Suzanne Evans pulls out of Question Time

This is disappointing news, that caused George Galloway to issue a tweet stating 'UKIP have pulled out of tonight's Question Time. Cowards.' Hardly fair, given that Evans is ill. Galloway was therefore forced to eat his words.

Question Time: George Galloway versus Jonathan Freedland?

Tonight’s Question Time will be broadcast from Finchley, and judging from the panel it seems that it has been set up to engineer a confrontation between George Galloway and “Liberal Zionist” and Guardian journalist, Jonathan Freedland. Presumably, Tower Hamlets would have been Galloway’s preferred London location, taking into account his ethno-confessional predilections, but instead he finds himself in rather different territory where the local residents are not likely to be so . . . how can I put this? Receptive to his message?  

So, prepare yourself to sit back and watch a lot of ranting and raving about conflicts in faraway lands which really shouldn’t be any of our concern. Unfortunately, however, it turns out that they are our concern, insofar as we now have so many millions of residents from the said faraway lands that they have brought their bigotries with them and their hatreds are being played out on our soil.  

I anticipate that Nicky Morgan and Tristram Hunt will make for very dull viewing, dutifully and mechanically trotting out their respected party lines, but quite what to expect of UKIP’s Suzanne Evans, I’m not sure, but as she has taken on Tim Aker’s policy brief for the party, I will be keen to hear what she says and reveals, if anything, about UKIP’s forthcoming manifesto. Once the programme moves away from the inevitable ding-dong between Galloway and Friedman over Palestine/Israel, I am hoping that Evans will shake things up a little. Will any members of the audience or panellists pick up on Galloway’s recent Bradford speech, in which he attacked Charlie Hebdo and effectively called for a global blasphemy law to protect Islam? I hope so. If you haven’t heard his speech, or are curious to view a summary, click here.  

Review: Paul Nuttall’s Question Time Performance, 22 January 2015

Last night’s Question Time from Eastleigh featured UKIP Deputy Leader Paul Nuttall alongside Diane Abbott, Esther McVey, Tim Farran and Amol Rajan. Nuttall put in a strong performance, McVey looked OK, but her voice grated (what she said, was not particularly interesting). The body language was interesting, particularly that displayed towards Nuttall. When the camera allowed us to see them, Farran was almost invariably looking at him with a combination of contempt, condescension and defensiveness with his arms folded; McVey looked on with a hard stare, whilst Abbott displayed a greater array of emotions, ranging from smugly satisfied implicit concurrence during Nuttall’s first few remarks on the Chilcot Inquiry, changing to scowling whilst chewing on a particularly sour wasp for most of the rest of the time.

In response to the first question regarding the Sun’s ‘Page 3’, Nuttall quite rightly highlighted the strange focus of many feminists on women baring their breasts in the paper, whilst ignoring far more serious and damaging issues such as domestic violence, forced marriage and FGM on a mass scale. Nuttall stated:

Models who pose “earn good money, it’s their freedom of choice.” “I would have thought that the feminists of this country had more pressing issues such as the increase in domestic violence. Deal with that. Forced marriages, more than ever before. Female genital mutilation – they should be campaigning against that. There’s 40,000 girls in this country, who’ve been mutilated, yet we’ve now got the first court case, and it’s been illegal since the 1980s. It’s an absolute disgrace. These are the real issues that feminism should be tackling. Now look, with the Sun, I am a survivor of the Hillsborough Disaster. I made a choice not to buy the Sun newspaper. If you’re offended by Page 3, you can make that same choice as me: you don’t have to buy the Sun.”

Diane Abbott disagreed, stating that although “there’s nothing wrong with pictures of naked women; art galleries are full of them”, she objected to what she asserted to be the “increasing objectification of women” and the “pornification of the media and advertising.” In making this point, as well as referring to Clare Short [a parliamentary expenses fiddler] as a “great woman” who had “championed” the anti-Page 3 cause in Parliament. Like Nuttall, I would be rather more interested in knowing why Short had not championed the anti-forced marriage, anti-FGM and anti-domestic violence causes in so vigorous and high profile a fashion whilst an MP? As he stated:

“FGM has been illegal since the 1980s, you know, why hasn’t there been a big hoo-ha throughout the 1990s about what was going on, and why has it taken until 2015 to have the first court case and the first conviction? I mean it’s an absolute disgrace. What is going on here?”

The next question to be addressed by the panel was “Who benefits by delaying the publication of the Chilcot Report until after the General Election?”

Nuttall: “Well I think it’s very convenient for the mainstream political parties. Well, obviously not the Liberal Democrats because they voted against, as did Diane, but the mainstream political parties as a whole, that the Chilcot Report is released after May, because all it would do I suspect, if it was released before, would increase the distrust that the people have in the Establishment and the politicians, and I’m sure that the Labour Party in particular would suffer badly as a result of its publication.” Nuttall then made reference to a flying pig when Dimbleby said that Blair regretted the delay to its publication. Abbott could not repress an involuntary smirk. Nuttall continued:

“Look, the fact is, I suspect . . . well, I think they are being economical with the truth, as a politician would say. I don’t think they’re being honest [stony look from Esther McVey, Tim Farron looking contemptuous and defensive with his arms folded. Diane Abbott sitting with hands clasped, a satisfied smile on her face] I think the report will implicate a number of leading Labour politicians [Abbott’s facial expression changes. She’s not looking happy any longer], a number of Labour grandees. Indeed Ed Miliband voted four times against such an inquiry taking place. You know, that’s the Establishment protecting the Establishment. The Tories voted for this war. I’m guessing that leading establishment figures will also be culpable when the report is released. And let’s not forget, this is an Iraq War which cost the lives of 600,000 Iraqi civilians; 179 of our brave British boys and girls who went out in the armed forces never came home. Now, I just hope that the Establishment, are as concerned about the protection of civilians and our own armed forces as they are about protecting themselves.”

The next question illustrated the extent to which UKIP is setting the agenda for political debate, for it focused upon Nigel Farage’s comments that the NHS, as it is today, would be unaffordable in the future. Many commentators, and UKIP’s opponents in particular, have used this as an opportunity to attack UKIP, implying that it wishes to introduce a US model of private health insurance. Nuttall took the opportunity to – for the time being – lay this ghost to rest:

“Well look, I think that at some point in this century, with an ageing population; a growing population, drugs becoming more expensive, we may well have to have a conversation about how we fund healthcare in this country. We’re not at that point now. I want to make it perfectly clear UKIP is committed to ensuring that the NHS remains in public ownership, being funded and free at the point of delivery, but there are problems within the NHS, we know that.”

When questioned by Dimbleby as to how he could possibly know what would be in the UKIP manifesto when Tim Aker, who had formerly been responsible for its drafting, had been discharged from this duty recently, Nuttall replied:

“In our manifesto will be a commitment to keep the NHS in public hands, funded by the state, and free at the point of delivery.”

“We never sacked Tim Aker as the Head of Policy. Tim resigned three weeks ago. He actually put it out in a tweet, because he’s become a councillor in Thurrock, he’s an MEP, and he’s also in one of our top five target seats. The job was too big. It’s now been given to Suzanne Evans, and our manifesto is progressing quite nicely thank you.”

It will be interesting to see what the contents of this manifesto are, and to what extent, if any, UKIP has moved away from its Atlanticist Thatcherite economic position. Recent debates within the party around TTIP are suggestive that this may be the case.

Nuttall’s final major intervention related to issues connected to the SNP. He provided a robust, and fair, response:

“I am absolutely sick to death of Salmond, Sturgeon and the SNP. And I tell you why. Firstly, they lost that referendum, and secondly, you know with them it’s take, take, take, take, take. You never get anything back [Abbott scowls]. And you know what they’re taking? They’re taking your tax. You know, people in Scotland get an extra £1,600 more than people in England. You know what that pays for, your taxation up there? It pays for no tuition fees, whereas down here we pay tuition fees of £9,000 per year. They have free hospital car parking. Down here, we pay. [Abbott looks as if she’s chewing a wasp]. They have free prescriptions. Down here, we pay. When devolution happened, they got themselves a parliament, the English got nothing.” “Nothing is ever enough for them, is it?”

In response to Sturgeon’s recent comment that SNP MPs would in future vote on issues that only affect England, he stated “It’s absolutely appalling.” Quite correctly, Nuttell asserted that “English MPs should vote on English only issues,” not anybody else. Who could disagree? Virtually every member of the Labour Party, it would seem.

John Lydon: Diversity in the UK

It has been quite a while since I last watched Question Time, for viewing the programme makes for a highly predictable and unsatisfying experience. The panellists, even if they happen not to be politicians, tend to trot out responses that can be anticipated well in advance, and the specially selected audience fulfils the formulaic role of fielding approved questions and providing the type of applause desired by the producer. So, it was somewhat against my better judgement that I decided to view the latest programme on iplayer this evening, not having wished to deprive myself of sleep last night. The honorary non-politicians in this episode proved to be John Lydon and Dominic Lawson, the former presumably invited onto the programme as some sort of ‘jubilee’ curio, given his unofficial role in the Silver Jubilee of 1977.

There may be those who view the affluent LA tax exile Lydon as some sort of ‘rebel’, but not suffering from such a delusion myself, I anticipated a predictable performance from Lydon, and this is what we received. As performances go, it was not very entertaining, and it was a struggle to keep viewing. The faces and the voices may vary from week to week on Question Time, but the song remains the same. Lydon’s presence was to prove no exception, with his first utterance – “A parliamentary committee cannot be trusted!” – being intoned and delivered in embarrassing pantomime fashion, setting the scene for the remainder of the programme; “I don’t know anything at all,” he continued. Quite. Dominic Lawson could be seen looking on with an air of resigned disapproval.

What was his opinion on the new citizenship test? What was his view of Britishness? Was it an unorthodox view? Hardly. Lydon trotted out the most stultifyingly conformist and ‘on-message’ definition imaginable:

A complete understanding of your love your of neighbour, your culture, your country and the inclusion of all religious, race, creeds and colours and philosophies. We are an island culture. We always have been and we must keep our shore open. This is what improves us. Hello, I’m a classic example of mix and match. Hello England!

He followed up with the question: “Please, can you give one [i.e. a citizenship test] to the people that are already here?” Predictable? Yes.

Once upon a time he may have screamed about ‘Anarchy in the UK’, but nowadays it would seem that he is rather more in favour of ‘diversity’ than ‘anarchy’, which in some respects could be seen as near synonyms, but it is unlikely that this is the sense in which he wished his ‘celebratory’ remark regarding this word to be taken.

The least disengaging section of the programme consisted of Louise Mensch’s drugs confessional, during which many members of the audience gurned with disgust (whether genuine or feigned it was hard to discern) as she recounted the negative psychological impact that using unspecified Class A drugs had had upon her. Normally, I don’t have any time for Mensch, but for the couple of minutes during which she spoke upon this theme, she did something unusual for a politician: spoke honestly and from direct experience. Lydon however, predictably made some rather juvenile points about the issue, implying that there was a conspiracy (not involving lizards on this occasion) to cover up the ‘truth’ about drugs.

Irrespective of the positions held by the panellists upon the status of illicit drugs, to criminalise individuals for abusing such substances is wrong, not because I would wish to condone or encourage such usage, but because the abuse of such substances should be dealt with as a matter of public health and education. Rehabilitation is the right approach, not punishment. Criminalising drug users is akin to criminalising those who attempt suicide or self-harm: essentially inhumane.

So it was that last night’s episode of Question Time proved to be true to predictable form. For the producers, all was well with the world, for diversity was celebrated, an ageing ‘rebel’ was brought into the fold, and John Lydon delighted replica torque manufacturers across the land by wearing such an item around his neck; admittedly, not as elaborate as anything found in the Snettisham Hoard, but a torque nonetheless. As for Question Time, I shall once again bid it farewell, and resist tuning in until such a time as it looks like something may be said that isn't completely predictable. 

The Snettisham Torque: superior quality to John Lydon's