Boris Johnson used to be the editor of The Spectator - house magazine of the radical right in Great Britain.
Guess what? In this article written today, The Spectator has labelled Barnet Council "The Looney Right".
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/6685298/part_4/councils-of-despair.thtml
In a private exchange of emails with the Deputy Leader of Barnet Council, Andrew Harper yesterday, he accused The Barnet Eye of publishing nonsense. Well Andrew, go and tell your beloved Leader Lynne Hillan and your bezzie mate Brian Coleman that The Spectator thinks you are a bunch of Loony right wing nutters. The article is titled "Councils of Despair". At exactly what point will the Conservative Councillors in Barnet realise that their Leadership has made them a laughing stock? At what point will they realise that Barnet is becoming a by-word for Bonkers? Surely the time must be coming when this bunch of dullards are kicked into touch.
Guess what? In this article written today, The Spectator has labelled Barnet Council "The Looney Right".
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/6685298/part_4/councils-of-despair.thtml
In a private exchange of emails with the Deputy Leader of Barnet Council, Andrew Harper yesterday, he accused The Barnet Eye of publishing nonsense. Well Andrew, go and tell your beloved Leader Lynne Hillan and your bezzie mate Brian Coleman that The Spectator thinks you are a bunch of Loony right wing nutters. The article is titled "Councils of Despair". At exactly what point will the Conservative Councillors in Barnet realise that their Leadership has made them a laughing stock? At what point will they realise that Barnet is becoming a by-word for Bonkers? Surely the time must be coming when this bunch of dullards are kicked into touch.
3 comments:
It is a fascinating article, because it highlights real issues about the localism agenda, which has got good things going for it. But, if there is not no ring-fencing of funding AND no central control over how local representatives are either chosen or interpret their view of party policy, to the extent that local councillors can make decisions which are contrary to party policy, then it is impossible for the party as a whole to ensure implementation of its vision.
The allowances issue, which Ross Clark mentions, is one example of this, and a particularly striking one because local councillors said they were whipped to vote against stated party policy. The reticence to allow public participation in the democratic process is another. The commitment to massive spending on consultants is a third.
Ross Clark implies this is not David Cameron's fault, although it rebounds on him, but lack of control over local councillors is as much part of the vision as lack of ring-fencing of funds.
It is an interesting problem.
The Conservative party has always prided itself on being a broad church, managing to encompass a range of views from the likes of Nadine Dorries and Michael Gove, to Ken Clarke, Dominic Grieve and David Davis. As part of a coalition the range of views in government is even wider.
However, at what point do you decide that someone is making statements and decisions which are so far outside party policy that they no longer represent the Conservative party and should not be a member?
With articles like this being published in the national press, and people like Grant Shapps describing Lynne Hillan as insane on R4, it is difficult to say that some of Barnet council's decisions have not damaged the Conservative party "brand". But there is no clear and effective way of protecting the brand, in other words ensuring party policy is followed, if local candidates have safe seats and a power base within their local party.
It will be interesting to see whether David Cameron decides to retract partially from his commitment to localism, either by increasing ring fencing, or by increasing central party influence over the local parties.
Alternatively, he may decide that occasional public spats and humiliation of local councillors is the price to pay for the benefits of devolving power locally.
It may depend on whether councils like Barnet remain a minority, or whether the lack of regulation, checks and balances actually encourages the idea, consciously or sub-consciously, that if you say you are a Conservative, and your friends say you are a Conservative, then whatever you choose to do is Conservative party policy.
Feeling you are untouchable is never a healthy thing for someone in power.
And the bravest Conservative in the Commons is the MP for Totnes. She has an independent (Conservative) mind, who write articles bemoaning the whipping levels within the party.
An ex-GP, she was only allowed on a health committee if she agreed to be voting fodder - no criticism of the proposed NHS changes, no amendments, nothing.
Sarah Woollaston? Yes, I saw that. Ben Goldacre has been writing some good stuff about Andrew Lansley's use of the word evidence in regard to the proposed changeover to commissioning.
Speaking as an ex-doctor, and someone who has twice been invited to give evidence to the Health Select Committee, I am not convinced this is the best way forward.
Post a Comment