OPEN LETTER TO IAIN STEWART on Covid. Brexit, UK AID, Post Office, Integrity, scrutiny and leadership

 

From: Mike Cashman
Sent: 26 April 2021 
To: 'iain.stewart.mp@parliament.uk' 
Subject: OPEN LETTER TO IAIN STEWART on Covid. Brexit, UK AID, Post Office, Integrity, scrutiny and leadership

 

OPEN LETTER TO IAIN STEWART MP

Dear Iain

We corresponded last year and until now I have not followed up on those interactions this year. I am now taking this opportunity to write on these and other topics. I am afraid that the result is a 2000-word letter, but the issues are related so I have combined them in one letter.  There is a summary at the end.

Let me say at the start that while you and I would often be on opposite sides of the argument, I have been vocal in encouraging those on my side of the argument to be understanding of those on your side. I have strongly made the case that we should not judge all Tory MPs by the actions of the leaders, and for some I am sure life has been difficult. I have also encouraged people to avoid the temptation to say “I told you so” on Brexit.

For transparency, then, I want to acknowledge that I have been active in campaigning against Tory Leadership policies, as you would see from both serious and satirical material from Viewdelta and from my YouTube Channels “I Dont Beg Pardon” and “Brexits A Trick Not A Treat”. I am not mentioning these in any expectation that you will view any of the material (though naturally you would be welcome to join 1000+ Subscribers), and indeed I was pleased that you viewed the video that Peter Cook and I prepared for you last year; but as I say I am just being open about my other communications.

I want to focus here on constructive steps forward in a number of areas.

 

  1. COVID:

We need to be concerned about the B1617 variant. I have publicly called for an approach that is strategic and that has clear outcomes defined rather than just interventions (“25000 contact tracers”, “100,000 tests per day” last year). Massive lateral flow testing without confirmatory tests may be counter-productive if there is as expected a significant level of false positives.
I encourage you and all concerned members of the Government to follow advice from Independent Sage. (Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the independent Sage meetings each Friday were televised?)  Testing close contacts and backward tracing are best practice not being adopted in UK, and were important in the (DFID-funded) eradication of Ebola in Sierra Leone – I managed the budget for burials and vehicles (ambulances/hearses) and have some insights regarding that programme, but it is Independent Sage that is giving clear informed up to date guidance in this area. Assistance to sequence the genomes of emerging variants at source would appear to be needed as well – by the time a variant arrives in the UK it may be too late. Effective financial support in the UK to remove the disincentive to isolate would also be a significant step forward.

More broadly, Lessons should be learned, and applied as soon as possible. “We did all we could” is not true but more importantly indicates “We do not know what we misjudged”, A Public Inquiry should be held soon so that lessons can be applied and so that memories are fresh.

 

  1. BREXIT:

You and I corresponded in 2019-2020, including the response in January 2020 from the Department for Exiting the European Union promising consultation. We now hear from many businesses who made many efforts to engage in some consultation with Government but who could not establish any communication, and have lost business in 2021 – in some cases an entire stream of business, e.g. the Cheshire Cheese Company where the Government adviser admitted the problem which wiped out their export business to the EU. So it appears that my concerns were justified and the reassurances from DexEU were empty promises.   I don’t need to criticise the Northern Ireland protocol myself, as I did then, because the UK government itself is unhappy with the agreement it signed, after the Prime Minister denied its terms several times, which I think is a measure of his distaste for the arrangements.

I feel that it’s reasonable to take account of events and experience in 2020-21 when identifying the best possible future for this country. I cannot see any resolution for the multiple problems seen in 2021 other than rejoining the Single Market and Customs Union; can you?  But this will I acknowledge need change under point 7 below.

Incidentally, let us recognise that any “mandate” from the 2016 referendum was fully discharged as indeed the Conservatives claimed. The referendum can not bind the UK for all time and therefore now has no significance; we can respond to the circumstances of the time. (Being advisory the referendum should not have bound the UK at all when it became clear that the promises made to garner Brexit support were unachievable, but that is a different and non-current matter).

 

3         UK AID:

I put significant thought into expressing my concerns about this. I was disappointed to not receive any reply from you to my considered point in my 14th March email. It may be that the damage is now done, but I am still open to hearing any response.

 

  1. POST OFFICE:

I spoke on BBC Radio 4 Any Answers about this (Saturday 24th April, 27 minutes from the start). I would simply encourage the Government as Post Office shareholder to require this matter to be resolved quickly to redress the wrongs suffered by the people wrongly prosecuted and threatened by the Post Office. This is a question of the Public Sector acting with integrity

 

5         INTEGRITY:

The UK voters, to my amazement, had continued to provide a level of support for the Conservatives generally greater than for other Parties, despite the string of corruption and scandals – for example the favouring of unqualified people and companies for Covid-related services such as PPE, which can be seen from the National Audit Office report and the Good Law Project website. I suspect that this is a major reason for the complacency about these issues in the Government (e.g. no-one has resigned), but you might know the reasons better than I do.

For example, do we believe Boris Johnson who stated at the dispatch box that all the contracts were on the record, or the Government lawyers who provided information in Court that 608 of the 708 contracts had been published and 100 were outstanding? They can not both be correct.

The oft-cited defence of “we are in a hurry” does not wash. The VIP lave slowed down effective procurement. I have been in a position of obtaining procurement waivers under time pressure with public funds, and I am well aware that the Senior Responsible Office is still accountable for ensuring Fitness for Purpose, Suitability of Supplier and as far as possible Value for Money.

This is all recent history over the last 12 months – as I say we can all speculate about reasons for the public reactions or lack of reaction so far. But the reason I write now is that there are indications that the issue of Government integrity is now seriously “cutting through”. Cameron’s lobbying,  Mercer’s news, Cummings’ revelations, and the judgements in Court for the Good Law Project may all be factors. Mike Galsworthy (Scientists for EU) has predicted out that when the issues show battles between personalities (rather, than, say contracts) , e.g. Cummings vs Johnson then the mainstream Press engages, and as I look at the newspapers yesterday it seems to me that this prediction is accurate.

If the above is correct then the decision for the Tory Party is whether to be branded as the party of deceit and corruption, or whether to take a decisively different direction.

This is an area where I have been particularly vocal in saying we should not judge all Tory MPs by the actions of the leaders. Many people I speak to would tar all with the same brush; my view is different (and I would be fascinated by your view but do not necessarily expect that you can be open about it).

My view is that if your political instincts and convictions are broadly Conservative then

  • I might not agree with you on many points though I would of course absolutely defend your right to honestly represent them,
  • but I would also recognise that your Parliamentary home might be the Tory Party even if you don’t agree with the conduct of its leaders
  • and I could also see that it could be difficult to do other than “toe the Party line” for the moment, and that your only hope of having a positive influence on the Parliamentary Conservative party in the future under different leadership might be to follow the party line for now.

 

  1. SCRUTINY:

This Government clearly dislikes scrutiny. The current co-ordinated actions to severely constrain public protest, eliminate programmes critical of the Government (MASH report), and cripple Judicial Review all act to reduce scrutiny. I am well aware of past form – the Government’s attempts to prorogue parliament failed and one of the key reasons was the reduction in legislation scrutiny that would result (for no good justification).

The fact that the Prime Minister rarely answers a question at Prime Minister’s Questions (sometimes admonished about this by the Speaker) adds to the impression of a Government fearful of scrutiny.

 

  1. LEADERSHIP:

I do not know whether Boris Johnson will resign (or be deposed) e.g. within the next month, within the year etc. Dominic Cummings does not know. Members of the Cabinet do not know. MPs do not know.  But that question is now under active discussion, and the Prime Minister will be further damaged by each new revelation of corruption. “What won’t fundamentally alter is the character of Mr Johnson’s government. If you’ve missed the latest sleaze story, don’t worry, another one will be along in a minute” writes Andrew Rawnsley , after so many scandals and I have no doubt  that he is correct. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/25/tories-wrong-to-think-they-will-never-face-day-of-reckoning-sleaze

This will be on the mind of the Members of the Cabinet and others hoping to be the next Conservative Party Leader and Prime Minister. Last time there were a dozen contenders.  We now have to see how disruptive this may be to the process of Government.  Personally, if we are to have a Conservative Government for the next 3 years then I would like to see it led by a person of integrity, and my own view is that some of the best Conservative candidates are people respected by their fellow MPs and elected to be Chairs of Select Committees (and therefore outside the current Cabinet, which means they are less tainted by the Government scandals).

In fact I think – in his own interests - the best moment for Boris Johnson to make his farewells would be now. He can claim some success from the Covid-19 vaccination programme and can highlight the headline “Got Brexit Done” and depart before the more significant impacts become unignorable. It may be the calm before the storm of the B1617 Covid variant. I appreciate that the Leadership may be more of a poisoned chalice at the moment than contenders might hope would be the case if the change were postponed to next year; but I am nonetheless sure that there would be many contenders including some who could effect some positive change in the areas I mention above.

For those reasons I can see that it could be a kindness to Mr Johnson, as well as a blessing to the country, to arrange the change as soon as possible, ideally during a time when the Covid infections are low before the impact of the B1617 variant.

It might be argued that you might file this section away until the leadership election is under way. But you and the other Conservative MPs have the responsibility to ensure the best possible leadership for the UK., and I would encourage you, even if only in private conversations, even if of course you can not in any way acknowledge this, to work towards a Conservative Party that can claim some integrity, led by a Prime Minister of integrity. That must mean being proactive.

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this email is intended to prejudge your reaction to it; I will only know your reaction to it if you respond.

Yours

Mike Cashman

 

 

SUMMARY

  1. COVID – Please follow independent Sage advice. And hold a Public Inquiry
  2. BREXIT – Is the best way to resolve the Brexit problems to rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union?
  3. UK AID – I would welcome a response to my earlier letter .
  4. POST OFFICE – can the injustices be resolved as quickly as possible ?
  5. INTEGRITY – Can the Conservative Party act to avoid being forever branded the Corruption Party?
  6. SCRUTINY – Bearing in mind the Leadership point, it would be good to see a new Leader more confident of policies and therefore open to scrutiny.
  7. LEADERSHIP – Can we hope to have a Prime Minister of integrity, and indeed would it not be desirable to make this change quickly?

 

Yours

 

Mike Cashman  

Viewdelta Press

www.viewdelta.com

<name address & phone number supplied>

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Johnson departure - why, when, how, who & what next ?

Image
  JOHNSON DEPARTURE - why, when, how, who & what next? (1000 words) I have blogged bits of this in various places, so this blog post brings them together. WHY? Boris Johnson is arguably the worst leader we could have at this time. Thousands of people have died unnecessarily because of his mistakes; thousands more will die. We also cannot start to fix the Brexit blunders while the Blunderer-in-Chief is in charge. He persistently resists scrutiny and will learn nothing. #IDontBegPardon , we hear from him, which is why that's the title for our new book & CD. A change of Prime Minister, has the potential to save thousands of lives, and that on its own is a good reason to hope for this and to work towards it. We could get a new Prime Minister who is focused on the real job, not on enriching incompetent cronies in the way that the National Audit Office report shows that Johnson's Government has done. WHY WILL MPs SACK HIM? Most MPs want (1) to retain their seats - that's...
Read more

Meaty First Caller - "Indian variant" B1617 - transcript of Mike Cashman on BBC Radio 4 Any Answers 15 May 2021

  Anita   Anand ( 00:00 ): Let’s start with the news of the Indian variant, the announcement that we've got to go carefully at five o'clock yesterday, Michael Cashman. You're our first caller on this. What did you make of it all? Mike Cashman   ( 00:11 ): Hallo there Anita, I wish that people who spoke about this on the radio understood the maths. We've had both the prime minister and Niall Ferguson saying it's relatively small numbers - and the Prime Minister actually saying, if we saw exponential growth, then we would have to do something about it. We are seeing exponential growth, now. It's tripling each week is what we've seen, Now the government is wrong to block surge vaccination in Blackburn, Bolton, and so on, because that could have a real impact. And you know, I've heard people say, “Oh well, but the vaccine takes three weeks to take effect”; Anita I'll give you a statistic. If it's tripling every week, then in five weeks, it mult...
Read more

Covid situation in India tragically illustrates the impact of "taking it on the chin"

  The Covid situation is India is a humanitarian tragedy, I hope the UK  can help further. The DEC Coronavirus appeal has been extended to cover India The situation is also, if we needed one, an illustration of what could have been the impact in the UK  of “letting the virus move through the population” , “taking it on the chin”,  and of not locking down while other countries do so, to avoid (in the words of Johnson’s Greenwich speech), going “beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage”. There is debate as to whether Johnson shouted “let the bodies pile high in their thousands”  and thereby demonstrated a lack of empathy with the bereaved and a lack of caring as to how many would die. But after three fatal decisions to delay lockdowns, and after his refusal to meet families of the bereaved, there can be little doubt about the lack of empathy, or of his continued  inclination towards an approach that woul...
Read more