MPs are having a party next week to celebrate the return of Nadine Dorries to the Tory fold. But as they pop champagne corks for the Prodigal Daughter, they might be wondering whether a similar drama could unfold with another of their number. Dr Sarah Wollaston appears to be growing increasingly angry with her party’s leadership, and isn’t afraid to say it in the press. She may be a very different Conservative to Dorries, but there’s a risk that she moves into the same open stand-off territory that led to her colleague flying to the jungle.
Many observers wrongly assume that the trouble began when Dorries told Giles Dilnot that David Cameron were ‘two arrogant posh boys who show no remorse, no contrition and no passion to understand the lives of others and that’s the crime’. But this was the steam escaping after months of building frustration. Remember the way Cameron humiliated Dorries when she raised a question about abortion in the House of Commons? She wanted to know why Nick Clegg was blocking her demand for independent counselling for women seeking a termination. Cameron replied with a smirk that he knew ‘that the honourable lady is extremely frustrated’. Dorries walked out of the Commons.
Wollaston has been trying to raise concerns about a number of policies that she wants the government to adopt, including a minimum price for alcohol. The Cabinet split on this meant it didn’t make it into the Queen’s Speech, which was intended to calm backbenchers, not stoke unnecessary conflict. She has written a piece for the Telegraph in which she examines the crisis many Accident and Emergency departments are facing. But she closes it with this killer statement:
‘And in the meantime, the Government front bench should spend a Friday night in a town centre A&E. There, they will see the impact cheap alcohol has on waiting times and working conditions; and perhaps a minimum price per unit of alcohol would be more seriously considered.’
This isn’t arrogant posh boy territory, but it is hinting that perhaps the Cabinet isn’t as in touch with serious issues as its members believe. Wollaston seems to suggest that the policy was dismissed out of hand. There is a danger that she starts to think that no-one is bothering to listen to her: one Tory MP recently joked to me that ‘if it’s a policy supported by Sarah Wollaston then it’s probably doomed’. Not a pleasant feeling, though, if you feel no-one wants to hear why you think something shouldn’t be doomed. And she was infuriated by the suggestion from Lynton Crosby that backbenchers should put up or shut up, tweeting:
‘I cannot ‘participate’ without the freedom to ‘comment’, even if that is sometimes inconvenient to the Executive.’
Nadine Dorries and Sarah Wollaston are very different backbenchers. But the leadership needs to remember what happened to the former, and learn the lessons to avoid pushing the latter so far that she finds her own ‘posh boys’ line to snap back at them with.
Comments