PARTY POLITICS: The Conservative Party Walk Into a Bar...

Charles I's execution in January 1649

373 years ago (give or take 4 days), England, for the first and last time, executed its own monarch. Charles I wore two shirts as he was beheaded, fearing that any shivering caused by the wintry weather would be mistaken for fear. He was charged with treason.

This is a turning point in history, and one that isn’t talked about enough (in my humble opinion). Whilst we are comfortable today that treason means to betray your sovereign - and we can understand the people to be sovereign - this was a foreign idea to the people of the 17th century. By declaring that Charles had committed treason was a momentous shift of sovereignty to the general public, which perhaps is understated in our history books because of the restoration eleven years later. Or maybe because the Stuart era gets a bad rep for being boring (though goodness knows who started that myth.)

More specifically, and amongst other things, one of the main grievances against Charles was his 'upholding of a personal interest of Will and Power and pretended prerogative to himself and his family against the public interest, common right, liberty, justice and peace of the people of this nation'. This charge against the king was followed by Judge John Bradshaw’s speech in which he proclaimed: 'there is a contract and a bargain made between the king and his people, and your oath is taken: and certainly, Sir, the bond is reciprocal; for as you are the liege lord, so they liege subjects... This we know now, the one tie, the one bond, is the bond of protection that is due from the sovereign; the other is the bond of subjection that is due from the subject. Sir, if this bond be once broken, farewell sovereignty!”

This idea of a contract between the government and its people is a familiar concept which, though much debated, is a principle which now underpins our understanding of democracy. Hobbes and Locke can testify to as much. We can now say quite comfortably that regardless of where you sit on the political spectrum, the purpose of government remains the same: to protect, provide and advocate for its people. I’m no fan of the Iron Lady, but Keir Starmer proved exactly this when he quoted Maggie in his speech this week: 'The first duty of Government is to uphold the law. If it tries to bob and weave and duck around that duty when it's inconvenient… then so will the governed.'

Perhaps it’s surprising that there hasn’t been anarchy, or further bobbing and weaving around the law, since the scandalous news of Boris Johnson and crew’s parties have been splashed across the news. The outrage is evident, though, cross-party, cross-government, and cross-everywhere. It’s impossible not to be, with enough parties to impress Charles I’s son, better to known to those raised by Horrible Histories as the King of Bling and Partying.

In amongst these mushrooming rumours of suitcases of wine or alcohol-infused cabinet meetings in the garden, stories are circulating of individuals who at the same time missed seeing loved ones or couldn't go to school. Or the funeral of the Queen's husband, not to mention the many other and equally important funerals of non-royalty that happened throughout lockdown. Some are ready to pinpoint this all on the master of gaffes, who maybe has gone one gaffe too close to the sun – our Prime Minister. But this is a bigger problem. It’s horrifying that a whole party could somehow have felt at ease with their morals (and dangerously trusting of their colleagues) to have all turned up to these shindigs.

And nor is it only about merry gatherings that shouldn't have happened. It's all the other deceptions that have characterised Johnson's era. It’s about the government announcing that typical homes will see a predicted 54% increase in energy prices the same day that Shell announced a profit rise of $19.3bn, with $8.5bn of this going to shareholders. And that Sunak’s answer to this is a £200 energy rebate, which is actually a loan in disguise that will put bills up £40 each year. If you want to feel even worse, you should know that MPs can claim up to £3500 back each year for their gas bills. Weirdly, we were told after Brexit that we’, as non MPs, would have cheaper gas bills. That worked out well. We were also told that unemployment would fall (it’s risen) and that crime would fall (you guessed it - it’s risen.)

Just your average work meeting - does the baby have clearance to be there?

Charles I was made to pay for his treason against the people by having his head roll outside the Banqueting Hall in Whitehall. I’m certainly no advocate of the death penalty, and equally unenthusiastic when it comes to our now favoured punishment of prisons. I'm also ashamed to admit that I consider Charles I to be one of my problematic favourites in history (that’s a story for another day, though.) But the comparison to be drawn here is not that Boris and his party need to be publicly humiliated - if that hasn't already been achieved - or that he needs to be thrown into a jail cell. There just needs to be some accountability rather than this unfathomable skirting around the law that the entire group have so far afforded, giving the party the opportunity to continuously satirise our notion of political office and cause the suffering of everyday voters.

Charles, who was supposedly given his power by God (a pretty giant statement in the 17th century), had such power taken away by the people when he wouldn’t, as they saw it, give in to their parliamentary demands and therefore put the country before himself. Our Prime Minister and co, who we vote for as the executive heads of the country, have broken the contract, broken the law and broken any trust that we should have in their capability to act as reputable leaders. They are not doing the one duty that they are there to do, instead using it as a chance to make themselves and their buddies richer and merrier. And the same applies however you casted your ballot - don't be fooled that this bunch of politicians is advocating for you, the voter. It's a mockery of the institution of government, and certainly not how we should be wielding our right to a so-called democracy.

Another person I’m not a huge fan of is Oliver Cromwell. It shocks me that the pub nearest to my childhood home bears his name and it shocks me that we should celebrate him at all. However, it does seem fitting to finish with this speech from the Lord Protector (otherwise known as a king by proxy). He delivered it to the Long Parliament of 1653, four years after we first dipped our toes into the waters of republicanism.

"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonoured by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter’d your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil’d this sacred place, and turn’d the Lord’s temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress’d, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

In the name of God, go!”

If you know, you know