Episode 11: The T-Shirt Cannon
John Lanchester
At sporting events in the US, the organisers sometimes set up a fun thing called a T-shirt cannon. This is what it sounds like: a cannon, or rather a bazooka, which emits a thud and sends a T-shirt across the arena where it softly thwacks into one of the punters. Who doesn’t want to be hit in the face by a free T-shirt?
The T-shirt cannon was brought to mind by the latest round of policy announcements from the Tories. The most recent of these came yesterday: a plan to sell off £4 billion of shares from Lloyds to members of the general public. Lloyds is already 22 per cent owned by the UK public; the sell-off would transfer ownership from everybody to the specific subset of the population who buy the shares at a 5 per cent discount from its current market price. This is a transfer of ownership from the state to individuals, straight out of Margaret Thatcher’s playbook and the British Gas privatisation. The sell-off of Housing Association stock to current tenants is a very similar move from the same political handbook. This is the T-shirt cannon: a policy that brings no general benefit to the taxpayer but instead is aimed at delivering largesse to a specific chunk of the electorate. Another policy to shoot out of the cannon was the raising of the inheritance tax threshold.
So there are now three components to the Tory ‘offer’ (as sales and marketing men call it).
1. Long-term economic plan.
2. It’s either Dave or Ed, and it must be Dave because Ed is rubbish and will deliver England to the SNP.
3. T-shirt cannon.
The Tories had hoped that numbers 1 and 2 would be enough, as they were in the (to them) comparable circumstances of 1992. The problem here is that 3 contradicts 1 – you can’t be both the party of austerity and the party of freebies. The calculation must be that it doesn’t matter, and that the voters won over by the giveaways won’t detract from the core voters who are already onside with 1 and 2.
This is dispiriting in and of itself. But the other thing that happened yesterday is that news came of 700 migrants dying in the latest Mediterranean refugee disaster.
There are no easy solutions to the refugee crisis facing Europe, and no cheap solutions, and certainly no populist solutions, and it may be that there’s nothing one could describe as a ‘solution’. But there are times when we need someone in a position of power to come up with some language that feels adequate to the moment. We get that we aren’t living in Harry Potter World: our leaders can’t just say ‘Refugee Crisis, Disappeario!’ and make everything better. And yet, sometimes, we need to hear something that seems as if it responds to the scale of the occasion. We stand witness to a once-in-a-generation humanitarian disaster in the Mediterranean, and our leaders have nothing to say and no policies to offer, beyond a generalised antipathy to immigration. What they have instead is a T-shirt cannon buying off the electorate, one interest group at a time. I don’t remember a time when our politicians seemed so small.
Comments
The present government has gone further: they are giving away the shop (in advance) when it's about to go into liquidation.
So much for the Tories' reputation as economically prudent, surely?
But who, among the electorate, will even notice?
Or is this all by way of a Modest Proposal?
The first thing such conflicts and afflictions like the "flood of migrants" (excellent phrase) needs is us literary types to dramatise and imaginate the proceedings. Byron and Shelley did the same.
The truth, so to speak, by contrast, is off-putting. I was sacked overnight in 2004 and watched, late at night, alone, subdued, on Channel 4, a brilliant documentary filmed on the migrant run, all the way across, from south of the Sahara to the Med. Canny 3-ton truck traffickers stopped in the middle of the desert and said, pay more now, else we'll dump you here. I think they passed human skeletons - that might be my own orientalism.
That was 10 years ago. There was dust on the camera, the ride was bumpy, I think the filming was secret. But I did not feel so bad about my own economic slump after seeing this chilling and desperate stuff.
I think the UK, France, the US, Sweden and many other countries could have absorbed that number between them to the immeasurable benefit of their economies, polity and intellectual life.
Don't you?