The death of Senator Edward Kennedy was a moment when even his most hostile critics sat up and acknowledged the passing of a formidable political figure. Teddy Kennedy was the last in the line of the Kennedy brothers and sons of Joe Kennedy. What ifs are a great game to play in politics and as the TRG Board is composed largely of History graduates, it is a game we are often prone to.
All the newspapers ask the same what if…What if the tragedy at Chappaquidick in July 1969 had never happened? Would there have been a second President Kennedy? Well the truth is that we will never know. Ted Kennedy’s 1980 bid for the Presidency fell flat, largely (but not only) because voters were not satisfied by his explanations for the tragic incident.
But as the world remembers Teddy Kennedy, they remember a great legislator – the champion of civil rights, of voting rights reform, of freedom of information, of a more liberal immigration policy and recently a renewal of his campaign to make health care universal.
The liberal lion’s influence and skill as a legislator made him one of America’s most recognisable and prominent political figures and here there is a lesson for us across the pond.
The past twelve years have seen the emergence of an overly powerful Executive which has showed near contempt for Parliament. This must change. We need Kennedy figures in our legislature as well. Our select committee chairmen should be chosen by Parliament and not by the whips. The position should be given the same pre-eminence as that given to cabinet ministers. Chairmanship of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Home Affairs Committee, Public Accounts Committee, Liaison Committee etc should be the culmination of a Parliamentary career and a position of huge power and influence. These chairmen (and women) should be household names. In short we need some Teddy Kennedys over here please…!
Hear, hear. Despite his personal flaws, the man was a political giant. He was a champion of numerous important causes, such as civil liberties, gun control, reproductive rights and equality, arguing for what he believed in even when it was unpopular. Our politicians could learn a great deal from him.
Comment by Victoria Roberts — 31 August, 2009 @ 4:50 pm
I do agree, but we won’t get them until the legislature is separated from the executive! So – getting more Teddy Kennedys equals getting more radical reform of our political structure.
Comment by Giles Marshall — 2 September, 2009 @ 7:09 pm
“Despite his personal flaws”: yes like his longstanding apologia for the Provisional IRA’s campaign of mass murder and mutilation; his visceral Anglophobia and his truly appalling conduct at Chappaquidick, which would have earned any ordinary less well-connected person a lengthy prison sentence.
If this is the “compassionate” TRG’s idea of a role model, God help us all.
Comment by Michael McGowan — 15 September, 2009 @ 1:05 pm
He did, indeed, support the IRA and attended funding meetings for Noraid, the US charity that was the front for them. This was not generally mentioned in the coverage after his death, but the Kennedy-clan support for the IRA was one of the main reasons that it was able to survive for so long. Their efforts “legitimised” the IRA in the eyes of many and gave credence to their lie about it being a struggle by a majority for independence against an oppressive foreign power.
Ted Kennedy may have done a lot of good for many social causes, but his forays into British and Irish foreign affairs was misguided, to say the least, and enhanced the ability of terrorists to kill British soldiers and civilians.
Comment by Timothy Barnes — 15 September, 2009 @ 1:45 pm
I make no excuse either for his actions at Chappaquidick or his support for Noraid: he was deeply flawed, as have been many political leaders on both sides of the Pond. I’m not sure that he ever expressly supported the IRA. Supporting Sinn Fein is not a crime though it may have been misguided. Like a lot of Americans, particularly those with Irish heritage, I think he had a romanticised notion of what the IRA were, what they stood for and what they did, and had little, if any, understanding of the reality. As they say, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. The IRA caused death and destruction and some elements continue to do so, not least those who get little attention having refocused their efforts on racketeering and drug running. They also caused a hell of a lot of discrimination for the thousands of Irish nationals who lived and worked in the UK.
Comment by Victoria Roberts — 15 September, 2009 @ 3:27 pm
I don’t think “deeply flawed” is an adequate way of describing a man who was guilty of
culpable homicide and then gave tremendous political and moral support to an organisation
which brought death, mutilation and pain to the lives of thousands of innocents. Whatever the the faults of politicians, most never stoop to those levels of ignominy. I don’t particularly
care what weasel words TK used to not quite openly support the IRA’s campaign of terror.
Next you will be telling me that there is no link between the IRA and Sinn Fein.
Comment by Michael McGowan — 9 October, 2009 @ 2:26 pm
Michael – you have raised an some valid issues about Teddy Kennedy. There is no doubt that was deeply flawed in his views on the IRA but really the blog piece is about legislators and the need for more House of Commons men and women. I would be interested in your thoughts on the powers of Parliamentary select committees, on Parliamentary reform etc. How should we look to mend our broken politics?
Comment by Tim Crockford — 9 October, 2009 @ 3:22 pm
He wanted American to become even less of a free market. No thanks.
Comment by Thomas Byrne — 13 October, 2009 @ 7:19 pm
I see the actual point you were making, Tim, and using Senator Kennedy as an example of a powerful legislator, not holding him up as a moral guide to be aspired to.
I agree that a Parliamentary career in the UK can only be judged a success if Ministerial office is reached, even relatively junior positions. Whereas Chairmanship of a Parliamentary Committee carries relatively little kudos either within parties, parliament or the media. Public awareness of such figures is non-existent: the exception being when Labour Whips conspired to get rid of Donald (now Lord) Anderson as Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and the late Gwyneth Dunwoody as Chairman of the Transport Select Committee.
Steps needed to rectify this have already been announced by Cameron, including a reduction in the size of the Ministerial payroll. But we need to go further. Chairmanships need to carry a better salary uplift – currently this stands at between £12,000 and £14,000 which is lower than the uplift given to Councillors who are Chairs of Committees in some local authorities and certainly much less than the uplift given to so-called Cabinet Members in our local councils.
Comment by Rene Kinzett — 25 October, 2009 @ 5:35 pm