26 The Sunday Times April 10, 2022COMMENT
Robert Colvile
there to be a mid-term reset: the
streamlining of the legislative agenda
that Barclay is leading, and Griffith’s
attempt to refocus minds on the 2024
election, have strong echoes of Sir
Lynton Crosby’s attempt to “get the
barnacles off the boat” under Cameron,
which steadily turned a large Labour
lead in the polls into a surprise
Conservative majority. The prime
minister has even brought in one of
Crosby’s closest allies, David Canzini, as
his deputy chief of staff.
But the point of hiring Crosby wasn’t
just that he got the barnacles off. It was
that he helped Cameron and George
Osborne point the boat in the right
direction — and then made sure the
passengers and crew were crystal clear
about what that direction was. The
government does need to keep MPs
onside. But voters will judge the Tories
at the next election on whether growth is
rising, cost of living pressures are easing,
NHS backlogs falling and the
opportunities of Brexit are being taken.
If ministers allow themselves to be
wafted hither and thither by every gust
of parliamentary indignation, over wind
turbines or whatever else, they
shouldn’t be surprised if they end up
being blown off course.
@RColvilehousebuilding. Even firms that never put
up a cladded building, or obeyed all the
rules when they did, have been ordered
to help cover estimated costs of
£4 billion (which could well go higher).
Similarly, this government believes in
privatisation when it comes to Channel 4
— which might give the station the
financial muscle to upgrade schedules
that rely too much on imported pap and
homegrown agitprop. But it believes in
nationalisation when it comes to chunks
of National Grid and the railways.
It fervently supports deregulation —
except when it’s hiring hundreds of civil
servants to check that tech companies
are policing with sufficient zeal what we
say on the internet, or to scrutinise the
details of mergers and takeovers across
swathes of the economy. Indeed, the
recent white paper on the benefits of
Brexit explicitly noted that a tough target
for reducing regulation would be a great
idea but couldn’t be done because of the
government’s plans for tech and net
zero. And of course it believes in
lowering the tax burden, except on
budget day.
It’s hardly unusual for a government
to contain multitudes: conviction
politicians such as Thatcher who chart a
firm course for the whole of government
are a sad rarity. Nor is it unusual forchancellor — whose recent experiences
serve as exhibit A if you want to explain
why so many talented, dedicated people
run a mile from a career in politics —
rejected Labour’s calls for a windfall tax
on the energy sector. He made the
impeccably conservative argument that
if you want more of something, in this
case oil and gas investment, it’s
counterproductive to tax it. Yet Michael
Gove’s solution to the cladding crisis is to
impose exactly the same kind of tax onmajority, the prime minister kept getting
defeated by his own MPs — and then, of
course, faced a near-death experience
over the No 10 parties. So it is
understandable that he has prioritised
rebuilding relationships with his
backbenchers. It is telling, and arguably
unprecedented, that two of the senior
advisers brought in to rebuild Downing
Street — the chief of staff, Steve Barclay,
and head of policy, Andrew Griffith — are
MPs themselves.
For any other leader this might be an
uncomfortable adjustment. But among
Johnson’s greatest assets, and certainly
among the most infuriating to his
enemies, is his ability to adapt his
priorities and his persona to the needs of
the moment. If tooth-and-claw
Toryism is what it takes to secure his
position, tooth and claw is what the
troops will get.
But there are four structural
problems. The first is that MPs don’t
always agree with one another, let alone
No 10. The second is that MPs don’t
always agree with the public. The third is
that sometimes you may need to do
things that are unpopular with both.
And the fourth is that sometimes — even
often — the things the government ends
up doing look contradictory.
For example, last month theI
t’s not exactly unusual to see this
government making a U-turn. But
it’s still unusual to see it making a
U-turn in the face of largely
imaginary opposition. Last week’s
energy security strategy was all set
to recommend a big expansion of
onshore wind, championed by the
business secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng —
but the final announcement instead
restricted itself to milksop language
about “consulting on developing
partnerships” with “a limited number of
supportive communities”. No 10 had
once more bowed to angry MPs,
panicking about the reaction in their
constituencies.
So nimbyism reigns triumphant once
again? Well, not quite. The bizarre thing
about this decision is that onshore wind
is hugely popular. Every survey on the
matter, every way of putting the
question, returns the same findings.
Pollsters have broken the results down
into old voters, Tory voters, Brexit
voters, rural voters, even people who
live near existing wind farms. In every
group an impregnable majority is in
favour of onshore turbines, and in
favour of building more of the things.
If nimbyism is bowing to genuine
local resistance, then we need a new
word for pre-emptively surrendering toa noisy but tiny minority: dimbyism,
perhaps?
Still, this episode is a perfect
illustration of the strategic dilemma
facing the government. Boris Johnson
has two overriding priorities: to keep his
job and to win the next election.
Sometimes, as on getting taxes back
down, these imperatives overlap. But on
a host of issues they push the
government in opposite directions.
Take onshore wind. If you want to win
the next election, doing whatever you
can to reduce energy prices — or even
just showing that you are trying — is a
good idea. Putting up more wind
turbines is quick, cheap and popular,
especially compared with building
nuclear plants (although we do need to
build more nuclear plants as well).
But there is a folk memory among
Tory MPs of the local opposition to
onshore wind in the early 2010s, which
convinced David Cameron to kneecap its
development. WhatsApp groups were
starting to form. So No 10 caved, because
it wants to keep MPs happy. And it wants
to keep MPs happy because happy MPs
aren’t voting against the government —
or, worse, writing letters of no
confidence to Sir Graham Brady.
This process has become self-
reinforcing. Despite his healthyWe need a term
for surrendering
to a noisy but
tiny minority:
dimbyism,
perhaps?If a mere murmur of dissent can blow the PM
off course, he will never get anything done
Three shish to the wind
Your investigation of David
Warburton MP (“The
dishonourable member”,
News, last week) revealed
something that, even in these
cynical times, shocked and
amazed me. There is a
“British Kebab Awards”? And
it’s held in Westminster? Ah,
well: it’s probably just
another way for the Tory
party to find new doners.
Robin Dickson, Edinburgh
Wales and measures
Camilla Long says Vladimir
Putin’s Sochi estate is “39
times bigger than Monaco”
(Comment, last week). Since
when did Monaco become
the unit for this purpose?
Unless area is given as a
fraction or multiple of Wales,
I’m completely confused.
Martin Brunnschweiler
Port Erin, Isle of Man
Revert to small type
You report that publishers
are struggling with spiralling
paper costs (Business, last
week). There is a solution:
revert to the olden days and
print books with smaller type
and less space between lines.
Smaller books are less
wasteful all round.
Jo File, Folkestone
Print and be damned
Rather than wailing and
gnashing their teeth, book
publishers need to fully
embrace the 21st century.
Save the trees: go digital. It’s a
no-brainer.
Ray Howes, Weymouth
Barnes’s cross to bear
Julian Barnes is a fine writer
but he shouldn’t regard
himself as brave and edgy for
offending Christians (Culture,
last week). He knows it comesat no personal cost; gangs of
Christians will not be
scouring north London for
him, nor calling for his books
to be burnt. Followers of this
“dangerous” religion are too
busy celebrating the Easter
message of love, sacrifice and
forgiveness.
Brian Churchill
Abergele, Conwy
Louis, Louis
Your article on Emmanuel
Macron said Louis XIV “was
executed by guillotine in
1793” (Magazine, last week).
This seems unlikely, as he
died in 1715. Perhaps you
intended to say Louis XVI?
Nora Neilson, Bristol
Clocking out
To Julian Richer’s tips on how
to use your time (Business,
last week), I would add this:
don’t sell it on an hourly
basis. I see retired lawyers
and accountants who, after a
working life of selling their
time, are at a complete loss
when they have it all to
themselves: once-vibrant
conversationalists lose their
sharpness overnight.
Chris Burgess, by email
Sew simple
In her report on a new virtual
shopping service, your
reporter rejects a dress
because “the hemline
reached the floor” (News, last
week). I do find this odd:
can’t anyone take up a hem
any more?
Alison Finlay, London N10years later, you are still
together and wouldn’t change
it for all the apps in China.”
And how about Caroline
Attwood’s way? “Eye them
up at the railway station, take
a chance and ask them who
they are, talk to them for
several weeks on the train,
have a date that leads to other
dates — marry and do as
above 36 years later.”
PollyWollyDoodle recalled:
“Hubby and I met in the goodold-fashioned way at a disco.
His mate fancied my friend
and they went onto the
dancefloor, leaving us
together. We celebrate our
44th anniversary this year.”
Now for those tips,
inspired by Rod Liddle. “If
you want to give to food
banks, just take food off the
supermarket shelves and put
it straight in the food bank
bins,” suggested Roger
d’Altry. George the DragonUnless politicians set the
tone by being open about the
problems we face, how can
they expect the people they
lead to be? Every time a
minister answers a question
about healthcare with spin,
they contribute to the failure
of the NHS.
Richard Schilling, professor of
cardiology, London
Unlimited demand
Having lived and been cared
for in France, Spain and
Switzerland, I am frustrated
when British politicians claim
the NHS is the best health
service in the world. It is not.
It is a flawed and sprawling
leviathan. Worst of all, no
politician is willing to state
the obvious: that the NHS’s
mandate to deliver an
unlimited quantity of costly
healthcare at no cost to the
individual will inevitably fail
to meet demand.
Peter Tonissoo
Valencia, SpainWrong targets
I take issue with Syed. I know
no nursing colleague who
regards criticism as
sacrilegious, and see no
evidence of compassion
morphing “into callousness,
humility into arrogance”.
On the contrary, we do our
best, despite understaffing
and high pressure. Look
instead at the government’s
culture of targets.
Isabel Weeks
Registered nurse, Cirencester
Spin from the top
This deification of the NHS
developed in the 1970s, 1980s
and 1990s, when staff were
on low wages for
extraordinarily long hours:
the public recognised their
sacrifice and responded
accordingly. Since then
conditions have improved,
but the attitude has not
disappeared because it is
used to prevent criticism of
poor services.NHS managers
dodge the blame
Matthew Syed (Comment, last
week) is right that deification
of the NHS is an obstacle to
improvement — but having
worked as a doctor for 45
years I can tell him it is not
the clinical staff who push the
idea that the NHS is sacred.
Instead, they express
frustration and anger when
dealing with their managers.
Managers are not regulated
and cannot be held to task for
negligence or dishonesty.
Practitioners can be struck off
the register and even go to
prison, but those who create
the conditions in which poor
practice flourishes can just
move on to another job.
If they were regulated, we
might have management that
was not rewarded by bullying
and cover-ups.
Peter Ramsay-Baggs
Holywood, Co DownWithout storage,
wind can’t work
Oliver Shah’s clear appraisal
of our energy crisis glossed
over one serious problem
with wind and solar (News,
last week). At times of
plentiful wind and sunshine,
many suppliers have to be
paid to stop generating to
avoid oversupply to the
National Grid; when there is
little of either, they cannot
contribute power. What’s
needed is more energy
storage capacity — but this
and previous governments
appear to have done little to
tackle the problem.
Roger Calvert, Smeeton
Westerby, Leicestershire
Build now, worry later
Shah quotes Greg Jackson of
Octopus Energy saying that
onshore wind turbines can be
erected quickly, but the
problem is the several years
required to obtain planning
permission for them. The
government’s new energy
strategy does little to help.
Given that we are in an
energy emergency, why don’t
we make the planning
process retrospective: build
the turbines now, and in the
event that they subsequently
don’t get permission, take
them down again?
Stephen Hey, Ilkley, West
Yorkshire
Hot air turbines
It is true that a wind turbine
can be placed in position in a
day, but the infrastructure —
substations, cabling and so on
— can take years. To suggest
that cutting through the
planning quagmire will mean
plentiful eco-friendly power
tomorrow is just dishonest.
Now, if we could create a
turbine to harness all the
Boris Johnson bluster, that
truly would be a source of
endless energy.
Chris Mills, Ryton, Tyne and
Wea r
Urban generation
Tony Killeen hits the nail on
the head (Letters, last week):
the majority who live in cities
are happy to selfishly blightthe countryside with wind
turbines. A similar split arose
between city and country folk
on foxhunting. In both cases
there is an obvious solution.
Allow hunting in rural areas,
but ban it in towns and cities;
and leave the countryside be,
but erect all those wind
turbines in Hyde Park and on
Hampstead Heath.
Peter Froggatt
Dorking, Surrey
Eyesore for an eyesore
Killeen is upset by turbines in
the country. I propose a swap.
The residents of Devon could
take on the 17-storey Soviet-
inspired housing development
planned for the heart of
suburban Purley, and we’ll
have the turbines instead.
Barbara Campbell
South Croydon
Road worthy
Turbines are unsightly things,
so why not build them beside
motorways, where nobody
has to stop and look at them?
Paula Winter, Saffron Walden,
Essex
Standing joke
James Coney takes a swipe at
the standing charges levied by
energy companies, saying
they bear no relation to costs
(Money, last week). Indeed.
My contract is due for
renewal and I am faced with
increases of 691 per cent for
my electricity standing charge
and 389 per cent for the gas.
As a low user, I will pay more
for the standing charges this
coming year than for my
entire energy bill the previous
year — and that is before I use
any fuel. I am speechless.
Alistair Nicoll, Sheffield
Pumping out nonsense
The government’s offer of a
£5,000 grant towards the
£10,000 cost of a heat pump
only shows how out of touch
it is with the millions of
households who cannot cover
their immediate bills. What
next? State-subsidised car
loans to buy a Tesla?
Carol Forshaw, BoltonFrom Falklands to
Ukraine, stay firm
Max Hastings says Margaret
Thatcher embarked on the
Falklands war to save her own
authority (News Review, last
week). Not so. She was a
conviction politician and
knew instinctively, like most
of the nation, that it was the
right thing to do.
When the dust settles in
Ukraine, I hope we can be
proud once more, having
supported an effort to resist
invasion. Again, it is not about
calculation, but conviction.
Mark Longden
Stapleford, NottinghamshireIslanders’ perspective
Hastings says retaking the
Falkland Islands wasn’t
essential to the UK national
interest. Whether or not that
is true, it certainly was
essential to the interest of the
Falkland Islanders.
Dr Cath Livingstone
Galashiels, Selkirkshire
Four winners
I am a Falklands veteran and I
have always thought there
were four winners in our
victory. The islanders won
because it restored their way
of life. Britain won because it
restored our national
confidence. The Argentine
people won because it wasthe beginning of the end of
their brutal dictatorship.
And the West won because
it showed the USSR the
resolve of a single Nato nation
— and therefore the likely
resolve of a band of similar
nations.
Peter Ross
Weston Longville, Norfolk
Last gasp of empire
I disagreed with the war and
still do. What did we gain for
the nearly 1,000 lives lost on
both sides? There are less
jingoistic ways of solving the
problems of the outposts of a
dying empire. The Falklands
conflict served only to help
save an unpopular British
government.
Damian Plant, Coventry
Popularity contest
One of the most depressing
results of the conflict was
that it made politicians
believe that going to war
could make them popular,
after decades of nothing
but inconclusive strife
(Northern Ireland), stalemate
(Korea) or abject failure
(Suez and Vietnam). The
second Iraq war and the
Afghan war were a direct
result of this fallacy.
Robert Blood, London SE1040 and 45 Commando make for Stanley as the conflict ends1633 Novel food appears in
a London shop: bananas
2010 Lech Kaczynski,
president of Poland, killed
by air crash in Russia. All 96
passengers and crew died
2021 Rachael Blackmore is
first woman to win the
Grand NationalNicky Campbell,
broadcaster, 61
Sophie Ellis-Bextor, pop
singer, 43
Lesley Garrett, soprano, 67
Gloria Hunniford,
broadcaster, 82
Peter Morgan, writer, 59
Daisy Ridley, actress, 30
Paul Theroux, writer, 81Sophie Ellis-Bextor is 43JOIN THE CONVERSATION ONLINE
reckoned that “spending five
hours a night in the pub
drastically cuts my heating
bill. The bog roll is free; the
wi-fi is free.” “Surely the cost
of the beer erases any
savings,” objected Mr
Influentia, but chris fay
pointed out: “He didn’t say
anything about drinking
there.” As long as you’re not
reading free newspapers as
well, George, we’re with you.
Rob NashLETTERS
TO THE EDITOR
Your comments from
thesundaytimes.co.uk
We were going to dedicate
this column to tips for staying
ahead of the cost of living, but
we were waylaid by some
vignettes we must share. Matt
Rudd had described the
course of true love in the pre-
app age, eliciting this from
Clareta: “Meet a friend of a
friend at a party, let him drive
you home and phone you on
the landline two days later,
marry the following summer
... listen to him sleeping nextto you as you read this
column 40-odd years later.”
Or, wrote Joannah Yacoub:
“Meet a friend of a friend by
chance in a pub, argue about
a film (because really it’s a
children’s film, not arthouse,
and he’s 43), tell him he’s a
pompous clot, go home,
discover he managed to get
your phone number from
friend, accept invitation to
dinner, argue some more,
marry and wonder why, 44The Sunday Times,
1 London Bridge Street,
London SE1 9GF
Email: letters@
sunday-times.co.ukANNIVERSARIES
Letters should arrive by
midday on Thursday and
include the full address and a
phone number. We may edit
letters, which must be
exclusive to The Sunday TimesBIRTHDAYS POINTS
READERS’ POLL
Last week we asked: Would Princess Anne make a better
monarch than Prince Charles?From a poll of 13,272 Times and Sunday Times readers
This week’s question: Are the tax affairs of the chancellor’s
spouse any of our business?
Have your say at sundaytimes.co.uk/pollNO
79% 21%YES
CORRECTIONS & CLARIFICATIONS
We have been asked to point
out that, contrary to our
article “The man who lost
America” (Sport, last week),
William Walters did not act as
a bookie for Phil Mickelson.
We are happy to make this
clear.
Complaints concerning
inaccuracies in all sections ofThe Sunday Times should be
addressed to complaints@
sunday-times.co.uk or
Complaints, The Sunday
Times, 1 London Bridge Street,
London SE1 9GF.
In addition, the
Independent Press
Standards Organisation
(Ipso) will examine formal
complaints about editorial
content in UK newspapers
and magazines. Please go to
our website for full details of
how to lodge a complaint.Conversion
therapy rethink
As professionals, parents and
concerned adults, we urge
the government not to rush
through ill-judged legislation
to ban so-called conversion
therapy. Abusive and harmful
practices are already illegal,
but ambiguous language and
weak definitions risk
criminalising ethical
exploratory therapy.
In particular, we worry
about children who are
presenting with gender
dysphoria. Similar legislation
in other countries has had a
chilling effect on therapists,
leaving vulnerable youngsters
on a one-way path to
irreversible medical
interventions. We cannot
make the same mistake in the
UK. Increasing numbers of
detransitioners — with their
physical and emotional scars
— show that children change
their minds.
Hasty attempts to decouple
gender identity from the bill
will inevitably provoke
hurriedly drafted
amendments to put it straight
back. But what is needed is an
evidence base — as Dr Hilary
Cass said in the recent interim
report from her review of
paediatric gender services.
The government should
pause for Cass’s final findings
and proceed only when it is
clear what is actually
required.
Debbie Hayton; Dame Jenni
Murray; Rosie Duffield MP;
Maya Forstater; Baroness Fox
of Buckley; Simon Fanshawe;
James Esses; Helen Joyce;
David Bell; Jess de Wahls;
Neale Hanvey MP; Sarah Vine
QC; Professor Jo Phoenix; and
69 others. For a full list, go to
sundaytimes.co.ukIWM/GETTY IMAGES