From: The Unit
To: GB
Subject: Public quaking
So, feel we are starting to turn the corner. Everything really starting to look good. Bar polling and economic prospects, national and party mood, obviously.
Think there are a few things we need to worry about. Main one is that while "hard-headed internationalism" has really caught the public imagination in the no-longer-existent saloon bars, it has still not eclipsed the memory of the public hand-quaking you suffered when responding to Cameron. This is still playing massive. Think if we don't retaliate, it has potential to become our ERM. There are three options for Shaky Hand rebuttal lines:
1) The Eddy the Eagle gambit. This is high risk. But the approach would be to say to selected commentators that yes, as a matter of fact, the shaky hand was caused by fear. The line is that Cameron is always going to be the likely victor in parliamentary exchanges. But we emphasise that this is because he's used to oak-panelled rooms and shouting at people, and winning and hurting and smashing and laughing and beating decent folk with champagne bottles and shooting sticks and rolled-up copies of The Lady. Whereas you know about slightly boring stuff like tax and fractions and the Co-Op and Gertrude Himmelfarb and Eric Frogspawn. Obviously, openly promoting the PM as terrified of the leader of the opposition is potentially risky. But the up-side could be massive. If we could get the nation on your side in a Benny-from-Crossroads v Little Lord Fauntleroy-type battle, everything could turn from shit to gold in terms of the parliamentary dynamic. His every victory would boost us in a positive feedback loop of reverse payback. It's the Eddy the Eagle strategy and I think we need to think about it very carefully, but probably ultimately reject it. Alternatives are:
2) The Hulk defence. We say the quaking hand was anger. This is the safer route. Play it as a decent man, a stately rhino, pushed beyond his limit by the tauntings of a privileged Billy Bunter-type yobbo.
With this could maybe get a side order of sympathy vote as outlined in option (1). We could float it that during Commons exchanges, under his breath, Cameron calls you horrible things like "Brown Trousers" or "Gordon Boring" or "Policy Wonker" (NB: they must not be good enough to catch on). But the important difference from (1) is that we say this doesn't make you cry in private, it makes you incredibly angry, like the Hulk. But instead of going green you go a bit shaky in the hand.
Final option is another sympathy-vote line:
3) The Hawking claim. Could say the hand wonk is a physiological ailment? And people should stop going on about it because you and Hawking and Mandela have all overcome massive challenges to get where you are, so how dare anyone talk about it? Could get the Sunday Times etc to do a nice big graphic on how and why it happens and it might become an object of national affection like Beckham/Rooney's metatarsal?
Let us know your thoughts.
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
