Marching on the Anti-Austerity Demo and contemplating British Hypocrisy

Arriving early for the Anti-Austerity march and demo in London yesterday I decided to 'have an hour' in Westminster Abbey. On reflection I may not have been in the right mood, especially after I queued for quite a time in the wrong entrance queue [online bookings and groups only] and had to start again.

So once inside the ancient walls the feelings of the history take over - for a while. But my feeling of the inequality of British society soon rears its head and I am off on the usual dichotomy that occurs when visiting such ancient piles: wondering at the history whilst growling at the imbalance amongst our people that it shows.

So I did a few anarchic things to address the balance. Well mostly taking photographs which are not allowed [but I am sharing them with you all so it was a kind of Robin Hood action] And ducking across blue cord barriers. Oh the thrill of it all. 

And on the day of an Anti-Austerity march this was a pretty good tombstone to start my reflections at:

Twenty years a leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister in the post war years - and if judged by the standards of today I doubt if he would be elected due to our cult of celebrity. Certainly he was not a publicity savvy chap, did not have the sort of 'presence' that seems to be demanded today if the media is not to pillory a politician. But what a leader and Prime Minister he was - first peace time Prime Minister after the 1939 - 1945 war, the Prime Minister of the Post War Austerity years whose government never the less saw the instigation of the Welfare State [care from the 'cradle to the grave'], the establishment of the National Health Service - many of whose present day employees were marching yesterday against the dreadful cuts and pay under which they are now expected to work. The new Education [ditto] and training provisions that the Labour Government of 1945 saw in, the housing programmes instituted and whilst the new builds were constructed at least returning soldiers had somewhere to live on the many 'prefab' estates that were quickly erected. Thought for the working people you see. By the party who really were the party of the working people.

I wandered on through the massive tombs and chapels that were erected for various Lords, Ladies, Kings and Queens. As a family historian I know where many of my ancestors are buried. In unmarked graves of course, some in multiple graves as 'paupers'. Just as mourned as these souls, but without the money behind them to be glorified. And looking at tributes to leaders of wars and battles, often erected by public subscription one cannot help thinking of all the 'ordinary' souls who perished in those battles never to have a memorial and never to be considered.

Of course the grave to the unknown soldier in the Abbey is regularly visited. But - to me - is so little for so many when - again to me - there is way too much for too few others.

And of course I laughed at a brilliant example of supreme British hypocrisy. I have always had a soft spot for Mary, Queen of Scots. Ever since I was taught that she lost her throne and eventually her life for the love of the Earl of Bothwell. Of course when I came in turn to teach history I taught a very much less simplified form! But I had to sneak in to see her magnificent tomb:

Only the [English in this case] could murder a Queen and then honour her tomb in this magnificent way! Originally buried in Peterborough Cathedral with great solemnity by Elizabeth 1's orders [odd that since Elizabeth had ordered her death! Hypocriscy?] but Mary's son James I brought her remains to Westminster Abbey for re-burial in 1612. And ironically the Protestant Elizabeth 1st shares a far plainer tomb with her half-sister, the Catholic Queen Mary who had reigned before her [and is often known as 'Bloody Mary']. More, well hypocrisy? So history is not only written by the survivors - but by their children too. Mary Queen of Scots had a son - Elizabeth the first and her sister Mary did not have children......

So nicely primed I rocked up for the march and joined the estimated 250,000 there. Lovely atmosphere although no doubt the media will show any small scuffles [ if they mention the march at all]; good tempered marchers; lovely polite policeman - I do wish 'though they wouldn't call me 'madam' as it offends my egalitarian principles!; brilliant signing on the speeches which should have helped when my hearing aid battery ran out but my signing is no where good enough!; brilliant speeches from too many to single out a few - but I must mention Len McClusky and Mark Serwotka just to get them in the same blog as Elizabeth the first!; Charlotte Church was really good!; good enough weather to sit on the ground to listen to the speeches and lovely service by the Underground services despite the fact that the District and Circle services were not running through Westminster.                                                    

So a day of contrasting hypocrisies,  and what may seem odd on such a full march but lots of time for thought whilst also space to make new buddies and have some good discussions [of course!] Sitting in the wavering sun listening to really good speeches is always a pleasure! Possibly a different march from many others I have been on because there were so many different organisations represented there but very effective. And maybe I will be leaving my rucksack packed for next time because we ain't giving in!

Family History, Funerals and Facebook

Melbourne Argus 31st October 1950

Bless her, I hear you say, Elizannie has really lost it now. Not only does she provide a scintillating [not] blog title but then she gives us a boring picture to boot. Well all I can say - to quote Miranda's 'chum'* "bear with...."

Yesterday was a sad day for my family as a beloved older cousin was laid to rest. She was 88 years old and for all but the last few days of her life had been as bright as a button, had a fantastic sense of humour, great common sense and possessed a wonderful kindness and generosity of spirit. No wonder she will be missed by so many. But in the aftermath of the funeral - which had been arranged by her, she wanted us all to have a drink and something to eat 'on her' it has to be said that it was good to catch up with some members of the family who hadn't seen each other for years. We have a large extended family and there were a few games of 'Do you know who I am, then?' Edna would have loved that, as she was also the keeper of many of the family records. And following in her footsteps there are a few of us who are trying to write the family history too and last year many of us got together with old photos and stories to try and collate the facts.

Over the past few years we have not only collected and collated the facts when we could meet up, but we have used the often abused social media to keep in touch. Facebook has been great and whereas 50 years ago we all lived close enough to keep up the family gossip face to face we now can do so easily with facebook!!

This morning, with torrential rain outside providing an ideal excuse not to clean the windows or anything silly like that, I decided to have another go at finding a few errant ancestors via the internet. And I struck lucky and that elusive 2x great grandfather who emigrated to Australia in 1873 suddenly came to life [well actually I found his obituary!] via the Australian newspaper archives. And a question which had always bothered me, had he and his second wife produced any Australian half-cousins for me and the rest of the family was finally answered.

But here is the really exciting thing and something which maybe my longstanding readers may find interesting. I may have mentioned that my political journalist father was sometime the London editor of an Australian newspaper, back in the 1950s. So, seeing the name of that newspaper pop up during my archive search, I thought, why not? Let's type in his name and see what comes up. And yes, loads of articles did. He obviously had a weekly column where he told the Aussies what was going on in Westminster, sometimes throwing in a bit of gossip as well.

I haven't kept very many of my father's newspaper articles. Well you don't do you, when every day of one's young life a newspaper plops through the letter box and one's father has at least one byline, and that often to the headline. Although it gave me a big thrill a few years ago when the shop 'Past Times' was selling a pack of various newspaper replicas from the 1960s and one of them was the old Daily Herald with my father's byline on one of the articles! And going back a few years more, one of my cousins opened one of those Reader's Digest pictorial History Books and there was a picture of my father lecturing on Pacifism in the late 1930s. However I have been printing out some of these articles found today. And some of the political comments, written in the 1950s sadly make me realise that times haven't changed that much. His comments about wages and income tax are very interesting. And maybe others will now understand my dislike and disgust with Winston Churchill. These are two articles posted on here as photographs with 'translations' below.

Forgive me if I am being a bit self-indulgent today. I am dedicating this to Edna and all my lovely, huge family xxx

Melbourne Argus 19th December 1950

Text for the photos:

Attlee will introduce more socialism

SPARKS will fly in the political spheres of Britain tomorrow. By then the world will know from the King's Speech what legislation the Labor Government intends for the next Parliamentary session. The Opposition leaders and newspapers here are kidding themselves that the Government is going to coo as gently as a dove because of its small majority in the Commons. Don't believe that tale if you've been told it. The Government's new legislation will be challenging and belligerent. It will contain two proposals at least which will rouse fierce passions.

One will be a radical sugar nationalisation project - and the other will be a bill to make permanent the economic and industrial controls made necessary as temporary measures in wartime Britain.

And there will be another bill dealing with leaseholds that will bring all the backwoodsmen on one of their rare - and angry - visits to the House of Peers.

I sniff an electoral battle in the air.

February will see the struggle at the polls, I think.

When an election does come; cost of living will be a big issue.

Though it has been kept in check here better than in most countries in the world - and certainly better than in Australia - it is surely going up.

Fear of further price increases is making Christmas shoppers buy early this year.

Prudent husbands are buying their wives a something-to-wear present weeks ahead of the usual time.

Some shops have already sold more coats than during the whole of the winter season. 

Handbags and shoes are more popular than ever, and in both cases rising costs are likely with the increased leather shortage.

Handbags are already costing between £9 and £40. 

Everybody's feeling the draught, including higher income groups.

19/6 in the £

JUDGED by the income tax standards, the British millionaire is now almost non-

existent.

Last year there were only 86 people in the United Kingdom with over £6,000 income after tax.

In 1939 there were 6,560.

Tax at the highest rate ontop-level incomes in this country is 19/6 in the £.

Stiff, yes; but it doesn't begin at 19/6; it only reaches that at the supertax stage of £2,500 a year.

Lack of income has driven an Anglican parson out of his job.

He is the Rev. Austin Lee, talkative 45-year-old vicar of St. Stephen's, Hounslow, Middlesex.

He is offering his services as a cook for luncheon and dinner parties. To those ready to take him on he will also be prepared to bring a former Cambridge undergraduate as a waiter.

Oratory takes a  tumble

IF Australians still think of Winston Spencer Churchill as The Voice of England, they ought to shed their illusions. I sat in the House of Commons last week and saw Britain's wartime Premier descend, in the course of a few sentences, from the high level of a statesman to the abusive personal slanging level of the parish pump.

It was the most astonishing,  most impudent, and most insulting Parliamentary performance I have seen.

All the more so because Churchill's taunts and gibes were neither spontaneous nor unconsidered.

They were part of a meticulously prepared script from which Churchill spoke in a critical foreign affairs debate.

Coming at the end of a speech in which he had generally supported the Government on its Korean policy and had paid tribute to Mr. Attlee's mission to Washington, Mr.Churchill's charge that unless

the Government dropppd the act to nationalise steel he would "doubt their loyalty to the people of this country" was not only irrelevant-it was a studied reflection on the integrity of the men of whom Churchill has said he could have asked for no better Ministerial allies during the war.

What is the mystery behind all this? Why did Churchill deliberately destroy the non partisan atmosphere in which the debate on foreign affairs had proceeded up to that moment?

The answer is not easy to give, for it is many-sided. But one thing I can say with certainty: The hold of Churchill on the Tory Party is not as tight as it might be and to fasten his grip he must not make too many speeches even on foreign policy, which can be interpreted as support for the government.

Another reason it that, however grave the international situation, Mr. Churchill - and Tories generally-always have one eye cocked on the next general election.

*TV comedy starring Miranda Hart. Her chum is always uttering 'bear with' when answering her mobile in the middle of a conversation with A.N.Other. How rude.