Corby messages

So Labour duly reclaimed the parliamentary seat of Corby?  Big surprise?  I don't really think so as the former Conservative MP, Louise Mensch, had a rather slim majority, anyway.  Also this was a lowish turn-out of around 45% and so maybe the Conservative supporters just stayed at home?

Nevertheless, this result does pose questions and provides lessons for David Cameron and the Tory leadership.

The minority-coalition partner, Liberal Democrats, were badly beaten into fourth place.  How badly should not be under-stated.  This party that seeks, from a very minority position, to dictate (successfully in most eyes, so far it must be said) the tone and direction of UK Government policy and yet could garner less than 1,800 votes!  A lesson for David Cameron?  Maybe there is no need to be so super-nice to these folks?  Maybe you should press on with boundary reform? And deeper welfare reductions.

The big winner of this by-election, was the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP).  UKIP came a very respectable 3rd getting almost 15% of the votes and three times that of the Liberal Democrats!  UKIP's main policy objective is the exit of the UK from the European Union.  In national opinion polls, UKIPis now regularly polling in third position.  A lesson and and opportunity for David Cameron and the Tories.

As I have posted here before, I believe that whichever of  the major party - Tory or Labour - that has the courage to clearly announce a policy of re-negotiation of the relationship between the UK and EU, a policy that does not rule out a possible exit, will greatly benefit in electoral terms. 

In spite of Labour's sudden conversion to an anti-EU stance on the EU budget issue, we know that they are fully on-board with the statist and protectionist policies of the EU as well as their federalist politics and direction. 

After all, in Europe, Federalism means 'do as I tell you. I am an EU politician and therefore I know best!  Okay so I wasn't democratically elected but I still know best and you need to know your place!!  You, are a taxpayer and provide funds for my lavish lifestyle, I don't need your opinion, just your money!'

So there is a great opportunity for the Conservatives to, at a stroke, gain political popularity and seize the political initiative.  I doubt though that they will grasp it.  I sense that come the next general election, of the four main parties, Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems will all offer a common platform of 'negotiation rather than confrontation' with the EU and so will keep the UK saddled with this enterprise-stifling and dangerously undemocratic organization.

The biggest danger for the Conservatives is, what if UKIP just doesn't 'fade away?   What if they continue to poll third, nationally?  What if they start to put together a policy platform that holds-up all of the Socialist policies that the EU has fostered and brought countries like Greece, Spain and Ireland to their knees and the edge of anarchy, and show that this is the direction where the UK could head?  Then they would be stealing the economic policy of the Tories, as well.

Not good times for the Conservative leadership. 

Your Choice - National Interest or Political Opportunism

Which would you choose, if you were a politician?  Go for the quick soundbite and a 30 second slot on the Six O'clock news or do what's right, in the interest of your country?

Consider:

You are a finance minister and there is a global banking crisis with confidence in the whole economic system, on a knife edge.  The Finance Sector is a major component of your country's economy.  The largest bank in your country faces insolvency and this would have a catastrophic effect on the whole financial system.  A major contribution to this particular local  situation is that this bank over-stretched itself with an overseas acquisition but you worry that the light and 'hands-off' regulatory systems, that you allowed to exist, might also be a contributory factor.  

So you inject a very significant sum of taxpayer money, into the bank and take a substantial shareholding.  You decide that it would be best if the semi (largely) state-owned bank be managed at arms length rather than become part of any ministerial portfolio, though you do push for the exit of the bank's CEO.  You put in place such an arrangement for the management of the taxpayers investment.  You, along with the bank's board, negotiate with a suitably qualified banking executive.  Someone not caught up in the immediate crisis but who 'made his bones' in banking.  You agree contractual terms and set targets etc. and then step back.

Get into your personal Tardis

Now Fast Forward 2 years


You are in opposition.  The recent election sees the electorate lay a charge of economic mis-management, at your party's door and they kick you out of office.  However, they are swayed by the charm and rhetoric of a smaller party and so the election result is that this minor party gains a seat at the big table and participates in the coalition government that is formed.


Back into your personal Tardis

Fast Forward 2 years

In spite of the government initiating austerity cuts, your party is languishing in the polls and many lay this at the door of your lacklustre leader.   The earlier mentioned banking executive is making good progress at the bank and achieving the targets that are set for him, by the Board of Directors.  Under the terms and conditions of the contract of employment, which you and your colleagues either directly negotiated or approved, he is entitled to a performance related bonus.  The government that succeeded yours, imposed a blanket ban on large cash bonuses and so the bulk of his bonus must be in shares that vest over a period of term.  Technically that may be a breach of his contractual terms but he doesn't complain - he is in it for the long run.

Do you as an opposition MP or Shadow Cabinet Minister throw hypocrisy to the wind and use the compensation package that your party agreed to, when in power, as a stick to beat the recently elected government, or do you support the individual that you selected and find the words to placate the mob whose fury has been whipped-up by a sensationalising media?

Consider also.

You are part of the newly elected government.  The majority political philosophy is founded on the support of trade and business and less intervention from government in the business sphere. 

Given the above scenario, do you
Support the executive and say that his compensation is a matter for the Board of Directors? Pointing out, as you do so,  that the employment contract was negotiated by the previous administration.  Also that by forcing boards to ignore legal contracts we bring into question the foundations on which our society is built!

Do you throw the executive to the baying mob, pressure him into forgoing the bonus, while at the same time pointing out that the employment contract was agreed by the previous administration, etc..  At the same time ignoring the risk to your party's and your country's reputation.


Now

• Answer this as if you were a UK Labour politician
• 
  
• Answer this as if you were a UK Conservative politician
• 
  
• Answer this if you were a UK Lib Dem Politician 

and finally

• Answer this if you are just a decent UK citizen, who, maybe doesn't understand the complexities of the financial system nor why all of these bankers seem to get such large salaries and bonuses, but think it is important that the UK doesn't get a reputation as a place where contracts are agreed and then ignored.  In short, someone with decency and a moral code that isn't swayed by the slightest of political breezes.