Sometimes, deselecting an MP is the only sensible option

In this restless, anti-establishment political mood it is not surprising that there has been an increase in attempts in both the Conservative and Labour parties to deselect sitting Members of Parliament.

Often two issues get muddled together during such controversies. One is whether local members in a constituency association should have the power to deselect their MP. Another is whether they are well-advised to do so in any given case.

Labour has generally shown greater willingness to embrace deselections, and it is understandable that should be the case. For over 40 years left-wing factions in the Party have used this tactic: in the 1970s, “bedsit Trots” would move home to which constituency was being prioritised. They haven’t even been terribly secretive about such plotting. Chris Mullin, who himself went on to be a Labour MP, wrote a pamphlet that was published in 1981 with the catchy title: “How to deselect your MP”.

We now have the bizarre situation, years after the defeat of Communism in the Cold War, that the Marxist infiltrators have finally captured the Labour leadership. The tension is that the leadership and most of the members are on the far Left, while most Labour MPs are social democrats of varying hues. That leaves the MPs vulnerable. A few have jumped – perhaps worried that they might otherwise be pushed.

For the Conservatives, the membership tends to be less consumed by politics than in the Labour Party. There is a tradition of public service and loyalty. That means that a sitting Conservative MP enjoys – or at any rate used to enjoy – a considerable degree of deference. If a deselection did take place it then it was as likely to be due to personal misconduct or some sort of social antagonism rather than a dispute over a political issue.

Anger over Brexit has changed that dynamic, at least in a few extreme cases. During the EU referendum itself, relations were pretty cordial in local Conservative associations where members were campaigning on opposite sides. It was mutually accepted as being fair enough to do so. The problem has come with the result not being implemented. The greatest exasperation has been with those Tory MPs who declared in the 2017 general election that they accepted that Brexit must happen, but then have since tried to thwart it.

It is right that local members should be able to choose their candidate. This should not only mean choosing a new candidate when a sitting MP retires or there is some quirk or fate such as a boundary change. It should also mean being able, should they so wish, to choose someone else even if the sitting MP wishes to continue. It is a huge honour to serve as an MP – yet too many of them have a “sense of entitlement” an assumption that if they have a “safe seat” then they have a job for life.

The counter argument is that deselections give power to “small cliques”, in what used to be described as “smoke filled rooms”. But the antidote to Party democracy being abused is for Parliamentary democracy to be exercised. When a general election comes along we all have a vote. The sitting MP who has been ditched by his Party could stand as an independent. If the electorate feel a Party has been “captured by extremists” they can vote for another Party.

Is an alternative arrangement really credible? Is it really plausible if a local Party votes to ditch an MP as their candidate that the apparatchiks in some distant headquarters should be able to overturn their decision? If the difficulty is that too few of us are members of political parties, then denying the membership of any rights is scarcely a good recruitment strategy. It would reduce them to a kind of serfdom – handing over money and being sent out to deliver leaflets but denied any decision-making power.

A different point is whether the Party members would be wise to exercise this power. In some cases it should be done more often. Ten years ago we had the MPs expenses scandal. Many cases caused justified anger. It showed that many MPs had the wrong motives. Yet the clearout was very modest.

Soon there will be a by-election in Brecon and Radnorshire. The Conservative candidate is Chris Davies who has been the MP. Yet the by-election is taking place due to a recall petition after he pleaded guilty to two counts of fraud regarding his Parliamentary expenses. Surely the local Conservatives should have chosen a new candidate.

When it comes to Brexit the “broad church” argument is still strong. What strains loyalty is when a pledge is broken. Ken Clarke, at least, never said he would accept the referendum result. But others did. To then vote for a second referendum, or to revoke Article 50, or to “take no deal off the table” is at odds with that.

The fury induced should come as no surprise. Sometimes it might result in some unedifying language being used, with references to “traitors”, “liars”, “quislings” and so forth. This will often come from long standing members. The efforts of Leave EU, led by the businessman Arron Banks, to encourage UKIP members to join the Conservatives has been less significant than claimed. It has been exaggerated both by Mr Banks and the various Conservative MPs facing difficulty.

Is it a good judgement to deselect the anti-Brexit Conservative MPs? It depends on the circumstances. In the case of David Gauke, the Justice Secretary who represents South West Hertfordshire, it would seem to be a mistake. For Dominic Grieve, the MP for Beaconsfield, it is a different matter. He was one of ten Conservative MPs who voted to revoke Article 50. What’s more, he says he would be prepared to vote against a Conservative government in a motion of no confidence. To even contemplate doing so is a pretty shocking stance for a Conservative MP to take.

Trust the people is the best approach. For all the abuse heaped on Conservative Party members, they are mostly decent, patriotic, public-spirited people. They will be keenly conscious of how their actions have consequences for the national interest, and the Conservatives standing with the public at large. The Conservative members are currently choosing our next Prime Minister. If they occasionally decide at local level that their MP is a dud and should be replaced, then they should have the right for that decision to be accepted.