Meddling in politics

ANYONE drawing up a list of radical organisations likely to rock political boats would be unlikely to put the Women's Institute (WI) high on it. The image of the WI is of comfortable middle- class women more concerned with making jam than with making political waves. It is not wholly fair or accurate. As I wrote in a previous "Letter" - March 14, 1999 - I had been asked to arrange a discussion on the Euro for the Cambridgeshire Federation of Women's Institutes, and that kind of interest in important issues is not at all unusual.

Nevertheless, the traditional image dies hard. The hostile treatment given by the annual conference of the WI to Mr. Tony Blair, the first Prime Minister to address them, came as a surprise. It also, of course, became the occasion for jokes at the expense of the Prime Minister and the WI. One of the participants in a satirical news programme on BBC radio, for example, had great fun with a mock comparison with the Irish Republican Army (IRA), referring to "the provisional wing of the WI" and suggesting that a cache of illegal jam-making equipment had been discovered.

There was inevitably great glee at the discomfiture of the Prime Minister; pulling politicians off their pedestals is a national sport - and generally a healthy one, certainly healthier than putting them on pedestals.

The reasons for the debacle are complex. It appears that Mr. Tony Blair misjudged his audience and gave the impression of using his speech to score party political points off his opponents in setting out some key aspects of Government policy. It is clear, too, that the audience did not care for his manner.

With hindsight, there was clearly a risk inherent in an organisation which is firmly non-party-political inviting a politician to its conference. Yet the WI has always been interested in a range of topics which are political (with a small "p"), and so it made sense to create an opportunity for members to hear about major policy issues from the horse's mouth.

It was a seven-day wonder, and we have all moved on to more important things (like, in the Prime Minister's case, running the country). One of the oddities of the situation, and one not much discussed, is its reflection of the British tendency to want - or at least claim to want - politics to be kept out of things. People will argue vehemently that politics should be kept out of education, or local government, or transport. It works the other way round, too. For instance, if a church leader makes a comment about ethical questions raised by a piece of legislation, he or she will, as likely as not, be told by someone writing an angry letter to a newspaper to "stick to religion, and stop meddling in politics."

One of the worst put downs is to describe someone, scathingly, as "politically motivated." Of course, such a put down needs careful interpretation. What it usually means is that the object of the put down has expressed a view opposed to that held by the person doing the putting down - who is almost invariably someone holding strong political views of their own.

When you think about it, it is very odd indeed to see political motivation as something to be criticised or avoided. Most of the important things which affect our lives, after all, are the very stuff of politics. Strategic decisions about education or the health service, social policy, the environment, defence, transport and so on and so on are essentially and necessarily political decisions. And if religious leaders do not have views on ethical questions, one ought to ask "why not?" rather than complain that they are meddling in politics.

Governments and oppositions are, by definition, composed of people who are politically motivated. That is their job. It is what makes them tick, and their political motivation is the reason why we vote for, or against, them. Think how depressing it would be if they were politically demotivated.

Any organisation inviting the head of a government to make a speech at its conference should surely not be surprised if the speech is political. P. Politics, to coin a phrase, is too serious a matter to be avoided by politicians. Mr. Blair's speech may not have been well judged. He may have trodden on some toes. Apparently his jokes were not particularly good. I was not present and so I am not going to commit myself - for fear of being accused of being politically motivated.

BILL KIRKMAN

The writer is a Fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge.

E-mail him at wpk1000@cam.ac.uk

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Aquarian conspiracy
Next     : Land of the thunderbolt