Wednesday, 20 April 2022

Abandoning morality

 

An inability to learn from experience seems to be a standard requirement for Tory MPs, particularly when sent out on defend-the-PM duties. Every time any of them comes up with a new line of defence which they think to be clever and apt, some quote or action will be dredged up from the PMs 'colourful' past to undermine the point they are making, yet still they keep trying to do it. And thus it came to pass yesterday that, within hours of one Cabinet Minister comparing the fixed penalty notice with a parking fine, someone drew attention to the PM’s views on parking fines – as in that he accumulated piles of them, deliberately ignored them, didn’t pay them, and allowed them to disintegrate in the rain, using a Belgian-registered car as his excuse on the basis that the local constabulary wouldn’t bother to chase the owner of a foreign vehicle. Another handy comparison bites the dust, unless the more limited lesson that we’re supposed to draw is that at least he pays his fines these days. The long arm of the law doesn't seem to be long enough to catch even a self-confessed serial fine dodger.

According to an increasing number of reports, many Tory MPs have decided to wait until after the May local elections before moving to depose their leader. The theory behind this is, apparently, that a really bad set of results will demonstrate that the electors at large want him out and that will be the trigger for the gutless ones to think about doing something to remove him. It’s a way of evading any sense of morality or propriety that might still be lurking somewhere about their personage; it says, in effect, that all the lawbreaking, the lying, the misleading are entirely acceptable to Tory MPs up until the point that the electorate demonstrate at the ballot box that they are no longer acceptable to voters, and thereby threaten the continued presence of the spineless ones in the distant recesses of the palace of Westminster. It’s every bit as self-serving and immoral as the PM himself. They deserve all the opprobrium which is heading their way.

2 comments:

Gav said...

These days you gets your laughs where you can, so it was delightful to read of some MPs' reported criticisms of the Archbishop of Canterbury for "moralising*", almost as if they're altogether unaware that moralising is a good part of his flippin' job.

*"misguided moralising" is even worse. Who do they think has been misguiding him? [glances anxiously upwards]

John Dixon said...

Gav,

I fear that you (and the Archbish) might be misunderstanding the role of England's established church. Ultimately, it all boils down to selecting the right preposition. The established church is supposed to preach on behalf of the Establishment, not to it - and especially not at it.