Samizdata

The press has covered the walkouts by the brothers, and where friendly to the government has characterised it as ‘brave’. But Tony Blair’s advertised last speech to the Trades Union Congress was fascinating in itself, calculated in a cartoonish way. Who was it for?

Who would be entranced by the sententious, treacly opening, claiming some sort of credit for sympathy with the victims of terrorism and war?

Before speaking to you today, I want to remember all those who died, including the many British people, repeat our sympathy and condolences for the loss of their loved ones and rededicate ourselves to complete and total opposition to terrorism anywhere, for whatever reason.

Who would be persuaded by the windy pseudo-rhetoric, the clichés set in shattered sentences, and exhibition of truism as valuable policy insight?

We have to escape the tyranny of the “or” and develop the inclusive nature of the “and”.

The answer to economic globalisation is open markets and strong welfare and public service systems, particularly those like education, which equip people for change.

The answer to terrorism is measures on security and tackling its underlying causes.

What, addressed to trades unions, was the point in half the time to international affairs, and Mr Blair’s role on the world stage?

Peace which threatens its security is no peace. But on the right terms it must be done.

Yesterday’s announcement of a government of national unity in Palestine is precisely what I hoped for. On the basis it is faithful to the conditions spelled out by the quartet – the UN, EU, US and Russia – we should lift the economic sanctions on the Palestinian Authority and be prepared to deal with the government, the whole government.

Then, piece by piece, step by step, we must put a process of peace back together again.

Is this really carefully scripted? Is it aimed at an English-speaking audience? What on earth does it have to do with congress?

And who could miss, or be fooled by, the manipulative slide from lachrymose anectote about exploited foreign workers to the hint (immmediately contradicted) that they might be stopped from coming here at all (and thus from competing for work with union members… er, being exploited…) by magic biometric border controls?

I know this answer isn’t popular, at least in some quarters. But I tell you, without secure ID, controlled migration just isn’t possible.

You can have armies of inspectors, police and bureaucrats trying to track down illegals but without a proper system of ID – and biometric technology now allows this – it is a hopeless task.

And as identity abuse grows – and it is a huge problem now across parts of the private as well as public sector – so the gains for consumers and companies will grow through a secure ID database.

And we all want effective armies of inspectors, police, and bureaucrats, don’t we, children? The whole thing (offered by The Guardian here) is extraordinary. The relevant bits – attacks on protectionism, allusions to Labour’s success in enacting union-friendly legislation – would be a perfectly good TUC speech. Short, but to the point. One might not agree with it, but one could see it as a piece of working political machinery. But that speech is suspended in a mush of late-Blair messianism that is much more instructive.

He’s going to fix all the world’s problems. All it requires is for all the great powers to come to a final lasting peace agreement in which he is playing a vital role, defusing the grievances that (alone?) drive global conflict(s), and monitoring all activities of everybody who lives in or visits Britain using a big database.

So who was the speech for? It was the calling-card of a War Leader for the lecture-circuit, some cynics may say. But this cynic suspects the speech was mainly for Mr Blair himself – that this is how he sees the world, and how he wants us all to see it too. It is a preamble to rants to come.