It was a cold, blustery evening. Meandering across campus, bracing themselves for an evening of crazed lunacy and incoherent rhetoric, the pair entered a cramped, unassuming lecture hall. Descending into the familiar seating, an abhorrent figure feebly slithered into the corner. It spoke loudly to his character: despite a self-awareness that the room was brimming because of his attendance, he positioned himself heavily obscured behind a wall of executives - as if facilitating any hardship to the audience was a rewarding endeavour. That, or perhaps, he had some disdain knowing these puny University students were once mere subjects in his United Kingdom. Yet, now he had to hold lectures to cling to political significance. Gormlessly standing, the living resemblance of Voldemort uncannily began discussing Musk, motorways, and how everything you despise him for was the fault of Minister X or civil servant Y. Ladies and gentlemen, Dominic Cummings. 

The Labour Party shall never leave government: they will continually form unruly coalitions with the wider left, namely the Liberal Democrats, the Greens, and Hamas. The words of the former chief adviser to the British Prime Minister who has, certainly not, completely lost it. A look of bewilderment engulfed the room as Cummings concluded a series of incoherent conspiratorial thoughts, bordering on those spewed in the deeply unfavourable corners of the internet. Entitled Innovation, Policy, and the Future of Governance, Cummings’ 'lecture' was a desperate attachment to his long-gone days of executive operations, without a particularly clear message on any of the themes the talk was intended to explore. The only clear theme was his obvious ethical complexity and decency - because we all know Cummings is an example of the utmost moral fibre. 

Dominic Cummings demonstrated a deeply misguided self-perception of his Messianic qualities. Refusing numerous times (including when directly asked) to accept responsibility for his own mistakes, Cummings was quick to pass any responsibility for Britain’s failings onto anyone else. The Establishment, the Civil Service and the ‘woke mob’ were all responsible for Britain’s decline and, most importantly to Cummings, his swift removal from power in 2021. Yet, this is not to say all his arguments were without merit. 

Cummings’ views on the obstructive nature of planning law and the desperate need for infrastructure development were not too dissimilar to those of the current government. Despite these occasional moments of sanity, the event served as evidence of his political craving, which amounts to nothing more than an inexplicable lust for influence and power. In its absence, he will say whatever feeds his attention-seeking, provocative, and contrarian nature. 

This was exemplified by his obsession with modernising British governance. Reiterating his discontent with the Civil Service, Cummings suggested politicians ought to be given more prominence within the institutional arrangement of the legislative process. These comments were made accompanying his criticism of the various members of the Johnson administration - especially former Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, who was subjected to a justifiable outpouring of verbal vitriol. 

Cumming’s goal of enabling governments to more proficiently foster change that will generate growth in what he perceives as a socio-economically declining Britain is admirable, yet it stands against his distrusting, dismissive perspective of the pool of MPs selectable for the major political parties. His vision for future governance quickly morphs into an overtly idealistic lunge towards corporate libertarianism, prioritising efficiency and functionality over logic and reason. He seeks to create a growth-obsessed state, driven by capitalist ideals, reminiscent of Musk and his Department for Government Efficiency. The Cummings' view of bettering Britain is to turn it into the ideal environment for tech-start-ups and corporate governance, as opposed to bridging the cultural and economic disparities that plague our society. 

We can be confident that, between his hatred of British Parliamentarians, the Civil Service, and the major political parties that cycle through running this country, Cummings would suggest political outsiders would be best suited to fixing the system he perceives as long-broken. Outsiders, like himself, perhaps? If we learnt anything from his lecture, let’s ensure Cummings doesn’t step foot in Downing Street again.