Party's over folks ... back to work

I'm going to save everyone a lot of time and bother here. If anyone knows Sue, please pass this on.

The issue at hand today (apologies to international readers who may be more concerned about matters in the Ukraine or the continued presence of a global pandemic) is not about parties. It's not about which parties were held, where, who went, what they drank, whether cheese was on offer and whether rules were broken. That's all a distraction.

It's about culture and leadership. Do the people leading our country - the ones who run Downing Street and other offices of state - have integrity. Are they honest. Are they respectful of the nation they serve. Do they actually realise that this is their job - to serve.

If not, why not.

The Shadow of the Leader

A long time ago, in a different life, I was a management consultant. Goodness knows how or why - I'd never actually managed anything but, hey, neither had any of my colleagues.

My particular specialism was leadership, culture and change management. Again, I had absolutely ZERO experience of leading anything and, being in my twenties, hadn't seen a lot of change either. It's utterly baffling that clients paid for our advice but that was then. Maybe things are different now.

Anyway, one of the concepts I drew on when talking to my elders and betters about leadership was that of the "shadow of the leader". Leaders, by their actions, set the tone, the vibe, the norms. I mean, can you imagine anyone who worked for Theresa May thinking it would be a good idea to take a wheelie suitcase to the nearest offie to fill it with booze?

If the people in and around Downing Street are cavalier about the rules, disrespect the people they are supposed to serve and think the rules don't apply to them it's simply because they are following the leader. There you go, no need for a report.

Speaking of Sue

READER ALERT: This section will mean nothing to anyone under the age of 55 and who didn't grow up the UK in the 1970s.

There was a very popular children's show on TV - popular because at the time there were only three channels and only two of them ever broadcast shows for children and even then it was only for about 45 minutes a day. It was called the Sooty Show or, sometimes, Sooty and Sweep.

Sooty is the yellow one. He was the (mute) male star of the show. Here's how Wikipedia describes him:

"Cheeky, performs magic tricks and practical jokes, and infamously squirts his handler and other people with his iconic water pistol, including on other television programmes he guest stars on."

No idea why but Boris does spring to mind.

His sidekick Sweep, the grey one, also male, made the odd squeak but was utterly incomprehensible, here's Wikipedia again

"Dim-witted but good-natured, who would often make mistakes that would cause problems for others."

Jacob Rees Mogg? Did you hear him call the leader of the Scottish tories "a lightweight". The Scottish Nationalists adore him.

So who's the panda? I hear you ask. She was a she, obviously, and her name was Sue (spelt Soo but let's not quibble.). She never took star billing, her name NEVER appears in lights unlike Sooty & Sweep but strangely enough she was the only one who could actually talk. Her role was to help the viewers make sense of what was going on. She was:

Sweet, shy, and mainly responsible, acting as a motherly character to the other two, the voice of reason.

No wonder we're all on tenterhooks waiting for Sue (though see above if you really want to get to the nub of the issue).

Language Timothy

(I promise this will be the last cultural reference to a TV show most of you will never have heard of).

What is it with these politicians? Why can't they string a simple sentence together? Have you noticed how they all insist on adding irrelevant and unnecessary verbs? Such as Michael Ellis, paymaster general

"What I would say is, let's wait and see what Sue Gray has to say".

What does he mean "What I would say is". Why doesn't he just say it? "Let's wait and see what Sue Gray has to say." They all do it. And it's the same with do. "We do know .... we do believe ... we do follow the rules." Take out the dos and it means the same thing.

But the thing that MOST gets my goat is when they refuse to make themselves the subject of the sentence and find measly words and phrases to avoid personal culpability. Such as

"though I cannot anticipate the conclusions of the current inquiry, I have learned enough to know there were things we simply did not get right and I must take responsibility".

If he really did want to take some responsibility he could just have said.

"I was wrong."

Things would all be so much more efficient don't you think? Though I suppose then Sue would be out of a job. And so might Boris.

The Queen Accepts an Apology

Even the Queen has been dragged in. Can't have been the easiest of weeks for her. Still, Boris has done her at least one favour. He is such a let down as a leader that even the antics (or alleged antics) of her second son are unlikely enough for most of us to vote to abolish the monarch and go for some sort of elected representative.

Get a Job

Having said that, I do think we could all get on board with the idea of most of the royals becoming "private citizens". No fancy titles, no special privileges, no apartments in palaces and most importantly no money from the public purse.

They could all go and get jobs like the rest of us. There are plenty around.

I've just googled it and the most in demand job in the UK right now is "professional driver". I expect most of them have passed their tests so there you go. Keep an eye out next time you open the door to take delivery of your Amazon parcel/Deliveroo/Getir order.

Is that treason? Please keep this thought to yourself just in case.

Meanwhile in the Real World

Putin seems to be amassing his troops on the border of Ukraine. Energy prices are going through the roof. Inflation is on an upward trajectory. Brexit is definitely NOT done (my local butcher - whose brand messaging is always banging on about their meat coming from lovely farms in Yorkshire - ran out of chickens for three days, apparently because the chickens, or should we say poulets, all actually come from France and were stuck at the border). Oh, and there is still a global pandemic.

I know this because, on my return from France, I tested positive. Cue ten days of self isolation. Well, not technically self isolation because three of the four of us were in the same situation, meaning the fourth, my daughter, had to be the one to move out to keep herself safe. She wasn't happy.

Every time she came back to the house she made us go to a different room to avoid her. She wore a mask and gloves and wouldn't touch any surface or item we'd been anywhere near. The only exception she made was the washing, drying and ironing she brought back on a regular basis. I was allowed to touch that.

Anyway, I'm out now. Back to work. Unless, of course, anyone would like to invite me to a party.

I watched: The Trial of the Chicago Seven. Really good.

I listened to: Rethink on Radio 4. Amol Rajan led a five part series which challenged some long held assumptions about population change. Thought provoking.

I read: And am still reading, Cloud Cuckoo Land by Anthony Doer. Set in the past, the present and the future. Leaders are untrustworthy, Joe public is left to their own devices and there's a pandemic. It's a work of fiction.

Have a good week people. And make sure you follow the rules.