There is an old saying about being in a hole and stopping digging, and it seems to apply to critics of Reform UK. (Note: I’m not saying that voting for Reform UK is like falling down a hole!)
People voting for Reform UK are doing so because they are fed up with existing politicians (for which I don’t blame them at all) and in an uncertain world where a safe pair of hands and common sense would seem to be needed, the other parties are more concerned with fighting each other.
Labour is wasting all its energy electing a new leader to replace the one it already has, partly because of his U-turns but in part because he’s boring albeit a safe pair of hands, who has dealt with Donald Trump with a great deal of common sense.
So what do people who don’t like Reform UK do? They mock them for being stupid and / or racist; they might as well cut out the middle person (Facebook) and sign up as Reform UK recruiters.
The latest issue was this week, when Reform UK member Coun Sarah Wood said she didn’t understand anything about how the council (Kirklees) worked, and was universally mocked.
It seems to me she was making a perfectly fair point – no new councillor understands anything, which is why they get training sessions.
Coun Wood claimed the opposition was trying to stitch up Reform UK by passing a resolution on a new leader.
Her colleague Coun Rob Butler said: “We are being manoeuvred with a game play when we do not know the rules and I do not think that is right.”
They were undoubtedly correct – playing games is not completely unknown in politics, after all.
You, reading this, could decide next May you want to stand for the council, and as you are smart and honest (you read the “Chron”, stands to reason) you might get elected – but know very little about the council.
You just want to solve community issues and try to make a difference, and now there’s all these rules and terminology to get to grips with.
You wouldn’t expect candidates to take a pre-election course in council as it’s very boring and they might not win; you really wouldn’t want to do it unless you had to.
Journalists have to learn about central and local government, and the latter is one of the driest of topics; I had an inspirational teacher and it was still hard going, possibly the most tedious thing I have had to learn, and I once learned about crystallisation of molten rock.
Let’s be honest, most people who end up in local politics don’t grow up dreaming of standing orders, committee structures and the mysteries of the constitution. They stand because they care about bins, buses, big potholes and bad planning — the stuff that actually affects people’s lives. The idea that a new councillor should grasp the labyrinth of local government procedure is absurd.
(We’ve also come across long-serving councillors who pretend to understand everything while bluffing their way through. At least Coun Wood said the quiet part out loud. If more councillors were willing to admit gaps in their knowledge, we might end up with better decisions and fewer political games).
As for Coun Wood, she has the makings of an excellent councillor: she’s clearly not afraid to admit ignorance and be humble, and can spot a political trap. Maybe in future years the council video will resurface as often as William Higgins addressing Tory Party conference when he was three.
This is not to say Reform UK does not have problems. While its elected members try to solve local issues, its national leadership seems more interested in headlines and clickbait. Nigel Farage only has the one policy, looking after himself, and of course he still owns the party outright, meaning any claims it makes about democracy sound a little far-fetched.
* * *
Politics now is too much about the “woke” (who, like Trump’s Antifa, do not exist as a group) and the perils of diversity but, as I’m getting older, one would hope that whoever forms the next Government will still address one form of prejudice that seems endemic in this country – discrimination against the elderly.
I’m not saying it’s like in the 20s, when teenagers enjoyed the sport of pensioner-tipping, but more the indirect discrimination of ignorance.
I’m a big fan of phone-ins and the excellent Dean Dunham legal phone-in recently had a call from a bloke of 90, who’d gone into the bank he’d used for 50 years to transfer money from one account to another.
The bank asked him if he had ID. He produced his driving licence, but they said it was out of date. He said the picture was clearly him, but they were having none of it. He produced his bus pass but they said it was not accepted.
He pointed out (he still had his marbles despite his age) that if he went outside and called them from a phone box they’d transfer the money without any form of ID, but their response was: “Good luck finding a phone box.”
He said he hadn’t got a passport because they cost too much money and, well, he was 90, and he didn’t use his phone to bank with because he didn’t want to and we don’t live in a dictatorship.
He didn’t really have a legal question for Dunham. He was just making the point that when you get to 90, you shouldn’t have to put up with this crap.
He did make the reasonable suggestion that bank cards should carry a photo ID, with which Dunham agreed, and said he would raise with the banks next time he spoke to them.
After listening to all this, I went back to work and was told a story about a parking meter on a Congleton car park and a member of our staff getting a parking fine (story next week, still waiting for a Cheshire East comment).
He’d driven over from Leek to do some shopping and found the meter out of order and, as used to be the case, assumed that motorists didn’t have to pay for parking.
Obviously, you can now pay on an app – which he didn’t have, and has had no inclination to get – so got a parking fine.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of his case, it makes the wider point that this policy of parking seems discriminatory against certain people, chiefly the elderly who don’t have smartphones, those who can’t get or don’t want a smartphone, or have no data – people may have data limits and not be able to use the app.
Indeed, when the change to pay-by-app parking metres was made, the council reassured people without smart phones that they’d still be able to park. Except when the parking metre is broken, it now transpires, in which case they’d best go to another town.
Our man made the point that he’d come from Leek and spent 25 quid, but he will not do it again.
It could also be asked what the council expects people to do who find themselves unable to pay because the council machine is out of order. Block up a side street? Miss an appointment and go home?
Whether it’s trying to get money out of a bank in London or paying for parking in Congleton, it all discriminates against older people who may not understand the technology or just not want smartphones.
The trouble is, life is now being run by people who assume everyone lives their life through a smartphone. It’s as if the country has been redesigned by a committee of 23-year-old snots. Don’t get me wrong: banking by app is marvellous, and I run my life on my phone, but people should have the choice; apps should not be mandatory.
It’s not just banks and parking apps. I booked a GP appointment recently, via a form. I tried calling but the recorded messages last longer than the 100 Years War.
The form worked well, I got a text back and booked a blood test online, all hunky dory. But then the surgery called and left a message for me to call it back. Guess what? No shortcuts, because some numpty has decided that online is best, and never considered the surgery might want a patient to call back without waiting the time it takes to get to Leeds and back on a traction engine.
