Dear Sir,
You have to give Paul Howell credit for his column in the Newton News, but he should be getting his facts right. He did back Rishi Sunak in the summer, but when I spoke to him about it, he was one of the very few who did not believe Rishi has stabbed Boris in the back.
He also stated that Boris and Penny pulled out due to the overwhelming support by the 1922 Committee and other MPs for Rishi. In fact, Boris had a meeting with Rishi and sensibly pulled out because he did not want to get back into the problem of a squabbling split party. Penny and her backers, after complaining that the way the selection was made to keep out a another female PM was pressure to drop out. The way the selection for a new leader was made, was certainly a stitch up. I think they found out how many would back Rishi then declared that each person should have 100 backers so really, but not practically a maximum of three could stand.
So, the fact is that, Rishi got in with about two thirds of the MPs backing him, therefore they did the dirty on the actual members of the Tory party by ensuring they did not get a vote. So what we really have is a stand in PM, for as long as the 1922 Committee want him thrust upon us.
Does Paul think that this is an acceptable way for the party to treat their members by not allowing them to choose, as they did before, who they wanted, or were they frightened he would be rejected as before?
As others, I would personally not now vote Conservative due to the way this has happened and think the red wall of seats will go to, God forbid, the Labour Party, especially if they can find a confident leader who will get back to listening to the working people and stand up to the unions.
John Armstrong