Banning President Trump could give him a 'halo of victimhood'
3 min read
Paul Flynn MP argues that banning President Trump would not work, but we should not 'lavish' him with a state visit.
The debate relates to two petitions, firstly: Prevent Donald Trump from making a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
Secondly: Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.
This is by no means the first time a UK state visit has caused a political stir, although never has a royal-assented invitation garnered as much negative reaction than Donald Trump’s.
Some state visits have been universally applauded including Nelson Mandela in 1996 and Lech Wałęsa of Poland in 1991. Others have been derided and caused considerable embarrassment to the reputation of the UK.
It is expected that state visits will cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds. Total true costs are unknown with such information exempt from freedom of information request.
Controversial state visits will inevitably be the most costly. The BBC reported in 2003 that the thousands of extra police officers for the state visit of George W Bush cost the taxpayer an estimated £5 million due to mass disapproval. Protests at a Donald Trump state visit may be more difficult for the police to handle. A recent YouGov poll indicated that under half of UK citizens approve of the Trump state visit. Unsurprisingly women were particularly against Trump’s visit.
The timing of this invite has caused concern and anger. President Trump was mere days into his presidency before invited for a state visit. Other presidents, some may say, better presidents had to wait much longer for their invite. Perhaps their invites were not so desperate, perhaps we were in a better position in the world. A place where we needn’t grovel, cap in one hand, gold embossed state invite in the other.
President Obama waited 854 days before invited for a State visit, President George W Bush 1032 days. President Woodrow Wilson waited 2,123 days before coming to the UK on a State Visit. It took Donald. J. Trump 9 days to receive an invite, with his arrival almost certainly coming within his first year in office.
Last year, on a debate with much the same subject matter as this debate, I said:
"Our great difficulty is that showing disrespect for Mr Trump might be interpreted by his supporters and others in America as showing disrespect to the American nation, but that is not what we are doing. One individual is involved. If we attack this one man, we are in danger of fixing on him a halo of victimhood. We give him the role of martyrdom, which can seem to be an advantage among those who support him."
I stand by this position. Bans do not work. However, to lavish upon an individual with such unique qualities the luxury of a state visit would be both inappropriate and deeply unacceptable to many in this Nation.
This is a man who desires to put America First. Will a man who wants to outmatch and outlast us, be a good military ally, or even, a good trading partner? Donald Trump said in Art of the deal:
"I'm the first to admit that I am very competitive and that I'll do nearly anything within legal bounds to win. Sometimes, part of making a deal is denigrating your competition."
To quote president Trump’s Art of the Deal:
"Sometimes your best investments are the ones you don’t make."
Paul Flynn is the Labour Member of Parliament for Newport West
PoliticsHome will be running a liveblog covering the Westminster Hall debate from 4.30pm which you can follow on our news front page.
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
