Bob Spink, MP for the safe seat of Castle Point, has surprisingly resigned the Conservative Whip. He chose to announce his decision in a point of order during the House of Commons Budget debate this afternoon.
He cited the Party's failure to deal with unspecified "serious criminal and other irregularities" in his constituency, although the BBC is quoting a Party spokesman saying the Whip was withdrawn from him...
5pm update: Spink's statement confirms his resignation is related to deselection attempts from his Association...
"The Party has failed to deal with local breaches of its rules and electoral irregularities, and with criminal activities over a long period and there are now corruption and other investigations, surrounding certain senior members of my local Association. It is with great sadness that I therefore felt compelled to resign the Party whip. I hope my action in resigning will bring the necessary changes and therefore be in both the public and the Party’s best interests."
He had written this in his local paper two weeks ago:
"It is for Castle Point residents to decide who will be their MP, not a small number of self-selected individuals with their private agendas. I have made very serious enemies. So it is not surprising that some senior members of the Conservative Association executive have been working, yet again, to deselect me."
6pm: We've added the italics to the title: '...after Tory machine declines to save him from deselection'. It appears - according to our CCHQ sources - that Mr Spink asked for the Tory machine to intervene to save him from a deselection meeting scheduled for next Tuesday. He threatened to resign the whip if he didn't get that help. The Tory leadership decided to take the whip away from him in response to that "blackmail". There is some dispute as to whether he resigned first or was sacked first. CCHQ say the whip was withdrawn before his Commons intervention.
9pm: Other blogosphere reaction: Guido has an email from Bob Spink. Nadine Dorries expects Bob to defect to UKIP. The FT's Jim Pickard has some of the background.
"He cited the Party's failure to deal with unspecified "serious criminal and other irregularities" in his constituency."
Surely that's a police matter and not one for the Conservative Party? This is rather bizarre.
Posted by: Votedave | March 12, 2008 at 16:53
The Echo reported that "a Tory councillor had acted as an intermediary with a local businessman to offer him [Bob Spink] an anonymous donation, which he turned down".
I wonder which came first, the principled stand or having the whip withdrawn?
Posted by: Mark Fulford | March 12, 2008 at 16:54
Bye bye Bob. Your actions today show you shouldn't be a member of our party.
Posted by: Bye Bob | March 12, 2008 at 16:55
Bob Spink's enemies in his association have tried to deselect him before. This must be at least the third attempt. If there are serious criminal and other irregularities relating to this latest deselection attempt, they should be investigated by the local police.
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 16:58
My understanding is that he was facing a reselection meeting, and told the Chief Whip to get it called off or he'd resign the whip. To which the Chief Whip seems to have acted against effective blackmail.
Bob Spink faced a reselection meeting in the last Parliament, why is it unacceptable now?
Posted by: Margaret on the Guillotine | March 12, 2008 at 17:04
Editor, it is completely wrong to state that Spink resigned the whip. It was withdrawn from him before he made his statement. He wrote to the Chief Whip threatening to resign at a time of his own choosing if they did not back him against activists in the seat (I have no idea of the rights and wrongs of that battle). The point being Tory MPs cannot threaten to resign whenever they choose in order to inflict maximum damage. Given this, the Chief rightly sacked him. See BBC story here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7292642.stm
He was sacked. He didn't resign.
Posted by: activist | March 12, 2008 at 17:05
When the whip is withdrawn, does it affect where an MP can sit on the benches? If so, where was Bob Spink sitting today?
Posted by: Ignorant | March 12, 2008 at 17:08
This is very sad news. Bob was one of our staunchest eurosceptic MPs and I hope he is able to get back. I hope he does not defect to UKIP.
Posted by: Derek | March 12, 2008 at 17:08
Spink knows his association is about to deselect him. This chidish outburst is because DC refused to stop them. As for his nonsense about illegality - it's nothing but a pathetic smokescreen.
Posted by: Common Sense | March 12, 2008 at 17:11
"Bob was one of our staunchest eurosceptic MPs"
True - he's also has an 'independent mind', in the sense as quoted by Bernard Woolley in Yes, Minister.
Posted by: powellite | March 12, 2008 at 17:17
Spink will be UKIP's first MP within one month.
McCloughlin could surely have handled this better?
Posted by: Bluepatriot | March 12, 2008 at 17:19
"I wonder which came first, the principled stand or having the whip withdrawn?"
According to the Echo report, it seems the principled stand came first. He turned down the anonymous donation before 29th Feb. The whip was removed today.
As someone who was effectively forced to resign from my local Association over a matter of principle and professional integrity, I think we should wait and see the facts before judging Mr Spink.
He may be in the wrong or he may have just upset a few important local people by not toeing the line.
We need open primaries.
Posted by: Mrs awkward | March 12, 2008 at 17:22
Bluepatriot, I don't see how. The party cannot let MPs threaten to resign the whip for the sake of a favour. It's blackmail whatever way you want to look at it.
Posted by: David | March 12, 2008 at 17:23
This sheds a little light on the matter - indeed it is from two weeks ago. It does raise the question why the Tory Chief Whip didn't do something about it earlier.
Requesting reselection then attempting to pre-empt the process by slagging off the constituency party doesn't seem the best way of doing it. Also his constituents are very amused by it all in the comments.
http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local/display.var.2083135.0.mp_spink_goes_head_to_head_with_grandees.php
Posted by: Margaret on the Guillotine | March 12, 2008 at 17:24
Hmm... Let's see... A Tory BOO signatory who doesn't think UKIP a fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists? Clearly in the wrong party...
"Spink will be UKIP's first MP within one month." Amen.
Posted by: Gospel of Enoch | March 12, 2008 at 17:25
Bob Spink has been a first class MP. He has actively pursued the BBC over its bias; he is chairman of the Campaign for an Independent Britain and above all he has experince of real life outside the political bubble, as a very distinguished engineer.
That's exactly the kind of MP the party needs not some clones of the weak-kneed occupants of CCHQ - - - and the leadership
Posted by: Christina Speight | March 12, 2008 at 17:26
"activist" did not read the BBC report properly. It says "In a letter the Conservative Chief Whip, Patrick McLoughlin, told him...
I must therefore treat your resignation as taking immediate effect".
I agree that Bob Spink is likely to join UKIP, just as George Gradiner did when he was deselected.
Note that gloaters on this thread are the usual Europhile suspects who welcome defectors from other parties.
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 17:34
My god... This is a disaster for the Conservative Party. I despair. When will we ever learn. Here's to another 10 years in opposition.
Posted by: Wang Din Chin | March 12, 2008 at 17:36
"The party cannot let MPs threaten to resign the whip "
Maybe it wasn't meant as a threat. Maybe he was just trying to explain to those in charge that there was something seriously wrong and if nobody dealt with the matters he had brought to their attention, he would be forced to resign as a matter of integrity?
I don't know - but it's a possibility. It happened to me.
Posted by: Mrs Awkward | March 12, 2008 at 17:42
Waing Din Chin.
Don't be so silly.
Posted by: Northernhousewife | March 12, 2008 at 17:42
Spink will be UKIP's first MP within one month.
It will/would indeed be a major and well-deserved coup for Nigel and the eurealist movement as a whole.
Posted by: Chad Noble | March 12, 2008 at 17:42
(My god... This is a disaster for the Conservative Party. I despair. When will we ever learn. Here's to another 10 years in opposition.)
Well, not quite Wang Din Chin. Some MP no-one has ever heard of has had a hissy fit because HQ refused to intervene in his association's attempts to deselect him. It's hardly a disaster on an epic scale.
Whilst it is true that MPs are elected to represent a constituency, they have a duty to the party who supports them as well. That duty includes an implicit agreement not to attempt to hold a party to ransom. The party is bigger than one man and certainly bigger than Bob Spink and his self-serving agenda.
His actions show that he is just the sort of person we can do without.
Posted by: Craig Barrett | March 12, 2008 at 17:44
I always saw Bob Spink as the symbol of the Conservative turn-around. An massive 18 000 majority before 1997, perhaps the most extreme loss in 1997 to be the first, I think, to get a Conservative seat back on election night, 2001. The council went from total Tory to a single member and is now very close to total Tory again.
I hope this is solved.
Posted by: eugene | March 12, 2008 at 17:44
Applying a bit of lawyer's caution I make no comment on the matter as such.
But is is clear that there have been dirty deeds at the crossroads and thus it might be sensible if someone starts to compile an accurate timeline of who did what when as this looks to blow up in our faces. It is evident from the comments above that this particular problem has been coming to the boil for some time and it seems to me likely that the order of events will be important here, not least to enable us to judge the rights and wrongs of the matter and therefore better able to make informed comment.
This must not be allowed to get out of hand and act as a distraction from the job in hand, which is, as any fule kno, evicting the Socialists from power.
Posted by: The Huntsman | March 12, 2008 at 17:45
If he does go to UKIP - I will seriously think about joining him - we have to get real on this -
Posted by: ashley rochdale | March 12, 2008 at 17:53
Roger Knapman once had the Tory whip withdrawn... I wonder whatever became of him...
Posted by: Gospel of Enoch | March 12, 2008 at 17:54
Northernhousewife & Craig Barrett
I have to tell you in my country of origin a defection to another party would be considered a disaster and not tolerates.
This is not the first. Quentin Davies then Derek Conway. To lose 2 MPs is unfortunate but to lose 3....... (complete the saying yourself)
Posted by: Wang Din Chin | March 12, 2008 at 17:56
I have to tell you in my country of origin a defection to another party would be considered a disaster and not tolerates.
Well in this country it ain't necessarily soQ
Quentin Davies is a rat that jumped onto a sinking ship. No one even remembers who he is or what he did anymore!
And how could anyone even think about keeping Derek Conway? The whole country was looking on in disgust.
MPs are public representatives. They are not angels or super-heroes and there are, as always, plenty more where they came from.
Posted by: torydeb | March 12, 2008 at 18:09
It would be very interesting, and welcom, for Bob Spink to join UKIP. If he wishes to do so now, or wait until the May elections, the door is open to him.
David Cameron may not like the idea of members of his party having a mind of their own...but we do. Let Mr Spink resign his seat, stand under the UKIP banner, and let, to coin a phrase, the battle be joined.
Posted by: UKIP Member | March 12, 2008 at 18:12
Activist @ 1705: I've altered the headline of this piece and added a 6pm clarification. Sam or I will post again when things are clearer.
Posted by: Editor | March 12, 2008 at 18:13
Bob Spink shouldn't join ukip because he is a CONSERVATIVE, and although I cannot condone attempts to blackmail the leadership, I do think cchq should of handled this better.
I do not agree with bob spink on many issues but he is a popular and independent minded mp and this is a great loss to the party.
I know its unlikely, but I hope he will have the whip restored and soon.
Posted by: Dale | March 12, 2008 at 18:29
I never cease to be amaze at CCHQ's incompetence and/or inability to intervene in really serious association matters. Surely they could have avoided this.
In Sevenoaks, we had an industrial tribunal caused by the Management Team's stupidity. It cost the Association nigh on ?100k and we ended up in the press. And did CCHQ intervene when told it was about to happen? Did they foxtrot.
Posted by: Cornyn | March 12, 2008 at 18:32
The Pink Times has launched a predictable attack on Bob Spink.
"Tory MP hostile to gay rights is sacked from party" - http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-7114.html
"Since entering the Commons in 1992 Mr Spink has consistently opposed gay rights. He voted against civil partnerships, gay adoption and the abolition of Section 28. In January Mr Spink was one of a small group of Christian MPs who attempted to weaken the new offence of incitement to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation currently under consideration."
Have the Cameroons made an example of Bob as a warning to other Cornerstone Group MPs?
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 18:33
CCHQ is already briefing against Spink - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/12/conservatives. "Tory sources view him as a "renegade" and there is no guarantee that the parliamentary party will take him back."
It stinks!
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 18:36
"Bob Spink shouldn't join ukip because he is a CONSERVATIVE"
Well, so are we, and so are many "c"onservatives who have grown tired of the Tory Party turning into some directionless social-liberal hybrid.
Bob Spink clearly has a lot in common with our party and its members. If he wises to take a principled stand against CCHQ, causing a by-election, and fighting under our banner, is the sensible, principled, mature thing to do.
Posted by: UKIP member | March 12, 2008 at 18:40
I believe Mr Spink will be found to be correct in his actions, after the full story unfolds.
Posted by: R.Baker. | March 12, 2008 at 18:43
I think it's far too early for anyone to start pointing fingers or picking sides in this whole debacle, due to the minute amount of information which is public at present.
One thing I must say though on the subject as a whole is that CCHQ should not intervene with association business, except where party rules are being broken. If it is a legal issue, it is an issue for the police, not for the party. Some associations may make bad decisions (Like the Sevenoaks case), but they must retain their autonomy. We cannot reasonably complain abut a lack of party democracy regarding the European selections one minute and the whinge that the central party doesn't fight a local party over a deselection (Regardless of how capable the MP is) the next minute.
Posted by: Chris | March 12, 2008 at 18:55
A vote for UKIP is a vote for Gordon Brown to remain Prime Minister.
Back Cameron or get Brown.
Posted by: Votedave | March 12, 2008 at 18:56
Chris, I have to laugh at your comment
"One thing I must say though on the subject as a whole is that CCHQ should not intervene with association business, except where party rules are being broken."
CCHQ interferes in candidate selection more than ever under Dave - even when the initial shortlist is drawn up. It receives a lot of money from associations. CCHQ, rather than local associations, chose the London Mayor shortlist after Greg Dyke rejected Dave's unwanted attentions.
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 19:11
"Bob Spink shouldn't join ukip because he is a CONSERVATIVE"
Yes, that argument really stopped Roger Knapman and Christopher Gill...
Posted by: Gospel of Enoch | March 12, 2008 at 19:19
"Well, so are we, and so are many "c"onservatives who have grown tired of the Tory Party turning into some directionless social-liberal hybrid."
One could argue that if the tory party is, as you claim, a 'directionless social-liberal hybrid' party, that it must be because so many more traditional members have left to join parties like ukip.
"Bob Spink clearly has a lot in common with our party and its members. If he wises to take a principled stand against CCHQ, causing a by-election, and fighting under our banner, is the sensible, principled, mature thing to do."
Is bob Spink more influential in parliament and in the tory party or out of parliament and in ukip? A bye election between bob spink and another conservative candidate would mean a victory for labour (or the libdems).
Posted by: Dale | March 12, 2008 at 19:30
He may have legitimate concerns about his local party.
Why did he have to deliberately try and undermine CCHQ though?
Posted by: Activista | March 12, 2008 at 19:33
"Yes, that argument really stopped Roger Knapman and Christopher Gill... "
And where are they now?
Nuff said!
Posted by: Dale | March 12, 2008 at 19:34
Bob could cross the floor without resigning, Dale...
Posted by: Gospel of Enoch | March 12, 2008 at 19:53
Why did people want to deselect him in the first place?
Posted by: IRJMilne | March 12, 2008 at 19:59
What an utter twit.
Posted by: David | March 12, 2008 at 20:01
HERE'S A LATER VERSION FROM BOB SPINK HIMSELF--
"“For the Conservative Party to now imply they withdrew the whip from me is brass-necked dishonesty. This sort of low-political deceit is why the public hold politicians in such deep contempt.
“The Chief Whip said my resignation would disrupt the Party Spring Conference this weekend and asked me to reconsider, or at least to delay announcement. I refused.
“He also asked me to meet with him, the Party Chairman, Chairman of the 22 Committee, and Dominic Grieve MP a Tory solicitor, and I did so this morning when they sought to get me to change my mind. I refused and at 12 noon today I informed Sir Michael Spicer, the Chairman of the 22 Cttee, that I was irrevocably set on resignation. I announced my resignation on the floor of the House this afternoon."
“I remain a committed and principled Conservative and will continue to sit on the Tory benches.”
=-=-=-=-=-=-
Votedave @1856 "Back Cameron or get Brown."
Why should we carer if Brown wins?. It'll be just a different version of the same party unless he can be his own man and get rid of the dreadful crowd of subversives in CCHQ - You kniw, they're the ones who told us in West London NORT to mention tax cuts. Well we did and we won 3 councils!
Posted by: Christina Speight | March 12, 2008 at 20:19
Some very fair posts. I agree CCHQ's responses are seriously mixed and flawed. In Sevenoaks, the agent gets sacked, wins an employment tribunal and then dies of cancer. So we look really good as the caring party and CCHQ does zip.
They want a non-white male in a safe seat and it's all systems go.
Am I missing something?
Posted by: Cornyn | March 12, 2008 at 20:22
Literals galore - sorry
HERE'S A LATER VERSION FROM BOB SPINK HIMSELF--
"“For the Conservative Party to now imply they withdrew the whip from me is brass-necked dishonesty. This sort of low-political deceit is why the public hold politicians in such deep contempt.
“The Chief Whip said my resignation would disrupt the Party Spring Conference this weekend and asked me to reconsider, or at least to delay announcement. I refused.
“He also asked me to meet with him, the Party Chairman, Chairman of the 22 Committee, and Dominic Grieve MP a Tory solicitor, and I did so this morning when they sought to get me to change my mind. I refused and at 12 noon today I informed Sir Michael Spicer, the Chairman of the 22 Cttee, that I was irrevocably set on resignation. I announced my resignation on the floor of the House this afternoon."
“I remain a committed and principled Conservative and will continue to sit on the Tory benches.”
=-=-=-=-=-=-
Votedave @1856 "Back Cameron or get Brown."
Why should we care if Brown wins?. It'll be just a different version of the same party unless he can be his own man and get rid of the dreadful crowd of subversives in CCHQ - You know, they're the ones who told us in West London NOT to mention tax cuts. Well we did and we won 3 councils!
Posted by: Christina Speight | March 12, 2008 at 20:22
Christina's quote from Spink is staggering. If true, either CCHQ or the Chief Whip is lying. If it is McLoughlin he should resign and lose the whip too. If it is a spin doctor, he or she should be summarily dismissed.
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 20:37
Every subject on this site no matter what it is always ends up about Europe. It really is pathetic and shows how out of touch people who post on this site are with the REAL concerns of the British people.
Posted by: Jack Stone | March 12, 2008 at 20:40
Jack: 75% of our laws come from Brussels, and it affects everyday issues such as post office closures.
Until the Tories deal with "The Elephant in the Room", no progress can be made...
Posted by: Gospel of Enoch | March 12, 2008 at 21:01
Jack Stone, this thread is not about Europe. It is about whether a sitting MP who regained his seat and then increased his majority substantially should be hung out to dry by the Party and the Whips.
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 12, 2008 at 21:06
“The Chief Whip said my resignation would disrupt the Party Spring Conference this weekend and asked me to reconsider, or at least to delay announcement. I refused.
Arrogant twit. As someone who is active in the Party and is taking part in that Forum, that really helps me and my colleagues.
Is it me, or is this not the firt time that Spink has thrown a hissy fit over this or that, based on his ego? I don't have links to hand, but this appears to be the straw that broke the camel's back.
So Spink was spanked. I wish every success to the new Conservative candidate in Castle Point as soon as they are selected.
Posted by: Richard Carey | March 12, 2008 at 21:24
Too many comments are coming out here in ignorance of the facts. The truth is that we will get a clearer idea over the next few days but we don't know yet.
Guido has some allegations in his Comments which might shed another light on this issue, but those are equally likely to be erroneous.
Let's just chill and not feed the trolls. We can debate the rights and wrongs when we actually know what went on.
Posted by: Geoff | March 12, 2008 at 21:47
"As someone who is active in the Party and is taking part in that Forum, that really helps me and my colleagues."- Richard Carey
Who is the arrogant twit? I'm not sure yet. I'd like to wait and hear the facts.
If Spink really has been obliged to resign because the Party has failed to deal with local breaches of its rules and electoral irregularities, and with criminal activities over a long period and there are now corruption and other investigations, surrounding certain senior members of the local Association, you have more to worry about than how you do at the Spring Forum.
Posted by: Mrs Awkward | March 12, 2008 at 21:51
I see that Guido has the line:
Guido suspects that Spink is going in a huff because he faced deselection by his own constitutency association who were not happy about him employing his lover / wife / lover's daughter etcetera.
Seems a rather complicated lifestyle.
The pity is that Castle Point Association didn't draw the line at explicit racism or any of the other follies to be laid at this man's door.
Posted by: Ellesmere Dragge | March 12, 2008 at 21:52
Bob Spink has been a martyr looking for a cause for ages. Unable to resist having the last word with what is admittedly very 'challenging' Association and with an elephantine memory for minor slights or insults, real or imagined, I can only marvel that this has not happened before.
If there was ever a constituency that needed an emollient Bufton Tufton type MP with a hide like a Rhino, Castle Point is it.
Canvey Island... the place that regards Genghis Khan as a weak-kneed leftie, soft on law & order......
Posted by: Treacle | March 12, 2008 at 22:06
It is all unfortunate, but Spink used the phrase "what part of send them back do they not understand" on an election leaflet in 2005. I know he was referring to unsuccessful asylum seekers rather than immigrants as a whole, but I think that the use of that phrase reveals someone who takes a bit too much delight in stirring up racial resentment.
I knew nothing about this situation until this afternoon and many posters will have an inside track but If he feels UKIP is his natural home I think that says more about them than us.
Posted by: Cath | March 12, 2008 at 22:06
Bob Spink has been a martyr looking for a cause for ages. Unable to resist having the last word with what is admittedly very 'challenging' Association and with an elephantine memory for minor slights or insults, real or imagined, I can only marvel that this has not happened before.
If there was ever a constituency that needed an emollient Bufton Tufton type MP with a hide like a Rhino, Castle Point is it.
Canvey Island... the place that regards Genghis Khan as a weak-kneed leftie, soft on law & order......
Posted by: Treacle | March 12, 2008 at 22:07
It looks like some one in the Party is not handling things properly.
How many more MPs are we going to loose?
If the party want more members to join, it is time to listen to members too.
Posted by: Patrick Ratnaraja | March 12, 2008 at 22:15
I'm sure his signing of this EDM a short while back really helped his cause with CCHQ!
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=35229&SESSION=891
Posted by: Mike | March 12, 2008 at 22:16
May I repeat my point from above - let's find out the facts before we respond to the trolls or we speculate without evidence.
Let's discover what has happened before we make accusations and unfounded comments. There is clearly a big story to come out of this one so we should hear it before we give our opinions.
Posted by: Geoff | March 12, 2008 at 22:29
""Yes, that argument really stopped Roger Knapman and Christopher Gill... "
And where are they now?
Um, at home, able to sleep at night?
Posted by: Chad Noble | March 12, 2008 at 23:38
This has been organised by allies of Stephen Castle... It has long been on the cards.
Expect Stephen Castle to be quickly selected as Conservative candidate for this area.
Posted by: Richard Wilson | March 12, 2008 at 23:43
Castle Point is a wonderful place. When Mrs Thatcher sacked a Cabinet Minister in 1985, he pleaded with her saying he'd have to sell his country house at Benfleet.
Posted by: Joe James Broughton | March 12, 2008 at 23:56
I don't think, in all honesty, that losing Dr. Spink is the worst thing to happen.
He has looked to be on the fringes of the parliamentary party for some while, and having met him a few times I came to the conclusion that he would probably feel more at home in UKIP.
We don't know the 'full story', but it looks, from what we do know, that he said, in effect, 'back me or sack me'. That sort of stance only works if you are sure of your position, which suggests that either Dr. Spink is an idiot (which I don't think he is) or did it on purpose with the intention of getting thrown out.
I wouldn't bet against UKIP having 'tapped him up' to use footballing parlance.
Posted by: Walter West | March 13, 2008 at 08:15
interesting comment from his labour opponent 2005 on guido
'Guido
I stood against Bob as Labour candidate in Castle Point in 2005 and with my LD counterpart exposed his "send them back" advert nationally.
I deplore his views on Europe and immigration but would defend his personal integrity.
He was threatened with deselection not because of his views on national issues but because he offended powerful local business interests in the building trade by opposing planning applications that were not in the interests of his constituents.
He has made allegations of political corruption in Castle Point that chime with what local residents told me on the doorstep and need proper investigation by both the public authorities and the Tory Party.
Luke Akehurst'
Posted by: digger | March 13, 2008 at 10:40
Knowing Dr Spink myself, he has been a good constituency MP and tireless fundraiser for charity, but his Association has been well renowned for sh*tting on him and riven by internal bickering.
The fact he lost the seat in 1997, I think demonstrated his complacency but his marginal gain in 2001 was poor considering Christine Butler was quite useless.
The Tories were never reduced to a single councillor on Castle Point. In the 1990s the seat flipped from 35 Cons and 5 Lab to the other way round and they almost reaped a clean sweep in 2003, but Dave Blackwell's Independents have virtually almost wiped them off Canvey; the BNP have now arrived and Labour are back on the council.
I predict a Tory hold in 2009/2010 but the majority will be affected by BNP and Spink as an Independent. God help us if Mr Castle becomes the candidate
Posted by: CONfused | March 14, 2008 at 11:33
I am grateful to your contributors, I can learn from their perception of this matter. I was particularly moved by Luke Akehurst's comments, he is a gentleman of honour.
May I give the facts. On Tuesday 11th March I told the Chief Whip I was resigning saying: 'If you wish, we can discuss how to handle my resignation, including publicity'. Party bosses tried to change my mind saying I would certainly win any selection again as I won the last one with 87.5% of the vote. I stuck by my guns and announced my resignation on the floor of the House. The Conservative Party issued a written press release on 12 March 2008 Ref: 0509/08 stating: 'Dr. Spink e-mailed his resignation to Mr McLoughlin yesterday (Tuesday) and ... the whip was withdrawn today... Wednesday.
I am a principled Conservative and intend to stand as that at the next election.
I can be more influential as an Independent Tory, pushing for stronger policy on pensions, Europe, crime and immigration, and against corruption and bad local planning decisions and I will redouble my fight for local infrastructure and for Castle Point people... no change there then!
Finally, the police have been investigating corruption in Castle Point for some time and their investigations remain open.
What I did may carry a high personal cost, but this is not about Bob Spink, it is about what is right for my constituents and for Britain. There is too much spin and deceit in politics, and it’s not confined to one Party.
Posted by: Dr. Bob Spink MP | March 17, 2008 at 11:14
Vote Spink and split the tory vote as a labour supporter I am glad this euro skeptic is more interested in himself than his party. LOL. the tories have no loyalty to their party there more interested in tedious issues like Europe than getting into power.
Posted by: Ken will be seen as a goldern era | March 17, 2008 at 12:02
I thought the rules had changed in that the use of the words "Independent Conservative/Labour/Liberal" was a breach of copyright, or something?
Or have I got it wrong?.
Posted by: curbishly | March 17, 2008 at 12:06
This just goes to show that CCHQ/the Chief Whip were unusually right.
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | March 17, 2008 at 12:25
Yep - can't call yourself an Independent Conservative, its a breach of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000. Its also wishful thinking to claim that any single independent MP can have any real influence on the type of issues which Mr. Spink highlights - something shown very clearly by both Richard Taylor and George Galloway.
I also note that Mr Spink complains that "the police have been investigating corruption...and their investigations remain open", which at the same time calling for the Conservative Party to intervene on the same basis. If the police are still really investigating (rather than going throught the motions) the last thing they will welcome is any interference from the Conservative Party...
Posted by: Prentiz | March 17, 2008 at 12:30
Which minister had a country pile in Benfleet?!
Posted by: Neil Martin | March 17, 2008 at 12:31
You can call yourself an Independent Conservative etc if you want, surely, just not on a ballot paper? Clare Short does and councils are full of 'Independent Conservatives' and so on. There's an Independent Liberal Democrat Libertarian somewhere.
Posted by: Neil Martin | March 17, 2008 at 12:33
"Which minister had a country pile in Benfleet?!
Posted by: Neil Martin | March 17, 2008 at 12:31 "
I think it was Patrick Jenkin, when Mrs Thatcher dispensed with his services after the botched abolition of the GLC.
Posted by: Joe James Broughton | March 17, 2008 at 12:44
" Its also wishful thinking to claim that any single independent MP can have any real influence on the type of issues which Mr. Spink highlights"
This stuff about being inside or outside the tent is vastly over-rated.
Inside the tent you can shout as loud as you like but if others bury their heads in the sand and refuse to listen - because it suits them to do so - you will have no impact.....and all the time you are required to keep quiet about the truth.
However, once outside the tent you can tell the world what is really going on and all sorts of pressures come to bear. Sometimes a bit of openness and transparency works wonders.
Mr Spink actually said "I can be more influential as an Independent Tory". He may be right.
He probably sleeps better now too.
Posted by: Councillor | March 17, 2008 at 13:30
At least Bob can call for conservative policies and values.Which part of 'you won't be better off under a Conservative government but you won't be worse off' can you possibly sell to streetwise Essex folk.That will give many candidates sleepless nights.
When you fight for what is right and tell the truth it is amazing how much easier it is.Truth is far more potent than being 'on message'.Bob may have made some powerful enemies but these will be outweighed by his many friends----famous or not.I look forward to this most active and commited MP firing on all cylinders,a true parliamentarian not a CCHQ serf.
Posted by: michael mcgough | March 17, 2008 at 14:10
If there is an Independent Tory and a Tory and the vote is split, there will be no Tory voice in this consistuency, independent or otherwise.
A suicide pact only helps your enemies in this case Mr Brown.
No real Tory would ever do that.
Posted by: Northernhousewife | March 17, 2008 at 15:08
Let us be clear on two points.
1. Dr Spink cannot call himself an Independent Conservative on the ballot paper. To do so is against the law and neither the Electoral Commission nor his local ERO will allow it.
2. If he stands, he will poll 1000 - 2000 votes maximum and will finish 4th. What makes Dr Spink think he would do better than the late George Gardiner in Reigate ?
Another case of "All political careers end in failure."
Posted by: ak23566 | March 17, 2008 at 15:17
iof you wanted to help join ukip that way vit would not lead to conFusion
Posted by: james cullis | March 17, 2008 at 15:22
If Mr Spinks problems locally are as set out then you can sympathise. He may indeed be a man who has many qualities, but you must 'come to equity with clean hands.'
The inflammatory comments in his leaflets and the financial arrangements relating to the employment of family members in his constituency jar with today's public.
The public are unlikely to view this as a Martin Bell/Neil Hamilton situation.
Posted by: Northernhousewife | March 17, 2008 at 15:33
look the oarty must realise it has a lort in common with ukip and ok im not particulary dfond of any of them but unles we stop atacgkinthe one party that shares some of ouhr beliefs (we differ on immigration) and start working together brown will stay vin power
Posted by: james cullis | March 17, 2008 at 15:44
At a rough guess, I'd say about 3 to 4,000 for Spink, but it could actually only be about 700.
Posted by: Joe James Broughton | March 17, 2008 at 16:24
UKIP have no campaign structure in Castle Point.
The local UKIP activists resigned en masse and joined the English Democrats.
Bob Spink will have a very lonely time as a UKIP MP.
Posted by: Bents as a nine Bob note | March 17, 2008 at 18:11
The interesting question, is, who do local UKIP campaigners support if the official Tory candidate also turns out to be BOO?
Posted by: Gospel of Enoch | March 17, 2008 at 23:23
CASTLE POINT 2009/2010
Clarke, Helen (Lab) 11,388
Brokenshire, James (Con) 11,335
Janman, Tim (UKIP) 10,229
Pell, John (BNP) 6,339
McGuinness, Justine (LD) 934
Spink, Dr Bob (Ind Con) 775
LAB MAJORITY 53
LAB GAIN FROM CON
Posted by: West London Tory | March 18, 2008 at 00:51
What an absurd prediction. You are clearly a puffed-up UKIP troll who wants to see Gordon Brown re-elected.
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | March 18, 2008 at 01:10
West London Tory is just winding up the po-faced EUphiles. Justin Hinchcliffe, an aspiring Thames angler, had his sense of humour removed long ago.
Bob Spink, as a sitting BOO MP, would not be challenged by UKIP if he stood at the next election. Tim Janman (former Conservative MP for Thurrock) has not joined UKIP and remains a Conservative Party member.
Castle Point may be James Brokeshire's best and last hope of being selected for a safe seat.
Posted by: TFA Tory | March 18, 2008 at 01:29
I am afraid that you all (or most of you) seem to be missing the point here. It is UKIP's first MP and many others have been waiting in the wings because although they want to go they did not wish to be the index case as it were. The Conservative Party has become the private tool of left leaning Europhiles who are prepared to sacrifice their country for their own selfish ends. Well done to you Bob for having the courage to tell Cameron what a drip he really is.
Posted by: John | April 22, 2008 at 12:39
Spink has joined UKIP at a troubled time. Farage is fighting allegations of graft - he took a 10,000 pound cheque from fellow MEP Graham Booth last summer, supposedly to buy a new car. He never bought the car....
This follows revelations that he broke a pledge to his party not to employ relatives, by employing his wife, and possibly arranging a job for his son, Sam.
It seems Farage is driven by money troubles, and lacks financial integrity. He is the only UKIP MEP never to have given money to the party.
Posted by: Lee Davies | April 25, 2008 at 19:32
Bob Spink could have served his constituents best as an Independent and his Country in his new found roll as Chairman of CIB - which addressed his very real and propper concerns about the catastrophic relationship these United kingdoms have with the corrupt, centralised and undemocratic EU that has been so damaging for Britain and at such immense cost and risk has achieved so very little of value.
Time will prove Bob's move to EUkip to be a huge error of judgement on his part, a disaster for EUkip, a catastrophy for CIB and a calamity for EUroScepticism.
In the short term it might give the impression that Farage has achieved something in his 20 months of leadership which is misleading as he lacks the vision or competence for leadership.
It also stands every chance of seeing Bob Spink linked with various upcoming Inquiries by the British Police, OLAF, the Gibraltar Police, IoM Authorities and Courts relative to the activities of Farage and others and the fraud, embezzling and money laundering by EUkip's MEP Tom Wise as openly published and easily verrified.
Time will tell but I do feel certain that Bob Spink has very much made the wrong decision by any 'standards' but maybe 'standards' are of no interest to him.
Regards,
Greg L-W.
Posted by: Greg | April 28, 2008 at 00:49
Dr. Robert Spink seemingly features in his own political obituary titled:
'Eyes Wide Shut'
Posted by: Greg L-W. | April 28, 2008 at 00:55