The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Archbishop of Canterbury: “no one voted” for the coalition’s policies

Rowan Williams launches an outspoken attack on the government in a leader for the New Statesman<

By George Eaton Published 08 June 2011 23:00

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has launched a remarkable attack on the coalition government, warning that it is committing the country to "radical, long-term policies for which no one voted". In a leading article for this week's New Statesman, which he has guest-edited, Williams says that the "anger and anxiety" felt by voters is a result of the government's failure to expose its policies to "proper public argument".

His political intervention is the most significant by a church figure since Faith In The City, an excoriating critique of the Thatcher government, was published in 1985 by the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert Runcie.

With particular reference to the government's health and education reforms, Williams says that the government's approach has created "bafflement and indignation" among the public.

"With remarkable speed, we are being committed to radical, long-term policies for which no one voted," he writes. "At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context."

Before the election, David Cameron promised to stop the "top down reorganisations" of the NHS but later embarked on the biggest reforms to the health service since its creation

In reference to Michael Gove's education reforms, the Archbishop writes: "At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context. Not many people want government by plebiscite, certainly. But, for example, the comprehensive reworking of the Education Act 1944 that is now going forward might well be regarded as a proper matter for open probing in the context of election debates." Gove's free school reforms were pushed through Parliament with a haste usually reserved for emergency anti-terrorist powers.

He warns: "Government badly needs to hear just how much plain fear there is around such questions at present."

Williams also calls into question Cameron's "big society" agenda, a phrase he describes as "painfully stale". He writes that the project is viewed with "widespread suspicion" as an "opportunistic" cover for spending cuts, adding that it is not acceptable for ministers to blame Labour for Britain's economic and social problems.

In an implicit criticism of The Chancellor, George Osborne, Williams says: "It isn't enough to respond with what sounds like a mixture of, "This is the last government's legacy," and, "We'd like to do more, but just wait until the economy recovers a bit."

The Archbishop also launches a sustained attack on the government's welfare reforms, complaining of a "quiet resurgence of the seductive language of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor." In comments directed at the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, Williams criticises the "steady pressure to increase what look like punitive responses to alleged abuses of the system."

In his piece, Williams says that his aim is to stimulate "a livelier debate" and to challenge the left to develop its own "big idea" as an alternative to the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition.

Read the full version of Rowan Williams's leading article.

Tags: Rowan Williams Religion

More from George Eaton

View the discussion thread.

136 comments

Sat, 2012-07-28 17:15 — Paracord (not verified)

Pretty good post. I found your website perfect for my needs. Thanks for sharing the great ideas.

Thu, 2011-06-09 13:46 — Emily (not verified)

Finally...
Sorry it's been a long post, but I lt it was important to address this issue rather than argue or talk around the subject. Not everyone will agree with RW (I don't know until I've read the full article) - but I think he shows a refreshing concern about the welfare of others whether I agree with his conclusion or not.

Thu, 2011-06-09 13:46 — Redwizard187 (not verified)

36% of the electorate voted right of centre at last elections and 52% voted left of centre so Dr. Williams is correct in respect of the lack of mandate for these policies.

As for those who say they did indeed vote for these policies...they didn't....because they did not appear in the respective coalition manifestos.

Pleased to see Dr.Williams speak up in a loud and clear voice and desperately disappointed that the opposition have been so poor in engaging public consciousness to the same degree.

Thu, 2011-06-09 13:49 — Alan R (not verified)

Well said that man!

Thu, 2011-06-09 21:58 — Glyn (not verified)

Please tell me - did we vote for this Archbishop. No we did not. However, approx 60% did vote for the two parties and their policies that make up our Government.

Dr Rowan should stick to leading on Faith - after all this is what he is paid to do.

Thu, 2011-06-09 22:18 — Rick (not verified)

I don't remember anybody voting of the Iraq war - did Dr Rowan comment on this as as well?

Sun, 2011-06-12 14:35 — Keir

'when those terrible things happend in Japan'

The Japanese would not surrender.

Thu, 2011-06-09 14:07 — Dave The Happy Singer (not verified)

Who voted for Jesus?

Sun, 2011-06-12 14:36 — Keir

'those terrible things'

TV advertising is so expensive.

Sun, 2011-06-12 14:37 — Keir

'his mate GOD'

Mate?

Fri, 2011-06-10 15:05 — Ivan White

"The Archbishop of Canterbury should stand above politics. His editing of the New Statesmen and his repeated interference in the political process is both inappropriate and hypocritical."

What utter rubbish! The Church of England has always been involved in politics, with its seats in the House of Lords, and it was set up by a head of state, Henry VIII.

Religion and politics have always mixed. In AD 380, the Roman emperor Theodosius made Christianity the official religion of state and introduced severe punishments for people who disagreed with the official version of Christianity. The Bible is full of politics, such as the second commandment, namely "to love your neighbour as yourself" - hardly a basic tenet of Toryism. The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16)is seen by many as a political statement - "market forces" or "to each according to his need".

In the sixteenth century, Calvin established a theocracy in Geneva, and it would be hard to separate politics and religion in Iran today. Try telling Ulster Unionists and their supporters to keep religion and politics separate (even if it might have been better if they had). Whenever abortion, stem cell research or homosexuality are discussed by politicians, you can be sure that some church leaders will soon have something to say about those issues.

Come and join in the discussion of this:- http://cuttingedgeuk.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=displa...

Sat, 2011-06-11 12:44 — Colin McDonald (not verified)

Nice to see that Christians are still in the ascendant in the Church of England - it would be good to see other faith groups joining in criticism of this government of, by and for the obscenely rich.

Niemoeller Lives!

Thu, 2011-06-09 14:40 — Keir

Constantine.

Sat, 2011-06-11 13:24 — Keir

Isn't that amazing. Only Christians realise that poverty ain't good. What would we do without them.

'it would be good to see other faith groups joining in criticism of this government'

What? Nonconformists? Good heavens.

Thu, 2011-06-09 14:50 — Williamtheb (not verified)

Quote: "No one voted for him." They DID if they voted for The Labour Leader who jointly appointed (or "selected"), him. The widespread ignorance about this is astounding. It would be useful if The Archbishop made a statement on the matter, a practicing; Rasta, Catholic, Quaker, Jew, Unitarian, Muslim, Hindu (other than Protestant), et.el CANNOT BE Prime Minister of this country whilst the permission demands subservience to The Protestant State.

Fri, 2011-06-10 15:47 — Keir

'Religion and politics have always mixed. In AD 380'

Oh, how cute. If, as that canny Harold Wilson said, a week is a long time in politics, what's 350 years?

Except on an individual level, Christianity cannot mix with or deal with any aspect of government, or with any other temporal institution; any organisation that reckons to do so and call itself Christian is antichrist. The CoE is antichrist, even though it may contain some Christians (unlike the RCC, which cannot).

Fri, 2011-06-10 16:20 — Ivan White

"The CoE is antichrist, even though it may contain some Christians (unlike the RCC, which cannot)"

Who the hell are you to pontificate? Obviously not the Pope, as your last remark indicates.

Rowan Williams is entitled to say what he likes, we're supposed to live in a free country. Just as Thatcher was entitled to say that, from her depraved outlook on life, "what mattered about the Good Samaritan wasn't that he was good, it was that he had money".

Wed, 2011-06-08 23:35 — Livers (not verified)

Hallelujah.

I could get to like religion.

Wed, 2011-06-08 23:40 — Michael Smith (not verified)

Plenty of people voted Tory. Who voted for Williams?

Fri, 2011-06-10 02:08 — durgamata (not verified)

I will be buying the New Statesman tomorrow for the first time in my life! Good choice of honorary editor and great article. I can't wait to read it in full. Thank you Rowan for hitting the spot so eloquently. There is huge frustration and anger as well as fear - in response to this governments actions.
Personally I think that if a politician lies - promising one thing and then doing the opposite as happened with the Lib Dems and university fees - and that's just one thing, there are many - they should go straight to prison because they are undermining the credibility of the whole democratic system. If we are holding up democracy as a good way of governing, with fairness and justice - then we need to make sure we actually behave in a democratic way. At the moment, the way the govt. is going on, I am completely sick of it. I don't feel like voting again. But I might just join the Anglican Church!!!!

Wed, 2011-06-08 23:47 — Belinda Webb (not verified)

Well said!

Fri, 2011-06-10 02:15 — durgamata (not verified)

Oh - and another thing - if you care at all for good Religious Education then contact your MP urgently and request that Mr Gove includes it in his English Baccalaureate. As things are schools will be judged on a humanities subject and language as well as on English Maths and Science as they were before. This is called the English Baccalaureate. But Mr Gove excludes Religious Education from the Humanities subjects which count. He has a 'thing' about Geography and History and only wants them to count. As a result schools across the country are marginalising RE so it won't compete with Geog and Hist. No RE GCSE = fewer students who learn to think more deeply and develop empathy and understanding. I guess some of those posting here with cheap attacks on Rowan Williams could benefit from some good RE lessons! Religious Education is about the whole world of religion and how we make sense of the world - not about sectarianism or believing in God

Wed, 2011-06-08 23:52 — Dr Robin Guthrie (not verified)

As much as I dislike this deluded idiot, in this he is correct.

However whilst he lets under the banner of "Anglican", African churches kill gay people in the name of Jesus I hold no truck with him.

Thu, 2011-06-09 16:31 — SG (not verified)

I voted for the Government's health and education policies - they were all in the Conservative election manifesto. The Lib Dem manifesto also called for radical reform in these areas.

I did not, however, vote for you, Archbishop.

Wed, 2011-06-08 23:59 — PaulH (not verified)

I reserve full judgement until I have read the article. However, it seems that Mr Williams is not familiar with the bible, which does consider some poor to be undeserving. 2 Thessalonisans 3 v 10 says "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" (the emphasis is on "will not", not "cannot").

Thu, 2011-06-09 00:00 — charlesfrith

Doesn't Rowan know the left right divide is theatrical diversion to keep the people divided? He writes like it all matters when it doesn't. Fact.

Fri, 2011-06-10 16:59 — Ivan White

“approx 60% did vote for the two parties AND their policies that make up our Government.”

What a deceitful remark! Yes, 59% of those who voted did opt for either the Tories or the Lib Dems, but they didn’t vote for this coalition and the policies which it’s implementing, so Dr Williams is correct in saying that there is no mandate.

The 23% who voted for the Lib Dems thought they were voting for the most left-wing party of the big three, with thousands of students voting for the abolition of student tuition fees. That 23% were not voting to prop up the most right-wing Tory government in living memory while it pursues its evil ideology. Even those who voted for the Tories weren’t voting for a VAT increase, cuts to pensioners’ winter fuel payments, and the scrapping of the EMA and Sure Start centres. And they most certainly weren’t voting for a top-down reorganisation of the NHS.

Thu, 2011-06-09 00:07 — Dr Robin Guthrie (not verified)

This befrocked old man has the power in him to prevent Africans from dying but he keeps his gob shut as long as his organisation is held together.

Thu, 2011-06-09 00:19 — Williamtheb (not verified)

Will the archbishop therefore push for the administration to reform the laws governing his own appointment? Perhaps between them he and The Prince of Wales could finally consign our anachronistic and sectarian parliament to the history books.

Thu, 2011-06-09 00:22 — kenny jenkins

More people voted against the tories than voted for them. Nobody voted for Rowan Williams but then he isn't trying to govern the country.

Thu, 2011-06-09 00:32 — Jon (not verified)

I absolutely love this man. I cannot think of another person who so articulately puts into words the things I myself feel. Would that we all had some of his acuteness of perception and facility of expression. Thank you Dr Williams.

Thu, 2011-06-09 00:32 — Keir

'I could get to like religion.'

As long as it's phoney.

Thu, 2011-06-09 01:02 — AGM

Dr Williams, you are my hero!

Thu, 2011-06-09 01:09 — Daniele1

Nice opinions shame about the man who hasn't a democratic leg to stand on and no authority over the vast majority of the population.
Why doesn't he go and pray to his god like any decent shaman would do, so that things get better? A sacrifice or two should do it.
PaulH:
If the bible says: "if a man will not work he shall not eat" does that mean that all the idle rich bastards like princes and princesses and other degenerate aristocrats should be locked up and starved? or does that only apply to the poor?
Anyway how do you know what it really meant in the original language?your idea that the word "will" is accurate and significant is wishful thinking on your part.And who the hell cares what a 2000 years old text declares to be the right attitude to the poor? Ah yeah Williams I suppose but who else?

Fri, 2011-06-10 17:35 — Keir

'Rowan Williams is entitled to say what he likes'

True. But what Rowan cannot do is prove that he has the tiniest shred of authority, where it counts- by his own declared standard, the Bible. In fact, the Bible precludes his authority, because it is legitimated by an authority outside the church. So whatever Rowan says, it cannot be taken as more than a worldly opinion. So you can have establishment, but you cannot know that you have any better than an echo of your own mind from it.

Whereas Keir's views might be valid.

Thu, 2011-06-09 01:14 — chris (not verified)

Sorry Dr Williams I'll put my hand up for voting for the coalitions policies. After all you did headline "No one"!

Fri, 2011-06-10 17:39 — Keir

'Dr Williams is correct in saying that there is no mandate.'

But people have been saying that for months. Just not so much recently.

Rowan is just trying to get bums on pews. So cut along, atheists, come Sunday. Shake a leg.

Fri, 2011-06-10 18:26 — swatantra

Archbishop Williams is wrong, the canny electorate voted in a hung Parliament, which means that all the Party Manifestos were in effect binned and you start from scratch building up a bespoke new one whichever coalition was formed.
Anyhow all Party Manifestos are only aspirational. Nobody in their right minds believes that a Party will actually deliver on their promises. So it comes as a bonus that Labour actually did deliver on some, but failed spectacularly on welfare manufacturing and housing.
He is also wrong about 'the deserving ad undserving poor' The People are getting a bit fed up about 'the underserving poor' who are not pulling their weight, despite the vast amount of money invested in projects and schemes to help them rise from the depths. The Public rightly has only a certain amount of patience and tolerance.

Thu, 2011-06-09 05:01 — REPAY

Unlike religion, economics is a bit like physics. If you ignore it completely you will get hurt. That's New Labour. If you don't understand you may still screw up - that's the Coalition. Put not thy faith in clerics or politicians...

Fri, 2011-06-10 18:30 — Ivan White

I wonder if the people who are complaining about Dr Williams’ remarks made the same fuss when Vincent Nichols (Archbishop of Westminster) attacked the last Labour government for being “too strongly influenced by a secularist agenda”, adding that he was much more comfortable with Cameron’s “Big Society” (or BS, as it’s affectionately known)? What Nichols was really upset about was Labour’s legislation allowing the creation of human-animal embryos and extending the rights of homosexuals.

Nichols thought that the last government should have abandoned its policies and given way to the entrenched dogma of the Catholic Church. However, I don’t deny Nichols the right to express his views, and once again we see issues of religion and politics overlapping.

Thu, 2011-06-09 07:10 — Luddite (not verified)

Whoever took any notice of this bearded twit. Didn't he once call for sharia law, he more then a twit he's a twat!!

Thu, 2011-06-09 17:36 — alareeza (not verified)

Thank you Rowan Williams. Judging from cameron's reaction you have definitely hit a raw nerve.

The truth hurts.

Thu, 2011-06-09 07:18 — Mark Occomore (not verified)

Although a member of the Church Of England should keep there opinions to themselve. I do beleive he maybe right in some area.

Thu, 2011-06-09 17:40 — alareeza (not verified)

....just adding.

I am listening to David Cameron at the moment on the news and it strikes me that he sounds slightly hysterical. Oooo the truth does hurt.

Thu, 2011-06-09 07:27 — Michael (not verified)

very refreshing to start the day with such sound, humanitarian views....

Thu, 2011-06-09 07:31 — Max Ryan (not verified)

Luddite:

That's misconstrued. He called for the application of Shariah law to settle disputes within the Muslim community relating to minor issues like inheritance. Moreover, it would have required both parties to have opted into it. Religious courts like this already exist for other faiths like Judaism.

Your comment is rather flippant and if anything, Dr Williams seems like a very fair and balanced person.

Thu, 2011-06-09 07:42 — KC Jones (not verified)

I'm saddened and amazed that this unelected old man, who espouses a 2000-year old superstition, is given this platform to air his views on how modern society is managed. Let him get back to his prayers and talk to someone who, if he/she exists, might be interested and leave the rest of us get on with living in the real world.

Thu, 2011-06-09 07:59 — T Dalton (not verified)

The bible and especially Jesus himself says "man cannot have 2 masters" Therefore working for someone else is not allowed, because god is your only master. I think quite a few fascists on here are trying to re-write the true Christian views with the gospel according to.

Thu, 2011-06-09 08:02 — Luddite (not verified)

Max!! he called for sharia law, he is also apologist for medieval barbarism, Mr Williams should spend more time defending his faith against the onslaught of religious-fascism.