mckenzied.com In defence of politics & some politicians, in loyal support of Labour and in appreciation of decent political journalism.

21 June 2020

Fred Jarvis, a personal appreciation

Filed under: Uncategorized — Ian McKenzie @ 7:01 pm

I met Fred Jarvis in the week beginning 12 October 1992, a meeting that was to change my life for the better. My new boss, the then Shadow Secretary of State for Education, Ann Taylor, brought him down to the basement office under Speaker’s Court to introduce us and tell me that Fred was here to help me. Help? That was an understatement. There are countless people who will testify to having received Fred’s help personally and professionally, and he was 95 so there are an awful lot of us.  Each of us has many, many stories.

I’d worked in Higher Education, but my knowledge of schools’ policy was zero. Fred set about helping me as he helped countless people: selflessly and effectively. He would say “you need to talk to this or that person. Tell them I asked you to call.” He once told me to ring the Chair of Education in Ealing: “he’ll explain the good work they’ve been doing on this” and gave me his number. So, I rang. That was my first conversation with Hilary Benn; he did indeed help me exactly as Fred had predicted. 

Fred was a weekly, sometimes twice-weekly, visitor to the basement to impart wisdom. I had a fast track introduction to schools’ policy from a master. He’d arrive with bundles of very helpful scribbled notes about a Bill amendment or some thoughts on how to debunk the latest nonsense article by the Tory Secretary of State, the odious John Patten. Fred’s extended public correspondence with John Major’s Political Secretary, then merely Jonathan Hill, now Lord Hill, was as amusing to us as it must have been a torment to Mr Hill.

Shadow Cabinet Researchers were paid an awful lot less than they are today, so my summer holidays consisted in my wife and I driving her beaten up old Peugeot 205 to my Dad’s little house near Macon in Southern Burgundy where he had retired, and sponging off him. “Anne and I have a place only a couple of hours drive South from your father’s, in Sainte Cécile-les-Vignes”, said Fred, “come and visit.” 

In 1996, we did. I rang him on the eve of our visit. Anne Jarvis, whom I’d never met, answered. “Fred’s in hospital” she said, “it’s his prostate.” I asked her to convey my best wishes for his speedy recovery and that I’d see him in London. She’d have none of it. “But you can stay here, and we can all visit Fred. I know he’d love to see you.” So, we did, first in Avignon and then in the local, smaller, hospital in Orange.

We stayed with Anne for a few days. She bought us dinner in a small local restaurant now owned by good friends of mine. The following year we stayed for longer, did a few days sightseeing and wine tasting and fell in love with Provence. I first tasted Anne’s fabulous rabbit stew and her homemade Vin d’Orange; I received my first stern warning, the first of many, about the dangers of drinking water too soon after eating cherries. I loved Anne Jarvis. She became like a second mother to me. A few years later we bought a house in Sainte Cécile. Fred and Anne introduced me to so many good people including Guy Penne, the French Senator Fred had known in his student days and who was the reason they’d bought a house in his village. 

Fred rang me in April, just to ask me how I was. I am ashamed to say I never did that for him, and I’m saddened that now I never can. He always rang if he was about to visit Sainte Cécile, or he’d just arrived, to check when I would be there. Sometimes he’d call to exchange views on some outrage in the political world. In recent years, that always meant a solidarity session about the latest ridiculous excesses of the Corbynista cult. That last conversation in April was almost all taken up with the evils of the entryist ultra left. Fred had no time for Trots and was gloriously withering about them. He’d seen a lot up close over nearly 80 years of dealing with them.

He loved a good party, did Fred. I ran the bar at his 70th, held in the Barnet Teachers’ Centre. His 80th was in a packed village hall in Sainte Cecile, a huge affair. His 90th was at the Institute of Education. He joked that he’d not live to see his 100th so he’d better have them yearly. And he did. And they were always fabulous affairs with speeches, always speeches from a cast list of Labour’s great and good. And – full disclosure – a couple were not quite so good. I have only heckled a member of Labour’s soft left at a Fred Jarvis birthday party once, honest. The last time I saw him was at his 95th last year. I fully expected there to be at least another five. 

He could make a speech, could Fred. A few years ago, he spoke at a Friends of Labour Students dinner. As this man, a former NUS President more than 60 years earlier, in his late 80s, shuffled towards the podium, the bemusement of some youngsters in the room was palpable. Ten minutes later they weren’t bemused they were bewitched, spellbound by his seemingly effortless oratory and on their feet in standing ovation. The man was a class act. He made people think. And he was funny, with great timing. 

My real father is 90 this year and was recently diagnosed with dementia. Fred and he met several times over the last 20 years around my dinner table in Sainte Cécile on balmy summer nights. They both had a fierce liking for leg of lamb and Sainte Cécile’s great red wines. Thinking about the two of them today has focussed my mind on upping my game. I’m shamed by their example into making more of what time I do have left. I need to do a bit more raging and a bit less pondering at the dying of my own light. It’s not too late. If I could summon a tenth of Fred’s energy in my last 10, 20 or 30 years, I could be proud. I could light the way for someone behind me in the way that Fred did for me.

Fred Jarvis has left us, which leaves anyone who knew him feeling bereft. I am distraught so I can only guess at the loss felt by Robin and Jacky, his children. His three-quarters of a century of activism in the trade union movement, and in the education world, leaves a legacy that is unrivalled. We will not witness his like again. 

Fred Jarvis was a legend in the public realm. But it was his wider humanity in private with people, his kindness and his manifest decency, his integrity, that I will remember most, and miss most. It may be a cliché, but I can’t accept that he has gone. 

Last night, I raised a glass of Sainte Cécile red, since 2016 elevated and now labelled as a named Côte du Rhone Village. I raised my glass to Fred Jarvis: titan of the Labour movement, trade unionist, Labour loyalist, husband, father, loyal friend, and legend. I raised the glass and downed it. Then I drank the rest of the bottle. 

Thank you, Fred, mon père supplémentaire.

13 December 2016

Last resort not never resort

Filed under: Fascism,Labour,Labour leadership,Labour politics,Syria — Tags: — Ian McKenzie @ 6:19 pm

It turns out they were wrong, those people who told us that the only outcome to the Syrian genocide was a political solution. It turns out that there were two military solutions after all. One was to arm the secular moderate opposition to the fascist Assad, who were asking for a few MANPADS to down the helicopters barrel bombing their schools, hospitals and market places. The other was to wring our hands and let Assad, Putin and Iran kill half a million people.

War, what is it good for? Edwin Starr asked that question in 1970 as the Vietnam war was entering its final phase. His answer was “absolutely nothing”.

I disagree.

Of course, no decent person, no sane, rational human being would chose war over more peaceful means to achieve political ends. And yet, as a last resort, war can be a liberating, humanising course of action, and has been.

War came too late for millions of Jews, Slavs, Roma and homosexual people in early 1940s Europe. By the time the Vietnamese had, in the teeth of UN opposition, invaded to remove Pol Pot in Cambodia, 1.7 million people were dead. In 1994, about 800,000 Rwandan Tutsis lost their lives too, while an international community, forged in the post 2nd World War consensus, wrung its hands, or in the case of the French authorities, actively colluded in the genocide. The true horror of all those events was uncovered in weeks, months or years. This genocide in Syria was witnessed, live, on Twitter.
War is a very, very last resort.

But there comes a time when the crimes of some regimes are so evil and perpetrated with such fortitude, that they cannot be stopped by wishful thinking, by diplomatic persuasion, by political action or by economic sanction.

There comes a point beyond which such crimes can only be stopped by the application of armed and deadly force: “by any means necessary”, you might say.

(more…)

5 September 2016

Shadow Cabinet Elections will make a bad situation much worse

The Parliamentary Labour Party is about to vote on whether to reinstate elections to the shadow cabinet, reversing the only sensible thing Ed Miliband did as leader. It is a very bad idea in principle; in practice it will simply add to Labour’s catastrophe.

It’s bad in principle because leaders should be able to choose their own teams. No-one sensible would seriously expect a Labour cabinet to be elected, why a shadow cabinet? It was bad enough that after his 1997 landslide Tony Blair was required to keep the then elected team for a year as his incoming 1997-98 cabinet. Most of them were complete stars; I worked for one such. A few were not up to the job. A permanent such arrangement would be risible.

For moderate members who believe Corbyn is destroying the Labour Party, electing the shadow cabinet would be a self-defeating tactical blunder, playing into ultra-left hands. The current PLP would likely elect a sensible set of shadow Secretaries of State; they’d be spoilt for choice: Caroline Flint, Pay McFadden, Heidi Alexander, Rachel Reeves, John Healey, Chris Leslie, Peter Kyle, Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper, John Healey, Emma Reynolds, Lillian Greenwood, Julie Elliott, Ian Murray, Stephen Timms, Tom Blenkinsop, Bridget Phillipson, Lisa Nandy and scores of others would all be in contention. It’s a racing certainty that Corbyn’s current team would all find themselves out of a job. Richard Burgeon, for one, wouldn’t break double figures among his current colleagues. Diane Abbott? Pur-leaze.

But, I am told, shadow cabinet elections help PLP unity. Maybe in the 1980s they did. Now? Not so much.
(more…)

22 March 2016

Religious moderates license extremists.

Filed under: Hard left,Islamism,Theocractic fascism — Ian McKenzie @ 9:42 pm

Once when I was very young my father was making me porridge. Seeing him raise a saltcellar I asked for sugar instead. “You’ll have salt”, he insisted, “or I’ll tell your grandfather”. My grandfather was a Scot and, as any first-year student of philosophy knows, no true Scotsman would have sugar on his porridge. “I want sugar”, I countered, “or I’ll tell my grandfather you drink gin and tonic”. I ate sweetened porridge that day and have done so ever since, although now, in my 50s, I use slightly healthier honey in place of refined sugar. I also drink the occasional gin and tonic.

“No true Scotsman” is known as an informal fallacy, an attempted sidestep around the inconvenient fatal arguments of others. Religious moderates of all denominations use it to separate themselves from those at the other end of their religious spectrum who commit unspeakable acts of inhumanity in the name of that religion. (Yeah, yeah, atheists commit mass murder too, but they don’t do it in the name of atheism).

Many use the “No True Scotsman” defence when Islamists commit mass murder. Thus: no true believer would murder 2,000 men, women and children in cold blood by flying a plane into a skyscraper. No one properly religious would gun down a room full of cartoonists, or a theatre full of people or hack off someone’s head for the cameras, and do so in the name of god. Why not? Well, no true believer would do such a thing because Islam is a peaceful religion. See how it works?

Tony Blair says, “acts of terrorism are perpetrated by people motivated by an abuse of religion. It is a perversion of faith.” After the Charlie Hebdo murders, President Hollande of France said, “those who committed these terrorist acts, those terrorists, those fanatics, have nothing to do with the Muslim religion.” This side step has become the obligatory shuffle of politicians and most commentators, lest the religious be offended. The proposition froths down my Twitter feed after every fresh religiously motivated terrorist outrage. It may froth, but it’s a falsehood.

(more…)

14 January 2016

Tony Blair’s last fortnight

Filed under: Labour,Labour leadership,Labour politics — Ian McKenzie @ 5:11 pm

On 15 June 2007 the Guardian asked its readers to suggest ways in which Tony Blair should spend his last 14 days as Prime Minister. I’ve just found what I wrote at the time. I stand by it today. The last line is a cracker, even though I do say so myself

Jun 15 07, 10:24pm

How should Tony Blair spend his last fortnight in office?

He should spend his last 14 days looking forward to life without Guardianistas and their delusional rancour.

He deserves to reflect and bask in the certain knowledge that he has left Britain a fairer and more successful country than he found it, that everyone is better off. He should dust off a copy of Keir Hardie’s manifesto and note that he has made a reality of the first Labour Leader’s dream of a National Minimum Wage and Reformed House of Lords. He should be proud that since 1997 there are 80,000 more nurses, 32,000 more doctors, 27,000 more teachers and more police officers than at any time in history; that the spend on the NHS has tripled in 10 years; that there are 80 new hospitals either built or on the way; that every A&E department in the country has been renovated; that crime has fallen (except kids stealing mobile phones off each other). But he should devote at least an hour to condemning in words of one syllable the BMA Tory front campaign and the greedy selfish NHS consultants and GPs who have had their mouths stuffed with gold (like in 1947) and are STILL whinging.

(more…)

28 July 2015

Corbyn needs to be crushed in the vote. If he’s not, Labour will be out of power for decades and deserve to be

This whole “should Corbyn be on the ballot paper or not” thing is now out of hand. It is really very simple. The left in the Labour Party has not been crushed since the mid 1980s around the end of the last era during which they were a malign influencing force. Unless the left are crushed Labour can’t win a general election. Unless Labour wins a general election the Tories will carry on running the country doing things the left and centre left don’t like.
Contrary to popular mythology (including my own at the time), Tony Bair didn’t vanquish the left. Sure, in 1984-5, there was the months-long Clause 4 national tour, I was at its last rally at Crofton Park’s famous Rivoli Ballroom, but the left knew the game was up and faded away. It was all a bit inevitable. What we really needed then, and desperately need now, was to be locked in a room until the fight was won. Blair’s true opposition inside the Labour Party wasn’t the left. It was Brown. And we all know how that turned out.
In about 21 days, about a quarter of a million members of the Labour Party will receive leadership election ballot papers. Sadly, membership numbers will be swelled by rather too many Trots and Tories to whom some idiot decided to give a vote for the sum of £3, but we will all have a vote.
I expect that Jeremy Corbyn will come last. A lot of people don’t agree. They include some pollsters who told us that a Tory majority was impossible in May 2015, and some bookies, including the one who had to pay me £450 because I thought a Tory majority wasn’t impossible but rather impossible to avoid.
(more…)

20 May 2015

If you didn’t see defeat coming, you don’t understand how politics works.

Filed under: Labour,Labour politics — Ian McKenzie @ 3:44 am

It’s at least ten years since anyone paid attention to what I think about politics, if they cared even then. But the last five years have been very frustrating and if I don’t get what follows below out of my system soon I’ll have an aneurism which would be very bad on top of the subdural and arachnoid brain haematoma I suffered in March at the hands of the hit and run driver who knocked me off my bike.

I know that an absence of rancour, a positive attitude and looking forward not back are in order. I know that the public in both the UK and the Scottish part of it need Labour rationally and calmly to hold both majority governments to account and I am sure that those responsible for doing those things in the Labour Party will do them just fine. For now though, I’ve waited over a week but I’ve seen nothing yet to make me feel positive about anything. The August 2013 Syria vote aside, I’m as angry as I’ve been about politics for decades. I’m angry about a few other things too, so apologies in advance for the splenetic tone of what follows.

We lost the 2015 general election in September 2010 and probably also the 2020 one as well. The result was bad for Labour but catastrophic for the millions of people who rely on us to look after their interests. We let them down, and badly. If the Labour Party – a major controlling proportion of it – doesn’t rapidly accept that the only chance to make amends is to stand in the centre ground, shoulder to shoulder with, listening to, working for the British people, and fight and win elections from there, then it will cease to exist and it will deserve to die.

Without the will and the means to win elections we are irrelevant. We might as well be Compass or a whelk stall.

(more…)

7 February 2015

Rotherham: a case study in the laws of political mob dynamics

Filed under: Child sexual abuse,Local government,Rotherham — Ian McKenzie @ 2:42 am

Paul Lakin and Mahroof Hussain: a combined 28 years of loyal service to the people of Rotherham and to the Labour Party

 

I recently wrote of my terror at the prospect of a mob in full flow. On Wednesday I witnessed one first hand. It wasn’t as terrifying as a gang of religious thugs stoning to death a gay man who’d had the temerity to survive being thrown from a seven-story building, but it was frightening in its own context nonetheless. Seven decent, honourable people doing righteous public service for very little reward were hounded out of office in Rotherham, by a mob whipped up by a partial government report that has condemned the very people who had finally started to get a grip on the chaos and confusion that has hurt so many in that town.

Over the last 30 years, I suppose it’s possible I’ve met a braver politician with more integrity than Paul Lakin but I can’t recall one and I’ve shaken the hand of Nelson Mandela. If you think that’s hyperbole you’ve never had a friend who suffered sexual abuse from the age of eight and seen her shake uncontrollably at its mere recall many years later, or heard her scream out in her sleep, as I have. If you believe I don’t take sexual abuse seriously enough then stop reading now, I can’t help you and you will learn nothing here.

Paul Lakin and his team rolled up their sleeves when many others headed for the hills, and they were making good progress. Lakin was the Leader of Rotherham Borough Council from 10 September 2014 until Wednesday 4 February 2015. It was the interregnum between the Jay report and this week’s Casey report, shall we say? During those 146 days he put his heart, soul and considerable personal capital into serving the people of Rotherham who are today worse off for his absence as their council leader. Among their number are many survivors and victims of child sexual abuse.

(more…)

6 February 2015

A good man put his words into action.

Filed under: Uncategorized — Ian McKenzie @ 3:00 pm

Councillor Paul Lakin, then Leader of Rotherham Council, addressed a meeting of the full Council on Wednesday 10 September 2014. Given this week’s parliamentary statement by Pickles, it is worth setting out what Paul said in full. Some people say he was in denial. Nigel Farage alleges, libellously, that he and his cabinet were complicit in sexual abuse. Let’s have a look shall we? Interestingly, when he had finished his statement the entire room applauded including the full contingent of UKIP Councillors, 10 of them I believe, and the motion which formalised it was passed without opposition. I watched them all put their hands up. Paul said:

‘The people of Rotherham have been let down badly, and for too many years, by several agencies in this town, over the sexual abuse and exploitation of many of our children and young people.

‘Those children had the right to expect better of us, and we failed them. The Council accepts its responsibility and its full share of the blame for that failure, and I want to start by placing on the record, on behalf of the whole Council, our sincere and unreserved apology, to all the victims and their families, for the suffering they have endured over the years.

‘I am – we are – deeply, deeply sorry.

(more…)

25 January 2015

But-ing. Let us count the ways to but.

Filed under: Islamism,Theocractic fascism — Ian McKenzie @ 4:12 am

The steady advance of theocratic fascism with its multiple unspeakable acts of violence in scores of venues all around the world in an attempt to create a global caliphate forcing the rest of us to live under the Sharia is really, really bad.

Most people agree with this but there are lots of people who find a way to qualify it with a “but”. Let us count the ways.

Theocratic terrorism is very bad…

  1. But America has a foreign policy of which we should disapprove
  2. But lots of Muslims consider cartoons of the prophet insulting.
  3. But religion is important and we need to respect people’s faith.
  4. But would we want to see negative representations of black and gay people?
  5. But religion is the same as race.
  6. But Israel kills a lot of people too.
  7. But we shouldn’t gratuitously insult people.
  8. But these terrorists are just petty criminals.
  9. But these terrorists should be ridiculed.
  10. But we invaded Iraq.
  11. But they are trying to provoke us so, if we allow ourselves to be provoked, they’ve won.
  12. But we should consider whether we would publish these cartoons as part of our normal editorial policy.
  13. But there is no threat to us.
  14. But it is important not to over-react to acts of pure barbarism.

I must have missed some. Anyone seen any others?

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress