The Spectator’s Notes | 12 January 2008

Through all the apparent banality of campaign speeches, politicians do, in fact, convey a message about themselves. There is a vital distinction between candidates who, mentally, face outwards and those who face inwards. Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair all faced outwards: they instinctively wanted to communicate with voters, just as good actors or good preachers wish to reach their audiences. Although she may well win the Democratic nomination because of her standing with the party establishment, Hillary Clinton is a politician who faces inwards. She says she ‘found her voice’ in New Hampshire, but what does her voice say? One of her stated reasons why she should be the Democratic candidate is the need to resist the ‘Republican attack machine’ (shades of the ‘vast, right-wing conspiracy’ she identified years before). No doubt that machine is strong and frightening, but surely it is not an issue for voters. Inside her head, it seems, is a constant battle with political enemies, not a conversation with the American people. The British equivalent, with this brooding inwardness verging on paranoia, is Gordon Brown. It is not a good model of leadership.

For nearly a quarter of a century, I have appeared on Radio 4’s Any Questions? from time to time. The National Health Service often comes up, of course, and for most of the past 25 years, the cheers have been the loudest for the panellist who complains about ‘underfunding’, speaks passionately about the wonderful treatment he or she has received and makes sure words like ‘caring’, ‘angels’ and ‘the envy of the world’ get in somewhere. I have generally been booed for my less enthusiastic remarks. Recently, however, I have noticed a change, and this was particularly striking when I went on the programme last week at Chandler’s Ford in Hampshire.