A fine line between genius and madness

The same publications which, incidentally, introduced the campaign’s tax lobbyist Jacques Borel to the sector and provided him with several valuable opportunities to make his case to influential audiences. And the same publications which, to some extent, now have some cause to regret doing so.

Tim called me “pusillanimous” when we last met. I looked it up. It means timid and cowardly. I had given up on the VAT campaign at the first sign of government resistance, he said.

But Tim’s not looking for support on this matter; he wants sycophancy. The kind of blind, unwavering loyalty a man of his success and influence can demand from those in thrall to his legend and business. It’s no coincidence that all the recent signatories to membership of the VAT Club are Wetherspoons’ suppliers. And it’s ironic in the extreme that a man campaigning against an unfair tax is himself ‘taxing’ his supply chain to fund his pet project.

Cheerleaders​

In surrounding himself with people who dare not disagree with him, he risks becoming divorced from the reality of alternative opinions.

Martin doesn’t like the fact that my reporters and I are critics, not cheerleaders. Free thinkers, not yes men. Journalists, not PRs. I think he has confused the latter two roles, which is understandable, when there are people close to him trying to act in both capacities.

If so, he’s got the wrong editor.

When I uncover maladministration or perceive wrongdoing, it is my job to shine a light on it and expose it. Not to ignore it, or spin it positively to help their perpetrators save face.

And I have had cause to expose the failings of VAT Club Jacques Borel – thanks to its profligacy and ineffectiveness.

Compromising​

I still have in my desk drawer the contract sent to me by Borel in April 2012 offering the Publican’s Morning Advertiser​ substantial earnings opportunities (£1.35m to be precise) from signing up new members to the VAT Club. I didn’t sign it – that would have been both unethical and compromising in the extreme. But I have often wondered who did take up that offer, ever since.

Martin told delegates at last year’s Pub Retail Conference that Borel is the “Maradonna of campaigning” and therefore beyond criticism. Who are we, he said, to question talent of that magnitude?

I’m not sure that was a great analogy, for obvious reasons.

I say that it is entirely consistent to support the aims of a campaign (the PMA​ and M&C Report​ continue to believe a more equitable VAT treatment for pubs and restaurants is desirable), but not the means – especially if the tactics are suspect.

And I know, because they have told me, that there are many, even within the VAT Club’s membership, who believe that this ‘Maradonna’ is having a bad game (not least after he scored an embarrassing own goal by being fined for late payment of VAT); but who won’t put their head above the parapet for fear of losing Tim’s favour.

Fine line​

Tim’s current argument is that most pub industry chief executives are out of touch with the opinions of the licensee community. That the vast majority of licensees want a VAT cut, but pubco bosses won’t listen to them. It’s funny, I don’t remember him trotting out that line when he was campaigning hard for a smoking ban in pubs – against the wishes of almost every publican in the country, and a major causal factor in hundreds of pub closures post 2007.

But what do I know? I am a mere hack and Tim is a pub retail genius.

They do say, however, that there is a fine line between genius and madness, and I fear that, on this issue, Tim has fallen on the wrong side of that line.

Read Tim Martin's opinion piece