Like MPS’ expenses, sex scandal could sink PM
When a Government is already rudderless and confused, ‘events’ start to resemble icebergs
On the evening of the 2001 general election, my parents made the 20-mile journey from Ayrshire to Glasgow in order to witness at first hand their son being elected as a member of Parliament.
They sat patiently for hours, denying themselves their precious cigarettes – that’s how much they wanted to be there. When I made my acceptance speech, I had never in my life seen such pride on their faces.
Eight years later, my dad, now a widower, fell into a conversation with a stranger on a train, who asked him what his son did. “I didn’t want to tell him you were an MP,” he told me.
The 2009 expenses scandal was in full swing at the time. Even though I was (largely) unscathed by the revelations and was officially informed I had nothing to repay from my previous claims, having an MP in the family had become a source of embarrassment rather than pride.
And as each day brings yet more revelations of inappropriate, lecherous behaviour by MPS and ministers, a new but familiar cloud has descended on the bars and tearooms of Westminster.
Many of those now serving as MPS were not around eight years ago and cannot imagine the deep and profound dread that prevailed at the time, as The Daily Telegraph churned out a horrifying daily charge sheet against the House of Commons.
It was the uncertainty that was most frightening. What claims, made according to the rules in place at the time, would now be deemed unacceptable by public opinion?
As each day passed, as more colleagues were forced to apologise and, in many cases, announce they would step down as parliamentarians, the rest of us breathed a short sigh of relief, before the tension mounted again and the run-up to the next day’s revelations began. The expenses scandal was pure poison for the normal operation of politics.
As in 2009, the political parties are now insisting that they take allegations of sexual impropriety seriously.
They are lying. Because, as in 2009, they are being spurred into action not because they have only just been made aware of ministers’ and MPS’ appalling behaviour but because it is being reported publicly and they wish to minimise political damage.
By 2009, we all knew how the allowance system could be exploited to maximum financial benefit; it is simply inconceivable that party whips had no knowledge of Sir Michael Fallon’s touchy-feely tendencies towards women until this week.
We already know that when young Labour activist Bex Bailey made a complaint about the assault against her by a senior Labour figure, she was told by a party official to keep quiet about it.
Westminster has always been full of gossip and reports about this or that minister or MP known to be “handsy”.
The bad news for Theresa May is that even though this current scandal affects all the main parties, the music has stopped while she, and no one else, is holding the parcel.
In 2009, the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, already under intense criticism from his own side for his stewardship of the Government, became the chief casualty of the expenses scandal.
Yes, many of the more headlinegrabbing claims had been made by Conservatives, but it was Labour that was in charge when everything kicked off. Had the government been perceived as being master of its own destiny at the time, with a clear set of ambitions and achievements to its name, the corroding effects of the scandal would have been more equally spread among the parties.
But when a ship is already seen as rudderless, its direction confused and uncertain, that’s when “events”, once they hove into view, start to resemble icebergs.
For Brown, the scandal could not have come at a worse time; it reinforced the public’s view that here was a man with no agenda of his own, other than to be Prime Minister, a man who had been a part of the establishment – and therefore part of the problem – for more than a decade.
No one can seriously doubt that Theresa May is genuinely disappointed in her male colleagues’ behaviour, nor that she is willing to swing the axe if necessary to remove those who have been exposed as lacking the skills or ability for dealing courteously and professionally with the opposite sex.
Yet, as with Brown eight years ago, these revelations have occurred at the worst possible time for the Prime Minister.
With a united Cabinet and a minimum of infighting, with a clear vision of what Brexit will mean and what it will look like, the Government might have weathered this storm with equanimity, offering confidence to observers that this challenge, like other serious ones, would be efficiently dealt with.
Instead, one mini reshuffle later, and with the prospect of plenty more revelations to come, Mrs May looks increasingly at the mercy of events, not the master of them. However unlikely it might seem, this scandal could sink the Government.