Why Nick was right to speak out

Nick Clegg’s article in yesterday’s Times – in which he looked at the impact of the recession, and predicted it would lead to a reinvention of traditional parenting roles – has provoked an entirely predictable knee-jerk from the right-wing media:

The Sun – LIB Dem boss Nick Clegg yesterday HAILED the slump as a chance for sacked workers to make a fresh start. In an astonishing gaffe, he said mass redundancies would have a “liberating effect”, allowing men to “reinvent” themselves as stay-home dads.

The Telegraph – The father-to-be has gone so far as to declare that redundancy could give men a welcome opportunity to “reinvent” themselves as stay-at-home dads. That’s going to go down like a lead balloon with the sacked staff at Mini. And Woolworths. And Leeds council. And JCB. And, and, and … These gaffes are becoming a bit of a habit.

Daily Mail – Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg was accused of another gaffe last night after suggesting the recession offered a chance for men to ‘reinvent’ themselves as stay-at-home fathers.

It’s one of the ironies/hypocrisies of life that these are just the kind of newspapers which will despair of politicians who all ‘sound the same’, and which will praise politicians prepared to speak their minds … so long as they’re anti-EU, anti-PC and anti-immigrant.

Read Nick’s article, and it’s clear that this was not – by any stretch of the imagination – a “gaffe”. It was a considered response setting out the ways in which families are affected by, and respond to, economic storms. Nick emphasised the ‘unsettling and deeply disruptive’ effect of the main breadwinner – usually a man – losing his job, and that there needs to be much greater flexibility, both among those seeking work, and by society in terms of how we all view men undertaking non-traditional jobs.

I’m not sure Nick’s use of the term ‘reinventing ourselves’, or his suggestion that ‘many men will be forced to let go of their earlier identities and try something new’, were the best way of putting forward his case – it strikes a slightly airy-fairy, new-age rhetorical note at odds with his practical proposals for ways in which British family life might be improved.

But I don’t think that matters for three reasons:

First, the right-wing press are never going to be won over to the Lib Dem cause. They adore Vince not least because he gives them extra cover to go on the offensive against Nick and the party more widely, while maintaining a pretence of impartiality.

Secondly, Nick is clearly passionate about the issue of work/family balance. And it’s entirely right that he should champion causes about which he cares so strongly.

Thirdly, Nick needs to get noticed, and sometimes to say things which get him criticised. For every right-wing macho hack who labels his comments a gaffe there will be another person open to reason, and grateful that a politician is addressing issues in grown-up way.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

21 Comments

  • kardinal birkutzki 18th Feb '09 - 8:03pm

    This is utter drivel, as usual. The moment a Tory or Socialist has talked in such terms in recent months -be it a politician or a commentator- the media have jumped on them. This was a clearly misjudged article, completely insensitive and out of step with the mood of the moment. You should concentrate on getting your berk of a leader to shape up and present himself in a sensible light, instead of whinging about the unfairness of the press. You can’t go on with the Party surviving on the back of the persona of Vince Cable alone.

  • David Heigham 18th Feb '09 - 8:12pm

    Nick’s piece was right, timely and well put. That it is getting knee jerk column inches from the old-fashioned part of the press is a welcome bonus.

  • Actually, having read Clegg’s article, I think the criticism in the press is unfair.

    But this is exactly what I was afraid might happen after Clegg’s genuine blunders last year. The media are starting to adopt the “gaffe” motif as their narrative for Clegg:

    “… an astonishing gaffe …” (under the headline “Clegg in dole slip”)

    “These gaffes are becoming a bit of a habit” (under the headline “Nick Clegg’s latest gaffe)

    “Nick Clegg was accused of another gaffe …” (under the headline “Fresh Clegg gaffe …”)

    And one you missed from the Mirror:
    “A Labour source called it another gaffe from the leader dubbed Calamity Clegg …”

    If this kind of thing once gets established, it can be incredibly hard to fight against – as Ming Campbell found with the “old man” label, of course.

  • David Morton 19th Feb '09 - 7:40am

    Nothing wrong with the content of the article. Its also quite correct to say the right wing press will never love us and to lead debates you some times have to take this kind of flak. I have also posted before about the 30/70 dilemma. Forget the 70% of people who will never vote for us any way. why are we not getting the 30% that are “liberal” rather than the 16% to 18% we bump around at ? often because we spend all our time on “hard working families” crap aimed at the other 70%.

    That said I think some of the imagery in the article is crass. The Full Monty ? “reinvent” etc.

    the timming is also very odd and gnores the human stages of bereavement. You dont go in there with your clodhoppers just at the moment of loss mch still less when “loss/redundendcies” are still over a year away from peaking.

    nearly all of the kind of people he is talking about still have shock,denial and anger to go through before they can come to acceptance. its only then that society will be susceptable to this knd of arguement.

    In short you can’t fault the articles content, some f the reaction was inevitable but he shouldn’t have written it now or in that style.

  • “They adore Vince because….” Huh?. The man has a nifty turn of phrase, which fits neatly with his nifty turn of direction every time something he has advocated slips down the popularity league. How can anyone take seriously a someone who once had a proper job at Shell and when he goes into politics becomes a Liberal – not a proper Liberal of the Manchester school who believed in Free Trade and sensible social policy but the left of Labour/Lib Lab pact/(pity Ashdown got swept along by Blair until No Longer Needed, whereupon dropped) and now we might join with the Tories. Just remember that Gladstone was a Tory until the chance of preferment made him become .. A Liberal

  • My guess is you haven’t lost your job?

  • And add “Oh dear. Another week, another crass misjudgment from Clegg.” from Viv Goskrop of the Evening Standard:
    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23646743-details/Really,+how+can+being+out+of+a+job+be+'liberating'/article.do

  • The problem, quite bluntly, was that it sounded like something from another age. Just like a lot of what Clegg says. You get the feeling he’d be more at home if he stepped into the Tardis and was transported back to ’97.

    Talking fondly about decade-old films with the dubious moral message that we shouldn’t care about the demise of manufacturing makes him seem like just another Blair.

  • While Clegg is totally right in the content of what he says, he should have known it would be twisted out of recognition by the right-wing press. Does he not have a press officer who can manage these things for him? Every single sentence needs to be considered carefully for how it can be taken out of context.

    Anyway, the theme is totally on the wrong tack and off-agenda. It may be correct but just comes across as a soft liberal topic. Criticising gender stereotyping just not part of the agenda at the moment.

  • I haven’t see Nick’s article but from what I have seen and heard he is right.

    Both fathers and mothers need to spend quality time with their kids and the work work work culture we live in has destroyed the family unit in the sence that partents are too tired to spend time with their kids because both need to work to pay the mortgage etc. and come back home too tired.

    Being out of work is soul destroying (well it was for me in the Thatcher recession) so even though people may have the time some wont be in the right mood. I do hope some people will take the chance to bond with their kids as well as look for a new job to avoid losing their home.

  • David Allen 19th Feb '09 - 1:08pm

    Speaking up for parents who take bringing up children seriously was dead right. Saying that this means men as well as women was dead right. Tying all that in with the recession and job losses was horribly wrong. That’s the gaffe, and gaffe it certainly was. Just because the Sun are right-wing bigots with an axe to grind doesn’t mean you can ignore them when they hit on an uncomfortable truth.

    Try reading the speech with the Full Monty bits taken out, and the “aren’t you lucky mate, you’ve been sacked, what a wonderful opportunity” line taken out. Suddenly it makes perfectly good sense! So why didn’t Nick get a press officer to point that out to him, before firing off another unnecessary vote-loser?

  • There is nothing at all wrong with the article – but unfortunately it is not what is required by the great british public of a party leader at the present time. Both Gordon Brown and David Cameron are focussing on the economy, how we got here, who is to blame and how we get out of it (allegedly unscathed) i.e. the big issue. Nick writes a piece on how individuals should react and cope with it. Sadly it is not what people expect to hear from a leader.

    If it had come from an appropriate spokesperson, possibly David Laws, it would have been spot on. From a leader it gives the media the opportunity to portray Nick as not focussing on the real problem.

  • Come on, he is a gaffe wildcard, GWB stylee (cleggover, pension amount, auto-calls, “The Pogues”, “Make It Happen”, etc). Another great example was announcing £7bn in spending cuts, and then a few weeks later the government announce a £7bn fall in revenue. Beware of the numbers 7 and 30, for they are the Clegg Numbers, and they mean anything he wants them to mean. Does nobody else get a twinge of embarassment when he says these things, or mentions any numbers, at all?

    We all want to see better parents, but I fear the recession, and the second world war, are/were not the golden opportunities he paints them to be. Also, as I understand it there seems to be evidence that women are losing jobs at a faster rate than men, and, as such, his article seemed to be fundamentally flawed in its perspective.

    We need to be honest with ourselves – there are fundamental problems with our current positions and leadership; Tory solutions are not part of a Liberal future.

  • “Every time they falsely describe a LibDem as making a ‘gaffe’ they only further debase the term and damage their own reputation in the process.”

    Well, of course you can take the optimistic view that Sun readers will find the idea of Nick Clegg making a gaffe so ridiculous that they’ll all stop buying the paper in disgust, and take out subscriptions to Liberal Democrat News* instead.

    I’m afraid most of them will simply swallow every word, though.

    [* How did that old story go about Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Napoleon being taken forward in time to Moscow in the Soviet era? The punchline was Napoleon, on being shown a copy of Pravda, saying “With a newspaper like this no one would have heard of Waterloo.”]

  • I agree – it doesn’t matter what the truth is, but what people perceive it to be.

  • “But this is exactly what I was afraid might happen after Clegg’s genuine blunders last year. The media are starting to adopt the “gaffe” motif as their narrative for Clegg …”

    Another indication that this is the case comes from this online article about the Lib Dems. The message of the article is positive – that the party will be well placed at the next election, but the author evidently feels compelled to fall in with the “gaffe” narrative.

    Thus, in the first sentence, on improved poll ratings, this has to be “despite the derision chucked at leader Nick Clegg”. And further on, when s/he’s praising Clegg for being “personable and intelligent”, s/he feels the need to add the caveat, “for all his faux pas”.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Jeff
    expats 18th Sep '21 - 11:07am: The first of the French ‘off the shelf Shortfins’ wasn’t due for delivery until 2033 so any ‘start from scratc...
  • Jeff
    John Marriott 18th Sep '21 - 9:38am: I gather that New Zealand isn’t happy about the new arrangement, as she still wants good relations with the PR...
  • Peter
    Where does this put psychiatric, psychological, therapeutic and consultative treatment of children presenting wih gender dysphoria? Is all exploration of such a...
  • Simon Pike
    I agree with Stuart that we need to get serious about housing. But getting serious means listening to the members with experience on housing issues - and Parlia...
  • Hywel
    Alongside this is the significant - but rather under-reported by the press - position adopted over the summer that the price of supporting a Labour admin/govern...