Boris Johnson’s defenestration — and lost. If you’re looking for a moment when the mountain became too high for any subsequent Conservative leader to climb, this would be it. Truss was positively Himalayan.
The Truss interregnum is certainly the period Sunak is most struggling to escape; his predecessor left him with a giant bucket of shit and a teeny tiny little shovel with which to get to work cleaning up. But clean up Sunak and his Chancellor of the Exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, have done, to the point where inflation is now back under control and the economy is beginning to show signs of life.
But 14 years of making decisions is a lot for any government to overcome, even when times have been pretty good. And as much as Sunak has improved on his poor inheritance, he is no John Major, and 2024 is not likely to be 1992, when Major picked up the pieces after Margaret Thatcher’s liquidation at the hand of her enemies in the cabinet. No, 2024 is looking more like 1997, when Tony Blair rode the wave of “Cool Britannia” to power to secure a huge majority.
Fortunately for Team Sunak, Sir Keir Starmer is no Tony Blair. Where Blair was kaleidoscopic, Starmer is monochromatic. If Starmer was a colour, he would be beige. Starmer is also, shall we say, situationally convenient. He was twice for the anti-semitic and isolationist Jeremy Corbyn, and then ran as “continuity Corbyn” during the leadership race following Boris Johnson’s majority win in 2019, only to then bin most of his left-wing pledges once assuming the leadership of his party. Since then, Starmer has kissed the centrist Blair’s ring, backed away from major green pledges, and welcomed Natalie Elphicke into the Labour tent from her previous perch on the ring-wing fringe of the fringiest fringes of the Conservative Party. Most days, Starmer has to check his own feet to see where he is standing.
More to the point, Blair campaigned in, and inherited, a growing and dynamic economy. Starmer, should he win, will inherit a (slightly smaller) bucket of shit. There are no big giveaways for Starmer to put in his shop window, because there is no money. There is barely any economic growth and productivity went AWOL somewhere around 2008. The best Starmer will be able to do is point at Sunak and shriek “CHANGE!” a lot.
And you know what? That’ll probably do. Because the people want change. The Tories will try to paint Starmer as a risk not worth taking, but as long as Starmer demonstrates a continued ability to fog up a mirror, he should be prime minister come July 4. Moreover, as long as Sunak continues to do things like ask a bunch of Welsh pub goers if they’re looking forward to this summer’s European football championships (a tournament for which Wales didn’t qualify), as he did Thursday on the stump, he’ll bag enough own goals to gift Starmer his victory.
Not that the world will notice much of a difference if Starmer does win. For all his painting himself as something different to Sunak, Starmer will follow, by and large, the Sunakian fiscal path. He won’t revisit Brexit. He won’t move an inch from the Tory position on Ukraine, even if his voter coalition is getting poleaxed by Gaza. Starmer will be rock-ribbed on NATO and silver tongued about the “special relationship” with the United States, even if it’s Donald Trump at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue come November of this year.
That’s right, the result of a “change” election could very well be “more of the same.” But at least the adults will be in charge. You remember them, don’t you? The kind of people who remember to take their brollies with them when they leave the house.
Andrew MacDougall is a director at Trafalgar Strategy and former head of communications to prime minister Stephen Harper.
The Line is entirely reader funded — no federal subsidy for us! If you value our work, have already subscribed, and still worry about what will happen when the conventional media finishes collapsing, please make a donation today.
The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Follow us on Twitter @the_lineca. Fight with us on Facebook. Pitch us something: lineeditor@protonmail.com
I think it quite right that if Starmer can continue to fog up a mirror, he's in. Partly due to severe Tory-fatigue; partly due to Starmer's efforts at making Labour electable after Corbyn (who reminds me of Michael Foot some 45 years ago - Loony Left, unelectable Left...).
But, I also think MacDougall is right in noting the absence of wild enthusiasm for Labour and its leader. For me, I think one of the biggest problems those on the left side of the political spectrum face is the reality that past generations have implemented almost all their policies since WWII. What more does one legitimately ask government to do? The Cdn experience in recent years with desperate efforts at creating excitement about Pharmacare and Dental Care proves the point. In theory, I am sure, everyone would love to have both services completely free. However, there is no money in the till and so both programmes here in Canada are almost laughably thin. Ditto, in its way, with Day Care - everyone is happy as a clam at the thought of $10/day day care. Pity it is unaffordable so rationing is achieved by underfunding demand and making it, shall we say, difficult to find a space. Indeed, a fair percentage of day care operations set up with the ambition of filling this undoubted demand have folded or scaled back in various ways because the financial support is inadequate. Stuff costs money and if you don't have enough you do one of two things: set the item to one side until you do; or raise taxes sufficiently to pay for it. If that tax rise is unthinkable, seeing as we already pay quite a bit, then see the first option.
Labour at least seems to understand this and are basically campaigning on 'stop the insanity' and let the 'grownups' run the shop while the Tories have some much needed rest in the penalty box. I am sure for the weary Brit this is compelling stuff. The rain-drenched PM serves as a brilliant metaphor of where the Tories are these days.
And, governments need to change stripes on a regular basis for the health of all. So all good.
Canada is in the same space with the difference that our 'Labour' party is about to enter the penalty box and our Tories are set to replace them. I suspect extravagant promises from the Tories will be scarce as our cupboard is as bare as much as Britain's. It'll actually be a pleasure to not have to have the vapours over yet more unfunded promises and a few years of solid and stolid management. Not sure our Tories can deliver but a few drama-free years have much attraction.
Yes, I know, '...events, dear boy, events...' will disturb this dreamscape...
One would think at the very least an aide would have been instructed to hand him an open umbrella or even to stand there holding same over the Prime Minister yo avoid the hilarious drowning comments.
Your lighthearted turns of phrase made me laugh out loud.
The UK situation reminds me of Canada’s current government. Poilievre may decide to do more than shout change but he’s no doubt taking notes on how this election goes down. It probably won’t take much more than fogging up the mirror to win here.