2019 Tory leadership candidates? I pass!

2019 Tory leadership candidates

The following exchange followed comments from a Telegraph article: “Tory leadership candidates with little backing could be ‘culled’ to speed process up” (Or on Facebook)

[ME]
Cull anyone that supported Mrs May’s deal. That’ll get the number down fast. We might need another batch of candidates, though, ‘cos this lot invalidated their application due to a medical condition: rather hard to stand up for the country when you don’t have a backbone!

[Stuart Surridge]
… so MP’s who showed loyalty to their own party leader, the Prime Minister, and supported the cabinet-approved deal have automatically ruled themselves out of the running, according to you. Great.

[ME]
It’s amazing that you get it – yet still completely miss the point, Stuart.

The cabinet, en mass, was clueless about the WA until October when – with a proverbial bullet to their head – they were presented with the torturously worded 500-odd page finished legally binding agreement and given an hour to read it and agree to it – or resign. Like her Chequer’s agreement before it, she basically told her cabinet: “Support it or resign, now, and walk home. I’m keeping your ministerial cars; there are cards for local taxis in the lobby.”

You also miss that Theresa May altered and added to the WA (ahead of MV4) without telling her cabinet. In fact, she added amendments they had emphatically ruled out in a heated cabinet meeting. But she wanted them in any way and went behind their backs.

On fuller inspection – as verified by numerous people from the cabinet (several of whom did resign eventually), from the back benches, and by independent lawyers and QCs across the country – the WA is, as widely described, Brexit in name only. It gives away everything for no return on a chunky £39 billion (plus) payment. And it has no end date – unless you are willing to sign an agreement with “20XX” as the end day, with the understanding the ‘xx’ is to be filled in by the other party.

Would you sign a TV package deal on those terms? A phone package? A house rental? I think not.

OK, you can fairly argue that other parties voted the deal down over and over again to be ornery, but at the end of the day, it was smashed on its first outing. It was the worst defeat in parliamentary history. All but the cabinet – which are extra paid to be loyal to the PM – voted it down.

Even then, most of the cabinet didn’t vote it down, not because they believed in the WA but because it was a job condition, a requirement. They had the option to be honourable and resign from the cabinet. They wanted the perks of the post more. (And the same with the no-confidence vote in her. It had little to do with liking the woman and everything to do with a) keeping their posh job, and, less so, b) loyalty to the post). In any other era, the defeat was so resounding and final that the PM would have had to resign. This one? Not a chance. With the support of the paid lackeys and backed up by an arguably biased and disreputable speaker, she just ploughed on. MV2, MV3… MV4 was only stopped because she was effectively sacked.

Regardless, virtually all of the HoC, from all parties – including the Conservatives – agreed that the WA was and remains both worse than cancelling Brexit and worse than a SUPPOSED “crash-out / cliff-edge” Brexit. It was widely – by MPs and media alike – called little more than vassalage, than a “surrender document”, than the “worse deal in history”. MPs and media also widely agreed that it completely fails to honour the Tory Manifesto pledge on leaving. Regardless of the lies Theresa May repeatedly told to the contrary.

So bloody hell *YES*, if they supported the PM and her WA – over their promises to the electorate and their constituents (who ultimately hired and paid their wages and expenses), they are to be reviled. They are not to be trusted.

I will go out on a limb here and assume you voted to remain. I, obviously, did not. However, the referendum was not divisive until – even before in happened – government and media (notably The Guardian) leapt in and openly, flagrantly, and slanderously called anyone that dared vote for exiting the EU, a xenophobic moron, or, as Matthew d’Ancona put it (Guardian, 13/6/2016), “With a symphony of dog whistles as our soundtrack, we are trudging dangerously close to the idiot option.”

Media – with the government’s full endorsement and MPs from all parties – went on the offensive as soon as the referendum was announced. Indeed, it started several months before the result. That Leave still won is incredible, and I personally expected it to be rigged if it didn’t go the “right way”. That’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s a fact of life. I am quite sure – given the past 3 years – that if some people could go back in time, they would be quite prepared and happy to do so. As such, I certainly wouldn’t trust them not to rig another referendum. (Paranoid? Yes, actually. That doesn’t mean it’s not possible, or there wouldn’t be so much rigorous attention to ballots, hmm…)
*

Funnily enough, just days after I wrote this, it was reported that for the Peterborough by-election, held yesterday, Labour’s vote share was down 17% – but postal voting was up 69%. At the same time, it is alleged: [dead link at politicalite. com] Labour hired a convicted ballot rigger (who had used postal rigging in the past) to “help” them win the by-election (at any cost?). The article reports of people being intimidated at the polling station by gangs and others being offered £10 if they’d vote for Labour. Be interesting to see if this is officially investigated – or not.

So, while I’d grudgingly accept (but be wary of) Boris or Raab, I wouldn’t trust a single candidate to deliver Brexit as promised in their manifesto for one simple reason: No backbone. Whether – like Rory Stewart – they fully endorsed the WA – or, like Boris, buckled on MV3, they gave in in the end, to bribes, to attrition, to blackmail, to stress, to peer pressure… I’m not for a second doubting that, as the months pressed on, the relentless pressure from whips, cabinet, and peers to “just give in, just accept it, just get it down” took its toll, but still, no. I know I would never have surrendered to what I knew was wholly wrong. And whether you were for remaining or for leaving the EU, the WA was wholly wrong.

Thus, anyone that supported the WA – fully understanding its implications – is not fit to lead a country.

For me, it has to be Steve Baker (or on his FB page), but I’d be satisfied with another that honoured their manifesto pledges of 2017, such as Sir John Redwood, Priti Patel, Peter Bone and Sir William Cash, all of whom need to be in the next cabinet. (JRM, Raab and Boris for cabinet, too, even if they need a back brace after weakly capitulating to MV3!)

The current cabinet, though – all of them – can take a walk.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to Top
%d bloggers like this: