The Clacton verdict Westminster cannot ignore

Part two of a review of the Clacton by-election.

IT DID NOT TAKE LONG for the same old voices who condescend from their exalted and self-entitled positions as members or supporters of the legacy parties to try and neutralise the strong result that Nigel Farage obtained in his Clacton by-election.

And it was his by-election.

It was created by him to bring a pause to the incessant media coverage stirred up by his opponents using parliamentary process to attack his credibility as a potential prime minister. Every, and I do mean every, media interview or press conference for some months had ended up with the questions about the Standards Commissioner’s inquiry. As Jacob Rees-Mogg has explained, that is a process which the alleged transgressor is not allowed to discuss except to deny the charge. He cannot say in detail what has happened or explain his case for innocence.

Those encouraging the media circus knew this and so kept the drum beating steadily. With it being made known that the inquiry would not report until at least September – probably going past the Reform Conference at the beginning of the month – the media then began to harass and doorstep Farage’s family. The pressure was unrelenting and, make no mistake, his political opponents and the media would have continued with this tactic all through the long hot summer.

We now also know – though we did not know when the by-election was called – that the media monstering without right of reply coincided with growing physical threats to Farage and his family: the mobbing of the family having lunch in a pub that forced them to escape in their cars, the incendiary device put through a letterbox at Farage’s London address, the damage to one of Farage’s cars – and, unconscionably, the withdrawal of government-provided personal security support.

My wife and I were directly behind Nigel in 2019 when he had a milkshake thrown over him in Newcastle and I can tell you that it is not a light-hearted moment easily laughed off as a joke. It is a moment of high tension and fear as it is not known immediately what has been thrown, or worse, whether it is a distraction for something far more serious yet to happen.

the issues he had raised about security, safety and political language were utterly sincere and justified

So when people ask whether Nigel Farage was right to force a by-election to make his treatment by the establishment a bigger question for the other parties should address, by letting the electors of Clacton – those who gave him his mandate –– have a say in the matter, I say he was.

And what has happened? Sadly and tragically, although as far as we know unrelated to Nigel Farage’s decision to force a by-election, Ann Widdecombe was murdered and this showed that the issues he had raised about security, safety and political language – which many were publicly denying were important – were utterly sincere and justified.

Typically, as I argued in Part I of my review of the Clacton by-election result, Farage’s opponents want to deflect away from the stunning result and switch to him not turning up to the count to hear the result in person – his agent would be there to represent him – saying it was a discourtesy to the other candidates or the electorate, or to argue about whether or not the outcome has changed anything.

Firstly let me deal with attending the count. Nigel Farage did not do anything wrong by not attending the announcement of the result. I have already pointed out previously that games – at the very least – were being played by many of his opponents (not all are joke candidates) and he wanted no part of it. By staying away he ensured he and the announcement of the result  could not be used or weaponised. The figures the acting Returning Officer announced are all that matters. By his action Farage showed true respect for the Clacton voters. It is those who seek to use formal events, such as disrupting a vote count announcement as a shock tactic to attract media coverage, who are truly disrespectful of our democracy.

Has the result changed anything?

Of course it has.

Farage called out those politicians using process rather than policies to try to defeat him

Farage has himself talked of how the media and political discussion moved away from the donation inquiry and towards the Clacton by-election, and how the approaches to his family and general harassment reduced significantly. While the Standards Commissioner’s confirmation that the inquiry has recommenced means the media will continue to speculate (much of it already using language that presumes him guilty before the process has concluded) it now has to be conducted in a context in which Farage has been given an overwhelming endorsement by his constituents.

Farage called out those politicians using process rather than policies to try to defeat him and they can now be seen in plain sight every time they repeat their partisan smears. We can see more clearly how they frame every comment as if the Standard’s Commissioner has made a decision and the Standard’s Committee has decided what action to take. That is pure unadulterated partisan misrepresentation and bias.

It is also the case that the continued speculation about a second by-election is now beginning to look rather overexcited. Firstly, Farage has to be found not just guilty of failing to meet the standards process, but also given a punishment of suspension from the House of commons that is at least ten sitting days. That only provides the opportunity to launch a petition for a recall vote and it is now far from clear that any such petition would meet the threshold of ten per cent of the electorate, which is 7,978. Yes, it is possible, but it is by no means certain that a by-election will follow.

Who would canvass for the petition – the Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems? Really? They would then have to put up a candidate and at least one of those parties would risk losing its deposit. A candidate must achieve more than five per cent of valid votes cast – which in the general election turnout was 2,297 and in the by-election 1,755. In the General Election the Liberal Democrats and the Greens both polled fewer votes than required to retain their deposits, another contest would again be complicated by a field of joke candidates, albeit probably fewer than at the by-election.

Only the Conservatives and Labour could be expected to have a realistic chance of saving their deposit. The main challenge to Farage would most likely come from the Conservatives, as they at least have a history in the seat, but their stock in the area is now very low and the divided opposition would split its vote. Of course, continuing with the speculation and generating headlines around the possibility of another by-election is all part of the partisan attacks through abuse of process. But now it is more obvious, now – because of Farage’s bravery in risking a by-election – we see it and can call it out.

There is one further point I wish to make.

The current process whereby a complaint results in a line of inquiry against a parliamentarian for not following parliamentary standards procedures correctly should not be allowed to drag on interminably. If there has to be a Standard’s Commissioner adjudicating rather than the voters deciding, there has to be a time limit so it cannot be exploited by mendacious opponents for their own political gain. Given the inability of a member to properly answer accusations, this creates a severe injustice. It surely should not be beyond the ability of a commissioner to receive and evaluate evidence within a short number of weeks, and certainly no longer than a month. This would give the public more confidence that games are not being played and that the process is being taken seriously rather than abused for partisan benefit.

Farage was right to force the by-election and he was right to avoid the count. Now Westminster should do right by putting its own house in order, recognising the electors of MPs should always have the final say.