HAS Andrew Bowie finally found a backbone?
Reports say that he has stepped down from his role as vice-chair of the Conservative and Unionist Party in protest at the sleaze engulfing the UK Government.
But Bowie himself has said no such thing.
What he did say, less than one week ago, was that the revamp to Westminster’s standards system in the wake of the Owen Paterson scandal was not about protecting that former minister from the consequences of his own actions.
READ MORE: Douglas Ross 'runs away' from key Westminster vote on Owen Paterson
According to Bowie, the Government’s attempt to save Paterson’s skin (and perhaps pre-emptively Boris Johnson’s) was “about creating a better, fairer system”.
He told Times Radio: “This is not about electoral politics, this is not about partisan politics.
“This is about creating a better, fairer system that’s better able and better placed to hold MPs to account if they’ve done wrong, but also to give them a system whereby they’re allowed a process of natural justice, a course of appeal to appeal any decisions that are taken.
“If voters misconstrue that, or we are not able to explain why we have taken the decision that we have, and that costs votes then so be it.”
Summed up, Bowie was asking what it matters if voters don’t support the Tories, as long as Boris Johnson gets his way.
However, unlike Paterson’s North Shropshire seat, which is one of the safest in the UK, Bowie’s sits on a precipice.
It seems that given the West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine MP has a majority of just 843, down from almost 8000 in 2017, he saw fit to change his mind.
Less than one week after defending Tory sleaze in such strong terms, Bowie handed in his resignation. This begs the question: did he believe his words even as he was speaking them?
If not, should anyone believe a word he says?
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel