
Audience for Sebastian Payne at the Blue Bear Bookshop in Farnham
There’s recently been a Literary Festival (3rd-12th March) in nearby Farnham and one talk I went to featured Sebastian Payne, author of the recently published ‘The Fall of Boris Johnson’. The event was held in the delightful Blue Bear Bookshop (see picture above).
Sebastian Payne was until recently a political journalist at the FT, often seen as a commentator in the media, and is now the director of the centre-right think tank Onward. The event was advertised as ‘in conversation’ with Richard Hunt CBE, who is a former chairman of the London Ambulance Service.
I was attracted to the topic as it’s a curious but important political subject, particularly as it’s still casting a shadow over everything that’s going on.
The session was a taster for the book which I’ve not yet read but have just received from the local library. Here are my thoughts from the evening:
There was a good intimate atmosphere and the ‘interviewer’, Richard Hunt, asked some very insightful questions which sparked a flowing and fascinating conversation. There was also a question and answer session afterwards.
Richard Hunt started the talk with a question to the audience:
Q: Who wrote this?
“When a regime has been in power too long, when it has fatally exhausted the patience of the people, and when oblivion finally beckons – I am afraid that across the world you can rely on the leaders of that regime to act solely in the interests of self-preservation, and not in the interests of the electorate.”
A: Boris Johnson
The interviewer had read the book in detail (some talks I’ve been to they’d not apparently done this) and had come up with his own overview and stance. He also obviously liked the book (which I guess helps). This then prompted a series of themes and the discussion jumped around to different parts of the book. So it was more interesting than a simple chapter by chapter overview.
The conversation went through all the well publicised issues: Partygate, Pincher, Ukraine, Sue Gray etc. Some of the themes that stayed with me were (in no particular order):
Handling Major Mistakes: Could he have scraped through if he admitted mistakes early and unequivocally? I think the general impression was no but it was odd that this approach was not even tried. It’s also quite odd that similar mistakes were made again and again. The author made an interesting remark that Boris’ view on what is success or failure may be different to most people. Perhaps based on a Greek rather than standard modern interpretation (this unusual statement is presumably clarified in the book).
Approach: Although there was a clear goal to win the election there did not seem to be a clear idea of what to do next. I imagine the issue is that it’s a complex mess with no clear ‘solutions’ so tempting to just patch up, appeal to key voters and run diversions. It seems a missed opportunity for clear bold thinking. Perhaps, fundamentally, he wasn’t that interested? The prestige of the role was more important than the duties.
His Chosen Team: Consistently appointing ‘crap’ people to important jobs. This is puzzling as a standard model is for a smart leader to appoint the very best they can get. It may reduce friction in the short term but otherwise just stores up problems.
International (Ukraine): Here he went against the standard Govt advice of being far more cautious. So there was vision and bravery (and self-promotion) there. In addition the Johnson/Wallace combination seemed to work well.
Character Strengths and Weaknesses: These are well documented and various people’s viewpoints abound. I’ve always remembered something my manager said to me early in my career. Strengths can be simultaneously weaknesses (if the context changes). They don’t need to be independent of each other. In this case they’re difficult to modify.
The Civil Service: There was a discussion of the role of the Civil Service. The strong background figure of Sue Gray (who was practically unknown to the general public), with her unusual career with it’s sojourn in N Ireland, was highlighted.
The Crucial Role of MPs: One point I had not heard emphasised before was that it was the MPs that actually changed the situation. It wasn’t the Cabinet or the ‘feelings of the Party’ although they obviously had influence. In this sense, in spite of some early mishandling, a clear and definitive decision was made by MPs. The system eventually worked. Parliament can often come over (whether true or not) as archaic, privileged and inward looking so it was reassuring that reality was a little different.
There was a final point that definitely resonated with me:
The Entertainer: Is it all a carefully cultivated act by Boris? I’ve often wondered this myself. To support this, the author pointed out that he’s quite reluctant to talk about his private life as this might conflict with the ‘brand’. It could also enable a distance between the lies/misinformation of the act and the real feelings of the person (shame, humility, anger etc). Although I’m definitely not a supporter, he’s obviously a charismatic character who loves interacting with the public, is quick on the riposte and seems to effortlessly dismiss criticisms. In fact I’ve often thought of him as an ‘entertainer’ in much the same way that Trump is. An actor playing to the gallery. This makes him an excellent campaigner of course, without an equal at present.
It was a very enjoyable evening and I’m looking forward to reading the book, partly to flesh out the initial thoughts and impressions above.
As a total aside, over the last few years I’ve been to a number of book publicity talks and this was certainly one of the best. In fact some of the others, even given in well-known institutions, were fairly insipid in comparison. This got me thinking why some ‘in conversations’ are so much better than others. From the event, two features stood out:
Confident questioning, from someone used to the issues and the type of people concerned
Intimate atmosphere, here an unusual bookshop and the speakers sat in comfy chairs at the front. In other places, speakers can be on a raised platform and everyone is lined up in neat rows watching. I think the latter lends an unhelpful air of formality whilst the bookshop came over as looser and more relaxed/creative.
Details of the book can be found here.