After a day of hard meetings I laughed when I got an email with the link to this video. Most of us just moan about things like the budget, but the wife of the Dean of Wakefield got creative and made the point much more effectively.


I missed the sheer joy of watching the Darling Budget yesterday because I was in meetings all day. So, I tried to catch up on it today and found so much contradictory stuff around in the media by way of response. The budget is good or bad, inevitable or reckless, cause for analysis or cause for punning headlines.

What is amazing is that the figures being thrown around are staggeringly huge – yet we hardly blink any more. Only two years ago we were being told that £5 billion was too much money for the entire developed world to pay to educate every child on the planet: it would simply not be feasible to use such an enormous sum on such a risky venture.

Now we talk about ‘trillions’ of dollars and don’t lose a wink of sleep. Is this because we are too far removed from the ‘reality’ of what this all means? Or is it because ‘this’ is all unreal? I went back to the ‘Two Johns’ and was amazed to think that their conversation (note for Americans: it is ironic satire) was recorded only six months ago, yet seems to come from a different age. (When you have watched it, look for Part 2 on Youtube. The best explanations of all this esoteric financial stuff are to be found in the mouths of the satirists and anything by the Two Johns is worth watching.)

sir_winston_churchillI was looking through some notes I took when visiting the home of Sir Winston Churchill at Chartwell a couple of months ago and I came across the following. During a speech in the House of Commons on 18 June 1940 – the day after the fall of France – he said: ‘Of this I am quite sure, that if we open a quarrel between the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the future.’

This made me stop and think. It is all too easy to pick over the different interpretations of history (how we got to where we are) and justify ourselves by the accuracy of our (post hoc) prophecies or analytical skills. But the danger is that, despite the importance of knowing where we have come from in order to know why we are where we are, we simply distract ourselves from the task of shaping the future.

I am conscious of this reading the post-Budget reporting this evening. I was in meetings all day and so was spared the puerile bear-pit shouting match that always accompanies Westminster activity. But it seems to me that there is a good deal of self-justification going on (in ‘I told you so’ terms) – to the detriment of an adult and responsible cooperation by political leaders for the sake of the country and the world. The massive enormity of the economic challenge should not be a matter for party-political opportunism. It is a classic of losing the big picture by haggling over some detail.

There is a typically English touch to Lady Churchill’s erstwhile bedroom at Chartwell. On the four-poster bed there is a sign that says: ‘Please try not to touch’. Isn’t that lovely? Not a command such as: ‘Do not touch!’ or ‘Touch this and you’re dead!’ But an invitation to be be responsible and considerate that recognises the power of temptation to do the opposite of what we are told.

I wonder if it might be remotely possible for our political leaders to accept a gentle invitation to try something different and resist the temptation to play the tedious old games of partisan point-scoring and take responsibility for our mutual future?