TORY stalwarts with decades of service have accused the party hierarchy of giving the brush off to those demanding answers over the way a leading candidate was ditched on the eve of the May election campaign.
One of them said last night, in criticism which will be highly damaging to the leadership aspirations of new MSP Ruth Davidson, the former broadcaster and Annabel Goldie aide: “We have been treated with contempt.”
In a letter to The Herald, the chairman and secretary of one of Glasgow’s largest constituency associations, Rutherglen and Hamilton West, claim treatment of lead candidate Malcolm Macaskill went “against the principles of natural justice”. They add that five polite letters to the Scottish Tory chairman have resulted in a “brush off”.
Jean Miller and Allan Kenneth write: “We don’t believe we can ask for the respect of the electorate when there is no respect in our party relationships.”
It is an unprecedented comment, given the loyalty of the pair to the party.
Mrs Miller has been a member in Rutherglen for 45 years and an office-bearer for 21 years, while Mr Kenneth first joined the constituency party 27 years ago and has been an office-bearer for the past 12 years.
They write: “Having been ranked as top candidate on the Conservative Regional List for Glasgow, Malcolm Macaskill was almost certain to be elected as a regional MSP in May.
“Six weeks before the election he was removed from the party’s list and Ruth Davidson was promoted from second on the list. She was elected.
“Malcolm was denied a formal hearing, which goes against the principles of natural justice. Despite five letters of polite requests from those of us who, as local party office-bearers have worked with Malcolm for many years, Andrew Fulton, the chairman of the Scottish party has given no proper explanation for the party’s high-handed action.
“His response can be best described as a ‘brush off’, with repeated statements that ‘this correspondence is now closed’. We don’t believe we can ask for the respect of the electorate when there is no respect in our party relationships.”
Last night Mr Kenneth went further, saying: “Malcolm has been a very successful fund-raiser for the party and recently attracted pledges of substantial donations to the party from prominent businessmen. These pledges were withdrawn when Malcolm was sacked.
“The party apparently did not understand that the promises were dependent on goodwill created by Malcolm. We feel he was very badly treated by the party in March. The reasons given in press reports did not justify the party’s vicious action.
“Jean and I have repeatedly asked the chairman of the Scottish party to give an explanation or to meet us but have been treated with contempt.”
A Conservative Party spokesman said: “This issue was, quite rightly, dealt with in private and we refuse to discuss personal circumstances in public. The decision was taken following due process and endorsed unanimously by the party executive.
The steps taken were regardless of the ranking position of the candidate and we consider the matter closed.”
Mr Macaskill said: “My method of removal from the candidates’ list and from the No.1 ranking in Glasgow was unjust, it would quite rightly not be tolerated in the workplace, or any properly constituted organisation. The disregard for a basic human right is not what people would expect from a modern political party which advocates fairness and democracy.
“Jean Miller and Allan Kenneth have been colleagues for many years and I hold both of them in the highest esteem. As I have not been party to any of the correspondence between them and Andrew Fulton, I am unable to comment further.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article