Cameron’s Warsi-related problems

David Cameron finds himself in the same boat as Dr Frankenstein. Baroness Warsi, a political creation designed to bring Toryism to sceptical ethnic minorities in which Cameron has invested heavily, may have to be neutralised as she is engulfed by two inquiries. Paul Goodman writes of Cameron and Warsi’s awkward relationship in today’s Telegraph, and he makes three observations borne of his experience working with Warsi during the last parliament. They are:

1) That responsibility had been ‘placed on the shoulders of a politician of no independent standing and with zero parliamentary experience.’
2) That Lady Warsi’s views on extremism aren’t Cameron’s.     
3) That Warsi’s position is impossible: ‘condemned to patrol the familiar territory of immigration control and integration policy without having real control of it.’

This last point is important because whoever succeeds Warsi (if indeed she is destroyed by present scandals, Goodman expects her to be) will inherit the same problem unless the leadership changes its approach to ethnic minority policy. An objection to Warsi among Tory MPs is that she influences electoral policy without having the trouble of getting herself elected. It’s felt in some quarters that this must change — something of which Cameron, who appears to be growing more conscious of the need for effective party management, will be aware. The challenge, then, is to promote an ethnic minority MP, of whom there are several, into a position where he or she has the power to shape and take responsibility for immigration and integration policy. It will be interesting to see if this issue is addressed by the imminent reshuffle.      

Then there is the matter of the policy itself. Warsi has always pushed a strategy that woos Bangladeshi voters, on the grounds that they are the fastest growing ethnic group. While others argue that polling suggests the Tories would better off targeting Sikh and Hindu small business owners, who are more sympathetic to low tax conservatism. This is part of the debate surrounding the Tory Chairmanship, of which James wrote on Monday. Should the chairman simply complement the Tory leadership and be part of the coalition government? Or should the chairman have sufficient independence to confront the coalition when necessary?  The reshuffle would seem to be the ideal opportunity to answer those questions.