Esther McVey's likening of smoking ban to Nazi genocide is perverse, dumb, and reputational suicide
In my latest LinkedIn newsletter, which focuses on the actions of those whose actions threaten the reputations both the figures involved and the organisations/businesses they represent, the focus turned to former Cabinet Minister and current Conservative MP Esther McVey.
What’s the story?
Last week, the Prime Minister, Sir Kier Starmer, says he supported the idea of banning smoking in some outdoor spaces, including pub gardens, as a way of reducing the pressure on the state-run National Health Service and the cost to taxpayers.
It’s part of his pledge to introduce the world’s strictest anti-smoking rules, which also include a smoking ban on young people born in or after 2009.
The tabled notion has been welcomed and applauded by many who are committed to seeing the 80,000 preventable deaths each year due to smoking reduced, but some have denounced the plans as “beyond stupid” (Priti Patel).
Esther McVey, however, took things a tad too far… far right that is.
How McVey linked the Nazi genocide of the Jews with a proposed ban on outdoor smoking
The Conservative MP for Tatton posted a segment of First They Came – a poem penned by Martin Niemoller in 1946.
For context, Niemoller was a German priest who was one of the first to call upon his fellow countrymen and women to take responsibility for the mass murder of six million Jews during the Holocaust in the post-war era. (you can read more about him on the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust website).
Here is what McVey shared on X:
And here is the poem in full:
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Martin Niemoller, First They Came
Why is this such a big issue?
There are so many parts to this. For brevity, let’s just highlight the two obvious ones.
First, aside from the humiliating General Election defeat in July, the Conservative Party is still reeling from a plethora of high-profile scandals involving several prominent figures within its ranks.
From Anderson, Blunt, and Cummings, to Menzies, Partygate, and Pincher to name but a few of the personalities whose faux pas have inflicted significant reputational damage on the Party.
And secondly, what the absolute feck was Esther McVey thinking when she chose to liken a cessation in smoking to mass genocide? I… I honestly cannot think of a single, plausible explanation for this.
Here’s how she responded to the backlash on Thursday:
How did the media report it?
As far as they are able, the media have been neutral – opting instead to share the backlash from key stakeholder and interest groups whose comments seem to sum up what many of us are already thinking.
The story has been covered by most of the nationals, with Sophie Huskisson writing in The Mirror, Becky Morton reporting for BBC, and Nadeem Badshah for The Guardian all providing a great summary.
Brand implications
At this point of the article, it is worth taking a moment to clarify what we mean by ‘brand.’
A ‘brand’ is not the reserve of a product or service, it applies to individuals too. Many of you reading this will know that I talk about the personal branding/executive profiling of an organisation’s leaders and key people rather a lot on LinkedIn.
That’s because evidence shows how hugely important an effective personal brand is both in terms of how the organisation is perceived by customers, investors and partners, and the financial success of the organisation itself.
Indeed, it is no coincidence that those companies who receive the highest investment are those where the CEO/founder and other key individuals have a strong personal brand that sees them frequently courted by the media for their opinions.
Can the Conservative Party’s reputation management team steer its crisis communications towards safer waters?
If anyone thought that instances of Conservative politicians sticking their big blue boots in the proverbial were likely to be few and far between now that the Party is no longer in government, were very much mistaken.
Indeed, the upcoming leadership contest could see a rise in very public boo-boos from some of the key contenders to replace Rishi Sunak, leaving those responsible for the Conservative Party’s reputation management with a beast of a job on their hands.
Kemi Badenoch, Robert Jenrick, James Cleverly, and Priti Patel are all up there and each has been in the limelight for all the wrong reasons at various points in recent years. So, we shouldn’t be shocked if one or more of them courts unwanted attention again – James “s**thole” Cleverly perhaps the most likely of them all.
The Conservative Party has lost its ways. It is plagued with in-fighting and so desperately needs to figure out its place. There is no doubt that Esther McVey’s actions have contributed to the melee, but the Party needs to get control of itself quickly.
The incessant self-inflicted wounds on its reputation will only prolong their time occupying the Opposition benches and could, unless curtailed, see it drift into the political wilderness altogether from which it may never re-emerge. If that were to happen, no amount of good crisis communications will help them.
