Carswell - To Defect Or Not To Defect

There has been much hand wringing over the Douglas Carswell’s to UKIP this week.

What dismays me, is the willingness with which he, and others before him, ‘give up allegiance to one state in exchange for allegiance to another’; in effect abandoning ‘a cause or doctrine to which one is bound by some tie, allegiance, or duty.’

I declare my own loyalty to the Conservative party here, lest anyone feels obliged to give me an ear bashing.

If I feel that decisions made are wrong for those I represent, or that my party behaves badly, then I speak out. It is the least I can do. I resist towing the party line, and there are times when I have questioned my own allegiance, and considered leaving.

I regularly approached by other parties to join them, and much as I might admire and respect their differing views, I have never considered defecting. This is partly due to my own stubbornness, but there is also the part that feels, much like a marriage. I’m in for the long haul and if I leave, things will never change.

Carswell’s Blog entry is headed ‘It’s Time for Change’. Perhaps his constituency, when counting the cost of the by-election, will think so too. What he appears not to acknowledge, is that he is part of the problem.

Europe seems to be at the centre of much dissatisfaction; rightly so. I have always been, and remain, a Eurosceptic , believing we were tricked into joining. However, what we must consider, until we regain full command of our own finances, is the cost of leaving, and the impact this will have on our recovery from a deep and painful recession.

Carswell complains of the Westminster ‘clique’, and I consider he is accurate in his assessment of the spin and positioning that takes place. What he does not recognise, though, in his naivety, is that cliques exist at all levels of government, from local parish councils upwards, just as they do in business; it is a sad fact of life. His defection may be more a case of sour grapes in response to his own dismay at not having broken into Cameron’s inner circle, joining a new clique of his own; because no-one would listen.

It is disingenuous of him to comment on other parties’ ‘safe seats’, when by defecting he appears to have been handed his own ‘safe seat’ on a plate. I would be skeptical of any party that so readily abandoned their own selected candidate, Roger Lord, because a richer plum landed in their pocket. This says much about their principles, or lack of them.

I do believe the current government is serious about change, but that in many cases our elected representatives are so far removed from what really matters to the man on the street the pace and form of the change is out of kilter with expectations.

Change cannot happen overnight, but with the need existing on so many fronts, what I want to see is more focus on the real issues, not the flurry of kneejerk reactions and ill thought out policies we see in response to yet another crisis.

Nehru said, ‘Our chief defect is that we are more given to talking about things than to doing them.’ I’ve always been more of a doer, even if I sometimes get it wrong. What Carswell’s constituents need to ask, is ‘What has he done? If available reference material is to be believed, quite a lot it would seem. I for one wish he’d hung in there.