I am ready to serve
Jonathan Aitken reveals that he is seeking selection for his old seat, South Thanet
NIoved. Amazed. Humbled. These were my emotions when earlier this week I was handed a copy of a petition, addressed to the head of the candidates' department of Conservative Central Office. It began:
'We the undersigned loyal members and supporters of the South Thanet Conservative Association request that our former Member of Parliament Jonathan Aitken should be allowed to enter the selection process for choosing the next Conservative Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for this constituency.'
This petition has been signed by more than 200 local Tory activists. Since the South Thanet Conservative Association consists of 355 members, the number of signatories is sig
nificant. So is the breadth of their support. As the principal petition organiser, Mr Malcolm Armstrong of Ramsgate, pointed out in his covering letter to Mr Andrew Whitby-Coffins of Central Office, the signatories include the two past chairmen of the Association; the two deputy chairmen; the chairmen of Broadstairs, Ramsgate, Ash and Sandwich branches; the Association treasurer; 15 councillors and 13 members of the executive committee. 'In local political terms it is hard to imagine a more representative loyal and hardworking group of leading Conservative supporters,' wrote Mr Armstrong, himself a holder of various offices in the Association over the past three decades.
So what exactly has been going on in South Thanet among these leading Conservatives? What are the local and national implications of their petition? In what realistic way should and others respond to it?
I should make it clear that this is an entirely grassroots initiative. It was not originated by me. It began (I think) after a fundraising Auction of Promises, which took place in Sandwich before Christmas. I was there because I had been invited to be the auctioneer. It was the first time I had attended any public engagement in my former constituency since 1997. My wife and I were touched by the warmth of the welcome and by the enthusiastic atmosphere of the evening. But not a word was said about the possibility of my return to politics, an idea which was not on the furthest or most fanciful horizons of my imagination.
Some weeks later my wife and I were invited to a party at the Ramsgate home of Eileen and Malcolm Armstrong. They and some 30 other leading lights of the Conservative Association had gathered to ask me a question: would I be interested in letting my name go forward for the forthcoming selection of the next Conservative parliamentary candidate?
At first I could only think of the obvious objections to this proposition. Everyone else had thought of them too. They said they had taken extensive soundings on the idea of a new Aitken candidacy. 'Round here you've been forgiven and rehabilitated,' said one key figure. 'You've paid your debt to society. We want you back because so many people remember what a good MP you were, because they still respect you and because we believe you'd be the best man to win the votes, especially here in Ramsgate.'
I hope I do not seem absurdly immodest when I say that from my local knowledge I recognised some grains of truth in what these experienced party workers were saying. The Thanet towns make up one of the most difficult areas of social deprivation in south-east England. Rarnsgate, with 45,000 voters, is the core of the constituency where the seat will be won or lost It is an EastEnders-by-sea sort of place — warm, cheerful, inclusive and, in this context, a forgiving community. For example, there are probably more ex-offenders than there are paid-up Conservative voters in Ramsgate. But long before I had any special rapport with that section of the electorate, I always enjoyed the town, worked hard for it and had a sizeable personal vote there. So it might just be true that the best candidate to unseat New Labour would be a well-known old face. It's the sort of colourful comeback which the Thanet electorate could enjoy voting for.
As these sentiments were being expressed during the Armstrong evening, I suggested we should talk about those who might be less than positive about an Aitken return, such as the Conservative establishment in upmarket Sandwich or, for that matter. the Conservative establishment in 32 Smith Square. It was from that discussion that the idea emerged of testing local opinion with a petition. The response to it in Sandwich and in the other population centres has been far better than expected, with only six refusals to sign. Moreover, once news of the petition got into the local press, it was the non-political people in the shops and pubs who were reportedly even more favourable to the idea. Perhaps it is becoming clearer why the fallout from this petition has made me feel moved, amazed and humbled.
So what happens next? The seat has been advertised as open for selection. I have now applied for it along with about 100 local and national competitors. As one of the entrants who are not on Central Office's approved list of candidates (there is a procedure for getting approval during a selection process) I am realistic enough to know that my application could be vetoed on grounds of morals or political embarrassment. However, I hope that the petitioners of local democracy will persuade the administrators of central bureaucracy to allow me to compete on the proverbial level playing field.
There are two reasons, far bigger than my own reawakened desire to serve in Parliament, why the local democrats deserve to win this argument.
The first concerns the rehabilitation of offenders. It is accepted that this is a sound principle. The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act specifies that low-sentence ex-offenders should be legally rehabilitated within five or ten years of their offence. After that the conviction is spent, and 'shall not be a proper ground for excluding a person from any office, profession, occupation or employment', as the Act puts it. Does this principle apply to politicians? My offence of perjury took place seven years ago. I am coming close to formal rehabilitation, which happens to me informally, in many circumstances, all the time. So perhaps the judgment of the Thanet petitioners that political rehabilitation can work now is not so unreasonable.
Secondly, who are to be the judges on these issues of rehabilitation, selection or election? Trust the people' is an established Toiy principle first voiced by Lord Randolph Churchill when he was chancellor of the exchequer. It is my hope that local democracy and the people of South Thanet will be trusted to be my next judge and jury.
Previous page
