A BRIGHTER HORIZON

There has been much to take in of recent stuff. Various members of the conservative party, donors and grandees, have taken exception to the government and the manner in which it behaves, what it does and how it does it. This is not surprising. Indeed, frequently among my peers, one hears comment on what used to be considered appropriate and accepted integrity, in relation to conflicts of interest and the acceptance of responsibility.

 

In particular, the acceptance of responsibility for one’s self as well as those working with us as assistants or subordinates, was a given. If one was head of a department within an organisation, one took responsibility and appropriate action. It was not just a matter of claiming responsibility and carrying on. One took the fall. It was not just a matter of words.

 

Since the advent of Donald Trump (and perhaps even before) the lack of acceptance of responsibility and absence of the recognition of conflicts of interest have dominated politics in the United States as well as in the United Kingdom. Trump has never accepted responsibility for anything and the whole notion of conflict of interest is unknow to him. His self-interest is so all-consuming that it overwhelms entirely whatever thought process he has.  Bizarrely, many of those around him are sucked into his sphere of ignorance and allow him to behave as he does.

 

I cannot say whether this started with Trump but it certainly resonates here in the UK. When certain politicians’ actions, or lack thereof, caused concern and disquiet amongst parliamentarians the first thought of the person concerned was outright denial of responsibility, attempt at diversionary excuses and the calling for support from acolytes. Sadly there was always someone to proffer a defence for the indefensible. The notion that dragging out the inevitable might be damaging to the party was totally ignored. Resignation in the face of mounting difficulties was never on the agenda.

 

Some have got away with it. Ms Priti Patel is an instance in point. Dominic Raab is under investigation. Boris Johnson is still under investigation. Mr Zahawi is yet another. He has dragged out a situation of his own making and further damaged the image of the Conservative Party. His attempts at supressing information and hiding from scrutiny only succeeded in making his breach of the ministerial code appear even more profound and serious. He exposed himself as a fool and unfit for public service, so much so that his position within his own constituency is now in question.

 

As a person of integrity, he should never have accepted the appointment in the first place, but then, he should never have been offered it to begin with. Having accepted the position, once his position became clear he should have resigned immediately. His failure to do so led to the charade that followed, a lack of decisiveness on the part of his boss, leading to an ethics adviser being brought on board, to his inevitable sacking.

 

Mr Sunak’s ridiculous claims of following the proper course of action and having an ethics advisor investigate the matter only extended the pantomime.  It made Mr Sunak look ineffective rather than decisive, particularly as Sir Laurie Magnus, ethics adviser, very swiftly gave his opinion. He didn’t really need to spend too much time making that decision.

 

None of this is new stuff and Mr Sunak has vigorously attempted to divert his ineffectiveness by attacking Mr Starmer with his own possible problems within the Labour Party.  I would remind Mr Sunak that he is in the position of Prime minister and no amount of diversionary tactics will change the perception of the public over his own failings and that of his party for the last 13 years. Enough should be enough, yet that is clearly not the case in today’s politics.

 

The situation in the United States also drags on. How long will it take to bring Mr Trump before a court of law. How long does one have to hear or read about Mr Trump “taking the fifth”.  For those in the UK who are not familiar with the fifth amendment of the United States Constitution it reads: 

 

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 

What witnesses in legal cases rely on to refuse to answer questions is the phrase “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”. This is a protection against exposing oneself to possible criminal prosecution by making statements, during an examination, which might lead the interrogator to have cause to indict the witness for criminal activity. The amendment thus includes the right not to incriminate oneself. It gives the witness a constitutional right to say “I refuse to answer the question on the grounds that my answers may tend to incriminate me”.

 

It has been stated:

To "plead the Fifth" is to refuse to answer any question because "the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked" lead a claimant to possess a "reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer", believing that "a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result."

 

One can ask, what has a man of honesty and integrity have to fear from any question he might be asked? How can a guiltless individual cause harm, to himself in particular, by answering a direct question? Therefore it is not a protection for another. Refusing to answer a question directed at oneself which might incriminate another, is not covered by the amendment. By adopting the rights conferred by the amendment, is one not associating oneself in the other’s possible criminal activity? It is a matter of, I may or I may not have something to hide, therefore I "plead the Fifth". Mr Trump proudly proclaims his right to do so under the Constitution he so blatantly attempted to breach a short while ago by having himself proclaimed president.

 

This is a man with no shame, nor any sense of honesty or responsibility, nor any idea of public service. He is totally without merit of any kind; yet, there are still millions, yes millions, of American citizens who are prepared to support him and put him back in office.

 

We live in an age where information is available at the click of a computer ‘mouse’. Sadly there is a lot of disinformation, harmful advice and opinion equally available. Education can teach discrimination and judgement. I believe the majority of people are capable of making the distinction between truth and lies, or at least between reality and fantasy, yet it is clear that sufficient numbers cannot, and we have the tragedies of war in the Ukraine, violent dissension in Myanmar, outrages in the Middle East and elsewhere. 

 

There seems to be no end of horrors human beings inflict on each other despite the apparent belief by millions in a benevolent and righteous god, and millions believing in the rule of law and justice, and millions adhering to the concept of personal honour and integrity. So why is it that electors across the world have chosen so many corrupt representatives as their governments? I do not just mean financial acquisitiveness but a venality that appears to purvey across the world.

 

Public service should have some meaning. I used to feel it did. Perhaps I have been naïve all along. I have never sought any such office myself, so I suppose I should not criticize or pontificate, but as a citizen exercising his freedom of speech in a democracy, I ask why can’t we do better. Surely there is a way for an elderly individual, sans god, sans cult, sans influence, sans power to see a brighter horizon.