Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[jfollows]

Suella Braverman won the contest to represent Fareham & Waterlooville at the next election.

 

[Typhoon]

Suella Braverman won the contest to represent Fareham & Waterlooville at the next election.

The Express reports:

Ahead of tonight's vote, The Express learned how Suella Braverman had gone on a charm offensive with local members, combined with a positive few weeks of headlines that went down well with members - including Rwanda, the small boats plan and this weekend's crackdown on child grooming gangs.

She also brought Deputy Chair of the Tory Party Lee Anderson to her constituency for a well-attended event.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/othe...1&cvid=b7997285bc634c6ba1884186a000af87&ei=33

The story goes on:

It is not know where Mrs Drummond will now try contesting, though the neighbouring Hamble Valley and new Isle of White seat have both been floated.

good to know that Geography is such a strong point with the Express, ironically as they include

She also called for better rights for Trans people and described the Black Lives Matter movement as having "laudable aims".

 

[nw1]

Suella Braverman won the contest to represent Fareham & Waterlooville at the next election.

Oh great. And as for bringing the obnoxious Lee Anderson with her, what can I say?

I hope the Fareham and Waterlooville Conservative Association are proud of themselves for selecting a hard right-winger over someone who is, by all accounts, more moderate.

 

[ainsworth74]

I hope the Fareham and Waterlooville Conservative Association are proud of themselves for selecting a hard right-winger over someone who is, by all accounts, more moderate.

I mean these people are from the same group that chose Truss to be their leader so...

 

[nw1]

I mean these people are from the same group that chose Truss to be their leader so...

I think the Conservative Party are rapidly losing all rights to claim to be a party of the centre right. Chosing hard-right Braverman over moderate Drummond is testament to that - in addition, of course, to Sunak promoting both Braverman and Anderson. Do they actually want the votes of moderates and centrists? It seems not.

 

[dosxuk]

I think the Conservative Party are rapidly losing all rights to claim to be a party of the centre right. Chosing hard-right Braverman over moderate Drummond is testament to that - in addition, of course, to Sunak promoting both Braverman and Anderson. Do they actually want the votes of moderates and centrists? It seems not.

They're far more worried about voters leaving them for UKIP / Reform than they are Labour. What they seem to have missed is while they've been having parties with Boris, Labour have got their act in gear and the centrists aren't afraid of voting for them any more. In the attempt to stop their right wing vote from being split and letting in Corbyn, they've simply abandoned the centre area, in the hope that those voters are still put off by Labour, which the polls strongly suggest they aren't.

 

[edwin_m]

There's actually little point in them moving to the right, because Reform UK can talk a better talk and make promises unencumbered by the realities of being (or potentially being) in power and being expected to deliver them. But, pretty much by definition, the members of a political party are more extreme than the floating voters they seek to attract, so they have a tendency to select candidates that will quite possibly repel the voters that count.

 

[Typhoon]

There's actually little point in them moving to the right, because Reform UK can talk a better talk and make promises unencumbered by the realities of being (or potentially being) in power and being expected to deliver them. But, pretty much by definition, the members of a political party are more extreme than the floating voters they seek to attract, so they have a tendency to select candidates that will quite possibly repel the voters that count.

Maybe not just voters

A Tory councillor in Suella Braverman’s new constituency would “struggle” to campaign for the home secretary if she wins the nomination.

Caroline Brook said she “disagrees fundamentally” with Ms Braverman and would find it difficult to knock on doors to get her re-elected.

and later

“I’m sure in time I’d get to know her. And she’d actually pick up the phone and speak to me, which she hasn’t during the whole process.”

Fareham and Waterlooville may find they get an MP who cares about them for six weeks every four years.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-suella-braverman-election-b2314651.html#

 

[SuspectUsual]

It looks like Benton has also spilled the beans on how hospitality rules are being widely abused by “many” MPs, by valuing the hospitality just below the £300 threshold that requires declaration. Imagine being so stupid and/or arrogant to happily tell a stranger that.

 

[Typhoon]

It looks like Johnson may have been thrown a lifeline

A Conservative MP has announced he will not stand for re-election in Henley, which it was said Boris Johnson may have eyed amid speculation he might seek a safer seat.

John Howell, who has served as the Henley MP for 15 years, became the latest Tory to announce they will not run at the next general election.

In a letter to the South Oxfordshire Conservative Association on Tuesday, the 67-year-old said he would be retiring and wanted to “pursue other avenues”.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...tp&cvid=c6cd0bd78a44461b81995ab1c883b8ba&ei=8

Not good news for Sunak!

 

[brad465]

It looks like Johnson may have been thrown a lifeline


https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...tp&cvid=c6cd0bd78a44461b81995ab1c883b8ba&ei=8

Not good news for Sunak!

Can Johnson change seats now, given he's been confirmed as the candidate in his current seat? If he can I suspect he'll wait until the Privileges Committee investigation is concluded first.

 

[Typhoon]

Can Johnson change seats now, given he's been confirmed as the candidate in his current seat? If he can I suspect he'll wait until the Privileges Committee investigation is concluded first.

Possibly wait, however when have rules ever applied to Johnson? The only thing that might stop him is if the Henley association said no. If I was a member there I would be looking long and hard at his record since last July.

 

[Gloster]

Can Johnson change seats now, given he's been confirmed as the candidate in his current seat? If he can I suspect he'll wait until the Privileges Committee investigation is concluded first.

Johnson can and will do anything he wants. Even if there is no precedent or it is contrary to established behaviour, he will do it if he wants. It is a party matter and there is nothing to stop the party changing its rules to permit it (or to prevent an embarrassing internal fight as a former PM breaks rules - surely he would never do that). For that matter, I think it is permitted to stand in more than one seat, but if you are elected for more than one you are can only sit for one.

 

[edwin_m]

Possibly wait, however when have rules ever applied to Johnson? The only thing that might stop him is if the Henley association said no. If I was a member there I would be looking long and hard at his record since last July.

Especially if he faces and loses a recall by-election in Uxbridge.

 

[Typhoon]

Especially if he faces and loses a recall by-election in Uxbridge.

I don't know whether this is possible. If there was a recall ballot, but he decided not to contest it, is there anything to stop him going for Henley, Very unethical, but it is Johnson we are discussing.

 

[edwin_m]

I don't know whether this is possible. If there was a recall ballot, but he decided not to contest it, is there anything to stop him going for Henley, Very unethical, but it is Johnson we are discussing.

I believe that's allowed if he can persuade the association to select him.

 

[Typhoon]

I believe that's allowed if he can persuade the association to select him.

Howell stepping down is convenient (I know about his age but so did he), as is Johnson moving to the area. I would have thought Henley would stay blue short of an annihilation. The one thing Johnson won't want to do is lose and Uxbridge is far from a banker in a by or general election. In that, he has something in common with a number of Conservative voters judging by the hysteria in some quarters about Starmer. I am deeply suspicious of the Conservative Democratic Organisation (led by two Lords - self appointed I believe); they may feel that Johnson is best placed in win next time and 'encourage' Henley to play ball.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

(Pulling into this thread from the Brexit thread as this seems a better place for a query about the Tory party. The context was a discussion about immigration/asylum seekers).

Can I ask, given you've disclosed being a Tory party member before, are you doing/saying anything to the inner party circles to try and get them to do something about this whole crisis? I've lost count of the number of different "solutions" that the Government have announced in the last year that have got nowhere, and the wider problem has got worse in the last few years, all under the current Governing party's watch. Now you probably believe Labour would not be able to sensibly solve it either, and whatever Reform UK come up with is meaningless (unless the Tories copy it) as they are not getting anywhere near power, but based on the Government's handling of the matter so far I cannot currently see how they are capable of solving this.

Therefore if you have any proposals that you believe are workable and sensible, I'd suggest putting them forward to the inner party, or at least threaten to withdraw membership if they don't sort it out in x time frame.

I believe there are somewhere between 160K and 200K Tory party members - so being one member out of that number doesn't really give you a lot of influence Especially when you throw in that I'm not particularly active and haven't been a member for that long (about a year)

And to be honest, although I'm happy to debate immigration when the topic comes up, it's not one of my personal top priority policy areas. If I was going to threaten to resign (which I'm not planning to do), it would far more likely be because of dissatisfaction about insufficient progress on protecting the environment/tackling climate change/supporting sustainable/public transport/etc..

 

[brad465]

(Pulling into this thread from the Brexit thread as this seems a better place for a query about the Tory party. The context was a discussion about immigration/asylum seekers).



I believe there are somewhere between 160K and 200K Tory party members - so being one member out of that number doesn't really give you a lot of influence Especially when you throw in that I'm not particularly active and haven't been a member for that long (about a year)

And to be honest, although I'm happy to debate immigration when the topic comes up, it's not one of my personal top priority policy areas. If I was going to threaten to resign (which I'm not planning to do), it would far more likely be because of dissatisfaction about insufficient progress on protecting the environment/tackling climate change/supporting sustainable/public transport/etc..

Sounds fair

 

[johnnychips]

@DynamicSpirit , if you don’t mind me asking - and feel free to decline - what was it that made you join the Conservative party about a year ago?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

@DynamicSpirit , if you don’t mind me asking - and feel free to decline - what was it that made you join the Conservative party about a year ago?

That's a fair question - especially since I joined at a point where the Tories were incredibly unpopular and the Government was mired in scandal after scandal, so most people were going in the opposite direction!

So.... getting on my soap box ... I would say that my main reasons for joining were (in decreasing order of importance):

1. Freedom and responsibility: Labour and Libdems (and in Scotland, the SNP) seem (to some approximation) to work on the assumption that everything is the Government's responsibility and if something goes wrong in your life, it's up to the Government to fix it. I feel society works better and people usually end up happier and more fulfilled if you let people (and expect people to) take responsibility for building their own lives, including dealing with the consequences of their own mistakes, with the Government only generally stepping in if people really are unable to help themselves.
2. Capitalism: I strongly believe that, for all its faults, capitalism is the only economic system that works and can generate wealth and generally lift people out of poverty. On the whole, the Conservatives understand that; Labour and the LibDems don't.
3. Identity politics/ 'culture wars'. I'm concerned by the rise of identity politics with its intolerance to different opinions, the way it tries to put people into categories and demands that people identify primarily by their ethnicity/sexuality/group identity rather than as individuals, as well as the increasing tendency to distort our history by seeking to view it through an inaccurate lens of, everything the UK did must somehow be bad. I feel the Conservatives share my concern, whereas on the whole neither Labour nor the LibDems do: Both parties to varying extent have got hooked on identity politics.
4. Tolerance: The Tories generally understand that people have genuine differences of opinion. The average Conservative would typically see Labour/the LibDems as well meaning but fundamentally (and genuinely) mistaken. By contrast, the culture on the left seems to have been largely subsumed by a holier-than-thou intolerance whereby you assume that anyone on the right must be evil or corrupt or something, and right-wing politics are viewed as something to be shocked about rather than something to simply disagree with. I think that kind of attitude is very dangerous for free speech and ultimately presents a risk to our democracy.

You'll note my reasons tend to be to do with broad conservative philosophy, so you shouldn't necessarily take them as a vote of confidence in any individual politician. In particular, I think Boris Johnson was borderline corrupt and regularly lied. Liz Truss was fiscally utterly irresponsible and her premiership was disastrous (I seriously considered leaving the Tory party when she and Kwasi Kwarteng produced their daft budget). Rishi Sunak by contrast does come across as professional and competent, and I think he is doing a good job at a managerial level getting things back on track - but I'm concerned that he seems to lack any vision for how to make the country fundamentally better. More generally, I do think that at the moment the Conservative Party has deep problems with its structure and with general competence. But to my mind that's fixable and not nearly as bad as having a fundamentally flawed ideology/philosophy, which I feel is the case for Labour and the LibDems.

 

[duncanp]

That's a fair question - especially since I joined at a point where the Tories were incredibly unpopular and the Government was mired in scandal after scandal, so most people were going in the opposite direction!

So.... getting on my soap box ... I would say that my main reasons for joining were (in decreasing order of importance):

1. Freedom and responsibility: Labour and Libdems (and in Scotland, the SNP) seem (to some approximation) to work on the assumption that everything is the Government's responsibility and if something goes wrong in your life, it's up to the Government to fix it. I feel society works better and people usually end up happier and more fulfilled if you let people (and expect people to) take responsibility for building their own lives, including dealing with the consequences of their own mistakes, with the Government only generally stepping in if people really are unable to help themselves.
2. Capitalism: I strongly believe that, for all its faults, capitalism is the only economic system that works and can generate wealth and generally lift people out of poverty. On the whole, the Conservatives understand that; Labour and the LibDems don't.
3. Identity politics/ 'culture wars'. I'm concerned by the rise of identity politics with its intolerance to different opinions, the way it tries to put people into categories and demands that people identify primarily by their ethnicity/sexuality/group identity rather than as individuals, as well as the increasing tendency to distort our history by seeking to view it through an inaccurate lens of, everything the UK did must somehow be bad. I feel the Conservatives share my concern, whereas on the whole neither Labour nor the LibDems do: Both parties to varying extent have got hooked on identity politics.
4. Tolerance: The Tories generally understand that people have genuine differences of opinion. The average Conservative would typically see Labour/the LibDems as well meaning but fundamentally (and genuinely) mistaken. By contrast, the culture on the left seems to have been largely subsumed by a holier-than-thou intolerance whereby you assume that anyone on the right must be evil or corrupt or something, and right-wing politics are viewed as something to be shocked about rather than something to simply disagree with. I think that kind of attitude is very dangerous for free speech and ultimately presents a risk to our democracy.

You'll note my reasons tend to be to do with broad conservative philosophy, so you shouldn't necessarily take them as a vote of confidence in any individual politician. In particular, I think Boris Johnson was borderline corrupt and regularly lied. Liz Truss was fiscally utterly irresponsible and her premiership was disastrous (I seriously considered leaving the Tory party when she and Kwasi Kwarteng produced their daft budget). Rishi Sunak by contrast does come across as professional and competent, and I think he is doing a good job at a managerial level getting things back on track - but I'm concerned that he seems to lack any vision for how to make the country fundamentally better. More generally, I do think that at the moment the Conservative Party has deep problems with its structure and with general competence. But to my mind that's fixable and not nearly as bad as having a fundamentally flawed ideology/philosophy, which I feel is the case for Labour and the LibDems.

All those reasons you quote above are why I generally vote Conservative, although I am not and have never been a party member.

 

[Falcon1200]

All those reasons you quote above are why I generally vote Conservative, although I am not and have never been a party member.

Same here, @DynamicSpirit's reasons are also why I tend, often, to vote Conservative, despite also sharing concerns about BoJo, Liz, and some of their wilder members; However, up here in Scotland, politics is skewed by the never-ending divisive independence debate, so my vote may well be cast for whoever is best placed to defeat the SNP (although they are doing a pretty good job of defeating themselves just now.....)

 

[DustyBin]

All those reasons you quote above are why I generally vote Conservative, although I am not and have never been a party member.

Same again here.

 

[duncanp]

Same here, @DynamicSpirit's reasons are also why I tend, often, to vote Conservative, despite also sharing concerns about BoJo, Liz, and some of their wilder members; However, up here in Scotland, politics is skewed by the never-ending divisive independence debate, so my vote may well be cast for whoever is best placed to defeat the SNP (although they are doing a pretty good job of defeating themselves just now.....)

I have the misfortune to live in a safe Labour seat (Warley) so my vote tends to get wasted at general elections.

However, the local council (Sandwell) has recently gained a Conservative opposition after many years of Labout holding all but two of the seats.

 

[jfollows]

I started supporting the Conservative party in 1981, I believe in the broad tenet that it believes in using the power of government sparingly whereas Labour views government as a force for good, which results in the latter using government to impose too many restrictions and laws on us "for our own good". That said, all governments become corrupted by power and start using it badly, it's just been less so with Conservative governments historically.
The big problem for me is that the Conservative party is now the nasty party, it's controlled by people who are arrogant, self-interested and dogmatic, so I haven't voted for them for many years. I was happy with the result of the 2010 and 2015 elections, but I have always viewed Boris Johnson as unsuitable in many ways to be my prime minister, and the party has been wrecked in his image since 2019 or before.
So ideologically I'm a Conservative, but practically I'm not. If the current terrible crowd get swept away then I might think again.
And, of course, I've always lived in a constituency in which my vote "doesn't count" (safe Labour or safe Conservative) but that doesn't matter, it's the way things work.

 

[Yew]

1. Capitalism: I strongly believe that, for all its faults, capitalism is the only economic system that works and can generate wealth and generally lift people out of poverty. On the whole, the Conservatives understand that; Labour and the LibDems don't.

How does systemic exploitation of the labour of others by the wealthy capitalist class lift people out of poverty? We have billionaires with personal space programmes, whilst their employees were struggling to heat their houses.

 

[Broucek]

All those reasons you quote above are why I generally vote Conservative, although I am not and have never been a party member.

Me as well

I'd love to have a credible alternative as this gov't feels a bit "worn out" although Sunak is a big upgrade on his recent predecessors. Starmer is, of course, a far more grown up alternative than Corbyn ever was but whilst having flexible opinions is one of the advantages of opposition, his seems *particularly* flexible and it's hard to tell whether he's stringing-along the left to turn right on gaining power or vice-versa....

 

[py_megapixel]

Me as well

I'd love to have a credible alternative as this gov't feels a bit "worn out" although Sunak is a big upgrade on his recent predecessors. Starmer is, of course, a far more grown up alternative than Corbyn ever was but whilst having flexible opinions is one of the advantages of opposition, his seems *particularly* flexible and it's hard to tell whether he's stringing-along the left to turn right on gaining power or vice-versa....

"a bit worn out" - understatement of the century!

In railway terms, this government is something like a Pacer just before withdrawal - it was never really fit for purpose, it was only put in place because of a short-term issue, it looks attractive to its few remaining supporters but is awful for the ordinary people who have to actually deal with it, and it's now just hanging on by the skin of its teeth because the replacement won't be available for another few years.

 

[DustyBin]

How does systemic exploitation of the labour of others by the wealthy capitalist class lift people out of poverty? We have billionaires with personal space programmes, whilst their employees were struggling to heat their houses.

Whilst I'm a conservative and capitalist through and through, I actually agree with you here, to a point at least. You're using a rather extreme example though; I'm no fan of exploitation, greed, cronyism etc. either, but I believe these things are the result of abuse of the system rather then an inherent part of it.