Why should Conservatives relate so much to White Vans? Labour has now decided to occupy the centre-left ground with an appeal that does not apparently protect ‘vested interests’, but is ‘one nation’ in its outlook. The term ‘white van man’, on the other hand, may have been in use earlier but the first recorded use in the British press according to the Factiva database was in an article published by The Sunday Times on May 18, 1997 written by Jonathan Leake, that paper’s then transport editor. Under the headline, “Number is up for White Van Man – scourge of the road”, Leake wrote:
“He is known as White Van Man and is the most feared driver on the road. But he is about to be tamed. Transport watchdogs plan to crack down on the young male van driver who looms in your rearview mirror, comes within feet of your bumper and usually makes obscene gestures until he forces his way past. The phenomenon of White Van Man – a tattooed species often with a cigarette in his mouth, who is prone to flashing his lights as he descends on his prey – has been identified in a report by the Freight Transport Association (FTA). It says his bullying antics have now become a threat to all motorists, and it believes the problem is so serious that a nationwide re-education programme is needed, possibly backed by legislation. “White van syndrome sounds like a joke, but it is an increasingly serious problem. These drivers are bringing the whole haulage industry into disrepute,” said John Hix of the FTA, which represents Britain’s biggest freight movers. He believes van drivers should be forced to undergo extra training, use tachographs and attach stickers to their vehicles with telephone numbers which aggrieved motorists can use to register complaints.’Researchers found that the white van was one of the fast est growing forms of transport. There are about 2m light vans on the road, mostly white, suggesting anyone travelling often in busy city centres is likely to have an “aggressive encounter” with one.”
Of course, Conservatives are not particularly well known for their aggression are they? In the period before the eventual resignation of Andrew Mitchell, Oliver Wright in the Independent wrote:
“It also emerged yesterday that senior officials in the Department for International Relations, where Mr Mitchell worked before the reshuffle, had privately raised concerns about his behaviour. Mr Mitchell, the Tory MP for Sutton Coldfield, is said to have told his Permanent Secretary that he expected male officials in his department to wear jackets and ties at all times and wanted to be addressed as “Secretary of State”.
When told that, owing to the nature of the department’s work, formal clothes were not always practical, he insisted that at the very least ties should be worn by everyone at meetings he attended. Despite his diktats, Mr Mitchell himself was said to sometimes hold meetings in his office without any shoes and still wearing his bicycle clips.
He is also said to have preferred a particular coffee cup bearing the words: “Secretary of State for International Development”.
“He could be cantankerous and aggressive,” said one official. “He was respected because of the generous financial settlement the department got in the spending review, but he was a horrible person to do business with.”
Another source said there was an “impromptu celebration” when news of Mr Mitchell’s departure was announced. A spokesman for the department said there had never been “any formal complaint” against Mr Mitchell.”
Essex and the Conservative Party have an odd relationship. Many people I know from Essex are in fact Taxi drivers, who used to live in East London, but who can’t stand the current government. Andy Coulson in a sense was ‘aspiration personified’ for the Conservative Party, given career promotion by David Cameron, but even Cameron felt that being charged with conspiring to intercept communications without lawful authority, from 3rd October 2000 to 9th August 2006 (article updated 25 July 2012), may not be that wonderful for the Conservatives’ brand. Possibly in a further bid to detoxify the Conservative Party (or more accurately prevent a further retoxification of the Conservative Party after recent events), Robert Halfon has been expousing the wonders of White Van Conservativism recently, in a move that appears like ‘have a go at making up policy’, rather any decent ideological philosophy. His not-so-epic article is here on Conservative Home.
“It is claimed that White Van Conservatism triumphed over metropolitan intellectualism. The Aspiration Nation over Harvard-inspired ‘predistribution’. “
You can bet your bottom dollar that Halfon doesn’t have a clue about what Prof Joseph Hacker has written about the subject, but simply wishes to rubbish it anyway. This streak of anti-intellectualism, particularly by people who have never progressed beyond an undergraduate degree anyway, has become rampant in the Conservative Party of late.
“White Van Conservatives want strong policies — such as lower taxes, lower immigration and more incentives for those who work — but that are compassionate too. They want support for public services, especially the NHS; a more sympathetic ear to Trade Union members, nurses and teachers; and a safety net for those who fall off the ladder. “
Let’s look at the debacle over UNISON at Hinchingbrooke Hospital, shall we? Circle has run Hinchingbrooke Hospital in Cambridgeshire since February. Regional NHS officials monitoring Circle say the company has made a good start, while warning that improvements at the hospital must be sustainable. However, the biggest health union, Unison, says staff morale is falling amid worries over job losses. At least White Van Tory has his White Van to rely on. Or maybe not. Car giant Ford has been attacked by unions after announcing plans to close its Transit van factory and another UK site with the loss of around 1,400 jobs. The grim news was given to union chiefs and workers at meetings with the company and was described as “devastating” by officials. This is presumably what Halfon might not wish as his rosy picture of Trade Unions relations. The Transit van plant in Southampton will close next summer, with the loss of more than 500 jobs, while a stamping and tooling site in Dagenham, Essex, will shut at the same time. Ford said it hoped to achieve the reductions through voluntary redundancies, enhanced employee separation and redeployment to other sites. What is noteworthy here is that Ford is still profitable, despite there being recent market threats. Ford has reported profit of $1bn as it continues to suffer heavy losses at its European unit. Chief executive Alan Mulally told analysts that Ford was reviewing all aspects of its business in Europe, and it looks like White Van Tory might be feeling the pinch.
It is understood that workers at the Dagenham site staged a walkout after being told the news, although they were told to go home by the company. Workers in Southampton were also sent home for the day. Unite general secretary Len McCluskey accused Ford of betraying its workforce and said the announcement had been handled “disgracefully”. He said: “Only a few months ago Ford was promising staff a new Transit model for Southampton in 2014. The planned closures will really hurt the local economies and the supply chain will be badly hit – up to 10,000 jobs could be at risk.” Furthermore, Justin Bowden, national officer of the GMB union, said: “This is devastating news for the workers in Southampton and Dagenham and is very bad news for UK manufacturing. Ford’s track record in Britain is one of broken promises and factory closures. There will be a feeling of shock and anger, and Ford’s commitment on investment will cut little ice.”
The demise of the White Van may be symbolic of the demise of the White Van Tory. One can only dream. And finally, please do forgive me for calling it an ‘Osborne slump’ – the figure for GDP just announced was affected greatly by external factors such as the Olympics and Paralymics, and one swallow doesn’t make a summer and all that.
