Leading a political party is difficult work. Do not for one second fall for the erroneous idea that it is easy, or be fooled by criticism from commentators like me or backbench MPs into thinking that we could do it better. It is far easier to be on the sidelines saying “I can’t believe he did that” than it is to be a practitioner. In that spirit one may disagree with David Cameron on Brexit, and I do, but it was obvious last night on the Sky debate that he is a class performer who even managed to keep his cool when being barracked by that rude waffling person who accused him of waffling.
That means that what I am about to say about Jeremy Corbyn is written in the knowledge that the man has one of the worst jobs in the country. Although it is not backbreaking manual labour, it instead involves ritual humiliation, intense scrutiny and blame with almost no power as a compensation.
But for all the talk that Corbyn was dragged to the chair a little reluctantly last year, the truth is that no-one forced him to do it. He made the choice. For him to complain now about the scrutiny and criticism he receives is ludicrous. You would have to be an idiot (more of this shortly) to think that he has somehow been done an injustice.
Yet that is what he seems to to think. I have just watched Corbyn the Movie, produced by Vice, for the second time, as I wanted to check that my initial reaction was justified. It transpires that Corbyn is even worse than I originally thought.
Here are my five observations drawn from the film. If you think personal abuse is uncalled for then please don’t read on. Personally, I want there to be a proper opposition. I think the leader of the opposition should be a serious person. Prime Minister is still a pretty important job. People putting themselves up for the post had better be good. That Corbyn is so useless but persists is an act of supreme selfishness and self-indulgence. He deserves everything that is coming to him from the electorate. Anyway, five observations. Here you go:
1) The film is worth half an hour of your time, not least for the look on Seumas Milne’s face when Corbyn ignores his spindoctor’s sensible advice to go for the flailing government during a statement in the Commons. Corbyn, being a total twit, thinks he knows better. Milne’s facial expression is that of every frustrated newspaper executive in conference when the editor makes a stupid decision, choosing the wrong splash or relegating a good story to a slot downpage on page 10. He’ll deny it but Milne looks like a bright man who knows he has signed up to work for a complete clown. He did.
2) I was going to observe that Corbyn is a nice man, because that is what one is supposed to say. But after watching the documentary made by Vice I am not even sure that is true. The poor fellow making the film was an activist who voted for Corbyn (I could have told him that was a bad idea) in the Labour leadership election. This is someone well-disposed towards Corbyn. Even so, when the interviewer turns up Corbyn isn’t even nice to him. He doesn’t even hold the car door open for his guest or invite him in to his home.
3) Corbyn is absolutely full of himself. He thinks he’s fantastic. Forget any notion that he is reluctant to be in the public eye. Corbyn is clearly loving the attention after years of being ignored and derided. Meeting the people keeps him “humble”, he says at one point. It is the most revealing moment in this gripping film. The thing about the humble is that they never need to point out that they are humble. It is part of the job description of the humble that they don’t say “look at me being humble”. Yet he signs his autograph with what looks like a gold pen and even says he is going to sign his crop of apples. He’s in love with it all and goes around the country meeting only the tiny, deluded minority that thinks he will ever be Prime Minister. It is pathetic to watch.
4) He’s not the sharpest tool in the box, and being dim he struggles to process setbacks. His on-camera tantrum against the blameless, bright Jonathan Freedland who dared to write an eloquent analysis of Labour’s real anti-semitism problem is quite weird. He ignores the substance of the argument made by Freedland and says the writer is obsessed by him, seemingly forgetting that it is not much of a surprise that a leading thinker of the Left who writes for a newspaper should take a close interest in the success or otherwise of the Labour party. Corbyn sneers that Freedland is not a “good guy” and that they will have to respond. Why respond rather than consider his criticisms? This vain fool is the man leading the party of Attlee, Healey, Jenkins, Castle, Smith and Cook. Imagine what either Jim Callaghan in his prime or John Smith would do to Corbyn. Someone remove Corbyn , please.
5) I know I said I had five observations, and I haven’t mentioned his stupid hat or his daft ideas on economics, but Corbyn is not worth any more of your or my time. And it’s time for lunch.
