The MPs expenses scandal has in many ways proved to be David Cameron's first big test of leadership. Given that he is on course to be our next Prime Minister, the revelations have in that sense at least done the voters a huge service. It's not quite a Cuban missile crisis, but it's the best clue to date of how the Tory leader copes under pressure.
Early on, Cameron appeared to outflank Gordon Brown by leading the way on expenses - calling for Chris Kelly to get involved, demanding a speedy set of proposals and being the first to set up his scrutiny panel. His proposals for instant online transparency and The Right to Know registers were smart, as was his call for furniture, fixtures and gardening to be axed from allowances. The move towards open primaries was certainly one of the best decisions any party leader has made in recent years (and now being copied by Tessa Jowell it seems). Reopening the candidates list to non-Tories was another shrewd move and has already prompted a flood of applications, I'm told. Many Tories have been delighted that their man has been on top of his game and even Labour types have wished Brown had been as nimble-footed.
Yet as the days have gone on, it seems that Cameron has also made some tactical decisions that his MPs are now bitterly regretting. The most pressing is his decision to effectively demand that his MPs subject themselves to the public stocks whenever there was an accusation that they had misclaimed public funds.
The formula seemed tough and simple - appear before your voters at a public meeting and explain yourself. Cameron subjected himself to such a gathering in Witney, which went off reasonably well (though it's not clear how much notice his constituents had or how they were invited). Michael Gove did likewise, though it's not clear that his own meeting went as well as some had claimed.
Cameron repeated his formula yesterday, when referring to Ms Kirkbride:
"The best thing to do, and I have said this to all my MPs, is to get out with your constituents, to hold meetings, to listen to them, to talk to them, to explain all of the circumstances of why we claimed, what we claimed, why we did want we did, to hold up your hand if you made mistakes and got things wrong and start to rebuilt trust in the political system and in that link between the constituency and the MP."
The problem with the public stocks approach is, as Team Cameron rapidly realised with the Kirkbride case, that it can be fraught with difficulty. What if there is a hardcore of opponents just out to get the MP? Is your public meeting open to all comers or registered voters?
Tory sources were very wary of the "Julie Must Go!" campaign, even to the extent of claiming it was run by hard-left activists (claims vigorously denied by those involved). Nevertheless, they still wanted Kirkbride to "at some point" appear at a meeting. Even the compromise of "pounding the doorsteps" of the constituency (with TV cameras in attendance) seemed just as likely to yield a public lynching as Andrew Mackay's fateful event last week. The people of Bromsgrove certainly didn't look in unforgiving mood ahead of the abortive meet-the-people event.
Tory MPs are now grumbling privately that Cameron has "released the mob" by suggesting they all appear before public meetings. They want to know when or if the genie can be put back in the bottle. Having been impressed by their leader, some now fear that he has made a huge tactical blunder in a bid to meet the demands of a voracious media. But if Cameron were suddenly to announce he no longer expects his MPs to face public meetings, he risks being accused of wobbling.
Labour has not been slow to spot the potential weakness on the leadership issue. Ed Balls pointed out today that not a single Tory MP has had the whip withdrawn to date, whereas Labour have suspended three MPs. Cameron says that it was the very threat to withdraw the whip that resulted in Steen, Hogg and Viggers all agreeing to quit at the next election.
Cameron claimed today that he had been tough when he needed to but also fair and "consistent". Yet with every case appearing to have its own quirks, backbenchers believe it is impossible to be "consistent" without appearing to adopt a blanket approach. Some MPs believe that the spectre of Howard Flight - who was summarily stripped of the whip over his call for public spending cuts (cuts that these days would seem to be uncontroversial among many Tories) - haunts the leadership as well as the Parliamentary party and that's why Cameron is loath to use the sanction.
In the past few days, Cameron appeared to try to adopt a less strident, more understanding tone to the Kirkbride case than to that applied to grandees. Yet while this was welcomed by some MPs, others wondered if such leeway was more about not being seen to attack a young mother. The leadership certainly tried to offer Kirkbride its help overnight, recognising its duty of care and sending a press officer to Bromsgrove.
Friends point out that at the end of the day it is the public who decide. It may well have been the vox pops from Bromsgrove on the Today prog - as well as on Sky and BBC News - that finally persuaded Kirkbride to go, as much as the media pressure. If that's true, maybe Cameron's brave experiment in trusting the public will be vindicated in the long term.
His allies will say that Cameron can't win in the eyes of his critics. But others are wondering whether the MPs expenses affair - and his invitation to the "mob" - has exposed his Blairesque fondness for an "eye-catching initiative".
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.
(URLs automatically linked.)
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address
Invalid URL
Read Full Article »
