Cutting with credibility

June 8, 2010 — simonashall

The PM speaking at MK

The PM’s speech in Milton Keynes was among the most important of his political career so far. It defined his position more clearly than anything previously on the defining political question of the decade – how to get Britain back into business.

We can take from it several things – firstly that the PM will lay it on very thick about the economic crisis being Labour’s fault. I think that’s no bad thing – particularly because they are starting to come out with some pretty outrageous criticism of the coalition on a situation they helped, at least, to create. But I think he’s got to be careful and not get too free with this tactic. He needs to be the consensus man, the leader, the unifier and the solution, not the “new” problem.

Secondly, the PM is happy to tell us just how bad it is, unlike Labour. Not everyone will agree with him but it is obviously in his interest to make things seem as bad as possible. I don’t think a great deal of exaggeration is necessary – things are very, very bad – but the openness he is in a political position to afford could be something of an advantage. I think if played well, far from Mervyn King’s prediction being correct, the public could be sympathetic to the Coalition for some time to come. Honest actions go a long way in politics nowadays and the public recognise favourably politicians who are prepared to do the right, if not popular, thing.

Thirdly, Danny Alexander will be right next to him – all the way. There’s no way that the Liberal Democrats are getting off the hook with this one as full members of the Coalition and I don’t think they want to. NC has said that there will be a “cut with kindness” policy that will shield some of the most vulnerable from the worst of what needs to be done but that can only do so much – they can’t be protected from council cuts in many areas.

Nor do I think it’s a good idea for George Osborne to widely consult the public on where to save money. This is a very risky strategy that could puta very considerable rod in his back when Labour organises a Twitter campaign to get people to respond in a particular way. The results could then be FOIed and may not be where the final decision needs to be made. It could look like the public has been consulted and ignored – not great PR.

The simple answer here is that, a bit like Masterchef, this new economic future is going to “change our life”. There are opportunities for efficiency, yes, and looking at different ways of providing services. But the bottom line is that we need to get a £170bn deficit down and there’s a lot of money to hack off budgets. It must be done, it must be done quickly and there is a certainly amount of political risk that is going to come as the pay-off of winning the election (sort of).

I think the Coalition needs to remember that the public has a great deal more of a problem with dishonesty than ineffectiveness. If the government tries to mask the problem, if it breaks its promises over what it is going to cut, if there is a suspicion that certain groups are being unjustly protected or if there is any underhand treasury regulation as with the last government, the considerable goodwill that the public holds will drain quickly.

If the government is straight, calls a cut a cut and acts responsibly for the best interests of the nation, it might just find itself laying down a legacy of decency – if not prosperity – and a chance in 2015 to lead the country properly back into the new world economy with its head held high.

Posted in Conservatives, David Cameron, Economy, lib dems. Tags: , , , , , , , , . No Comments »

A Classless stunt

May 29, 2010 — simonashall

A grim day for David Laws but also the relationship between the media and government

When the PM decided to make his big, open and comprehensive offer to the Liberal Democrats, it was done because he recognised the necessity in forming a strong government in the wake of an ultimately indecisive election. He knew that the British public didn’t want to be at the polls again in October, he knew that the country couldn’t afford – and probably wouldn’t accept – Labour being kept in power and that in order to form the only coalition government that could claim a mandate he would have to talk seriously, sensibly and flexibly to a party between whose activists there has at times existed a genuine hatred.

No matter – that quite rightly has been placed aside in order to get the best people into government. And if you look at the excellent line-up of the cabinet – the PM and NC working together, William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith, Ken Clarke, Vince Cable and others, you understand that the sacrifices both parties have made in their hearts and minds have been worth it.

David Laws has, for me, been the stand-out performer of the coalition. His handling of the announcement of the £6.2bn cuts last week was first-rate both in the house and in front of the media. His boss George Osborne was there with him but said very little and one hopes was watching carefully to see how it should be done. The point is it doesn’t matter whether he’s Lib Dem or Tory; if he’s got a mandate from the electorate and can do the job, the country needs him in place.

Enter the Daily Telegraph, whose view of the country is somewhat different. For them, the agenda is foxhunting, family values, favourable taxes and flag-waving. They don’t care much for Lib Dems – especially ones with secret gay lovers – and they’re not bothered about keeping the coalition together if it forces an election that could redress the result of May 6. Don’t get me wrong – I’m really disappointed that we didn’t secure an outright majority; but it was the failure to gain winnable Labour seats – not Lib Dem ones – that cost us victory.

The way in which the Telegraph has dealt with the David Laws story is bullying, immoral and reckless. What David Laws did was unquestionably wrong, although one can understand (just) why he did it. The money that he was taking from the taxpayer to pay his lover as landlord fell foul of regulations in 2006 that money could no longer be paid to “spouses” as “rent” (the fact it ever could be is bewildering). Had David Laws then not continued the payment, the question of why would have been asked – forcing him to reveal details of his private life.

Trouble is that £40,000 is a lot of money and he doesn’t need it any more than the PM. It creates the impression that a man asking the nation to make terrifying cuts across public and private fields is being less than austere with his own arrangements. For that reason, once the story became public, he has done the right thing in resigning – a very sad consequence of unjust parliamentary procedures in the first instance and social judgement in the second.

But for the Telegraph, there is no such mitigation. This angry, reactionary and backwards publication is an embarrassment to Conservatism and the nation it so very proudly wants to tell everyone it embodies. It represents exactly the kind of sneering, snobbish and bigoted values that the public reacted against in 1997 and brought Tony Blair into our lives. Why it felt it could not reveal the facts about David Laws during the original story is anyone’s guess and there is a rancid stench of spite and homophobia running through the decision to break it now – just as David Laws reaches the peak of his political career and achieves the platform to display his talents.

Who knows what’s behind it - there are of course powerful factions with an interest in removing a star in the making who wears the “wrong” colours (or the “right” colours in the “wrong” way) in both their political and private life. What amazes and disgusts me is that they, whoever they are, would choose to run so contrary to the national interest by fashioning the demise of potentially a key figure in the recovery and rebuilding of our economy.

The lowest nadir for UK journalism since the Sun decided it was in the public interest to publish topless pictures of the Countess of Wessex a few days before her wedding; and to trump the Sun on classlessness takes some doing.

Posted in David Cameron, Economy, politics. Tags: , , , , , , . 2 Comments »

A Price worth paying?

May 26, 2010 — simonashall

Norman Lamont famously, or infamously, declared in 1991 that unemployment was a “price worth paying” to get inflation down (so much so that the Mirror ran a scare story on this back in 2008). With cuts in public sector jobs inevitable and the knock-0n effects of government cuts likely to be seen in the services area of the private sector, will rising unemployment in 2011/12 be a “price worth paying” to bring the deficit down?

This is a question that must be weighing heavily on the minds of George Osborne and David Laws right now – and probably too on the PM and NC’s as well. Perhaps Vince has got a solution up his sleeve but one suspects not – what to do with all these people whose wages Labour’s wrecked Britain can’t afford to pay right now?

Sending them onto benefits makes no sense at all and is equally ruinous financially. While there are schemes for re-training and skills, there is only so much they can do and in any case, who needs an extra 30,000 people with IT qualifications? There are plenty of other, more manual, jobs around but for most people that’s not something they want to consider. Part-time work and sharing full-time equivalents between two or even three people means that what income is available is more equitably apportioned but again, that’s not going to be able to cope with the scale of what we might be talking about.

My feeling is that as many as 600,000 jobs could be affected both in the public and private sectors during the next five years and even if 100,000 of them have the nous and entrepreneurial spirit to set up their own businesses, that still leaves half a million more people out of work. I firmly believe that this is the fault of Labour, who expanded public sector employment in a shabby vote-fixing exercise to bring more and more people into public pay and into the clutches of Unite.

The truth was we couldn’t afford them and left to their own devices they would have found other ways to contribute to the economy. Now, they will be forced to do so in circumstances not of their own choosing and with an economy that is not conducive to their efforts.

Posted in Economy, politics. Tags: , , , , . No Comments »

Centre-Righter’s block

May 14, 2010 — simonashall

So now Gordon and his merry men are out of Downing Street and DC has become PM, what is there left to write about? It wouldn’t be so bad if I could switch attention onto the Lib Dems but they are now our partners so I can’t write anything about them either (plus they are all such nice people, of course).

Thankfully, Woking Borough Council fires up in six days with the first Muslim mayor of Woking, Cllr Mohammed Iqbal, being sworn in. I’ve known Cllr Iqbal for a number of years and he cares about his community. He has worked very hard to bring about positive changes in Maybury and Sheerwater and is a very approachable man with a great sense of humour and humility.

He will make a superb mayor – and it is about time that the Muslim community in our town should be represented among the roll of those who’ve served this town as council Chairman and later Mayor. I’m particularly proud that they should come from the ranks of the Conservative Party, though I know the other parties will share our enthusiasm for this development.

In addition, we wait to see what form the council will take this year. Although the election results produced no net change with 18 Con, 17 LD and one independent, our tenancy of the mayoralty this year means that the numbers are effectively 17-all with Peter Ankers having the casting vote if parties follow the whip. I have my doubts as to how healthy this situation is but perhaps more on this another time.

While I would obviously have preferred to have been sitting in the chamber around the benches on May 20, I was sworn in as a magistrate on Monday afternoon by the Lord Lieutenant of Surrey Sarah Goad, High Sheriff Robert Douglas and Mr Justice Critchlow at Guildford Crown Court in a short but memorable ceremony. I was particularly delighted that my parents were able to be there and I could see Mum welling up as I read the oath!

In all honesty, I have several months of quite intensive training and sitting ahead of me and it would have been ambitious to have combined it with the duties of a councillor. My father thought I was completely mad to have even considered it – perhaps he was right and some things happen for a reason.

That said, I have got a meeting of the Horsell and Woodham Conservatives this evening where I have to explain away our failure to win (joke, they are all extremely supportive) and we have got plenty to do in Horsell to make sure that people’s lives are improved and that they are represented well in council. As I said a week ago, councillor or not, the community is always there to be served.

Posted in Community, Woking Borough Council, news. Tags: , , , , , , , . No Comments »

Medicine Cabinet takes shape

May 13, 2010 — simonashall

The Medicine Cabinet

As the PM named his cabinet today, there are one or two surprises but also a good deal of talent that I hope will mean that this cabinet is able to heal and address the multitude of problems that we face.

The Foreign Office has been preparing for William Hague’s arrival for five years and I’m very pleased that this pleasant, intelligent, articulate and skilful man with such a mastery of politics has finally achieved an office that will do him justice. His last government post was as Welsh Secretary and since leaving the leadership in 2001, he has become one of the most significant and gentle voices in Conservatism. Immensely popular with the grass roots, he has got a significant challenge to extracate us from Afghanistan and head off Iran.

I’m delighted too that Michael Gove is Education Secretary and will get the opportunity to enact his reforms to improve standards and give more autonomy to teachers. He is a generous and thoughtful man who understands the value of education and its ability to transform lives. Iain Duncan Smith makes a very welcome return to the front line after working on policy at his Centre for Social Justice. His work on how to build a better society and his personal convictions on this subject will be an invaluable contribution.

We all thought that Ken Clarke was a successful chancellor but actually he has been a QC since 1980 and the post of Justice Secretary will allow him to take a step back from the economy for the time being. The appointments of Jeremy Hunt - who visited Woking two weeks ago and is a really nice guy as well as a great MP - and Sayeeda Warsi, who helped give Nick Griffin such a pasting on Question Time, are also reasons to be happy. I hope both will be successful and grow into even more prestigious offices in the future – but for the Lib Dem presence, undoubtedly both would have featured more prominently.

The Lib Dem presence is a positive thing. It is always difficult for the Conservatives to be representative of Scotland given we only have one MP there and Danny Alexander is rightly given the brief of Scottish Secretary. He is a skilled communicator and problem-solver who is well-placed to deal with the SNP on equal terms. David Laws, on the right of the Lib Dems, is someone who shares an economic realism that he will need as Chief Secretary - Vince Cable did well to side-step that role, which will be high-profile during the spending reviews ahead.

Chris Huhne is a principled and cerebral man who I met several years ago when he was an MEP. He will be able to argue strongly for a more sustainable future – whether he’ll be comfortable when it comes to energy policy remains to be seen. Vince Cable’s popularity will be tested as Business Secretary but his abilities are not in doubt and he has a wealth of business experience to draw on. 

I’m not happy about everything – George Osborne is still a barrier to support for many people and I believe should have been dropped as chancellor in favour of Philip Hammond. I’m not sure why Theresa May is Home Secretary and would have preferred the responsbility for women and equality to have fallen separately – perhaps to Baroness Warsi. I was never sure why Liam Fox was moved from health or why Andrew Lansley was moved into it and Caroline Spelman seems a strange choice for the environment. I regret the passing over of Nick Herbert and excellent housing spokesman Grant Shapps.

But what we have now is much better than the fag-ends of the Labour government and the pernicious influence of Mandelson and Campbell has been expunged from power. Now the work of the cabinet, which I believe is united behind its reform programme, must begin.

Update 13/5: Rightly, both Nick Herbert and Grants Shapps are now ministers according to The Times:

2.45pm The keys to the safe

Damian Green – once notoriously arrested (but not charged) on suspicion of receiving leaks from the home office – is confirmed as immigration minister. No longer any need for leaks then: he’ll be working in the home office.

And Nick Herbert will also be at the home office as the minister with responsibility for police.

Two facts about him: his middle name is Le Quesne. And he’s one of the few openly gay senior Tories.

Posted in Conservatives, lib dems, news. Tags: , . No Comments »

At long last

May 11, 2010 — simonashall

What we've all waited 13 years to see

The day after my 19th birthday, Tony Blair swept into Number 10 with a silly grin on his face and the nation hypnotised by the promise of hope, panache and plenty. I didn’t think he’d deliver any of these as no Labour PM had ever done so before and six months later, I joined the Conservative Party. I made it my aim as a student activist to try and get rid of Labour but I found a Tory Party unwilling to learn lessons or change and so followed a different path - but the events of May 1, 1997 politicised me in a moment that everyone active in politics experiences.

Today, Labour has finally gone. But unlike 1997, there is no sense of positivity and little hope for short-term prosperity. In 13 years of borrowing from the future, Labour has brought the country to its knees financially and failed to address any of the social issues that people believed it would. Yes, there have been some difficult circumstances not all of its own making but Labour has ruled recklessly – and, worse, in its own self-interest. It has expanded the public sector to bring more people into state pay, opened our borders to bring in voters likely to boost its standing and declined to address benefits dependancy and a lack of social mobility to keep whole sections of society locked into a sense of victimhood.

What has happened since 1997 has been an undermining of our nation far exceeding anything that happened under Margaret Thatcher. Almost every aspect of our daily lives has been made worse by Labour – and that is quite an achievement. From our economy to our overseas interests – our health service to education, Labour has failed to stem decline in all of these areas through a woeful addiction to political dogma and a determination that the country should serve it rather than the other way round.

The Conservative Party needs to accept its share of the blame for the 1997-2005 years. It was a shambles of an opposition during that time, fighting among itself and moving decisively to the right in the wake of John Major’s defeat. William Hague is a fine politician but if Ken Clarke had been appointed leader in 1997, it is quite possible that Labour’s spree of destruction would have ceased in 2005. DC is the person who has turned that situation around – but it is only the beginning.

I long imagined that the sight of DC entering Number 10 would fill me with joy but it gives me no pleasure that a Conservative Prime Minister should be in power once more faced with the bleakest, leanest and most difficult times since the Second World War. But at least at last, at long last, the shadow that the wretched and devisive New Labour project cast over this nation of ours has been lifted and the process of finding our place in the world once more can begin.

But I envy neither the new PM nor our coalition colleagues the Liberal Democrats for the work that has to be done.

Posted in Conservatives, David Cameron, Roll on 2010. Tags: , , , , , . No Comments »

Morning after the long night before

May 9, 2010 — simonashall

The need for electoral reform has indeed been highlighted by the result of the general election. Despite the electoral map turning its bluest since the 1992 election, Labour’s many small inner-city seats, the over-representation of Scotland and in-built majority of 90 have helped Gordon Brown stay in Downing Street three days longer than he should have done.

There is a clear case, not for a proportion system that will deliver permanent hung parliaments and rig the voting system in favour of the Liberal Democrats, but for a refining of the boundaries to ensure that every constituency is the same size and that every vote is worth the same. The Lib Dems suffer from this system only because their vote is evenly spread as they try to be all things to all people – it is not intrinsically more difficult for them to win consistuencies than anyone else, as we saw in Eastbourne and Wells.

It is noticeable that many of DC’s inner circle, who were in many cases picked in seats where they had no connections, fared less well than average. It’s interesting because the Conservative Party is often criticised for lacking diverse MPs. But in this case, black, gay and female candidates have been rejected not by the party, but by the electorate. It’s a shame - but hardly the party’s fault.

I believe that Nick Clegg and DC will do a deal. In a sense, the Lib Dems have little choice. If they prop Brown up, they’ll sink back to the 15% support they enjoyed under Ming. If they refuse a pact with the Conservatives, they can hardly claim to be hard done by in the voting system when they’ve rejected a chance at power. Many Conservative activists will feel a ache in the pit of their stomach at the thought of going into coalition with the Lib Dems, but I don’t. As someone on the left of the party I share many of their social aims and the fact that we spend three months each year tearing strips of each other is simply election politics, nothing else.

During times of crisis, you have to work for the betterment of the nation. I don’t believe a Con-Lib coalition will survive any more than 18 months, but neither party has the resources nor the will for another election in 2010 and we need to work to steady the market and ensure that the financial meltdown that is now potentially on the cards is avoided. The markets want the debt tackled now and as the winners of the election, the Conservative prerogative should be to deliver debt reduction. The Lib Dem influence, as I see it, is to ensure that social issues don’t get left behind in this process and keep our party focussed on economic stability, education and social improvement.

The two most burning issues of difference – electoral reform and Europe – don’t need to have a part to play during this time. I utterly oppose membership of the EU – although that didn’t stop me losing in Horsell West by a fifth of the votes that UKIPpers took off me. But even I wouldn’t argue that the time for a referendum on this is now – it can wait until we have people back in work and the country is back on its feet.

Similarly, if Nick Clegg and his party think that the most pressing issue of the day is the case for PR, he’s sorely mistaken. Sure, the British public will say they want reform in the light of this shambles of an election but when it’s explained to them that PR always delivers a shambles and that it would effectively take from them the option of a Labour or Conservative government governing alone, they soon change their mind – and I know that because I explained it countless times on the doorstep. So this too can wait for another time.

The major problem it presents for the Conservative Party is delivery – will people understand the compromises being made if they are reflected in our ability to do what we said we would do? And if there is another election in October 2011, will the fluidity of our politics have continued and where will it have taken us? Labour’s most dreadful legacy, unfortunately, is leading us to a point where views about the best forward were so utterly polarised.

Uncertain times are these - and the last thing that our damaged nation needs.

Posted in Economy, elections, politics. Tags: , , , , , , . 5 Comments »

Paper Tigers

May 1, 2010 — simonashall

Not particularly unexpectedly, the papers continue to turn on Gordon Brown as Labour heads for utter wipeout at the election. The Times, which has backed Labour for the past three elections, returns to the Conservatives along with the Sunday Express but interestingly the Grauniad and its sister The Observer is backing the Liberal Democrats, presumably in order to force a hung parliament and keep DC away from Downing Street.

It will also push Labour voters tactically into the hands of the Lib Dems in a reverse of 1997.

What previous Conservative voters thinking about chancing one on Nick Clegg have to consider is this: do they really want to be voting along with Guardian and Observer readers who’ve been happily voting for Labour since 1979? I’ll be the first to admit that the Conservative Party isn’t perfect and I’ve posted before on how I think that is but really, take the thoughts of the Times – which hasn’t supported the Conservatives in 18 years – on board and think about what Britain needs right now.

A hung parliament and Nick Clegg’s promise of change, which means different things depending on where you live, or David Cameron’s visionary and responsible blueprint for Britain that is backed up by a depth of experience within a party with a track record of sorting out Labour’s mess.

Posted in elections, news, politics. Tags: , , , , , . No Comments »

Vote amber, go red

April 20, 2010 — simonashall

Any Conservative voters who really believe that a vote for Nick Clegg will get them a sort of Labour-lite – avoiding the upheaval of a change of government, keeping the half-decent things that Labour has done while not having to put up with the “old party” of Gordon Brown or even Gordon Brown himself – should read this post at ConservativeHome.

We are choosing a government and people need to look at what the Lib Dems will actually deliver if elected. They want to give all pension tax relief at the basic rate – so if you earn more that £37,400 your contributions above that limit will get relief of 20%, not 40%. They also want to tax capital gains at the same rate as income – a 2% increase on the basic rate and 22% on anything above £37,400. They want to scrap the Child Trust Fund, scale back the HomeBuy programme that helps people onto the property ladder, cancel the next tranche of Eurofighter aircraft and cancel Trident. Then there’s the local income tax, the stopping of people going to prison for fewer than six months (effectively ending the power of magistrates to send people to prison) and the threats to reform our voting system so that they will remain in coalition with either the Conservatives or Labour in perpetuity.

In addition, the Lib Dems will push for further European integration and there will certainly be no support for withdrawal from the EU, they will open our borders for unlimited immigration, are proposing an amnesty for illegal immigrants and will continue to be staunch supporters of handing continuing amounts of sovereignty over law and order, foreign policy and taxation to Brussels. Quite a price to pay for a fresh face on the telly.

All of this policy may not be Conservative or Labour and it may not come directly from the mouths of those associated with past ills, although let’s not forget Michael Brown and the fact that Lib Dems too were invovled in expenses and other scandals, but that doesn’t stop it being regressive and contrary to the national interest.

The equation that we face is shockingly simple. The Conservative manifesto sets out a positive future for Britain under David Cameron that builds on opportunity, self-empowerment for individuals and communities and a focus on a high-technology economy to pay off our crushing debts. If you don’t agree with the Conservatives and you’re not convinced that we can deliver, the only other option open to you at this stage is a Labour/Liberal coalition with Gordon Brown as PM. I can’t think of a worse place for Britain to be on May 7 – an outright majority for either of those parties would be better.

We must leave The  X-Factor to Simon Cowell and the pop music industry and keep our sense of proportion in politics. It is time for change and not chance, confidence and not compromise and a future that shows to the world Britain has a plan for recovery.

Posted in Conservatives, Lib Dem lies, elections. Tags: , , , . No Comments »

Evening of debates

April 16, 2010 — simonashall

Yesterday evening saw the first leaders’ debate on television and by and large the media is portraying Nick Clegg as the winner. I didn’t see the debate for reasons that are obvious below but spent a bit of time in work this morning calming down my colleagues about Nick Clegg (they’ve come to expect that of me).

Firstly, it was always going to be easy for him to look like the reasonable man in between the Conservative and Labour warring factions. We saw Vince Cable do it in the Chancellors’ debate; we saw it again last night. Secondly, there is so much more at stake for DC and the PM, it’s no wonder that they looked more under pressure. Particularly for DC – when these debates were agreed, it seemed like it would just be a matter of cementing the lead. Things are different now. Nick Clegg was able to look and feel more relaxed because he’s not going to be PM.

Thirdly,  Nick Clegg can afford to be “honest” about cuts, tax rises etc because it isn’t him that’s going to have to do them. The Lib Dems have always been good at promising wonderful things in the knowledge that they won’t have to deliver. Their record in local government is much more patchy. Fourthly, let’s give Clegg some credit. He prepared well, understood the medium better than the other two and came across well. It doesn’t mean he’ll make a great Prime Minister. Or even prop one up.

Meanwhile at the Lightbox, the first of the Woking Hustings was getting underway with Jonathan Lord up against Tom Miller (Lab), Rob Burberry (UKIP), Rosie Sharpley (Lib Dem)  and the lady from the Peace Party whose name escapes me. The event was organised by the Federation of Small Businesses and focussed on the economy. Around 40 people turned up but mostly people I recognised as businesspeople or activists.

I thought Labour’s Tom Miller gave a good account of himself faced with a sceptical audience and the impossible task of defending this government’s mismanagement of the economy. He’ll be an MP for sure – just not for Woking. Rob Burberry spoke with the usual UKIP over-earnestness and although he talked a little sense about the European dimension, he wasn’t at all convincing in any other dimension.

Jonathan Lord spoke confidently and knowledgeably, gaining quite a bit of applause from the audience, although perhaps that was to be expected. The contrast though with Rosie was less expected. I thought that she’d bear up well in these hustings given her background. Not so – she stumbled around answers, had to be stopped when she started answering a different question to the one that was asked and from what I hear it got worse after I left.

She might know Woking “like the back of her hand” but in the end so do many people. What we need in Parliament is someone with the influencing skills, the energy and the strength of personality to push Woking’s case forward in among the great melting pot of conflicting interests.

Jonathan is in the process of moving here and whether you vote for Rosie or Jonathan, you will have an MP living here in the constituency. The question is what qualities you wish that person to have and the contrast couldn’t be starker. The Lib Dems have been pushing the sophistry for months now that Woking was Jonathan’s “third choice” seat. Not true. But even if it was, I’d rather be a third-choice seat than have a third-rate MP.

Posted in elections, news. Tags: , , , , , , , . No Comments »
« Older posts «
»