The return of former French prime minister Laurent Fabius to serve as François Hollande’s foreign minister has got the French buzzing with gossip over their copies of Le Monde. Not his vision for the European Union, of course, but the revelation that he had a ‘brief but passionate’ affair with Carla Bruni.
A source within the Parti Socialiste has told the Telegraph that ‘at the time Mrs Bruni-Sarkozy was very much a leftwinger with plenty of friends in the Socialist party. Mr Fabius was France’s youngest ever prime minister in the mid-1980s, and Carla found this very attractive indeed.’
I bet she did. It confirms a couple of basic truths in politics – that the French political class have much more fun than ours, and that a sexual scandal, far from ending a French political leader’s career, is positively de rigueur. Who can forget the sight of Anne Pingeot, the longstanding ‘mistress’ of François Mitterand standing with their daughter Mazarine, next to his wife Danielle at his funeral? That’s not a sight you’ll ever see at a British prime minister’s graveside, unless Edwina Currie turns up to see off John Major.
Notwithstanding all these sexual revelations, it got me thinking about another, less salacious, aspect of the return of Laurent Fabius. Fabius was prime minister for two years between 1984 and 1986. He was just 37 when he was appointed by President Mitterand, over older candidates such as Jacques Delors. He reformed support for families, transforming the lives of children, just as his boss was creating the grands projets which transformed the Paris skyline. Before the age of 40, Fabius stood down as prime minister after an electoral kicking for the socialists in the 1986 National Assembly elections. Twenty-five years later, he’s back in government.
In the British system, once you’ve been prime minister, that’s your lot. Our system, famously described as a ‘greasy pole’ goes only up and down. You climb up, and then you either jump, or are, more likely, pushed down. A politician may aspire to become an MP, then a PPS or junior minister, then a member of the cabinet, then to one of the senior jobs (home secretary, foreign secretary or chancellor of the Exchequer), and then on to prime minister.
Most MPs don’t become ministers; most ministers don’t get into the cabinet; most cabinet ministers don’t become prime minister. Politics is littered with bitter, frustrated politicians who never fulfilled the potential they saw in themselves. Some blame their fortunes on others, or capricious events, but seldom on themselves. Enoch Powell never wrote a truer word than ‘all political lives, unless they are cut off in midstream at a happy juncture, end in failure, because that is the nature of politics and of human affairs.’
Yet of those who do make it to the top of the greasy pole, life afterwards can be disappointingly long and pointless. Edward Heath was 58 when he left office, but hung around for another 31 years. John Major was 54 when booted out, and is still going strong. Tony Blair was also 54, when he was forced from office, and has created a vast array of philanthropic enterprises around the world. When we get rid of David Cameron at the next election, he will not yet be 50 years old.
If the cult of youth accelerates, our ex-prime ministers will be men and women in their 40s and 50s, perhaps only halfway through their lives, with decades of public service left in them. What will become of them? Hanging around the House of Commons long after they should have emptied their lockers, like Edward Heath? Philanthropy and diplomacy like Tony Blair? Writing their memoirs, like Wilson and Thatcher, before succumbing to dementia?
We need to change the political culture in the UK so that being prime minister is not the last job you do in politics. A former prime minister should not join a, albeit very exclusive, blacklist, whereby they are banned from future office. In Israel, as in many other democracies, a political leader such as Ehud Barak can serve as prime minister, and later return as defence minister and deputy prime minister. I’m not engaging in special pleading for either of Labour’s current ex-prime ministers (although Tony Blair would make a stellar foreign secretary in Ed Miliband’s first cabinet). The point is that our political class is not so blessed with talent that we can afford to close the door on those prime ministers who might have something to offer.
—————————————————————————————
Paul Richards writes a weekly column for Progress, Paul’s week in politics. He tweets @LabourPaul
—————————————————————————————
of course ,she’s put on a lot of weight now.
True, though the French and British premierships aren’t exactly comparable. I can’t imagine a French president taking a ministerial position after leaving office.
and which new wars would Foreign Secretary Blair start?
oh it would be the same old “war” TC – anywhere terror threatened genocide,that sort of thing !
Christ, Tony Blair back in Labour’s cabinet? There’s a big reason he stepped down, and unless Miliband wants to lose the next election, he’d be wise to concentrate on the future Labour party and not the divisive past.
oh yeah 13 long divisive years oh deary moi – we wouldn’t want to muck about with anyone successful would we,why ever would we do that ? the alternative would of course prove much more divisive so pull yourself together ! or rather, yourselves .
oh and Sotha, we are going to win the next general election ,the PEOPLE are going to win the next general election – because the nation is really beginning to understand that the Tory allegiance is to Global Capitalism and the 1% not the body of the people who have been manipultated mercilessly whilst their attention has been diverted by living simple decent lives !
You’re so right, Sotha! Does Paul Richards think Iraq didn’t matter? Or doesn’t matter any more? The last thing we need is a Foreign Secretary who thinks his role in life is to go round the world telling other countries what to do. The return of Tony would be the kiss of death for Ed.
going round the world telling leaders and terrorists not to kill their own people is a different thing though Sheila !
Such a shame the British public are so moronic. If more people had the power to come up with their own views using evidence, rather than copy words like ‘Iraq war’ from others, one of the finest politicians of the generation could still be at the forefront of shaping a progressive future for the UK. I suppose we should have ignored intelligence that a genocidal dictator, who had previously used chemical weapons on his own people, was developing his own weapons programme. That way I’m sure when he continued to get away with refusing requests from UN weapons inspectors, he wouldn’t have done anything untoward. I always find it quite disrespectful to those who have actually lost their lives fighting for this cause when the motives behind it are called into question. Are people really claiming the ultimate sacrifice made by them, due to unwavering support and belief in the cause they were fighting for, was WRONG?