Cameron must apologise for telling MPs to ignore Tory activists on EU

Some would say it was highly unwise at the very least (others might say “crass”) of him to tell MPs to ignore the views of their local party activists in the run-up to the EU referendum.

And I marvel at the moderation of my language.

Does David Cameron not realise that it is these unpaid workers – both Conservative and Labour – who do more than anybody else to get their parties into power and keep them there?

They trudge the streets morning, noon and night – in all weathers throughout the year, not just at election times – knocking on doors and often getting a hostile reception. They spend hours on the phone, licking envelopes and cajoling people to support them. They don’t do all that to be snubbed, even insulted, by senior politicians.

They are, in fact, far more crucial to the parties they support than any of the Members of Parliament they strive to get elected.

There has already – and not surprisingly – been a backlash. No fewer than 44 local Conservative Party chiefs have written a letter condemning the prime minister’s “arrogant” instruction to his MPs.

In the letter they say Cameron has “undermined” the goodwill that existed among loyal members and warn him: “No prime minister has a divine right to rule.” This is strong – almost menacing – stuff and Cameron would be a fool not to recognise what a mistake he has made.

There are four years before the next general election and no doubt Cameron will be hoping (even though he will not be fighting it as prime minister, and probably not at all) this will be forgotten between now and then. But these people have long memories, and they do not deserve to be treated like this.

Cameron should apologise at the very least, or the Tories could be paying a high price at future elections – national and local. And he will have only himself to blame.

• The multi-faceted campaign to secure Britain’s exit from the European Union, is in a state of shambolic disarray. Some of its supporters cannot even agree what the word “out” means, for heaven’s sake!

There have been ego problems (so, what’s new?), internal squabbling and general mayhem. Kate Hoey, a prominent Labour MP has stormed out of one group.

Now, they have Lord (Nigel) Lawson, the former Tory Chancellor, given a key role at the top of the Brexit campaign. Lawson – as Margaret Thatcher found out to her cost – does not suffer fools gladly, and it is expected that he will bang a few heads together to secure some semblance of order and unity into the campaign.

How politicians get themselves into this kind of mess with people supposed to be of a like mind, is hard to grasp.

• Philip Hammond, the Foreign Secretary, has denounced the UN report into the Julian Assange affair as “ridiculous”. This must be calculated as the understatement of the year.

In fact, that report is a scandalous, possibly deliberate, travesty of the facts. It is about as far from the truth as it is possible to be. In short, it is a shameful document.

The facts are that Assange is wanted in Sweden for alleged sexual offences, which he denies, as well as in the United States, where he could face charges relating to national security, which might attract the death penalty.

He was bailed at one court hearing in London and his supporters, whom he cynically betrayed, had to forfeit £293,500 in bail sureties on his behalf when he failed to respond to bail and sought refuge, where he remains today, in the Ecuador Embassy.

The UN says he has been “arbitrarily detained” by Britain, which is plainly nonsense, and says that Britain should pay him compensation – a breathtaking statement. One might well ask when he plans to repay the foolish supporters of his who lost their money. Britain’s role in this matter has been impeccable. Ecuador’s role has been despicable.

And the UN should be ashamed to have produced a report without, apparently, checking a single fact. Or is it a deliberate distortion?

• Tory peer Lord Brittan, who died last year, was one of the most hard-working politicians of his era. But he will forever be remembered now not for his political achievements (which, to be frank, were not spectacular) but for unproved allegations about historical sex abuse. Which is grossly unfair.

The Met Police decided to drop the inquiry into the allegations, but Brittan was unaware of this at the time of his death. Now Dorset Police, in a report, have said that the inquiry was justified, but that a prosecution would probably have ended with an acquittal rather than a conviction.

Under English law, you are innocent until proven guilty. Now, people will simply assume –no smoke without fire – that Brittan was guilty.

He deserves better than that.