A new President in the White House and the promise of decency and competence

courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol

And so, the wearying drama of the last four years is at an end, and we can look forward to something resembling proper governance again. It comes as a relief, and whilst today was emotional for many, I personally look forward to a degree of relative dullness for the next four years.

That, perhaps, sounds a bit like "damning with faint praise" but I genuinely mean it as a compliment. The thing is that good governance is a bit dull, happenstance if you like. You should, in truth, be able to take it as given that the President decides on the basis of facts, underpinned by a political philosophy, that he or she stands for something rather more than personal advantage.

President Biden's inauguration speech expressed hope rather than bombast, talked about the left behind and the vulnerable rather than at them, and was long on the challenges that face the nation collectively and as individuals. It was a call for unity, something that the United States badly needs. I'm not counting on him getting much, and what he may get won't last long, but asking for it puts pressure on moderate Republicans to think about whether or not to reach across the floor to pass whatever legislation he needs.

For, regardless of the poetry of an inaugural speech, he will be obliged to govern in prose. Yes, the Democrats have control of both House and Senate, but the Republicans can still make life painfully difficult for the next two years, and even though the 2022 Senate elections slightly favour Democrats, for the two years after that too.

But, for the rest of us, a Biden Presidency offers reassurance. Greater engagement with Europe, a more activist policy in terms of trade and aid (although a UK/US trade deal looks slightly more distant) and a sense that there are adults in the room rather than a transactional toddler prone to tantrums and in thrall to dictators. That offers hope that some of the more intractable global problems might get the attention they deserve.

There will be calls for the United States to resume its role as the world's policeman, and I find myself hoping that a Biden/Harris administration might take advantage of the opportunity to encourage regional groupings to play a stronger role, and to reassign some of its huge defence budget towards supporting that. Rebuilding its diplomatic capability, both by restoring the State Department's budget, and increasing the use and reach of its soft power, will reassure nervous allies whilst re-establishing trust that has been lost during the Trump years.

What is most needed though is an America which is more at ease with itself, something that clearly isn't so at the moment. It's a huge challenge for any incoming Administration, as polling shows an alarming polarisation between progressives and conservatives, and Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy and their colleagues have their share of responsibility to support that effort. I don't expect them to agree with the Administration - I'm not that naïve - but nurturing an atmosphere of courtesy and mutual respect would be a good start, along with a marginalisation of the crazies.

So, I wish Joe Biden and Kamala Harris the very best as they take the reins. I also hope that we don't pin too much upon their success, because just as overpromising and underdelivering is a poor strategy, setting your expectations too high and then complaining when they aren't met is pretty foolish too. Dull, workaday competence needs, perhaps, to be more highly regarded...

Is there a danger that our politics is spiralling into a moral void?

I don’t consider myself to be an exceptionally good person. I have, I admit, flaws. I have an erratic attention span, don’t always deliver entirely what I promise to, and could be better organised. But I like to think that I’m pretty loyal, prefer facts to rhetoric, and that I care about the people around me. If given a choice, I will tend to avoid personal attacks and make a positive case for the things I believe in rather than tear down my opponents.

And that, perhaps, is why I find modern retail politics so uncomfortable. I almost enjoy canvassing for myself, meeting voters and finding out what worries or concerns them. Putting out leaflets explaining what I think might be done reminds me that local government can potentially be a force for good. The problem is that, faced with opponents who make false claims, my first thought is to combat them with more positivity rather than confront their claims. The anecdotal evidence, unfortunately, is that such an approach doesn’t appear to work that well.

So, when my Conservative opponent in 2011 claimed to be the local candidate despite living miles away from the ward, I merely emphasised my local connections, leaving her misrepresentation to stand. I lost, albeit respectably, but I still lost. I am told that I should have raised the issue of her lack of connection to the ward early on, but it felt uncomfortable. Ultimately, my moral scruples may have cost me victory.

But I now find myself watching from the sidelines a contest where one side is running a campaign seemingly utterly lacking in moral scruples but without apparent consequence. Either voters have reconciled themselves to this, and polling numbers appear to suggest that, or the choices offered to them are so lacking in appeal that lying and misrepresentation are seen as legitimate tactics. That’s about as dispiriting as can be if you believe in politics as a potential force for positive change. For, if a politician is not tangibly punished for knowingly committing falsehoods, and indeed appears to be being rewarded for doing so, what incentive is there for others to play by the usual societal rules?

And thus, we see a political environment where those with integrity and decency are driven out, leaving those with the thickest skin, the least self-awareness or the greatest avarice left to “represent” us. Are such people actually what we aspire to in governance terms?

Don’t get me wrong. I still believe that many politicians are broadly decent and honourable. But tolerating such behaviour tarnishes the soul, and risks making you guilty by association. If your senior colleagues lie and dissemble, they are doing so in your name and, if you stay quiet, your complicity must be assumed.

I have no expectation that some of the more egregious committers of falsehoods will suddenly see the light and admit that they were wrong, indeed, I expect them to prosper, at least in the short term. But, in doing so they will coarsen our political debate, and the price will eventually be paid by us all, in poor government and resultant waste, inefficiency and expense. Because rules matter, and when times are tough, they matter even more...

Far from the campaign trail... is decent politics to be drowned out by the vilest common denominator?

The news that Jack Monroe has quit Twitter due to homophobic abuse is just another depressing event in what has felt like a descent into a world where too many of the voices you hear are unpleasant ones.

And no, I don't want to suggest that people who disagree with me are unpleasant. Yes, some of them are, but they can't be categorised as simply political opponents. But, below the line in virtually every newspaper, there seems to be a never ending stream of vile abuse towards anyone and everyone who dares to put their head above the parapet to espouse a view that they believe in.

But, and let's face it, such people are hardly discouraged from their belief that rudeness and crudeness are perfectly acceptable ways to treat their fellow human beings. Journalists who write snide comments picking on the imperfections of politicians, politicians who lie about their opponents or wilfully misrepresent them, members of the public who express a view that all politicians are 'in it for themselves', regardless of whether they have any evidence or not, all of them debase our political culture.

And it's worse in the case of such politicians and journalists, because they know exactly what they are doing. By encouraging the likes of Guido Fawkes to do their dirty work for them, or by ridiculing anyone who expresses doubt or hesitation, or even does a little free thinking, they send out a clear message that it is open season on the naive, the thoughtful, the non-partisan. No wonder that politicians attempt to control how they are presented - a foolish notion in any event, but perhaps understandable.

Indeed, I now find myself wondering why anyone thinking of entering into politics would even think twice. Why set yourself up to be abused by the stupid, the evil and the callous when you could live a quiet life, have a decent career and travel entirely under the radar? You and your family get a private life, nobody except your boss expects you to justify yourself and, eventually, you get to enjoy the fruits of your labour without hassle or insult.

There is an obvious problem, I accept. If everyone who has feelings opts out of politics, you leave it to those more fanatical, less caring of what others say or think. One shudders to think of the likely outcome of such a turn of events.

To make matters worse, such behaviour is now targeted at public figures generally. If you are a celebrity, one might at least hope that the financial rewards make up for it (they probably don't), but for those in public life generally, it is another disincentive to serve the wider public. I suspect that the current Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, is avoiding the internet and social media, given her decision on whether to prosecute Greville Janner or not. I don't know whether or not her decision was the right one, but she will have weighed up all of the evidence available before making the decision not to proceed. She will, however, be being abused by people who haven't seen the evidence, and wouldn't care even if they had. And they will be encouraged by the attitude of the Fifth Estate.

No, it's been a deeply depressing General Election campaign, and whilst I know that there are plenty of good, decent people campaigning for what they believe in, nobody is covering that...