Opinion: Jez We Can – In Guildford Too

Published on: 15 Sep, 2015
Updated on: 19 Sep, 2015

By Martin Giles

Surely the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour party is of little importance to Guildford? We are widely regarded as one of the truest, bluest of towns despite electing a Lib Dem MP in 2001 and only giving Tory borough councillors less than half the popular vote in the recent elections.

But perhaps we should take note and have a think. Maybe there is some relevance to our local politics?

Some of us might remain to be convinced by Jez’s policies but it has to be admitted that he has energised the membership of his party, especially the young, in a way no other candidate was able to do.

Why was this?

There is no doubt that his left-wing views attracted many traditional socialist Labour supporters, especially those who were disenchanted with their party’s careful positioning within the political centre ground under Blair and Brown and still, if to a lesser extent, under Ed Miliband. Their disaffection had increased when, despite that positioning, they lost the second general election in a row.

But there seems more to it than that. People were attracted to Corbyn as a man, as a character – sometimes, perhaps, despite his policies.

I must admit I am to.

It is refreshing to get a politician who answers questions directly and honestly, even if you completely disagree with that answer. At least, we feel, we know were we are with Jeremy. He does not pretend to be something he is not, he does not avoid a question and answer one that he wants an interviewer to ask. He does not think it is clever to waffle and avoid an issue.

This is what many of us want of our politicians. Time will tell if it can last.

Jeremy Paxman once said that when he was interviewing a politician he would be thinking: “Why is this lying bastard lying to me?” Perhaps that is too jaundiced but it is understandable that he took this view when “spinning” has become the prevalent fashion. Politicians seem to think they are being smart dodging questions when in fact they just look dumb, or worse, dishonest.

Most of us know that politicians don’t know everything, don’t have all the answers, goodness knows the evidence is all around us, and, to be fair, many problems have no easy solution. We also know that, quite naturally, they don’t always agree with their party political colleagues.

Why can’t a cabinet minister say: “The majority view in the cabinet is that the our policy should be… x, y or z although it is not one I personally agree with”? Would the world stop turning? Would the government fall?

No, they treat us like children. Mum and Dad must present a united front to the kids. Well we are not children, they are not our parents; they are meant to represent us and, actually, we might even know more than them on a given subject.

Of course, if we are to expect more honesty and a more grown up attitude from our politicians we need to exercise a more informed attitude to our voting. Voting on party political lines in local elections is for the simple minded and will inevitably lead to disappointment. For me party politics has no place in local elections, it is having a malign influence, encouraging lazy thinking, dictatorial behaviour and disengagement.

Have I convinced you? Perhaps not. But if, whatever your views, you are even slightly sympathetic to those Corbyn supporters who were attracted by a different sort of political behaviour why don’t you take the trouble to find out who your local councillors are and ask them some direct questions: what are their views on issues that might be affecting your ward or division and what are they intending to do about it? And, above all, ask them will they really vote to represent their constituents rather than support a party line when push comes to shove?

You can always share with us how you get on.

Responses to Opinion: Jez We Can – In Guildford Too

Bernard Parke Reply

September 15, 2015 at 1:53 pm

How much I agree: “Voting on party lines is for the simple minded and leads to disappointment.”

Such voting in local elections often elects candidates who have very little aptitude to contribute in any positive way for the good of Guildford and its residents.

Many who have such qualities are overlooked because apparently “blue”is not their favourite colour.
Jim Allen Reply

September 15, 2015 at 2:38 pm

Jez impressed me with his openness of response, something our local elected representatives and paid council officials could learn from. Just because residents speak out does not mean we are “against” or “fighting” the council. Our life’s experience have taught us that just because a person bears an elected or unelected office it does not mean they know best or will do what’s best.

Perhaps Jeremy Corbyn’s lasting legacy will be to open up local politics and destroy “closed shops” in the political sense? Being partially colour blind does nothing to harm my ability to vote for the singer not the song.
Stuart Barnes Reply

September 15, 2015 at 7:08 pm

Yes to much of what Martin Giles says but the policies apparently espoused by the Corbynistas have been tried many times before and have only led to disaster and much worse. Think of Stalin’s Russia, Venezuela, North Korea, Cambodia, etc.

If we are to pick politicians on the basis that we think that they speak in some sort of human language and that we would be happy to have several beers with them, then the obvious one to consider is Nigel Farage.

At least his policies are in line with what most English people think and would not destroy what is left of our country and civilization. Farage has grown his following mainly because the so called Conservative party under David Cameron has become just another trendy BBC/Guardian wet left wing party and the Labour party has gone so far to the hard left.

The problem with our current voting system is that we do not dare to vote for those not in the Westminster mould because we are frightened of letting in appalling people like Sturgeon or Red Ed.
Tony Edwards Reply

September 16, 2015 at 2:29 pm

It’s too soon to judge Corbyn’s qualities of leadership but his first PMQs clearly demonstrated that his new ‘improved’ format for questions is more like a local radio ‘phone in… “and now a question on welfare reform from Edna in Crawley”.

Not going to work, is it? It merely provides the PM with the opportunity to spout party policy by way of an answer, without any come-back from the leader of the opposition.

The voting public expects a leader to lead, representing a broad spectrum of public opinion in a series of concise, hard-hitting questions designed to put the PM on the spot. Corbyn’s never going to do with with a re-run of the Jimmy Young Show.

I wonder how many Guildford borough residents know that they are entitled to ask questions directly at full council or Executive meetings at Guildford Borough Council? Ed
Dave Middleton Reply

September 16, 2015 at 4:49 pm

I have to say that I’d never heard Mr Corbyn referred to as “Jez”. I had assumed the opinion piece title was a cunning, journalistic play on the word “Yes” as per “Yes we can”.

I must say also that I find the modern habit of referring in print to public figures by their surnames, or odd and often derogatory nicknames, rather unpleasant and quite disrespectful.

To me it’s simple courtesy to refer to people as Mr or Mrs, etc. Am I just being an old fogey, Mr Giles?

The “Jez we can” slogan, used by the Corbyn campaigners, was extensively covered in the national media, so I thought most might be aware of it; it is indeed a play on the “Yes we can” slogan of Barack Obama in his US presidential campaigns (not to mention “Bob the Builder”). As for referring to people by surname only, I think in the context of an opinion piece it was acceptable but would be interested to hear the views of other readers. What I do not accept is that I was derogatory or disrespectful. On the contrary I feel that a major point of the piece was that the Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP has shown an unusual honesty, to date, that is admirable, even to those who might question, or completely disagree with, some of his policies and actions. Ed
Bernard Parke Reply

September 16, 2015 at 8:21 pm

GBC Residents are indeed entitled to ask questions directly to full council, but do the councillors actually listen or do these questions just fall on deaf ears?
Dave Middleton Reply

September 17, 2015 at 10:44 am

My previous comment was not at all intended as a snipe at Martin Giles, nor did I think that he intended any particular disrespect towards the Rt Hon Mr Corbyn MP.

My point, perhaps not clearly expressed, was purely that I feel it is more appropriate and proper to refer to public figures, particularly those in government and other authorities in a more formal manner. Indeed I believe that courtesy should be extended to anyone who is not a friend or family member.

Perhaps (and I’m smiling as I write) I am turning into old fossil?
Adrian Atkinson Reply

September 17, 2015 at 6:04 pm

Certainly the councillors are very polite and thank the public speakers but my sense is that they crack on regardless.
Jenny Procter Reply

September 18, 2015 at 8:56 am

I feel that the election of Jeremy Corbyn is a real indication of just how disaffected much of the electorate feels and how little their needs are currently represented. A shake up is long overdue. However much I agree or disagree with what he says it is refreshing to see a groundswell of opinion voicing a desire for change. And more honesty in politics is a good start.

Certainly residents can speak at public meetings and there are different parameters for different types of meeting. Of necessity they are time limited. However, my experience in planning meetings is that the councillors do indeed crack on regardless. The three minutes allowed for two speakers from the public objecting to any application is rigidly enforced as is the three minutes given to the two speakers for the applicant. No further comments from the public as the debate progresses are allowed. This however is not as balanced as it appears when set against the limitations on other means of raising objection.

The only other avenue for expressing opinion is through letters which in my experience are widely dismissed as repetitive and ignored if possible whatever the volume. Many letters are extremely well researched and contain information and insights which Council and Council officers would do well to heed. Instead this seems to be used as a means to smooth the way for honing the issue to fit the required outcome.

Yes change and honesty would be refreshing and we would be wise in any local election to look very hard at the individual councillors we elect, whatever their affiliation, if we want decent representation.