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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
- COVID – Please follow independent Sage advice. And hold a
Public Inquiry
- BREXIT – Is the best way to resolve the Brexit problems to
rejoin the Single Market and Customs Union?
- UK AID – I would welcome a response to my earlier letter .
- POST OFFICE – can the injustices be resolved as quickly as
possible ?
- INTEGRITY – Can the Conservative Party act to avoid being
forever branded the Corruption Party?
- 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.
- 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
<name address
& phone number supplied>
Comments
Post a Comment