Cameron isn't the spider

I’m sure it is a mistake to see David Cameron as Prime Minister in a traditional sense. His role could usefully be translated as Area Manager (UK).

It is his primary role to oversee a complex and evolving process whereby the UK meets a vast and rapidly evolving network of transnational obligations deriving from treaties, international law and international standards.

It's a continually evolving web where Cameron isn't the spider.

From defence to climate change, from international banking to road signs, from internet standards to human rights and thereby to social norms, there is virtually nothing beyond these obligations for Cameron to pursue. So they are almost all he pursues. Even where there is apparent latitude, such as tax policies, vested interests set the rules.

His role as Area Manager (UK) is virtually his only role, the role he signed up for, the role he probably knew he was signing up for and the role he intends to carry out. His successor will do the same.

Transnational obligations stem primarily from the EU and UN, but there are many others too, such as NATO and the ECHR. It seems to me though, that the crucial point is the rate at which these obligations have grown over a matter of a few decades. Today, they are so complex and numerous, that it is impossible for one individual to understand, or even research them effectively.

A further complexity entangling what used to be the Prime Minister’s role are a huge number of lobbying groups from fake charities to trade bodies with directorships and consultancy sinecures in their back pockets. Their role is both to maintain established narratives and to ensure governments do not go off-message or get carried away by a party manifesto or any other wild promises.

As for the future, it will be more of the same because there are certainly no countervailing trends. On the whole, the obligations Cameron manages directly are few – he has ministers and the civil service for that. In that, he is much the same as other recent Prime Ministers and the next will be much the same as Cameron. Hairstyle may change, but little else.

The issue is so complex and the forces perpetuating it so powerful, that nothing we do as voters makes the slightest difference. Pointing these things out as best we are able may be balm to the soul, but is not an effective call to action as most voters still vote for the current trend by voting for one of the big three parties. As far as I can see, only disaster will trigger genuine change.

By the next UK general election, the UK network of obligations will be even more extensive and even more complex and limiting on the Prime Minister's sphere of action, simply because this is what the EU and UN do – what they have the power and the funds to continue doing.