Mike Causey – Wrecclesham and Rowledge
Waverley Borough CouncillorArchive for Tory Party
Curry and Competence
It’s late, but I must just post a few thoughts on the SW Farnham Conservatives’ Curry Supper last night at Rowledge Village Hall.
As ever the curries were fantastic, and we always seem to have some leftover. Ah well: curries are always better a few days later anyway!
It was fantastic to have Jeremy Hunt MP with us and, even though he had just returned from Los Angeles and must have been suffering from at least a measure of jet lag (as well as more importantly missing his family), he spent a generous time with us, speaking eloquently and informatively, then answering a good number of questions. He is such a competent man and we are extremely well served by him in government.
I won’t dwell on his LA trip (except to say that it was to investigate how to encourage greater opportunities for new industry in the UK and sounded successful). Instead, I wish to draw out a point he made in answer to my question on whether addressing MPs’ expenses and compensation continues to have momentum under the coalition government.
In responding, he highlighted what he saw as the key change driving better behaviour: transparency – namely that when MPs claim their expenses (even before they are scrutinised or approved), the claim is available online for all to see. I’ll buy that. Public and peer scrutiny is a powerful persuader. And in the words of my employer’s Code of Conduct, it’s essentially a “red-face test”.
The Left Hand, The Right Hand
Recent media reports have written about Conservative Party supporters paying money to sit at dining tables with the party grandees. It sounds unsavoury, a bit grubby, and a little corrupt. Although I hope that journalists and readers alike don’t conclude that the Tory party is the only one that’s doing it. They all do it: Tory, Labour and Liberal Democrat a like.
However, of course, that doesn’t make it right. And when considering – at the very least – the red-faced test (what would this look like to the general public), I wonder if the parties will reconsider theapproach.
[But, I'll also confess that when I've seen these invites in the past few years - to join some exclusive club (which of course isn't exclusive, just expensive) in the party - I've had a temptation to do so, but haven't. Human nature is pretty much universally drawn to being part of an important or influential group in any sphere.]
I believe that any voter in the UK should have the right to give money to political parties. But, I also believe that we should explore ways of making this anonymous to some extent (not excluding the need to consider why we have existing laws about declaring the identify of those donors giving over a certain amount), so that policy making and honours list contents and other processes are less influenced by those with the means to pay for influence.
Matthew 6 v 3 says “when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing”. These few verses are about giving to those in need, but when taken in context with Christ’s call to righteousness before Him, not before our fellow-men, and, that political parties should ultimately be about creating and maintaining civic society that is good and of service to all, I believe that we have an emerging principle that if we are prepared to give money to causes (political or not) that we see as worthy, then we should do so without making any kind of noise about it.
Serving One’s Country
How incredibly disappointing it is that Alan Milburn should be accused of putting ego before constituents by taking up an unpaid advisory role to the Prime Minister. But, that’s how Andy Burnham sees it.
And just to be clear, I’m not surprised. It was inevitable that the media would quickly find an MP who would denounce such bi-partisan collaboration between Labour and the coalition government.
However, all it does is serve to underline the tribal instincts of party politics, and I do not excuse my own Conservative Party from this charge: I’m certain that there are MPs in the Parliamentary Conservative Party who equally would not be able to stomach a Tory serving a Labour or Lib Dem Prime Minister.
The reality seems to be that Mr Milburn, having produced a well-respected and heartfelt report in the previous parliament, was saddened that the recommendations were not adopted. And so, when the new Prime Minister asks him to revisit that report with a view to its implementation, why on earth wouldn’t he take the opportunity? The report was not about his supporters, or even about his constituents: it was about the people of this nation. Why wouldn’t an MP seriously consider and then accept a chance to make changes that he or she believes would improve the lives of citizens of this country?
But, Mr Burnham can’t see this: all he can see is the Labour voters not being served. How does he work this out? Has Mr Milburn changed party allegiances? No. Has he taken up a paid cabinet position for which he will have to pledge some kind of commitment to the coalition or Tory party policies? No.
Rather, has he decided to serve his country and Prime Minister (and David Cameron is indeed the Prime Minister of all in the UK, not just those who voted Conservative) and work to change society for the better? Yes.
Honour
Listening to Radio 4 on my brief drive from home to the Farnham Pottery (my ‘office’ for the morning) I heard an MP being very honourable. Yes, the coalition agreement to hold a referendum was a compromise – as some things can be in any joint venture – and he would be campaigning vigorously against AV. But, unlike some of his colleagues, he would be voting for the bill itself to allow the referendum.
I was bouyed, listening to such an honourable position. Rather than disparage the bill itself, he recognised that it was the debate about the nature of AV that should command his attention and action.
Good stuff.
At last
I’m delighted to read in today’s Telegraph that George Osborne will be giving the cross-party Treasury Select Committee the right to veto his candidate for chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility. I hope that this sets a new tone for ministerial appointments: that being a minister does not isolate that MP from the need to ensure House support for key appointments outside of the democratic process, and yet critical to the governing of our country.
Clarity, Consistency, and Coherency
What a privilege it was last night to attend the launch of the 2010/11 Conservative Christian Fellowship’s (CCF) Under 35s Development Programme. The CCF acts as the Conservative Party’s relational bridge to the church, and has a special place in my heart springing from a number of years I spent as a trustee, and as a founder with my wife, of the development programme.
It’s so exciting to see young men and women who passionately wish to work out how their personal faith should affect their public policy, and, to discover in what way they can serve God and their country in the public sphere. The launch was held in Portcullis House, the main office base of MPs, just across from the Houses of Parliament, and the view from the windows reminded us all of our proximity to the seat of one of the oldest and most respected democracies in the world. I openly believe that it’s imperative that Christians have a significant influence in the public square, and yet, that government should not compel religion upon its citizens, but create the space for religious principle to play a full part in rigorous debate.
These next years hold much promise: not only will more capable and committed young men and women find out more about themselves, their faith, and their politics, but we’ll also see the ongoing development of previous programme participants as they undertake new roles as MPs, lobbying officers, businessmen and women, teachers, and in all other walks of life.
So what do I think? Hope.
A friend emailed today and asked what I thought? I knew what he was meaning. In fact, I’ve been asked the same question many times by colleagues and friends and family. And it’s a great question. I’m certain that almost everyone in our nation is considering their own answer.
Here’s mine:
Actually, I’m really excited about the possibilities of the coalition. Whilst – if the Conservatives had won an outright majority – I know I would have instinctively been happy with that, I’m now seeing some really great aspirations from the two parties having to work together. I guess it would be easy to be cynical – some of my work colleagues certainly are – but to tell you the truth, I really am inspired by what I hear and read.
I thought that the speeches yesterday afternoon in the Rose Garden of 10 Downing Street were wonderful: the setting out of a vision for our country that will return civil liberties to the people, and take hold of the immense challenge of returning fiscal and financial responsibility to our nation. And I read in the coalition contract between the parties, some excellent objectives, not least the Great Repeal Bill that will soon roll back some of the more insidious and invasive of the laws of the last government.
As for whether the Liberal Democrats will have too much of an influence on the moral fibre of government – I don’t know yet, but I’m prepared to watch closely and pray that the Conservatives have the right level of influence to prevent a degradation of our legal framework and it’s Judeo-Christian heritage.
