The Sedgefield Moment
Tonight, I watched the British election returns by way of C-SPAN's BBC coverage. Now there's a civilized way to run an election night. Well, except for that silly man who jumps about excitedly with all his computer generated maps and pie charts and the Swing-O-Meter and, most especially, those frightening Video Game Blairs, Howards and Kennedys. I'm sure I will have nightmares about those.
As people who pay attention to these things will know, in British elections the votes are counted by hand, in place, and at the end of the count in each constituency all the candidates file up on stage and the results are read out in front of God & Country. Not much chance for fraud there, which is reason enough for an American to admire the British system. (I understand there were some unfortunate questions regarding votes passing through the Royal Post in recent times. We will draw a veil over this anomaly.)
Tony Blair's constituency is Sedgefield, wherever that is, and being the Prime Minister and all, he drew opposition candidates like flies. I believe there were 15 people running against him. He won handily however, by something over 23,000 votes which was, I dunno, 15,000 or more votes better than his closest competitor.
One of the people running against Blair was a man named Reg Keys whose not-quite-21 year old soldier/son was killed in Iraq.
After the results for Sedgefield were announced, Blair stepped forward and gave his speech. The BBC cut away for a bit for some entertaining but generally useless analytical blab, then they cut back to the stage at Sedgefield. Reg Keys was speaking.
I don't know whether it was by custom, courtesy, or law, but Blair was still standing at the back of the stage along with the other candidates, listening intently to Keys who was talking about how much his family had helped him in this very difficult campaign. He mentioned his son who had been killed. And then he said something along the lines of:
"If this war had been sanctioned by international law, I would have grieved for my son, but I would not have campaigned. If weapons of mass destruction had been found, I would have grieved for my son, but I would not have campaigned... "
He criticized the Prime Minister for not apologizing. He spoke about the Prime Minister not attending any funerals for soldiers who had died in Iraq. He went on in more or less that same vein for a while.
And here's the thing... Blair was standing there, not ten feet behind this man -- this man who had lost his boy in a war that Blair had declared necessary even though it clearly wasn't. He listened to the man. He had to listen to the man. His expression was grim, but not, I think, defiant or belligerent. I tell you... I may not be any sort of judge of this sort of thing, but I tell you I think Blair wasn't just listening to this man, he was hearing him as well. I'm sure he feels he could not have done things any differently, but I'm also sure he felt pain for the loss of the Keys family. You could see it in his face. Or, maybe not. In fact, it doesn't really concern me what Blair was feeling. That's between Blair and his conscience and history.
What does concern me, however, is that the leader of my country, the most powerful country in the history of the planet, would never have allowed himself to be in that position.
I very much got the feeling that one of the main reasons Reg Keys campaigned for Blair's seat in Parliament was because he knew that on election night, he would be on that stage with Blair. Not ten feet from him. And that he would finally get to say his piece to the man. "My son died in an illegal war that you started."
It's a moment of profound moral consequence, one of the governed standing up in front of God & Country & the BBC, telling the man who governs him, "you killed my son in a war you had no right to start", and the man who governs him having to listen.
And here in my country, a moment of such profound moral consequence could never happen. The president of my country doesn't have the guts for it. The president of my country -- the prime mover in that illegal war -- is hermetically sealed off from such moments.
Whatever else you want to say about Blair, whatever else you want to say about how the American and the British systems compare, at least the people of the U.K. get to witness moments of profound human debate like that, between the governing and the governed.
I was moved. And I was filled with envy. And my contempt for Bush's moral cowardice grew more bitter still.
I too am fond of the British system, for lots of reasons. Yes, it's custom for all the candidates to get to make a short speech at the count, starting with the winner, who has, even if he is the prime minister and being broadcast on national telly, to remember to thank the returning officer, and to thank the people who ran the count, and his fellow candidates and so on. Because he is being elected for Sedgefield; it's his party that decide he's Prime Minister.
But as for Reg Keyes -- I'm sure that Blair has met with families of soldiers who died in Iraq many times. He might even have met privately with Keyes before last night; it's certainly the sort of thing he does. Obviously, there aren't as many UK deaths and injuries in Iraq; we have fewer soldiers there, and they are better trained. But still, it's entirely understood that it's part of the job of politicians to give time to members of the public with grave problems.
Blair is busy; but we know he still has meetings of that kind. Every so often he's heckled by someone in a public meeting and he responds by offering them a chance to come and chat with him later. And I think this is true for all our Prime Ministers of whatever party -- though I do think Blair's ability to disarm people with a very personal sincerity is one of his strengths. Whether you think that sincerity is genuine is another question.
What Reg Keyes got to do was make his speech in front of the whole country, have his moment in front of the cameras, and with no right of reply for Blair then. And that was indeed rather fine.
Posted by: Alison Scott | May 06, 2005 at 03:17 AM
...to remember to thank the returning officer, and to thank the people who ran the count, and his fellow candidates and so on. Because he is being elected for Sedgefield; it's his party that decide he's Prime Minister.
And the police, of course. They all thanked the police for all their hard work.
Do you mean that the Prime Minister, whoever he is, always stands for election in Sedgefield? I'll have to think about that one for a bit.
Obviously, there aren't as many UK deaths and injuries in Iraq; we have fewer soldiers there, and they are better trained.
88 Brits killed, Reg Keys took pains to point out, I believe. Yeah, a far cry from our 1600.
But still, it's entirely understood that it's part of the job of politicians to give time to members of the public with grave problems.
As opposed to our president, who gives his time to stage-managed "town hall meetings", corporate-givers, and the religious right.
What Reg Keyes got to do was make his speech in front of the whole country, have his moment in front of the cameras, and with no right of reply for Blair then. And that was indeed rather fine.
You probably understand this, but there are tons of people in my country who long, almost painfully, for moments like that with our leaders. Watching last night, it was a moment of clarity -- this is how far removed from our political leaders we have become. There's this illusion that we are connected to them through the ballot box or something. It's not enough. Not nearly enough.
But then I hear Blair talking about "a Mandate" this morning. Swear to god, I wish that word could be officially relegated to websites set-up for the man-whore Jeff Gannons of this world.
Posted by: Mike the Corpuscle | May 06, 2005 at 06:12 AM
The Daily Show made this point very strongly the night before the election when they played a game called Britain or U.S., identify the film clip. While Jon Stewart watched the audience, they would show a clip of Blair facing a tough question from a live audience, then Bush being lobbed a compliment on, say, social security. The last two clips showed Bush enterting a town hall meeting to rapturous applause and Blair entering a town hall meeting to mixed applause and boos.
The Cowboy doesn't have much in the way of guts.
Posted by: Maureen McHugh | May 06, 2005 at 03:43 PM
Awp! I found a clip of it at my beloved Crooks and Liars! (One of these days I have to get cable.)
That's a .wmv file, btw.
God Bless Jon Stewart, again. And thanks for pointing this out.
Posted by: Mike the Corpuscle | May 06, 2005 at 05:07 PM
One of the best aspects of the British (and any parlimentary) system is Prime Minister's Questions (viewable on C-Span). Every week he has to stand up in Parliment and publically take questions from his political rivals. No 'gee, I quess since I see some adavtage in it for me I'll deign to field some softballs from a pre-selected bunch of reporters who wouldn't want to seem to combative because they fear losing access to the drivel that my press office doles out' for the English.
Parenthetically, I thought that, in England, the Royal Mail delivered the post. While we(I)'re at it, candidates stand for office in England, they don't run.
Posted by: JHM | May 06, 2005 at 05:21 PM
Yes, I've watched PM's Question Time. It's immensely entertaining. Unimagineable for the sterilized (albeit sometimes filthy) political discourse we get in the U.S.
I've been trying to formulate something along the lines of: "In the US, the Post Office handles the mail, while in the UK the Royal Mail handles the post", but I'm not sure that last bit is acceptable in common UK usage.
Posted by: Mike the Corpuscle | May 06, 2005 at 05:50 PM