The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Is Sayeeda Warsi's time up?

Influential Tories call for party co-chair to move.

By Jonathan Derbyshire Published 01 September 2012 11:44

Sayeeda Warsi addressing last year's Conservative Party conference (Photo: Getty Images)

In July, the Conservative Party co-chairman Sayeeda Warsi was cleared of any wrongdoing in her expenses claims by the House of Lords Commissioner for Standards. Although David Cameron reiterated his support for Warsi at the time, he did, as my colleague George Eaton noted, leave himself the option of moving her in a September reshuffle.

Whispers that a reshuffle is imminent persist, which is presumably why Warsi makes a pre-emptive case for remaining in post in an interview with the Daily Telegraph today. She said: “If I genuinely had a choice, I would like to stay doing what I’m doing. If you look at the demographics, at where we need to be at the next election, we need more people in the North voting for us, more of what they call here 'blue collar’ workers and I call the white working class. We need more people from urban areas voting for us, more people who are not white and more women. I play that back and think: 'I’m a woman, I’m not white, I’m from an urban area, I’m from the North, I’m working class – I kind of fit the bill. All the groups that we’re aiming for are groups that I’m familiar with.”

That logic doesn't cut much ice with Paul Goodman of Conservative Home, the website is that is as reliable an indicator of Tory grassroots (and backbench, for that matter) opinion as there is. Goodman writes: "If this thinking is pushed to its exteme, it follows that only working class people can make a political case to other working class people, only Muslims can do so to other Muslims and so on." Warsi's "segregationist logic", he argues, "eats its own tail: under it, the Baroness would be steered away from Hindu voters, for example."

Strong stuff. And another reason, Goodman thinks, for giving Warsi a different job (though he's quick to insist that the other co-chairman, Andrew Feldman, ought to go too). He argues that the Tories ought to return to the practice of the past, where the party chairman was usually a "big beast" from the Commons front bench - he mentions Kenneth Baker, Chris Patten and Norman Tebbitt. His choice would be William Hague; his ConHome colleague Tim Montgomerie prefers Michael Gove.

Either way, September could be an eventful month for the Conservatives.

More from Jonathan Derbyshire

View the discussion thread.

7 comments

Thu, 2012-09-06 00:04 — Jennifer Ashcroft (not verified)

Nothing sums up David Cameron's pandering to the Islamist agenda better than his relationship with unelected Baroness Warsi . So desperate was Cameron after the 2010 election to show his 'diversity' credentials that he saw Warsi as the perfect face of the new 'tolerant' conservatism - young, Muslim, Northern accent and female. Cameron ignored all rationality in his appointment of Warsi since in 2005 she had not only lost the only election she ever run, but was also criticised for election literature which was described as "homophobic". Her corrupt dealings were also evident before Cameron appointed her as Party Chairman, because as a life peer (appointed as such by Cameron 2007) she claimed more than £50,000 in expenses in 2009 which included a fully tax payer funded trip to Pakistan where she attended a family wedding.

But if Warsi was simply just a useless corrupt unelected politician I would not be writing this article. Unfortunately, she is far more dangerous than that. The 'homophobic' literature (along with her strong opposition to a burka ban in the UK, her ambivalent attitude toward Islamic terrorism, and her obsession with 'Islamaphobia') should have been a warning to everyone that the modern anti-fundamentalist veneer that Warsi has tried to cultivate was always just a cover for a typically hard-line Muslim supremicist world-view. That world view has always been evident whenever subjects like the Middle East arise (she led the Conservative abuse of Israel during the Gaza war in 2010). But it came into sharp focus earlier this year when it was revealed that her business partner and relative Abid Hussain was a senior member of Hizb ut-Tahrir - the terrorist supporting Islamist supremacist organisation that Cameron himself had promised (but failed) to ban. Not only had Warsi invited Abid Hussain into Downing Street but he also accompanied her on some of her many 'official' trips to Pakistan and other Muslim countries (these trips were official only in the sense that the UK taxpayer paid for them; there was never any rational reason for the Party Chairman - whose job should always have been focused exclusively on grassroots UK activities - to make them; imagine the outcry if the Party Chairman was a Jew and all 17 foreign trips he made in one year were to Israel). When Warsi was also discovered this year to have failed to declare her business interests with the House of Lords authorities, and to have claimed an allowance for accommodation while staying at the home of a party donor who said he did not charge rent, you would have thought that Cameron would finally see sense and sack her.

For a few moment yesterday it appeared that Cameron had finally came to his senses. Warsi herself - in breach of Cabinet confidentiality rules - announced her dismissal as Party Chairman on twitter before it was officially announced. She also turned down Cameron's offer of the role of Commonwealth Minister (the Sun quotes her friends as saying "this job was so tokenistic it was ridiculous"). But, instead of telling the ungrateful traitor and cretin where to go, Cameron decided he could not do without her. He has actually created a new Cabinet post for her that gives her two ministerial positions with much greater authority than anything she has had before. And it appears that Warsi herself chose the two positions; they are the two ministries where her Muslim supremecist agenda can be used to the maximum: she is now Foreign Office Minister (with only Hague above her in seniority) and Minister for "Faith and Communities". In the former role expect a massively enhanced strategy of deligitimzation of Israel and even more millions of terrorist supporting foreign aid cash to Pakistan and Palestine; in the latter expect a massive drive to further criminalize criticism of Islam and soften opposition to the advances of Sharia law.

This is one of the worse days in the history of British politics. And it is being totally ignored by the main stream media, most of whom have managed to spin the story as being a 'humiliating demotion' for Warsi, who is the 'victim of Tory Islamaphobia, racism, and sexism'.

Tue, 2012-09-04 02:23 — Mike, Dalian (not verified)

Her self-serving argument might carry more weight if she would stand for election and so test whether the people she claims to represent actually want her to represent them.

Mon, 2012-09-03 18:23 — Steven m (not verified)

She has only been a token spokeswoman for the Tory Party, that is why they placed her in The Lords and not let her fight for a seat to enter the Commons. The token gesture has now run it's course and she will go.

Mon, 2012-09-03 07:49 — Richmard (not verified)

Agreed. Warsi's time is up, if it were for the public to decide... Shouldnt it? Discuss.
However; we can also be sure its Mr Cameron that is at fault for alienating the populace described and targeted by Warsi. This confusion is normal in politics i suppose. What isnt normal is waking up each morning and reminding yourself that you are a woman. After reading a comment made by none other than a woman with a chip on her shoulder, it has became apparent (in world of professional females who 'see the world differently' than everyone else) that being a woman doing a job seems to bear more importance than actually doing the job right.
We live in a modern developed country. Am i right? Bringing your gender into a non-gender related topic is the equivallent to advertising a weakness. If you build a wall, people will try to climb over it. If you create competition there will always be a loser.

I know i have diversed from the topic here, however, not unlike a few others.

Sun, 2012-09-02 10:06 — Pavlova

I think men like Paul Goodman underestimate how alienating it is to female voters to be faced with a wall of men to govern us who don't see the world like we do or care about what we do. I'd rather have some less-than-perfect women in the cabinet than none at all. I consider their sex to be one of their merits in representing me.

And after all the rest of the house is stuffed to the rafters with less-than-perfect men.

Sun, 2012-09-02 09:40 — Barrie J (not verified)

The departure of Warsi won't make a blind bit of difference, Britain's version of 'democracy' needs a radical shape up before worrying about some underperforming, self serving, worthless shoe-in politician.

Sat, 2012-09-01 16:07 — DMyers

She's gone. Begging in a newspaper for your job is never a sign of strength. Good riddance to her. She, and the other members of the Dorries-Patel-Mensch axis (Is it just me, or are all the Tory female MPs particularly mad and odious?) are great examples of how similar the Tories seem to be to the Republicans. Parachute in people with bizarre ideas and little intellect. Doesn't sound like a vote winning strategy (and it wasn't when it came to Warsi standing for parliament) to me.