David Cameron wasted no time in appointing Dominic Grieve yesterday but it might be a case of act in haste, repent at leisure. I’m picking up considerable concern in Conservative circles about Grieve’s appointment for the following reasons.
1). It unbalances the front bench: If one thinks of the Tory front bench as a see-saw, David Davis and William Hague balanced out David Cameron and George Osborne. While Cameron and Osborne were young, southern, privileged, modernisers, David Davis and William Hague were more experienced, sat for northern seats, came from humble backgrounds and were perceived as traditional Tories. Replacing Davis with Grieve, a barrister who was educated at Westminster and Oxford and sits for a Buckinghamshire constituency, upsets that balance. The problem is particularly acute because William Hague is not as visible as he could be. Who on the Tory front bench now speaks to the C2s?
2).
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in