Current Political Cliches
Frequently Used Phrases in British Politics and Their Implications
A discussion of some British political cliches, why they are used, and how they affect political debate.
The political discussions we hear in interviews, debates and press conferences often seem to rely on a group of phrases which keep coming round again. A few British political clichés are discussed below: why are they so frequently used, and what effect do they have?
Not fit for purpose
First used by John Reid of the Home Office, this has quickly become a popular phrase in British politics. It’s Westminster’s answer to Ronseal: “It doesn’t do what it says on the tin.” “Not fit for purpose” is a useful phrase because it doesn’t involve defining what that purpose is; John Reid would have sounded much more equivocal had he criticised specific failings in the prison service, or policing methods. (And even within one of those areas, he might have to define whether he thought the prison service was for rehabilitation, punishment, confinement, etc...)
“Not fit for purpose” shuts down discussion over the “purpose” of a department or policy, and offers a comforting sense that political problems can be solved by recourse to simple syllogisms. It also has a punchy, efficient sound: missing out “the” or “its” before “purpose” gives it the air of something which could be stamped across a report. It gives a more technical sheen to the underlying sentiment, which simply that something isn’t working very well.
“I don’t recognise...”
Used as a response in interviews and debates on programmes such as Any Questions, “I don’t recognise” allows a speaker to deny the general thrust of a point without addressing the specifics. Faced with a series of examples as to why, for example, the National Health Service is knackered, or the British Army is in dire straits, a politician can reply “I don’t recognise that picture of the NHS...”.
This suggests, without specifically saying so, that the examples put to them are spurious, inaccurate and misleading (which, to be fair, they might be.) However, this means the speaker can move on to describing what picture of the NHS they would recognise, without getting bogged down into arguments over the cases which the interviewer has raised.
“I think the people of this country...”
Finished with an a positive phrase such as “are fed up of the spin and party politics which is all we get from the government today” or “are clever enough to identify the real problems facing them at the moment.”, this can put an opponent in a difficult position. Irrespective of what he think of the people, and whether they might reasonably be expected to have read and digested the entire proposed EU treaty and its constitutional implications, he cannot say he doesn’t have complete faith in them.
Replying to this phrase offers two options, then: to imply that one has less than wholehearted and slavish admiration for the British people and their sagacity, or to agree with one’s opponent in a modified form. Neither are particularly palatable in the midst of a debate.
