Twice recently, Pecksniff has had occasion to applaud Lord Deben (formerly John Gummer, MP for Suffolk Coastal), the elegantly pugnacious Conservative peer who, in these extraordinary times, is still affronted by dishonesty. This week, however, he deserves the headline.
The debate which prompted his ire is, once again, over Rwanda. Having comprehensively disposed of his own government’s position, he then turns to the Labour opposition. They refuse to be seen to oppose the government bill, which is in breach of international law, for fear that a couple of racist bigots in the ‘red wall’ might think again about returning to the Labour fold and stick with the Tories. In the most cynical way, they are happy to side with an illegal law which will bring untold misery to refugees, in order to gain electoral advantage.
“I find that unacceptable in the party I support, says Deben. “I find it equally unacceptable in the party with which I disagree.”
He is talking about your next government, ladies and gentlemen. I hope we weren’t hoping for some kind of moral renaissance, were we?
*
Pecksniff has complained often about the lack of backbone in the Labour Party over Brexit. We were always assured it is nothing of the kind, but a quote from a Labour source reveals all: “Labour has been burned too many times on this issue,” we are told. “The mobility stuff is extraordinarily hard for a Labour government, when immigration is so high”.
We also discover that the party’s representatives aren’t considered entirely competent by their EU opposite numbers to discuss the options. “They didn’t seem to know what they were saying,” says one EU source.
*
The polls just get worse for the Tories. The last two are by People Polling, which shows the Tories down to 18%, with Labour on 46; and YouGov which has Tories on 20 and Labour 44. If the former poll were correct – apply the usual provisos – that would give Labour 537 seats and the Tories 24. Labour would have an overall majority in the Commons of 445…
May still looks the best bet for Sunak, if he had the courage. (In spite of his protestations otherwise, one learns that Tory digital advertising has increased by 1200% compared to the usual level.) A May election would urinate on further hopes by Reform of attracting more disaffected Tories and give Mr Sunak’s backbenchers no option but to try and look as though they support their government. Otherwise, what has he got? The continual threat both of further defections and of his being personally flung out on his ear.
We understand that Mr Sunak has held “tense” private discussions with the backbench 1922 committee, in which they made clear their opposition to a May election, but he must know their interests are not necessarily his. As to a vain hope that somehow public opinion will change: “Time,” as Voltaire said of Louis XIV, “ripens men’s judgements”. Can Mr Sunak really be hoping for the same from the electorate?
*
Meanwhile, it is understood that many in the Labour Party are also becoming inclined to May as the election date. They may include Rachel Reeves, who is due to become Labour’s chancellor of the exchequer. It is usual for shadow ministers to meet civil servants in the weeks leading up to a general election, so they can become acquainted – just in case. But Pecksniff’s spies in Whitehall report that Ms Reeves is hardly out of the Treasury these days. Would she be doing that if the election were still seven months away?
*
The threat hanging over the Conservative Party is not so much by now their imminent trouncing by Labour, which cannot be avoided, but their possible humiliation by Reform. If the Tory vote really is at 18%, and Reform is climbing to 13% – already in theory more than the LibDems – the Tories face the ghastly prospect of having to fight for the right wing vote and quite possibly lose. Beating Reform hardly amounts to a success d’estime – Reform won’t win any seats anyway – but it may be absolutely critical in ensuring the continuation of the Tory party.
*
Brandon Lewis (Gt Yarmouth) has announced that he will not stand again as an MP.
He was first elected in 2010, and since then has held eight government posts as well as being chair of the Conservative Party. During that time, he has been awarded a knighthood and become a very wealthy man, while his constituency remains one of the poorest in the country. He presently holds a number of lucrative jobs, with one of his paymasters being a dodgy Russian. It is not clear quite what he does to earn this money, though it may come as a surprise to some readers to learn that none of them appears to be as a used car salesman. Nor do any of them very obviously seem to be involved with working for his constituents, who throughout his career have complained at his absence. (Yet they still vote for him.)
Pecksniff met him once, in the company of an elderly couple grieving over the death of their only daughter. They provided the purpose of the meeting. When Mr Lewis arrived, he didn’t greet them or acknowledge them in any way, being too excited about talking to your correspondent about his new promotion. When he left, once again there was no acknowledgement, no handshake, no sympathies expressed. Mr Lewis was a busy man, making his career.
*
Tom Hunt (Ipswich) is furious at the Metropolitan Police for arresting a protestor carrying a placard declaring ‘Hamas are terrorists’. “At one point do we say enough is enough?” he wants to know. “Met Police are not fit for purpose.”
It is possible that Mr Hunt completely overlooked that he was arrested because he was confronting pro-Gaza protesters and a scuffle broke out. But there are further curiosities here. It seems that attempts to contact him came to nothing, because his mailbox is full. As it is whenever East Anglia Bylines has attempted to speak to him. So we know this hard-working representative of the people doesn’t ever answer his phone, and he doesn’t reply to messages.
*
Still on the matter of Tom Hunt and the anti-Hamas protester, an email trail also revealed another fascinating point. One of the complainants about the mailbox being full was one Terry Charles. It seems clear from the wording that he and Mr Hunt are close: “Hi Tom, I tried calling you on Friday, could you give me a call tomorrow (Monday) please.”
Now Mr Charles has previous. He is involved in lots of conspiracy theories: anti-globalist (which assumes a worldwide Jewish conspiracy), anti-vaxxing, 15-minute cities and the rest. In pursuit of these theories, he has also played a role in disrupting council meetings, including West Suffolk, which had to be abandoned. And he was among the far-right protesters outside Ipswich Novotel against refugees.
We cannot know whether any of this has a direct bearing on Mr Hunt’s views – he may abhor what Mr Charles believes – since, as we have established, we have no way of contacting him.
*
Is there no end? There is also more on Tom Hunt and his ongoing dispute with the man he won’t let into his ‘public’ meetings. Mr Hunt says this is because the man has issued death threats, though he hasn’t thought to report him to the police. The man, who is elderly and gets about on a disabled scooter, claims it is because it is feared he will be critical.
This week we learn that the gentleman turned up at a further Tom Hunt meeting, but this time he claims “a big burly man” came up and told him to move on because he was “causing harassment”. Our man pointed out that he hadn’t tried to get into the meeting, and actually he was on a public footpath, but the burly gentleman told him: “It won’t be good for you if you don’t move on and the police are called”.
The gentleman went home to a stiff drink.
*
A reader with a long memory kindly reminds Pecksniff that, in February 2022, your diarist quoted Liz Truss (SW Norfolk) as having sternly claimed previously:
“Every public sector worker should feel personal responsibility for the money they spend and the money they save. They should spend taxpayers’ money with at least the care they would give to their own. This change of mindset would be reflected in everyday changes such as travelling by economy rather than business class.
This was in the context of her (in her then role as foreign secretary) having just spent £500,000 on the use of a private aircraft to Australia. This week we learn that she also spent over £15,000 on ‘hospitality’ on a single flight to the far east.
*
Pecksniff is always interested in responses to party canvassers on the doorstep. It will be no surprise to learn that those canvassers tend to err on the side of optimism when reporting their results, an understandable subjectivity which nevertheless the Pecksniff logarithms (aka the wise men at the Muckrakers) can see through. This week your diarist has received three reports worth passing on, all from Labour party workers but from three different counties: Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire.
They are of interest because they all report the same situation, and together suggest there may be movement among former Conservative voters. In any election, the parties will canvass their own areas first, then – depending on response – become more adventurous. At this election it’s clear that most Labour canvassers at least are confident of their own vote and have moved on to what is sometimes known as the ‘kamikaze canvass’, deep into enemy territory.
So it is that this week we find three very similar reports from just such traditional Conservative areas. All of them expressing a movement at last among Conservative voters, not only not to put their cross in the usual box but actually to vote for somebody else. This mood seems particularly strong in South West Norfolk, whose MP is of course Liz Truss.
*
Often, however, the chances of booting out incumbent Tories rest on some kind of usually grudging understanding between the opposition parties, if not by standing down a candidate, then at least not campaigning for them. But the closer the opposition parties are in electoral support, the more intransigent they become.
LibDems are exasperated by Labour’s arrogance, Labour are furious over LibDem dirty tricks; and often the two hate each other more than they do the Tories. One might have thought that a basic quality in progressive politics is the ability to talk to each other, but too often that ability is missing. It is quite certain that the Conservatives will hold on to several seats across East Anglia which, with give and take among opposition parties, would have meant losing them.
So where does this leave the voters? As so often, forgotten in the melée. Do not assume elections are held for the benefit of the punters. Your views and so your vote will be misrepresented ruthlessly in order to make a party point.
EAB has 61 constituencies across the region, and at the election we intend to cover 20 or so of the more interesting seats. But among them may be one which isn’t perhaps likely to swing away from the Tories, but in which the Tory incumbent could be beaten if only the so-called progressive parties acted together.
*
Thanks this week go to Jess Knopp, Kate Viscardi, Karl Whiteman and Stacey Richards
*
<<< Previous Pecksniff’s Diary
