Today's Sunday Telegraph Letters

Who do the Tories think they are?

So Francis Maude thinks that the Tory Party should represent a greater cross section of society (Opinion, May 15). I agree. It should try including Conservatives again. Although how someone like Maude, who signed away the UK's self governance at Maastricht and runs a "think tank" which advocates tax breaks for "homosexual marriages" and one of whose leading lights ran "wife-swapping parties" on a commercial basis, can claim to be a Conservative beggars belief.

Rodney Atkinson, Stocksfield, Northumberland

I find it a bit rich that Lord Patten should offer advice on the method of election for the House of Commons (Opinion, May 15). How many people voted for him to sit in the House of Lords, and pass the laws which we must obey?

Fortunately there is a simple solution to the twin problems of an imperfectly representative Commons, and an entirely unrepresentative Lords. Keep first-past-the-post for the Commons, but replace Lord Patten and his unelected ilk with those who come second in the poll in each parliamentary constituency.

(Dr) D R Cooper, Maidenhead, Berkshire

Our Post-Democratic Society

The Sunday Telegraph has a report on the revised system for selecting the next leader of the Conservative Party, lamentably still the country's main opposition party.

It would appear that the rights now enjoyed by ordinary members to have a vote for their Leader, (first obtained under the leadership of William Hague, but resented following the election of Iain Duncan Smith, who could hardly have managed to do worse than Michael Howard in the General Election in my mind) are to arbitrarily withdrawn whatever new system is chosen.

Quotes from the article, which may be read in full from this link, are as follows:

"Michael Howard is to back new rules for Conservative leadership contests which could end in a stand-off between two rival "leaders", one with a mandate from local party activists and the other backed by MPs.

Under a radical plan to elect his successor, which Mr Howard will announce to senior Tory officials tomorrow, two parallel ballots would be held - one among local association chairmen, the other among MPs. The winners would then be pitted against each other in a knock-out round, in which only MPs would vote, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt."

...................

<>..... "rank-and-file Tories were likely to be angered that only constituency officials would be able to vote under the new rules. "For years it has appeared on our literature that choosing the leader is one of the main benefits of membership," he said. "People will understandably be very annoyed if this is going to be taken away."

Disaffected Conservatives need not bother to look towards the UK Independence Party or Veritas for better party democracy as a few moments reading the archives of ny blogs dedicated to those parties will quickly show.

Could the English Democrats live up to their party's name?

Five Tory MEPs finally rebel against the EPP

The five Conservative MEPs who defied the EPP leadership to which group their party disgracefully belongs, in the vote for a motion of censure against the Barroso Commission (read here) have been named in the Christopher Booker column of the Sunday Telegraph, linked here, and were as follows:-

Roger Helmer, Christopher Heaton-Harris, Martin Callanan, David Sumburg and Daniel Hannan

Tories - From 'Teetering' to 'Terrible' to 'Terminal'

The blog EU Referendum has been following the plight of the still main opposition party in Britain more closely then we have of late. Visit this link to read some of the almost unbelievable latest developments - Raiding the nursery!

Howard on the Skids!

A very satisfactory headline for this blog which has consistently made the case that Michael Howard was completely the wrong man to lead the Tories into the 2005 General Election.

One report of a prominent backer now demanding Howard's immediate departure is this link to a Daily Telegraph report - there are others. IDS has of course experienced exactly similar headlines immediately before his departure.

Refusals to sign the BDI by Party

Refusals to sign the BDI by Party

The following is a list of candidates who have refused to sign a declaration upholding the principals of parliamentary democracy.

If they are candidates for the Westminster Parliament in your constituency- please ensure that neither you yourself, your family, neighbours or friends within the constituency vote for such traitors. Looking at the manifestoes and policies on which they now stand for election - and considering the reasonable terms of the British Declaration of Independence, linked here, which they have refused to sign - how else can they thus be described?

Conservative refusals

Dr Julian Lewis
Hon Nicholas Soames
Dr Liam Fox
Michael Fabricant
Sir Michael Spicer
Ashley Gray
Caroline Flynn-Macleod
Paul Maynard
David Amess
Cllr Kim Humphreys
Rt Hon Oliver Letwin
Jacqui Lait
Ian Taylor MBE
James Paice
Rt Hon Stephen Dorrell
John Maples
Douglas Carswell
Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke QC
Rt Hon David Curry
Angela Browning
William Cash
Rt Hon David Heathcoat-Amory
Laurence Robertson
Rt Hon Michael Howard QC
Edward Leigh
Robert Walter
Quentin Davies
Rt Hon Francis Maude
Owen Paterson
John Bercow
Tim Collins
Peter Luff
Tony Baldry
Andrew Robathan
Sir John Butterfill
Peter Bottomley
Rt Hon John Gummer
Geoffrey Cox QC
Anthony Steen
Christopher Chope
Scott-Haywood
Peter Atkinson

Labour refusals

Doug Henderson
Joan Walley
Rt Hon Robin Cook
Valerie Davey
Barbara Follett
Austin Mitchell
Mike Gapes
Keith Vaz
Barry Sheerman
Rt Hon Peter Hain

All candidates of the Liberal Democrat Party refused to sign.

Lying Politicians

There is a fascinating Opinion comment in today's Daily Telegraph by Daniel Hannan, MEP Conservative for the EU's SE England Region, which may be read from here.

Mr Hannan muses on why all involved with politics are so distrusted as if he should somehow be exempt.

That of course is part of the answer to the question he poses. In fact, of course, he personally has just last year, not followed through on a solemn commitment, basic to the principles on which he was elected, but now acts as if he has behaved consistently and honestly throughout!

It was Hannan himself, regular readers of this blog might recall, who had committed to leaving the Euopean People's Party group in the European Parliament if re-elected in June.

There was plenty of opportunity for Mr Hannan and his colleagues to do the honourable thing and resign the party whip following Michael Howard's reversal of the EPP 'divorce policy adopted by IDS. Faced with a threat of removal of party support (and therefore all the perks of life as an MEP) he campaigned knowing that he would be elected and that he would then have to remain within the ultra-EU federalist EPP bloc in Strasbourg.

My many requests for an explanation (he was one of my own MEPS) went unanswered. Some of the events were reported on this blog earlier last year so may be read in the archives!

Is not total distrust of the likes of Daniel Hannan, who is clearly very much a part of the pays légal not therefore pefectly justified?

What are we to make for example of the reality behind his regular supposed eurosceptic, presumably well-paid columns for the likes of the Daily Telegraph, while also enjoying the unearnt taxpayer largesse as an MEP within the ultra federalist EPP!

What hypocrisy!