» News » Blogs - Jonathon Porritt

Politicians have always seized on particular instances to build swingeing generalisations about the state of society as a whole.

For instance, I have a rather vague memory of what I think was described as “the war of Jennifer's ear�, where whoever was in opposition at the time seized hold of the wretched Jennifer's ear (metaphorically speaking) to accuse whoever was in government at the time of total, heinous dereliction of duty in the management of the NHS.

At least Jennifer lived to tell the tale. One hopes that her ear is fully operational again, and that she has no abiding grievance against those who so ruthlessly manipulated her affliction.

By contrast, manipulating a child’s death is an altogether different matter. Personally, I feel a deep abhorrence at the sight of politicians (of any persuasion) jumping on the coffin (metaphorically speaking) of any child or young person as victims of street violence to argue that the entire country is collapsing in a state of unprecedented anarchy, and that it is all the fault of the disengaged, incompetent government of the day.

The implication that any one political party “cares more�, collectively or as individuals, about the tragic death through violence of young people, is just grotesque. And with the suggestion that one set of policy overlays (by which I mean if superficial bells and whistles are laid on top of decades of economic and social decline in areas of profound disadvantage) is going to do a massively better job than any other set of policy overlays, is headline-grabbing politics at its worst.

Self-denying, respectful sympathy would obviously be the ideal political response at such moments, in the immediate aftermath of such tragedies. But that would be too much to ask, wouldn’t it?

Source: http://www.jonathonporritt.com/pages/index.xml