I very much welcomed and enjoyed Andy Burnham’s comments during his first meeting as PM with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in which he reaffirmed the UK’s support to Ukraine in its struggle against the fascist invader from Moscow. I appreciate Burnham’s views will not be shared with everyone, particularly those on the far right of politics in Britain who have on occasion been more than a little sympathetic to Putin’s Russia. But it’s not just Burnham’s words I want to examine here, it’s how he said them and why that seems to be an issue with some people.
Like his predecessor, Keir Starmer, Burnham has a tendency to use notes when he makes speeches, reading from a teleprompter perhaps, a tablet device or from good old fashioned paper. I don’t have a problem with this because different people use different techniques when speaking in public. When I was involved in my trade union and Labour Party, if I needed to make a speech, I would write the entire thing and read it out verbatim. I knew that if I didn’t employ this method, I would likely come across as someone for whom English was my second, or even third, language and I would risk omitting important and relevant subject matter.
Other people I knew were able to memorise entire speeches and the very fortunate ones could make speeches entirely off the top of their heads. Indeed, the ‘top-of-their-heads’ speakers often sounded brilliant, especially if they were able to employ intonation. Yet, as I learned along the way, a so-called brilliant public speaker was often able to captivate and enthral a sympathetic audience with speeches that were seriously low in content. It sounded better than a crafted, sometimes practiced speech, but in terms of content it was severely lacking.
The critics – and no one will be surprised to learn that among them are the Reform Party UK Ltd Fagash Fuhrer Nigel Farage and his lickspittle deputy Richard ‘Dick’ Tice – pretend that because they are able to speak without notes means they are more passionate and knowledgeable about that they are saying than those who prepare speeches. Well, that’s just bollocks.6
I’ve seen Starmer give public speeches away from the public glare where he was not in possession of a single note of preparation. This is not to say he had not memorised his speeches, but given the amount of ad libbing he did on those occasions I very much doubt it. In any event, if he really wanted to speak without notes, he was more than capable of doing so. But it’s much easier for opposition gobshites like Farage and Tice, isn’t it? They don’t have to speak with accuracy and precision. They operate in a world of cheap populist sloganising. And even if they slip up, which they do from time-to-time, our compliant and indeed sympathetic media rarely picks them up on it, whereas if Starmer and now Burnham get even the smallest thing wrong it’s Front Page News™ in the gutter media, which is by its very nature opposed to any politics that is not anywhere near the hard right. That’s why I suspect the current and former prime ministers are careful in what they say and try to ensure that what they say is actually what they mean.
Anyway, when I see Farage and the ultra boring Tice make speeches, I don’t think, “Wow – aren’t these blokes clever, speaking without notes.” No. I think, “What a nasty piece of lying, populist shit this bloke is” because, frankly, that’s what he is. What you say matters far more than how you say it.
Some of the worst people I have come across in politics and the trade union movement (which is often the same thing in my experience) have had the gift of the gab, yet when it came down to it they were largely ineffective or very bad blokes, George Galloway, Mark Serwotka, Tony Benn and the two Reform Party UK Ltd wrong ‘uns referred to earlier in this blog among them.
I would certainly prefer it if Andy Burnham concentrated more on saying the right thing rather than how he said it. Putting this country right and making people’s lives better is not a fucking game, which depends on your ability to make a speech with or without using notes. And when it comes down to it, politicians are, by and large, people like us, so if you think a person’s problem-solving skills and their vision for the country depend on speaking techniques, then have a go at making a lengthy speech, where you want to make numerous points, without a single note to assist you. But why take a chance? If you’re talking about things that matter to ordinary folk, then at least have the decency to prepare yourself properly. If you make a clever, clap-trap friendly speech and then manage to miss out vital issues, who does that benefit, exactly?
