We need a leader who, like the Queen, can tell our national story

Our institutions are under attack. Now is not the time for an apologist who places process above narrative

Visiting Cornwall at the weekend, I found myself in the tiny hamlet of Tolverne on the beautiful Roseland Peninsula, its tranquillity diminished only by the chug-chug of a passing boat on the Fal. Yet in June 1944 this was one of the busiest places in the world, and certainly among the most important. For it was in a thatched riverside cottage in Tolverne that Dwight D Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander, established a temporary HQ for the invasion of Europe.

In this sylvan corner of Britain, surrounded by thousands of American troops preparing to embark for Normandy, Ike fretted about the inclement weather and made the final dispositions for the launch of Operation Overlord exactly 75 years ago tomorrow. All along the Fal and its deep-water estuary known as Carrick Roads are reminders of that moment. The remains of the slipways, jetties and concrete plinths built to load the soldiers, tanks, Jeeps and ordnance hidden in the creeks and surrounding woodland aboard dozens of ships and barges are still there to this day.

It is hard to believe that this was kept

secret from the Germans. And nor did it happen in some distant time long ago, but within the memories of many still alive. “History is now and England,” as TS Eliot says in “Little Gidding”.

This is, indeed, our story; and yet we are often reluctant to tell it. We need formal commemorations such as this week’s anniversary to serve as a reminder of who we are. It is as though we find recalling the triumphs and adversities of our recent past to be somehow, well, not quite British.

This has been true for years but Brexit has blown the lid off it, pitting those for whom the UK’S history and institutions are its strength against those who have never felt comfortable with either. Most of those in the former camp tend to be Conservatives, many of whom voted to leave the EU, while those in the latter are, by and large, on the so-called “progressive” Left and are predominantly Remainers, though not exclusively so.

Jeremy Corbyn, for instance, would fall into the latter category even though he is a closet Brexiteer. But that is because his internationalism derives from a Marxist belief in proletarian unity, whereas for others on the Left it is a straightforward disdain for patriotism. As George Orwell observed, and nothing has changed in the meantime: “England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In Left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution.”

When Labour Lefties looked derisively at the photographs of the state banquet in yesterday’s newspapers before heading off on their pathetic protest march, they were not only sneering at Donald Trump but at all the trappings of the pageantry, the Queen included.

After all, they are invariably republicans – Mr Corbyn avowedly is – yet dare not say so because most of their voters are patriots and are not ashamed of their country or its history. Quite the reverse, in fact. The Corbyns, the Thornberrys, the Khans and the rest represent a vanishingly small strand of metropolitan opinion.

What is worrying, however, is how many Tory leadership contenders are also nervous about subscribing to a national story and are obsessed with process above narrative. Listening recently to Lord Sacks, the former chief rabbi, on Thought for the Day,i was struck by his insight into the nature of leadership. What makes a leader, he said, was the ability to tell a particular kind of story, one that explains ourselves to ourselves and tells us who we are and where we are heading. A leader gives power and resonance to a collective vision.

Yet we are going in the opposite direction, toward an atomised nation where politicians seek to carve out a slice of the electorate by appealing to a narrow sectarian or ideological constituency. The latest national polls show the lowest ever joint Labour and Conservative vote shares on record at under 40 per cent.

The Brexit Party, the Lib Dems, the Greens and the SNP are picking up support because the old certainties that sustained a two-party system continue to crumble. The 2017 election when the Tories and Labour won more than 80 per cent between them turns out to have been an aberration. Politics are fragmenting because the institutions that held the country together are in crisis. Brexit is not the cause of this but the symptom.

When we undermine the institutions that make us who we are the whole edifice is in danger of collapse. Once it was unnecessary to articulate a national story as a sort of inclusive American-style shared covenant that all could sign up to, including immigrants, because our institutions were the story. But Parliament, the courts, the Civil Service, the Armed Forces, the BBC, the press, the monarchy – all have been beset by upheavals that have undermined confidence in them.

The institutions that define Britishness have been under attack for years, derided by the Left and weakened by submission to extra-territorial decision-making through membership of the EU. For an example, tune into Jonathan Sumption’s Reith lectures to learn how the most senior jurists are concerned that the law is taking over the space once occupied by politics.

Is there anyone among the leadership candidates for the Conservative Party who can put a broken country back together again by articulating the shared story that Lord Sacks has spoken about, one that gives identity and hope? To a great extent that story is embodied by the Queen as head of state, a living link to the past. As she reminded her guests at the state banquet on Monday night, she met Eisenhower when he was president.

Her present to Mr Trump of a first edition of Winston Churchill’s account of the Second World War shows how she recognises the importance of this story. The Queen is the personification of nationhood at a time when patriotism is a dirty word in too many parts of our civic life. The country desperately needs a political leader who instinctively understands that our story is one worth telling and can do so without apology or equivocation.