Book review: Francois describes how the unfashionable side won Brexit

8 Jan

Spartan Victory: The Inside Story of the Battle for Brexit by Mark Francois

“Nothing has more retarded the advancement of learning than the disposition of vulgar minds to ridicule and vilify what they cannot comprehend,” Dr Johnson once wrote.

A variant of this problem blighted the furious debates since 23rd June 2016 about how and indeed whether to implement the verdict handed down by voters in the EU Referendum.

People like Mark Francois were ridiculed and vilified. Little attempt was made to understand either him or his Essex constituents, who in the referendum had voted by a margin of 67 to 33 per cent to leave the EU.

Now Francois has written a book which anyone who is interested in why and how Brexit happened should read. An Essex man speaks, and tells us not only about the parliamentary manoeuvrings of the last few years, but about the character of a part of the British nation which cannot bear being bullied or preached at.

Pugnacious, patriotic, loyal, hard-working, quick-witted, emotional, able to distinguish immediately between friend and foe, unworried by class distinction, uninterested in correct spelling, fond of a good joke and a pint: these are among the characteristics of Essex man which leap out from Francois’s account.

He has an unfashionable love of World War Two analogies, as in this passage when he is standing against Ken Livingstone in Brent East in the 1997 general election, and a message arrives from the Conservative Party chairman, Brian Mawhinney, which informs them that the campaign is going “extremely well” and they just need to make “one last great effort in order to secure John Major a record fifth term in office for the Conservative Party”.

“What do you make of this, Mark?” the Chairman of the Conservative Association in Brent East asks Francois, to which he replies:

“Chairman, of course if you and I were in front of the rest of the Association we would have to maintain morale. However, as I have come to respect you over these last two years and we are alone, I interpret this message to mean three things: One: Berlin will never fall. Two: Our great counterattack across the Oder River begins at 05.30 tomorrow and Three: We will break the will of the enemy to resist with the use of the terror weapons and fight on to ultimate victory.”

No mainstream publisher wanted to bring out this book, so Francois with the help of Amazon has brought it out himself. This in some ways makes it a more authentic expression of his point of view: no editor has smoothed away the rough edges, corrected the grammar, toned down the jokes which might be regarded in metropolitan circles as tasteless.

One could be having a pint with Francois, perhaps in an establishment “which is about to kick off massively in about 15 minutes”, as a friend who can sense such things warned him on one occasion: the riot actually started in 12 minutes.

But this is a deeply serious book. Francois really means what he says. He wants so much to work out what Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement means that he reads it: something very few people could face doing.

One of the many virtues of this book is that he quotes the actual words of speeches and other important documents: he realises that the actual words matter, and in the case of the Withdrawal Agreement he concludes that in Article 174, the superiority of the European Court of Justice in the dispute resolution mechanism means that once ratified, this provision cannot be “over-trumped” even by Act of Parliament.

For a long time the European Reform Group of Eurosceptic Tory MPs maintained internal discipline, thanks in part to a secret whipping operation run by Francois which he takes great pleasure in describing.

The ERG split on the question of whether, on 29th March 2019, to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement, or to hold out against it. Some, like the Chairman of the ERG, Jacob Rees-Mogg, thought it was better, in this third Meaningful Vote, to accept the only version of Brexit that was on offer, rather than risk losing everything.

Others, such as Francois and Steve Baker (whose fiery speech to the ERG is printed in this book, and was quoted in the recent ConHome profile of him), decided to fight on to the bitter end.

These are the 28 Spartans, who got their name because, as Francois relates, soon after the second Meaningful Vote he was having dinner with Paul Goodman, editor of ConHome, who said how stressful it must be to be holding out so doggedly against unremitting pressure from the media and the Whips.

Francois agreed, and said “we have felt like the 300 Spartans guarding the pass at Thermopylae.” Goodman proceeded to use the term in a piece for ConHome, “Enter – or Rather Exit – The Spartans” (also reprinted in this book), and the word entered general use.

Goodman predicted, correctly, that “this time round, the Spartans may actually win”. May failed to get Brexit done, and Boris Johnson then got it done in a form more acceptable to the ERG.

This history is so recent that it has obscured earlier events. Francois entered the Commons in 2001 as Member for Rayleigh, in Essex, having cut his teeth as a councillor in Basildon, was soon on friendly terms with George Osborne, and served on the front bench under David Cameron both in Opposition and in Government.

He was not, as the more ignorant of his critics may imagine, a crank who refused ever to be satisfied with what the leadership was doing.

During the referendum campaign, he at first thought “the odds were very much against us winning”, but started to change his mind when he heard Osborne on the Today programme “effectively threatening the British people with a ‘punishment Budget’ if we were to vote to Leave the EU”:

“Both George and I had read history at university, and one thing that runs as a golden thread through British history is that you cannot bully us. Many have tried and all have failed. The British are an inherently reasonable people, often far more patient than many of their counterparts, but there is a point beyond which they simply will not go. And what sounded like a blatant attempt to bully or frighten the British people to vote to Remain in the EU, seemed to me a fundamental error…”

A free people cannot be coerced: Francois at this point showed a better grasp of the temper of the British people than Osborne did.

Francois was born in London in 1965, but when he was only six his parents took him to live in Basildon, a new town in Essex, to a house on an estate which looked like a prison, so was known as Alcatraz. His father did heavy manual labour, such as scrubbing out the inside of large industrial boilers.

His mother was from Italy, where they went on holiday each summer. Mark was sent to the local comprehensive school, and was one of two pupils out of the 226 who arrived that term who went to university.

When he was 13, his father gave him a copy of If, by Rudyard Kipling, and told him that “if ever I was anxious or uncertain and for whatever reason he was not around to offer advice, then I should read the poem again and it would help me decide what to do.”

The following year, his father died of a heart attack, a sudden and terrible blow from which his mother never recovered.

Before the third Meaningful Vote, Francois looked out a copy of If, read it, and found by the time he got to the end that “I was absolutely settled in my mind about what to do”.

The next day, when the ERG met to debate how to vote, Francois quoted the first stanza in his speech:

If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you, 

But make allowance for their doubting too

Kipling is not a fashionable poet, but If still has claims to be the nation’s favourite poem, and one can imagine the emotion with which he would invest Brexit if he were alive now.

The people who take pleasure in mocking Francois will never read his book, but if they did, they might learn something.

Andrew Baggott: We will deliver the most ambitious estate renewal plan Basildon has ever seen

9 Jul

Cllr Andrew Baggott is the Leader of Basildon Council.

In the recent election, Basildon, thankfully, returned to a Conservative administration.  For those unfamiliar with Basildon, electorally it has had a chequered history: in recent times “flip flopping” between ruling parties.  This began with the ascendancy of UKIP prior to Brexit. It then morphed into electing “pseudo independents” subsequently – these being individuals claiming to be Independent but having already done deals with Labour to ally with them on being elected.

Over the last two years, this alliance has created a toxicity in politics and a level of arrogance in a Party that due to elections being cancelled owing to the pandemic had no mandate.

It was against this backdrop that we fought the local elections: a leader who had brought insulting residents on social media to an artform; a highly unpopular Town Centre “High Rise Hell” Masterplan; a threatened closure and demolition of a much-loved community centre; and clouds of probity in decision-making.

I personally spoke to over a thousand people across the borough using Connect Calling and was amazed at the consistency of feedback from residents. It highlighted how, when people are incensed, a message can be spread far and wide. Our key pledges (but not the only ones) were to consult with the public on the Town Centre and to reopen the community centre. These messages delivered us victory in wards not held for some years.

So, in administration what are we doing?

I stated at our AGM that we would deliver on all our election pledges and that we would do so visibly and with accountability. That, if we couldn’t for whatever reason, then the public would be informed why.

Our administration and thinking is founded on five core principles:

  • Putting the community at the heart of what we do
  • Having effective and comprehensive public engagement
  • Listening to the community and being guided by their concerns and issues
  • Maintaining integrity in public office
  • Delivery of pledges.

Are there challenges? Absolutely! The public don’t necessarily understand – or even want to – the labyrinthine processes of local government; they just want to see actions. Managing expectation is crucial and communicating honestly and frankly pays dividends.

This all may sound like obvious themes and approaches and yet when you take an objective view how often is it done?

I am engaging with the community on a personal level with a series of “Meet the Leader” events where the community can come and ask questions on any aspect of the Council. Warts and all. Our town centre consultation has currently garnered over 1,300 responses in two weeks and thanks to our amazing communications team is being touted as possibly one of the best pieces of consultation and engagement that we have ever done.

Another issue that we are looking to address is that of climate change, it comes up time and time again with residents. With our plans for the town centre and regeneration, building in design to tackle that will be crucial. To that end, we need to recognise that much though we may think it sometimes, members are not experts in everything. If we are going to get it right then we need an expert in that field that brings gravitas and credibility to the policies and designs that are required. We are casting our net out for such a figure…

As a Borough that celebrated its 70th anniversary recently, it suffers from having been built all at the same time and is now crumbling at the same time.  We are embarking on the most ambitious estate renewal plan that the Borough has ever seen, with a commitment of £40 million over the next four years. To take our so called “forgotten estates” and make them our “unforgotten estates”.  Again, consultation and engagement will be vital – as will developing a delivery mechanism that is not linked to a very clunky committee system of governance. Challenges indeed, but there is also a great opportunity.  As a philosophy, I believe that residents should wake up, look out of the window and smile, happy in their environment.

On taking administration the public confidence in the Council was at an all-time low and its reputation with some elements of the community was in the basement.

I intend to restore public trust, to restore our reputation, and to give residents a reason to vote.

When local government elections can swing on the back of national issues, it is important to cement a reason for voters to stick with who they voted for. To give them faith that when they vote they will actually get what they voted for.  Is it a challenge – absolutely. Can it be done? Why not?

In cynical times there needs to be those who put their head above the parapet and say:

“Enough. We will do what we said. You can trust us, we will deal with you honestly and with integrity” 

Not to do so should not be an option, the public has a right to expect these basic credos.

It’s a lesson that anyone in public office ignores at their peril.