For the change 168
To keep the 1922 Committee as is 118
To keep the 1922 Committee as is 118
That's a far larger majority than I would have thought. It appears that the new intake voted the way the leadership wanted.
I wonder what implications this has for the election for the chairmanship of the 1922 Committee next week.
UPDATE: Just had a text from an MP saying "The 2010 Committee was formed today - initial membership 118..."
Not good. Not good at all.
So then, 118 founder members of the 2010 Committee.
ReplyDeleteThis makes me query Cameron's judgement. The last thing he wants is a group of disgruntled back benchers when he will need to be focusing on the main task - keeping the coalition together. Assuming that he wants to keep it in one piece......
ReplyDelete118 = Over twice the number of Lib Dem MPs.
ReplyDeleteInteresting.
This is a truly shameful result and its results like this that truly remind me why I never even considered supporting the Tories.
ReplyDeleteThe new intake are a bunch of sheep-like career politicians that are easy to win over, and Cameron is effectively purging those with unfashionable, true conservative values from his government and party.
Come on Iain, you and I both know the likes of David Davis are going to be disgusted at this result and justifiably so.
Still, at least there's a new face in Downing Street right? All that new politics malarkey? Bollocks.
Cameron played them like an expert. A ruthless exploitation of the know-nothing new intake. Doesn't bode well for the future - I hate to be making cynical utterances, but we will note in future that this was the first blow in an over-weening executive.
ReplyDeleteI suspect the next step will be a downgrading of the bankers issue via the new Commission, which will ensure no feathers will be ruffled in the City and that Parliament will remain compliant to financial industry "interests". Not that those bear the slightest similarity to the interests of those voters who put the coalition where it is, or Cameron where he is.
I assume Cameron is slaying his enemies early and is attempting to isolate them.
ReplyDeleteI note Bill Cash seems to be the only talking head on the telly...
There may be trouble ahead...
ReplyDeleteThere may be trouble ahead...
ReplyDeleteThe 1922 committee sounds like a medieval inquisition cabal albeit elected within the narrow perimeters. Cameron should get rid of this cabal and move forward to 2010.
ReplyDeleteA misguided move, whatever the motive, I fear. and perhaps more misguided if the motive was innocent.
ReplyDeleteIntruding one's presence at (or even taking control of) a forum for potential dissent does not actually prevent that dissent from occuring, or in any real way allow you to address and reason with the dissenters. It simply shifts dissent (and plotting) to where you can't see it. The '22 was a possible source of problems but Mr Cameron knew where it was and he had his own people there. A new group may well be more exclusive.
Disgruntled right wingers is exactly what cameron needs to keep the coalition partners on board.
ReplyDeleteInstead of stifling dissent, this is likely to promote it.
ReplyDeleteAs things were, extremist opinion in the 1922 committee would have been diluted by moderates. This will push them into becoming a separate entity and so even more dangerous to DC; especially as they will feel he has hardly played fair.
What with this and the reaction to the bomb plot, it's getting to feel like NuLabour all over again.
The 118 need to revisit their history.
ReplyDeleteThe 22 concept simply doesn't work in these so-called "new" circumstances. It's like staying in the Bullingdon after you're married.
The 22 has either got to be the Conservatives club or the backbenchers club. It can't be some hapless hybrid.
If anything the alternative logical reform would have been to invite Lib Dem backbenchers into the 22 as well for the term of the coalition.
I don't know if the change is a smart thing or not, but one thing is very clear: Cameron is sending a message to his party that he is in charge.
ReplyDeleteI interpreted it as a shot across the bow. He knows he's got some troublemakers on the Tory benches who don't like being in coalition and he wants to remind MPs who is the boss.
I don't know if it will work, but in the medium term it could make it more difficult for opposition in his party to coalesce. He'll have his hands full with the government and the LDs and I imagine he's calculated that it's a risk worth taking to protect his back.
118 - roughly the number of Tory MPs who can never hope to have a ministerial job.
ReplyDeletedear me isn't it a bit early on to go mad with power?
ReplyDeleteProof that the conservative parliamentary party has a death wish! Obviously not fit for government. IF Cameron is treated as badly as Major and Thatcher (in her final stages) then I can see the electorate walking away from the Conservatives.
ReplyDeleteThese nonentities should have the whip withdrawn.
Rather like the nonsense spoken about Bercow. I reckon about ten to fifteen voices, at the most, shouted NAY!! Some rebellion.
A 2010 committee? Cameron could ask each individual constituency association to discipline their MP. Just think when the new legislation comes around- where MP's can be sacked. These people could well be in the firing line. Especially, as I sincerely hope, if the coalition is proving a success.
This is going to be the start of a very large amount of trouble.
ReplyDeleteMr Cameron has just lost the benefit of the doubt with very many people.
I bet those 118 are precisely the ones who shaped and led the Tory party to its victorious election victories of 1997, 2001 and 2005.
ReplyDeleteThe reason I became interested in politics and switched my support to the Tories was David Cameron.
I suspect I am not alone in the country (although very, very lonely in the Tory blogosphere echo chamber).
There goes ATV. Poor Nick.
ReplyDelete118 UKIP MPs do you think? :)
ReplyDeleteWhat Stephen says is spot on. Traditional Tories (and I am one) and commentators need to realise that we do not have a Tory government. We have a coalition government. It makes no sense for the 1922 to draw attention to itself as a constraint on a government which does not exist.
ReplyDeleteCameron is ahead of the curve on this. And if he has acted ruthlessly then so be it.
People such as Cash, whose entire profile has been constructed from sidelines carping, need also to realise that the situation at present does not allow for a simple translation of manifesto commitments into government policy. Neither as a matter of logic nor of principle.
Are there 286 Conservative backbenchers or did some ministers jump the gun and give themselves a vote in the backbenchers grouping?
ReplyDelete"Not good, not good at all". Fact of life, "politics (as well as nature) abhors a vacuum (gerrymander)".
Clueless new members who owe everything to the party selection process more like. More moves in the save Dave campaign.
ReplyDeleteI remember that Blair did this sort of thing in 1997. Next they will have their pagers to stay on message (perhaps they already do). Cut down questions to the executive like only one prime ministers question time a week. In fact why bother with one at all.
His aim is to take over the 'centre' parties and get rid of the awkward squad who want real Conservative policies.
I don't give him more than 18 months as leader. Roll on the next reshuffle in our regional government.
Good!
ReplyDeleteThe party and the country need strong decisive leadership. We were never better served than Thatcher, lets hope Cameron is just as strong.
Hmm, the 2010 committee? I remember someone else who threw a hissy fit and formed their own 'party' when they didn't get their own way. Hows that Veritas working out for you Kilroy?
ReplyDelete@Boo said...
ReplyDeletedear me isn't it a bit early on to go mad with power?
It's never too early.
@Jimmy said...
There goes ATV.
WTF is "ATV" when it's at home?
Iain, it is not a big majority at all. Remember that all members of the parliamentary party including ministers were entitled to vote. There are 80 frontbenchers who are all effectively under the whip. That therefore leaves a majority of 118 to 90 against the change with about 20 not voting.
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the non voters, don't forget this vote was sprung by Dave without notice last night and some MPs will have been in their constituencies and not practically able to vote whereas all frontbenchers will have been in London attending to the preparation of the coalition agreement.
Putting aside the grubby putsch that this represents, Dave has also confirmed that all his hot air about devolving power and trusting people is bunkum. He does not even trust his own backbenchers and now we know that 118 of them no longer trust him.
The 55% proposal, the AV referendum just died and many other measures just died.
John said...
ReplyDelete"There may be trouble ahead..."
let's face the music and dance?
Why are people referring to "troublemakers"?
ReplyDeleteExpression of differing opinions is healthy - and should inform decisions. Cameron is effectively killing off free speech in his Party.
I don't like the colour of this Conservative Party. It's becoming authoritarian and is showing itself up to be ruthless and unscrupulous.
@Jimmy. "There goes ATV. Poor Nick"
ReplyDeleteATV? The ATV 9 analogue TV) is on the way out!
Cameron gets elected (sort of) and then immediately starts gerrymandering the rules to strenghthen his power. He'll probably change the Conservative leadership election rules next to make it impossible to depose him.
ReplyDeleteAre we witnessing rehearsals for the reappearance of the Tory "bastards",a fringe tragicomedy featuring the Right-wing as treacherous losers?
ReplyDeleteThe self-indulgent behaviour of Cash and cronies brings no satisfaction or pride to Conservative voters or workers.
Being pursuaded and indulged by the BBC to complain, only confirms their shallowness and inability to grasp reality.
Goodbye Tory Old Guard! ha ha ha Your days are numbered. I knew DC would get rid of them somehow... The Tory Old Guard got punked. Brilliant. Love it.
ReplyDeleteand everyone knows it was john major who advised DC to do this. Fact. A very sensible piece of advice...The Tory Old Guard are nothing but eunuchs now!
ReplyDeleteRight Wing Tories = eunuchs. Thank you DC! I heart you for doing this to them.
The result defeats the object of having a backbench committee.
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of the committee was to make the feelings of backbench Conservative M.P's known to the executive, without fear of retribution. Allowing the frontbench to be members will just drive the discontented to form another committee.
Simon,
ReplyDeleteI meant AV. My bad.
"Labour Party lobby fodder and payroll vote emasculate themselves" blogs Iain Dale - then remembers its the Tories...Oh Dear!
ReplyDeleteAre you absolutely sure about this? Not having your leg pulled? Haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else.
ReplyDeleteIf it is true, it is exactly why the backwoods Tories need a coalition.
kingruI've always regarded the 1922 Committee as a bunch of smug saloon bar/golf club bores, as arrogant right-wing bullies.
ReplyDeleteCameron, Osborne, Gove & Co got us over the finishing line.
Where would we be now if Brady, Cash, Leigh & Co were in charge? In the wilderness.
See them off Dave. The real "grassroot" members are behind their elected leader and they don't spend their time abusing him on this blog and ConservativeHome.
It seems this vote was "won" only because 90 odd government ministers, PPSs etc were for some inexplicable reason, allowed to vote though not being, by definition, backbenchers.
ReplyDeleteSo most people qualified for membership voted for the status quo.
Have I missed something?
So Cameron Announces the New World Order according to Channel 4.
ReplyDeleteIf their report is correct, Cameron
says his coalition is the New World Order and you just have to live with it for five years.
Now I will watch sickeningly loyal Tories crawl over each other in the desire to justify this announcement and tell us how wonderful this all is.
Pass a bucket.
Cameron told the Tory party he was heir to Blair.
Exactly! Blair was NWO we all know that.
Cast iron has gone even further.
He is openly the NWO - throwing it in all our faces.
Happy?.
Glad I didn't vote for him after he reneged on Lisbon.
Go and buy your bubbly.
Tories have betrayed the very freedom and fabric of our country -that little that was left after the Single European Act and Maastricht amongst much else.
Tory voters you were conned and you have sold us into the economic slavery of the Bilderbergers and the entire NWO affront.
The Parliamentary Labour Party should now adopt the position abandoned by the 1922 Committee. Whilst the 1922 Committee should now be called the 2010 Committee. There is then the possibility that 2015 election will come to be held on similar conditions to the 1918 Coupon Election which was used to hold onto much of the Lloyd George Wartime Coalition. This 1918 fix, of course, came unstuck when the 1922 Committee was established. But Cameron should beware the fate of Lloyd George and his Party at that time. But if the transferable vote comes into operation, then there might be no need for a Coupon Election in 2015. Cameron will, however, seemingly support first past-the-post which will bring a Coupon Election nearer. But perhaps there is nothing Tories need worry about as Cameron is acting more and more like Clegg day by day. So he will probably push us into the Transferable System after all and avoid a 1922 style collapse of the departing Prime Minister's Party.
ReplyDeleteCanvas, you really have got the bit between your teeth today. No more nice girl with spaghetti shades, more like this.
ReplyDeleteA stupid and needless thing to do. For my money Cameron has got little right since the election up to now, and this is a very big error.
ReplyDelete118 vote against, and some of the new intake will instinctively agree with them in time. Trouble ahead and he deserves it; it's almost as if he is embarrassed by the party he leads.
The 118 will make trouble, and they have the right to, probably over Europe. You can just hear the cabinet now, pouring over the form of words needed to deny a vote on Lisbon if it needs to be brought again before parliament Expect a master class of sophistry.
He is shedding votes by the hundred , by the day.
My, Cameron really is an ambitious little power-grabbing Lefty isn't he - he's no Tory, that's for sure.
ReplyDeleteIt was despicable of him to conceal this ploy until the last minute and even moreso when you realise it was done this way to capitalise on the fact that not all MPs were able to be present to vote on the issue.
I've never particularly trusted him and now I trust him even less.
Sadly, at the last election - and for the first time in my life - I found myself unable to vote Conservative, or specifically for "Cast Iron" Dave. I for one had worked out that Cameron was not a Conservative, rather some namby-pamby rich left-of-centre, euro social christian democrat hybrid "beast". I was perhaps surprised that so many others had not worked this out too. I am therefore not at all surprised at what he is now doing although I am no less disgusted that he is doing it or being allowed to do so. I doubt that we will ever again have a truly Conservative party to vote for in this country. God help us.
ReplyDeleteI worked on Election 2010 for three years. Now I see that we have a leader who thinks that he can/should change the rules of parliament to strengthen the hand he has been dealt by the electorate. Now, he wants to quell dissent in the ranks by putting them under observation.
ReplyDeleteSurely the point of the 22 is completely defeated by this move and it will come back to haunt Cameron, as instead of a quiet word in the shell-like, the dissent will spill out onto the streets.
All very New Labour if you ask me. We might as well have Blair back.....Well....maybe not quite.
What a lot of babies they are. Lightweight has moved with impressive speed to rein in his awkward squad (I confess I doubted he had it in him). He ran the risk that someone would have the bottle to set up a rival backbench association but he appears to have the measure of them. I can see why supporters of the swivel-eyed tendency might be miffed but I'm puzzled as to why their anger is directed at the leadership rather than against those who have decided to confine their resistance to unattributable bitching to the press.
ReplyDelete