POLITICS
Treason's off, but there's plenty more to choose from the out-to-lunch menu
SIMON HEFFER
Last week a distinguished former public servant and her husband held a lunch party for some former colleagues. While tucking into terrine, boeuf en daube and crème brillee, they had just the sort of conversa- tion our Prime Minister longs to think of intelligent people having: about growth being set to take off, and Britain becoming a model of prosperity and civility compared with other European nations. The former public servant is not wanted by the police, nor is she a member of any proscribed organisation. However, as she is Lady Thatcher, as two of her guests were Mr Portillo, the Chief Secretary and Mr Lilley, the Social Security Secretary, and as the Government is paranoid, one of the most absurd half-hours even of this administra- tion has ensued.
The lunch was not secret. It was entered in the Ministers' official diaries. For some time such diaries have been routinely sent to Conservative Central Office, ostensibly for co-ordination purposes, but really so tabs could be kept on which Ministers are seeing which subversives. The Government regards political debate as a social evil, and it closely watches those Ministers who are known or imagined to practise it. The attendance at Lady Thatcher's luncheon table of these two, who have never made a secret of their feelings for their former chief, allowed mischief-makers on the fed- eralist wing of the Tory party to embark on an unfortunate smear campaign.
Never mind that Maastricht was not, I am told, discussed at the lunch. The 'senior Cabinet sources' who so helpfully briefed the Sunday newspapers may well realise that such a gathering could find other things to discuss; but with the news man- agement for which this regime is famous, those 'sources' correctly surmised that no ordinary person would ever believe treason was not plotted. Therefore, it was made known by 'senior Cabinet sources' not only that Messrs Lilley and Portillo had acted foolishly by partaking of the boeuf en daube, but even that they would be 'carpet- ed' by Mr Major for their 'disloyalty'.
Whatever his problems, Mr Major is not that stupid. His office, having allowed for smearing of two of his senior Ministers by their colleagues to continue for a day or two, then unconvincingly denied that Mr Major would dream of interfering in Messrs Lilley and Portillo's social activities. He is clever enough to know that, even if these Ministers are less enthusiastic about Maastricht than he or Mr Tristan Garel- Jones is, firing either or both of them would scarcely help management of the Tory party. This would be especially true were the sackings to be represented as pun- ishment for lunching with another Privy Councillor.
This story came at the end of a week when the Ministers and whips responsible for piloting Maastricht through the Com- mons had been made to contemplate possi- ble defeat. One whip said that 'it looks inevitable that we are going to lose a vote at some stage — we can't help it.' Last week business was abandoned twice, once without even risking a vote, because the Government ran out of troops. `They man- aged to keep the debate going after 10 p.m. on Thursday,' one MP told me, tut then by 11.30 people were starting to drift off, com- plaining that they had constituencies to get back to and were fed up sitting around vot- ing for something they don't believe in.' What has especially dismayed the whips is that the number of Tory MPs who have, at one time or another, voted against or abstained on Maastricht has now passed 50. This is not far off a quarter of those eligible (by not holding any office) to rebel.
The attack on sceptical Ministers (for which fingers have been pointed, no doubt unfairly, at Mr Hunt, the Welsh Secretary, and Lord Wakeham, the Cabinet's stirrer- in-chief) was a second prong of an orches- trated assault. It started with an onslaught against rebels at the weekly meeting of the 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers. `Sheer panic,' said a rebel, 'and all they've done is make us more resolute to stuff them and the Bill.' The rebels add that the records of some of their main attackers in the Thatcher era put them in no position to lecture colleagues on loyalty.
The unpleasantness will reach a climax this weekend at Harrogate, when the Con- servative Central Council meets. Some back-stabbing is already scheduled, as the grass-roots want to take issue with some of the reforms of party organisation being car- ried out by the Chairman, Sir Norman Fowler. However, the main task of minis- ters at the conference will be to have a paragraph in their speeches about the need for 'loyalty'. The audience will include con- stituency chairmen and various other aspi- rant OBEs. Having failed to bring rebels into line, and with threats to withdraw the whip, meaningless with a majority of 20, the whips must now twist arms in the Shires. Mr Major confided in journalists on his way back from Washington that the time to apply pressure in the constituencies had come. This shows his poor grasp of how much support rebel MPs have in their stand against federalism and the ERM.
Several rebels have mentioned that the word 'cleselection' has drifted into conver- sation with their whips lately. No one has been threatened, but the odd whip has claimed to have heard that some such trou- ble might be brewing in rebel constituen- cies. There is no evidence of this, but the whips know the naivety of some of those with whom they deal. Rebels can apparent- ly be allowed to vote against points of prin- ciple, but not against the Government on matters of procedure. 'I can't believe that is going to play very well with my chairman,' a rebel told me. 'My workers aren't in the habit of passing their evenings in excited talk about procedure. They are worried about Maastricht, though.'
Whether or not the Government is defeated — say on one of the Social Chap- ter amendments that would change British law, and therefore be beyond the interpre- tation of the Attorney-General — other factors make Mr Major desperate to press on. The loss of his majority on this impor- tant question severely undermines him as Prime Minister. It detracts from what he can achieve. His trip to Washington was a success, but on his return all he could read about was news of a poll that claimed only 20 per cent of people thought he was up to his job. Also, if the Socialists lose the French election, and the German economic slowdown becomes worse, his internal opponents will be given more ammunition in their fight against European union.
Backbench MPs who have merely been a nuisance to him are now becoming a down- right pain. That is why some of their col- leagues launch pompous reproaches against them and why two perfectly good Cabinet Ministers have been smeared. The battle between the two sides in the Tory party has entered an unforgiving phase. Their can be no telling who will win. Maybe Lady Thatcher should invite her successor to lunch, and give him some tips on how to get out of this.
Previous page
