The 12 Tory rebels were wrong to make a move on Cameron
Posted 14 Sep 2012 by Walaa Idris
All this talk about a small group of Tory MPs plotting to oust the current leader, the nation’s Prime Minster is selfish to say the least but it is also a dangerous distraction from what is important, the economy and the much needed reforms. If things were different then maybe it would make some sense. But since that is not the case this plot is a luxury we cannot afford. We cannot appear egotistical and self-consumed when the whole country is hurting in one way or another.
As someone who highly values loyalty and its importance. I find the extent some will go to self-promote is extremely disturbing. So much so, it makes me wonder if they actually inhabit the same universe the rest of us does.
Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t think Cameron is perfect, nor 100% on the right track, but he is in a challenging position and doing the best he can to deliver on what he promised in the coalition agreement. Like most Conservatives, I have some issues with parts of the deal, but like most sensible people I understand life is about give and take and about compromise.
Give and take is something most of us do daily in almost all decisions large and small, personal and professional. So why does this particular group of MPs feel that after two and half years in a coalition during a fixed term parliament they are entitled to change the party leadership because now they don’t like being part of a shared rule government? What did David Cameron do that is so wrong, so bad and so unconservative they now need to throw everything away and risk all for a change that neither the grassroots nor the nation will thank them for!? Besides who will replace him? Boris, Liam Fox or David Davis, all wonderful Conservatives but one is the London Mayor; one did not even make it to the leadership finial and one lost big to Cameron!
Of course we don’t yet know who the 12 MPs who wrote to Graham Brady – the chairman of the 1922 Committee – but we can guess who they might be. And, even though this attempt will not trigger a leadership contest, the distraction and lack of allegiance it causes leaves a nasty taste of distrust, not to mention the absence of edification.
What I find puzzling is the notion that the move came about because of the party’s prospects of winning a majority at the next election! Well if the concern is winning an outright majority and it rightly should be, chopping chunks of each other will only benefit our opponents. Besides, if we can’t respect our own leader, why should others!?
Commenting is closed for this article.