|
« Europe's revenge on the Jews
Main |
October 28, 2003
Tory putsch
So they've gone and done it at last. The Tory plotters have got their coup d'etat. The assumption is that IDS is now history: he cannot possibly survive tomorrow's confidence vote in the Commons. The one thing that may just save him is if the constituencies are so infuriated with the plotters for engineering months of possibly fratricidal navel-gazing in a leadership contest that they instruct their MPs to back IDS in the vote. A slim chance, but still possible. The plotters apparently intend to prevent a leadership war by uniting behind Michael Howard. This may annoy the constituencies still further if they feel they are being deprived of their right to help choose their leader. And anyway, can anyone really see David Davis standing gracefully aside? That said, a Howard leadership would be interesting. As everyone agrees, he's one of an almost extinct breed -- a grown-up Tory politician. Everyone agrees he'd wipe the floor with Blair in the Commons. But then so did one William Hague, and a fat lot of good that did him. What's really interesting is why the Portillistas are backing him. It's not that they've grown up at last. It's because they think that Howard will finally test to destruction the old, 'non-inclusive', non touchy-feely politics. In other words, they assume he will lose the next election, and by such a defeat will pave the way at last for the libertine agenda of sex, drugs and politically correct victim culture -- for which programme of social suicide the electorate will weep tears of gratitude, and restore the Tories to power with acclaim. What a shower. Posted by melanie at October 28, 2003
Comments
Constituency activists cannot instruct their M.P on any matter whatsoever. Members of Parliament are not delegates.It appears that IDS is deeply unpopular with a majority of M.Ps and will be given his P45 this evening at 7. I would guess that whoever succedes him will go back to the pre-Hague method of electing the leader: that is, only M.Ps choose. Posted by: Julie Cleeveley at October 29, 2003 09:28 AMIt is disingenuous to claim that Michael Howard would "Wipe the floor with Tony Blair" or that the Tories stand any greater chance of winning the general election under him than IDS. To the disinterested observer he comes across as creepy, underhand and untrustworthy, and it is entirely possible in my view that he will actually lose the Tories votes. The real motives for this overthrow remain hidden, I suspect, from the general public, and have little do to with the party's electoral prospects. Posted by: extory at October 29, 2003 09:46 AMIDS is just not up to the job. Even William Hague seems more experienced and statesman like. If Michael Howard gets the job, his main tasks will be to rebuild Tory central command, fundraise, lose the next election successfully - looks matter, No hair = No chance - and prepare a new generation of Conservatives. David Davis, at 55, would have delusions of winning the next election & is again, too much of an unknown. General election 2010 is make or break for the Conservative party. Bernard Jenkin? Posted by: Smit at October 29, 2003 11:41 AMIf you are so anti-BBC (see previous articles) why do you link to their news website in your comments? Is it a tacit acceptance that they provide unrivalled news coverage? Shurely shome mistake? Posted by: James at October 29, 2003 11:04 PMLooking at many of the comments posted on this site and the BBC web site, I am depressed by the almost total absence of any discourse on any of the new Tory policies. Like then or loathe them, these are radical policies which deserve careful thought. However apathy rules, and it is another sad example of the current zeitgeist to debase politics to the level of a leaders star appeal. Of course none of these observations are particularly new...and indeed I remember reading that Lord Halifax had made this observation in the 1930s that in good times people voted for personalities, and only really looked deeply at policies or men of substance in bad times. As we have become more prosperous these trends have become more on more pronounced with the rise in celebrity generally. We probably need a really bad national crisis before anyone really bothers with politics all that much again. Until then the contemptuous cynicism of chancers like Tony Blair, who says apparently in private that most people are simply not interested in political issues, will rule the day. Posted by: Andrew Cadman at October 30, 2003 01:57 AMThe Tories make the mistake of seeing them -selves as a UK wide party. Even if they won the next general election, they cannot legislate for Scotland -Wales and Northen Ireland on domestic issues. However, MP's from other countries of the UK can and will vote against Tory policies for England that they think might have a detrimental affect on their countries. It has already happened under NL. What is the point?. |
