Ministers won't be able to vote in 1922 elections
Peter Hoskin 6:58pm
So it turns out that John Redwood's uncertainty was well-placed. According to Jonathan
Isaby over at ConservativeHome, the Tory chief whip has
decreed that ministers won't be able to vote in 1922 Committee elections after all. They will only be able to attend meetings, which, as Jonathan says, "no-one ever really had a complaint
about."
All this comes on the back of confusion about what last week's ballot even meant, making a curious situation even curiouser. But, whatever the reasons behind it, the outcome will be seen as a climbdown by David Cameron – and perhaps the first real dent to his authority since coming to power. Meanwhile, the 118 "rebels" will revel in how things have turned out.
The only plus for the Tory leadership is that this will have sucked much of the venom and urgency out of the situation. But the question they now have to face is: was it really worth it in the first place?
Previous
shorpe
May 24th, 2010 7:29pm Report this commentI assume you've seen Simon Heffer's jeremiad today in the Torygraph? Doubt this news will do anything to placate the likes of him. He just about stopped short of calling for an armed coup by the Cornerstone Group.
Sarnia
May 24th, 2010 7:51pm Report this commentAnd what other Blair tactic will he attempt next?
Tankus
May 24th, 2010 7:53pm Report this commentNo , he has entrenched a resistance, and now they know how many there are , and who ! ....A useful number ....
shorpe
May 24th, 2010 8:13pm Report this commentI suppose the 118 who voted against could start calling themselves the 118 Committee, but that would seem to imply their main purpose was to go jogging in disco-era track gear and facial hair, charging strangers extortionate fes to look up phone numbers for them. Still, it'd liven up the place, and the poor dears do need some sort of sideline now the expenses gravy train has finally derailed.
Richard of York
May 24th, 2010 8:52pm Report this commentCamerons bottom twitching like a rabbits nose methinks!
strapworld
May 24th, 2010 9:01pm Report this commentAn act of a statesman. Well done and now this can be forgotten. Except, of course, by the likes of the odious Cash and Mr Nelson perhaps?
ndm
May 24th, 2010 9:16pm Report this commentComing soon to a screen near you - Walkback
denis cooper
May 24th, 2010 9:21pm Report this commentWhy the "odious" Cash?
I thought the personal vilification of dissenters was part of the "old" politics.
AdamR
May 24th, 2010 9:52pm Report this comment@Strapworld:
Agreed. Though some of the posters on here will still claim he's out to destroy democracy itself. I hope some realise how great an overreaction some of their comments really were now though.
Tim Carpenter LPUK
May 24th, 2010 9:53pm Report this commentFreedom by permission (of the Chief Whip) is no Freedom at all.
Snowman
May 24th, 2010 10:29pm Report this commentNot bad, he's learning fast.
a j scott
May 24th, 2010 10:51pm Report this commentMy God! you political anoraks all. You can't see the wood for the trees; you are all noseless having cut them off to spite some silly "cherished" point. Grow up, and spare us the silly business.
Bacon Bill
May 25th, 2010 12:59pm Report this comment@Shorpe What is it with this term 'jeremiad'? As far as I'm concerned it's meaning is: a person who has engaged in a fully-justified verbal assault on a corrupt government, that is in great danger of bringing the country to utter ruin. I am not sure if any of the above applies to Simon Heffer or the current administration?
Back to top