I am not overly impressed with Baroness Warsi’s statement this morning.
“As far as the right wing of our party is concerned, I would say this to them … we had some who made much comment that we weren’t fighting a strong enough campaign but, interestingly, didn’t turn up to campaign. And therefore I would say to those who are critical, unless you were here, unless you were out delivering, and unless you were knocking on doors, you really don’t have a right to complain about us not being vigorous enough.”
Firstly, it is wrong to tar everybody who questioned CCHQ’s performance in Oldham East and Saddleworth as being ‘right-wing’ or arm-chair critics. Yesterday a Conservative supporting resident of Oldham wrote a blog for us on the campaign. It was very clear from Susan’s report that from the outset Labour and the Lib Dem’s saw themselves as potential winners, thus fought hard for the seat. The Conservatives ran in comparison a low-key campaign.
Secondly, ‘right’ ‘left’ ect are easy labels that don’t give justice to complex human beings. For example, it is perfectly plausible to be pro-gay marriage and anti-abortion. I don’t want to go into the debate about the heart and soul of the party – as I am sure these words will produce many blogs I will wish to respond to – but Conservatisim is not about labels.
Thirdly, ‘our party’ belongs to every single one of us. We are all a part of it and all contribute to its success and failures. The Conservative party is at its strongest when, through the wideness of membership, it can facilitate a high quality internal debate. This discussion should not be about ‘right’ and ‘left’ but ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.
Fourthly, those who believe that the top of the party is a narrow clique disconnected from ‘real’ Conservatives will use this statement as proof that they are not being paranoid. A lot of non-ideological, loyal members happily describe themselves as being ‘right-wing’. This type of language from the party Chairman allows the ideological discontented, such as Simon Heffer and Roger Helmer, to foster a ‘us’ and ‘them’ narrative on the conservation around what next for the Party.
Related posts:
- Attracting The Votes Of People Who Have Never Voted Tory Is Vital To Electoral Success
- So what will they talk about?
- The BBC Was Right. But Talk Of BBC Impartiality Is Pure Fantasy
- How poor do you have to be to talk about global consumption?
- With Spring round the corner: Why we need to talk sunshine
New blog: Divisive people will feed-off talk of division. I’m not happy about Warsi’s comments http://bit.ly/g0Gkmy
RT @betapolitics New blog: I’m not happy about Warsi’s comments http://bit.ly/g0Gkmy
Im not sure I quite agree here -
Yes, using a phrase like “right wing of the party” isn’t necessarily that helpful but it is just short hand for a group who proudly identify themselves as ‘right-wingers’.
More importantly, I think that you’re post is too understanding and broad. Like there is a group who call themselves ‘right-wing’ there is also a group who identify themselves as ‘liberal Tories’ who are rapidly losing patience with the freedom given to certain extremes within the party. In short, I don’t think liberal conservatives should always be afraid to be militant.
While you have a point that Warsi’s comments will stoke fires, I do not necessarily think that’s a bad thing. In the immortal words of Toby Ziegler, “They’ll like us when we win”.
Oxford Spring – Thanks for the comment.
I do not think anyone should be afraid. You have the argument, strong and loud, and then see where you end-up, hopefully with the strongest argument winning. After the wilderness years (1997 – 2005) the argument was won by modernisers and Cameron is now PM. But there is a discussion to be had about the future, especially as politics has changed so much since the formation of the Coalition.
I disagree strongly with much of what Roger Helmer writes but he has as much right to say it as Nick Boles does to talk about coalition candidates. Its better that these views are out in the open and then can be challenged. There are many groups within the party but we are one party. The party Chairman should be sensitive to this and avoid clumsy descriptions.
Ps, I agree that a potential weakness of mine is that I’m both optimistic and idealistic in nature!
Pingback: Tweets that mention Platform 10 » Blog Archive » Divisive people will feed-off talk of division. -- Topsy.com
RT @betapolitics: New blog: I’m not happy about Warsi’s comments http://bit.ly/g0Gkmy