Little Black Books
‘House of Cards’ would have us believe that the government chief whip is the most powerful person in parliament. But is it really true?
As I wasn’t born in this country, the British Parliament “whipping system” was quite peculiar to me – to have a dedicated system of MPs who would ensure that politicians would vote in the desired way of the Government (or in case of the Opposition, the leadership). In order to ensure this, the “cabinet enforcers”, led by the Chief Whip, seemingly have an endless arsenal at their disposal.
Michael Dobbs’ name doesn’t really mean much to anyone outside fans of British conservative politics. He has a somewhat classic career of his contemporaries – PPE at Oxford, then PhD in the United States, before returning just in time to join Margaret Thatcher’s inner circle, where he climbed the ladder to become the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff – a position he subsequently vacated because Mrs. T was a bit “cruel” to him. As a sort of revenge he wrote a novel – one of the better ways to channel one’s anger – which became of course ‘House of Cards’, later turned into the critically acclaimed BBC miniseries with two sequels and the Netflix original starring…. you know what, never mind who. Lord Dobbs – because of course he was given life peerage – may not further ingratiate himself when I reveal that in recent years he vehemently opposed Scottish independence and subsequently supported Brexit for… well, Tory reasons I suppose.
In ‘House of Cards’ the protagonist is one Francis Urquhart (who’s initials are ‘FU’ and that is not an accident) the shrewd and ruthless government chief whip, who holds all the proverbial cards, knows all the secrets, and uses them to orchestrate his own elevation to become Prime Minister. But beyond the obvious power-fantasy Dobbs engages in, what is the truth? Is there really a “little black book” containing all the dirt on all the members of parliament?
You only need to take a glance at the table of contents of Tabitha Troughton’s report ‘Cracking the Whip: The UK’s Party Control System’ – between pages 18 and 26 the chapter titles are speaking for themselves: ‘Blackmail’, ‘Bullying’, ‘Spying’, ‘Bribery and other weapons’. If politicians are adamant to claim the “little black book” only exists now in the history books – like Amber Rudd here in 2014, then some of these stories would certainly lend credibility to the opposite. I’m sure by the time the incoming Labour government has stretched its legs and repainted the walls, we’ll have some fresh allegations regarding their whips’ bad behaviour, but for reasons of balance here’s a story from the Blair years.
So the “little black book” does exist, but is it really a black book? I sure hope it’s not a Google Docs file somewhere on a the cloud – although if that was the case, it would have been leaked already. What we can put together from reports they are more in a shape of boring A/4 papers in manila folders rather than anything more fitting, like a nice Moleskin leather bound notebook. It seems to me in this day and age whips are opting for actual physical violence over anything as subtle as telling a misbehaving MP “I know about Eulalie”. And of course as the government it loses its footing, it makes it easier for MPs to become more of their own person – for better or worse.
What does the future hold for whips and “dirt books”? As much as we like to say these days that politicians no longer capable of feeling shame, or that some of these stories no longer have the impact they used to be – or because some things are no longer carry the same weight to be used as blackmail – I think these will still remain in the arsenal of whips in all parliamentary parties. The possibility that an MP would be embarrassed in front of the public, or even just in front of their constituents is still a deciding factor, and as long as the cost-benefit analysis tells them it’s not worth going against the whips, the “little black book” will retain its power over Members of Parliament.