Joint Press Conference on Public Appointments Reform

[Will Frost]

William Croft, joined by Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader Sir Bryant Wolfe, emerges from the Palace of Westminster and walks towards the lawn outside Parliament. The two men are seen talking to one another as they approach the lawn, at which point Mr. Croft steps in front of a podium placed in front of assembled reporters, and begins speaking.

Good morning everyone,

As you all know the Conservative Party, supported by our Parliamentary colleagues in the Liberal Democrat Party, have put forth legislation that will fundamentally reform the broken public appointments system. Our legislation will provide much needed autonomy and authority to the Commissioner for Public Appointments, enable the British people to throw out corrupt politicians, and commission a long overdue independent public inquiry into the systemic failures of the public appointments system. It is a logical, fair, and commonsense proposal put forth by the Opposition in the hopes of beginning the long process of restoring public confidence in Government.

We are singularly guided by the public’s desire for change, and for an end to the broken system that allows Government Ministers to operate in the shadows of the Whitehall machine. As I have said time and time again, the majority of the British public have a negative view of the public appointments system, and they are calling for change. In tabling Motion 1, expressing our opposition to the appointment of Peter Mandelson to head the Dome project, the Conservative Party has proven that there is a commanding majority in favor of delivering that change.

We have also proven that, while an independent inquiry is certainly necessary, there are obvious problems that we know about today and that we have the capacity to fix. We know that the Commissioner needs a wider scope of authority to compensate for loopholes in previous legislation, which our legislation solves for. We know that the Commissioner needs to be legally and financially independent from the Ministers she is charged with holding accountable, which our legislation solves for. And we know that the British people deserve a legal remedy to address a status quo where corrupt politicians can remain in office. Our legislation provides that remedy.

This is the status quo that our legislation seeks to dismantle, and the status quo that for some reason many on the Labour frontbench treat with complacency. There is no room for being complacent when the result of doing so is the erosion of British democracy itself. Call me an optimist, but I believe that deep down, the Prime Minister and her Government feel the same way. Politics and partisan bluster aside, I believe we share the same commitment for better government. I genuinely believe that the Government knows that this status quo is unacceptable, and that they want to change it just as much as I and Sir Bryant do.

That is why, in a sign of good faith and genuine partnership, I would like to invite the Prime Minister to meet with me and Sir Bryant in my office to discuss what it will take for the Government to support our legislation. I am ready and willing to find a way forward, and I know I speak for both Sir Bryant and I when I say we are eager to work together to reach a solution. Reforming the public appointments system, and restoring confidence in Westminster, is too important a task to fall victim to partisan politics. In my view, everything is on the table. All I ask is that the Prime Minister be willing to meet with me and hammer out an agreement.

Indeed I am willing to meet with any Member of Parliament, from any political party, if it means getting us closer to passing this landmark legislation and putting the people back in control of their Government. There is a major gulf between Sir Bryant and I when it comes to our politics, but we have set aside those many differences in order to work together to achieve objective public good. Anything less would be a dereliction of my duty as Leader of the Opposition, and as a public servant of the British people. Today, I would like to make a formal invitation for the Labour Party to do the same. To recognize that despite our differences, this is an issue on which we have the ability to not only agree upon change, but to enact it.

Thank you very much, and I believe my colleague Sir Bryant would like to say a few words as well.

William turns to the podium next to him, grinning at Sir Bryant and nodding for him to begin.

[Sir James McCrimmon]

Good morning and thank you, William, for those wonderful words you just shared with us. While I know we will find ourselves on opposing sides of various issues in the years to come, I am so honored to work alongside you, without any sense of gains for our parties, to make the needed reforms to fix this country’s issues with corruption and sleaze today.

Our parliamentary system is based around the idea that all democracies share - that “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government,” as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights puts it. This idea of the consent of the governed is what grounds my own work in Parliament as well - that I have been chosen by the people of North Southwark and Bermondsey and thus will vote, speak, and propose legislation on their behalf.

The great John Locke wrote that “the legislative and executive power used by government … is nothing except the natural power of each [person] resigned into the hands of the community … and it is justified merely because it is a better way of protecting natural right than the self-help to which each [person] is naturally entitled.” In Locke’s view, and this is one Will and I wholeheartedly share with him, it is our job as legislators to put forth bills that produce services and reforms that help all citizens of this United Kingdom prosper and to regulate against things that harm our community as a whole.

These relationships between legislators and constituents are built on trust - same with executives and citizens. When our system or leaders in it face tests of corrupt, dishonest, or immoral behavior, be it David Mellor, Jeremy Thorpe, or Peter Mandelson, that causes those relationships of trust to wither away bit by bit. It is why, in other legislative systems, like that of the United States, their Congress sees approval ratings of 37%.

Citizens deserve to trust the people they vote for. And they can only do that if us politicians police ourselves - both in our own actions and in helping to set a shared set of guidelines for how we should be treated if we stray off the straight and narrow path. That is the purpose behind the Public Appointments Comprehensive Reform Act. This Act will set up an inquiry, like everyone agrees should be done, to recommend changes to the public appointments system. However, William and I both agree that we need changes now. We have seen in this Millenium Dome saga how this system may be circumvented - not closing these loopholes now will leave them wide open for anyone else who wants to go through.

More corruption, cronyism, and sleaze is not what this country needs while we wait for this inquiry to do their due diligence. While I certainly do not expect anyone to do something that would break these rules, we have been surprised by a number of people that we have sworn up and down could never do something corrupt. But they did it anyway. We know now. Before even more animals escape, let’s close the barn door.

Finally, I would like to reiterate what William said - this is a bill that needs buy-in from all sorts of MPs. Whether you’re in government or opposition, on the frontbench or the back, William and I would be pleased to talk with you about how we can best make a bill that we can all support and stand by. I wrangled Cowboy Croft and got him to the negotiating table to hash this out - I’m more than willing to do that again with as many other MPs as necessary for us to have buy-in.

[Barclay A.A. Stanley]

This is the kind of thing I want to see more of from Croft (and from the Liberal Democrats). It would, of course, have been nice to see the Lib Dem leader out on this one, but I realize that we were technically on hiatus, so that doesn't count against them (though, you'll note, that it was not strictly necessary to go ahead with this until the hiatus ended, if they wanted the leader to be there).

Croft starts us off with a good rundown of the issue, a sound explanation of why he believes that the bill they have introduced is a good one, and a little bit of spin about why we don't need to wait for a public inquiry and it is taken well. Then, Wolfe comes in to back the Leader of the Opposition up and double down on the "we need to act now, and then do more later" line. It works well, the speeches are a good tandem (albeit slightly repetitive instead of tackling two separate angles, which would have been even more effective) and provides both parties with a bit of a (much needed) boost.

The final soundbyte in Wolfe's speech, about wrangling Cowboy Croft, was a bit of a jab that scores him some points, but it might hamper his ability to get people to the table in the future--we'll see.

Overall, the Tories gain +2 momentum for their lead on this issue, and the Lib Dems gain +2 momentum for their "wrangling" action.