Phew; I woke up this morning convinced that every single one of us has gone mad, but it’s OK now. Let’s just leave it at that – it was all bad but now its sorted. Time for tea.
But if I was filling in some time I’d tell you that my day started with Mad Maggie and ended with Delusional John. I know you all agree with me about this, so it’s fine that I’ve used insults for both of them. They’re doing bad things; I’m good, so if I’m saying bad things it’s obviously completely necessary and justified.
Thing is, Maggie Chapman isn’t mad. I got to know Maggie during indyref and, whatever her flaws, mental instability wasn’t one. She is clearly acting in a manner that she would describe as deranged if anyone else was doing it, and it really is deranged. But it would let us all off the hook far too easily if we put this down to a mental health issue. It’s not.
I spent a large part of my career advising politicians and other senior figures. Let me tell you something which at no point did I ever have to advise anyone: ‘If you’re standing in a crowd of mainly men and anyone (especially someone who was born male) is shouting about having a shite on a "heinous creeping old bitch", run as fast as possible. Do not appear in the same frame of a photo or video. Failing to react is not enough (certainly don’t clap). You need to not be in the picture under any circumstances. It will look like an endorsement of misogynistic hate speech.’
It literally doesn’t matter what the cause was, what the context was – those comments were disgusting and hate-filled and had no place in political debate. I’ve never met anyone serious who needed to be told that. So to go straight from clapping hate speech to claiming that the top judiciary in the UK are motivated only by hatred, bigotry and prejudice is more than a bad day at the office.
Ten years ago this would have led to a resignation – of a Tory, never mind a Green. Ms Chapman has no need to believe in either the work of the Cass Review or the Supreme Court’s gender decision and is free to argue against both on any grounds she can pull together.
But senior politicians (any politician) should accept that people they disagree with can still be acting in good faith. Or, put another way, if she is claiming the Supreme Court was really driven by hatred, prejudice and bigotry, she really, really better have very strong evidence. If she is in the possession of WhatsApp messages between the Chief Justices in which they are expressing their glee at finally having the opportunity to ‘rid us of trans people’ (or something) she should release them and I’ll retract.
Otherwise she should apologise. In fact I think this affair is extreme enough that she should consider her position further. I don’t see how she can remain a Vice Convener of an equalities committee. How on earth would a gender critical woman have any faith at all of being treated ‘equally’ in this context? Realistically, how can Chapman carry out her committee function?
If you only see ‘your people’ saying ‘good on you’ and ‘the other lot’ calling you names, that proves you’re right
The condemnation of Chapman’s actions has been so universal that I was just going to leave it. But what startled me today was looking at the comments below the line in The National. I never look at comments to see what real people think but it’s useful to see what defences politicians are prompting their supporters to make for them.
And the Green activist position (according to these comments) seems to be ‘how dare a judge think they have the power to clip the wings of a politician elected by the people?’. The idea that politicians are above the law is not meant to feature in ‘progressive’ politics. It is literally Trump stuff.
If I’d said what Chapman said I’d have instantly realised that, even just for cynical strategic reasons, I’d have to walk it back rapidly. Forget morality for a second; just for basic political survival I’d have been knocking together an ‘in the heat of the moment…’ climb down.
But Chapman doesn’t think that is necessary, and neither do her supporters. That is extraordinary. Or it is for me in my profession. It now seems the case that we are all in completely isolated tribes and anything that is fine with the people in our tribe is just fine, no matter what. If you only see ‘your people’ saying ‘good on you’ and ‘the other lot’ calling you names, that proves you’re right.
That applies to so much just now. I am watching a debate in The National between SNP loyalists saying ‘just elect us and this time it’ll be different’ and others saying ‘different how?’ and the SNP loyalists saying all the things that aren’t different at all in any way. I’m seeing Labour believe ten conflicting things before breakfast and then justifying them on the TV.
I’m watching as about four in ten Americans think Trump is doing a good job. I see lots of people in the Jewish community who still think Isreal is ‘defending itself’. Environmentalists are throwing paint at priceless works of art while calling for more arts funding.
That’s the point; since we’re all isolated in our grouping (they call it a ‘bubble’ or a ‘silo’ but it’s really a prison), how can any of us know it’s not us too? I meet a lot of intelligent, sane people who agree with me. Or are they? Perhaps we’re all mad too. It’s become so fragmented is there such a thing as a ‘conclusion’ any more? How are you supposed to know what way is up?
This summit is an insult to the people of Scotland who are absolutely justified in their contempt for the ruling classes
But wait; the white smoke has emerged from the chimney of the locked room. The anticipation is over. A group of the great and the good have got together and chosen a new… mission statement. People will talk about before Swinney’s summit and after Swinney’s summit. It’s a watershed moment. Now, finally, the important people have decided that our problems are "manifold and complex".
That would be petrifying (‘dear god sweetheart, on the telly they’re saying our problems are manifold and complex’) but it’s been solved. All these problems will go away through ‘participation and openness, the sharing of power, accountability and equal opportunity’. Well thank fuck for that. I was worried for a moment that the problems we face would remain manifold and complex.
This means that Joh Swinney is no longer rigging his party so its members can’t participate, the Scottish Government is no longer hiding behind an arrogant intransigence on paying anything more than lip service to Freedom of Information laws, they’re not longer slipping out bad news when other things are happening, they’re not ignoring stakeholders left, right and centre and they’re not betraying everyone who voted for them because they kept talking about world-leading climate change targets.
Except Swinney is pressing ahead with rigging his party, is obstructing FoIs like a medieval pope, actually slipped out the news that they were quietly dropping their car reduction targets during the summit, continues to ignore stakeholders like they’re invisible, and has ditched pretty well every climate policy they ever promised.
He joined Anas Sarwar (‘what is living wage again?’), Alex Cole Hamilton (‘quick, edit me out of swearing in parliament’), NGOs (‘is our cheque in the post?’), churches (‘we’ve stopped hating gay people!’) and trade unions (‘burn more oil, build more bombs!’). It was an arsonists convention at which they agreed a means of putting out their own fires by doing nothing.
This was literally a summit of the people who run Scotland. That makes it a summit of the people who have driven confidence in Scottish institutions and public services into the ground. It is the least trusted government in the history of devolution gathering together a bunch of wealthy people to complain that the plebs aren’t behaving properly.
If there is something in their statement today which has any substance whatsoever (anything at all, even a hint of something) which they have not promised us (pinkie promise, hand on heart) that they’ve been doing for 20 years, I can’t find it. Their summit is an insult to the people of Scotland who are absolutely justified in their contempt for the ruling classes.
But they ruling classes have got a plan. They’re retreating back into their own tribes where they are always right and never mad, always virtuous and never contemptuous. As I write this Colin McAlister (Swinney chief of staff) and Stephen Noon (his chief strategist) will be telling him this is a triumph and a hoard of backbenchers will be thumping their tables in appreciation.
Maggie Chapman will be pouring through whatever social media Greens use these days, lapping up every supportive comment, certain that she’s totally gotten away with it. And someone will drop me an email saying ‘good article Robin, I completely agree’.
So, like I say, today started a bit shaky but order has been restored and everything is fine now.