Just thought I would add a little tempter to readers to nip out early tomorrow morning. I have just been told that a News of the World poll due out tomorrow will give the Tories a 9% poll over Labour and another in the Sunday Times, conducted post Budget, will show Labour a whopping 16% behind!
Certainly a nice end to Spring Forum this year!
As I outlined on Wednesday morning, in my view, David Cameron had one big task to perform in his close of conference speech. Did he deliver? By and large, yes, I think he did.
The press over the last two days seems to agree and the polls out today, particularly the Guardian which puts the Tories and Labour neck-and-neck, back this up.
What did he get right? Most things. The key element for me, along with the warm words about education, the NHS and defence, was the tone and the philosophy that ran through the speech. What I was hoping to see, and what I did see, was a philosophy coming through that could be summed up on the doorstep with some juicy phrases. Some of the ones I noted down during the speech included:
“We are the Party of One Nation” - This was obviously a particularly TRG-friendly phrase!
“The revolution of freedom from control” - Which works as a key principle that many will understand and relate to.
“Stop wasting money on pointless gimmicks” - Another with broad control that, coupled with the right examples, will be a winner.
“Why don’t you [Brown] go ahead and call that election and let the people decide!” - This has been one of the most consistent recent themes and has been repeated by every member of the party interviewed in the last few days. Brown now has a no-win choice on the election and the Tories seem to be very much on the up as a result.
“Britain will win” - Nice and simple closer, although not exactly Churchillian, it worked well for the cheers in the hall but will perhaps travel less well.
One phrase I did no hear from DC, but which is already being used widely, is “Safer, greener Britain”. This did not sit easily with me the first time that I heard it as I thought the terms made an odd couple. However, it is being repeated and seems to resonate, so there you go. The connecting them is one of the Conservative Party protecting the country from the biggest threats and that was a good part of DC’s speech, too.
Was there anything wrong with it? The “no-script” approach might have jarred with some, but a larger number probably appreciated it. There were some sections that seemed a bit long, but even then there are audiences for some policies that might have felt left out had they been shorter. Really, though, these things are quibbles and the real answer to the question is no, nothing much.
So, the Tories now have a spring in their step and a bounce in their polls. Whether either lasts remains to be seen, but I think this is an overall vote of support in the Cameron leadership.
From a TRG perspective, it is all to be welcomed, and our members are likely to be able to campaign with enthusiasm and confidence should Brown not lose his nerve over calling an election.
David Cameron will give his main address to the party conference just after 2 o’clock, this afternoon. What should he be aiming for? For me it is clear that there is one remaining task.
It has been a clear fact that the conference audience has been completely united this week. The ordinary party members, perhaps because they are focussed on a possible general election within a month, have all had two main questions they wanted answered this week.
The first requirement was for a clutch of policies that can be used by activists on the doorstep. This has been delivered. We can talk about new ideas for pensions, inheritance tax, charges on non-domicled residents and others. Excellent.
The second need is the one that needs to be met by Cameron, today. That need is for a fresh articulation of what the Conservative Party stands for. It means we need a form of words that can be repeated by activists across the country. It requires a series of ideas that can be easily communicated that explain the values that were used to choose those policies that have been adopted from among all the ideas generated by the review groups.
This week the new policies and the coherence among ordinary members has given the party a strong platform on which to build and much of it will be of comfort to One Nation Conservatives. I am confident that Cameron will deliver the rest, today, when the stakes are high.
As the Conservative Party Conference opens in Blackpool, today, I find myself flicking through the official handbook. It has the complete listing of main hall and fringe events. One name that keeps coming up is that of David Willets MP. He seems to have the most hectic schedule of any speaker at the fringe, this year. If you think anyone else is doing more, then let us know.
The TRG’s own programme for conference looks pretty impressive and I should stress that I don’t have much to do with organising these things, that is mainly down to Tim Crockford, our events committee chair, and Clare Whelan, our National Director, so thanks (in advance!) to both of them.
We are hosting “4 Days, 4 Events”, with speakers including Lord Hurt, Oliver Letwin, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, Damian Green, David Mudell, Sayeeda Warsi, Nick Bourne, Dominic Grieve and others. It should all be informative and, hopefully, a lot of fun. As things develop, we will try and get some things posted on this blog to offer the TRG’s perspective on the conference as it unfolds!
Some political predictions are harder than others. It does not seem that a prediction that Boris Johnson will be announced today as the Conservative candidate for London Mayor will rank as a great act of political insight and it is the common view.
The question has become: will Boris be any good as a candidate?
On the one hand, Boris is a remarkably popular figure among sections of the electorate that do not normally get as engaged in elections as others. So, there is a chance that new voters will become pulled into the vote and that more bodies will be available for campaigning activities. Sadly, the students are unlikely to be able to bolster his vote as they will be engaged in exams or registered at home come election day.
On the other hand, there is a fear that Boris will issue another gaffe, of the type he has made over cities including Liverpool and Portsmouth.
This is not the problem that some perceice, either. The strangest outcome of these Boris comments, though, seems to be that no one really holds it against him when he says these things. It is simply a case of what makes Boris, Boris.
There is a further question. That relates to Boris’ role as an MP for an Oxfordshire constituency. Boris has already said he would not remain as an MP if he becames Mayor, as he repeated on the Today Programme, this morning. But what if he becomes the candidate and a general election is called early? How will he manage two elections that do not geographically overlap?
The first question will be answered today.
The others may take a little longer, but I suspect that Tory party members will not be disappointed.
Update - 27 September 2007
So, as we thought, the result was not a surprise. Boris has won and good luck to him! The scale of his win, though, is unprecedented. Boris took 75% of all votes cast, with a majority of some 14,000 over the next placed candidate. That is impressive.
BBC report is here.
As the last of the Tory’s major policy review groups to report, the finding of the Quality of Life team are particularly welcome. Firstly, their weighty tome has added a large number of exciting new policy options to the party for its consideration. Some were to be expected, such as calls to curb airport expansion. Others were less so.
However, throughout the long roll-call of ideas, there was a set of clear themes. In the first instance, the idea that the environment is rightfully at the top of the political agenda and will be seen by future generations as the defining moment of our political generation. Get this wrong, and those in power will be infamous. Get them right and they will be rightfully famous.
Secondly, their is a consistency of approach in their solutions. Top among these is the basis of using both carrot and stick to solve major issues. The stick in this case is invariably tax. While the group has gone to great lengths to make clear that they are advocating no change in the total tax burden, they do see the need for a redistribution of it to ensure that the true cost of our actions is reflected in the price. This is almost the definition of the case for government intervention in a market-based system and no practical capitalist will disagree with principle.
Where things are looking less firm, in the ideas of the media at least, is in how the results of these labours are to be squared with those of the others that have already reported, as this editorial from the Financial Times discusses.
But I am not sure that there is really the problem that some commentators have supposed. Not long ago, the Tory Party was under attack for not having enough policies. Now they think we have too many. There really is no pleasing some people!
The ability to really choose between policy options is really an opportunity. After all, decisions will have to be made and no one will be able to say there were no options. So whatever the Cameron administration picks out, it will have to stand by. The values that those decisions embody will become self-evident and the charge that there is no moral map to guide the party will clearly be null and void. Come election time, whenever that may be, there will be a real choice for voters and the basis of the Conservative choice will be clear.
Good luck to David, George and Oliver in making their decisions. We all have a lot riding on them.
I am at home over the weekend and my father, who was in one of the last intakes of National Service, has just expressed his support for what he thought was David Cameron’s idea of re-introducing it, as reported by the BBC.
Now I am not really sure that the idea of a service that is voluntary and one that is about community service rather than preparing men for war is really something that should be classified as National Service, even if it is a national service. Perhaps the most telling difference, though, is that this service is expected to last for six weeks rather than for two years or more. Is this really enough time to allow those taking part to bond and to learn the lessons of discipline, team work and camradre that my father so hopes it will? I suspect not.
However, it does illustrate, once again, the way that many people such as my father see the problems of society. He is not someone that has been the victim of a major crime, nor is he generally fearful. But he does believe that there is a general slackening of law and order based on a relaxation of fairly basic values.
I am not sure that the proposals outlined for this scheme so far, really will achieve what they have set out to do. However, the TRG values of social justice do lead me to praise the attempt to find a big solution to a big problem. This is a problem, after all, for everyone in society and not just those targeted by the scheme. With such high stakes, we should be prepared to be bold with these ideas, going further if necessary, and welcome the options of new choices for young people that have been failed for far too long.
Reports suggest that there is to be a major film of Lady Thatcher’s life. It appears she is to be played by the rather attractive Sienna Miller. Personally, I think there is something wonderfully Chaucerian about the idea of the grocer’s daughter being played by a miller’s prodigy.
The BBC has several details on how the film might come together. However, perhaps the key to understanding what kind of film this might turn out to be, comes from the choice of director:
Hollywood director Oliver Stone, whose previous films include Wall Street, Platoon and Natural Born Killers, is believed to have wanted to make a film about Baroness Thatcher - born Margaret Roberts - for several years.
I can see the Wall Street influence of the 80’s coming through during the Thatcher heyday, the Falklands War and the horrors of Goose Green captured as effectively as were the jungle fights of Vietnam… it could be a blockbuster!
How will it all end?
Over the last month there has been some criticism of David Cameron from former party donors and candidates, among others.
So, we thought we would run a quick poll to see whether readers of this blog feel the same. Have a look at the options in the poll on the right of this page and vote now by clicking on one of the responses.
There has been some further criticism of David Cameron for going to Rwanda this week instead of walking around his constituency in a pair of wellies telling people he was sorry their homes had been flooded.
Now if he had been jetting off on holiday I might have had more sympathy with that point of view, but as it is I have very little. Cameron is performing a useful task by heading to Rwanda, developing his own knowledge and highlighting important issues. There is little he could have done at home although I am sure he does sympathise with those that have been affected.
I have just appeared on 18 Doughty Street where Patrick Mercer MP was a fellow guest. Patrick has just returned from what he termed a “fact-finding mission” to Iran. The trips that MPs make can unquestionably be useful if organised correctly and should be a vital part of the preparations of any political leader who truly aspires to high office. Sadly, events at home have shadowed some of the points that the Cameron visit had hoped to highlight such as the need to remove trade barriers to help African countries develop economically and the well-timed release of Peter Lilley’s excellent report on reducing global poverty. Sadly, the media could have adopted a less cynical and more aspirational approach to this event, but such is not their way.
Anyone who has any doubts about the value of trip such as this should read Iain Dale’s account or the comments from the Guardian’s Will Woodward. On behalf of the TRG, well done to Andrew Mitchell MP, his team and all of those at CCHQ that put this trip together. We hope it leads to the actions that are so desperately needed.
There was a story in the Sunday Telegraph, yesterday, suggesting that David Cameron may come to face a leadership challenge.
I have no inside knowledge to be able to test the validity of this story. However, it would seem to me a strange one if it is true. There are, no doubt, those who are critical of the mode the Conservative Party has developed over the last eighteen months under Cameron’s leadership.
However, Cameron’s course remains broadly correct. That is not to say that there have not been mistakes, and there are always likely to be more in future. Many moderate party members are upset at some policy announcements at least as much as some of the more extreme members. Such is the stuff of political life and none of us can have everything we want. The best result for all Conservatives, though, is to remember that what unites us is still much greater than that which divides us and all of us are better off with a Conservative Prime Minister. David Cameron is the best chance we have of reaching that goal.
What is sickening, is it is many of the same individuals that criticised John Major during his time as party leader who are involved in causing trouble now. They have not learnt the damage that this does in the minds of the electorate. They have not learnt that such brick throwing causes only resentment and makes no positive contribution to the political debate within the party or beyond. In eighteen months, Cameron has turned around the fortunes of the party and returned them to the status of genuine challengers. He has earned the right to whatever time he needs to complete his strategy and lead the party into a General Election.
David Cameron was supportive of the TRG in the remarks he made to our members at our Summer Party earlier this month. We remain supportive of him.
The word is that Boris has decided to run as a candidate for London Mayor.
It is understandable from Boris’ point of view. He is a personality with a reputation that goes far beyond Westminster and this is the highest directly-elected office in the land; the one where personal reputation is more important than anything else?
But what does it mean for London? Well, the main point is likely to be the effect it will have on the election itself. Firstly, throughout the primary format that will lead to the selection will now attract vastly more media coverage than it might otherwise have done. With luck, this will achieve some of the party’s aims in employing such a system: namely, underlining the newly open nature of the party and the opportunity for non-party members to participate increasing the chances of selecting a candidate with mass appeal.
Something similar will no doubt happen during the full election if Boris is selected. Ken Livingstone has been a good and bad thing for London. His very forceful personality has enabled him to shape the job and give it more clout than a weaker personality may have done. But that same trait has led him to some dreadful and embarressing decisions, some of which we have previously discussed on this blog.
Taking on Ken needs a big personality, too, and Boris has that. Whatever else happens, you can guarantee Boris and Ken will grab the headlines. If you were a Lib Dem, you’d have to worry about being squeezed, though.
Quentin Davis’ decision to defect to Labour is a shame but no disaster. He is a capable politician but not an exceptional one. Neither side of the House of Commons will really notice his movement, I suspect.
The timing of this statement can be no accident. The resignation letter to David Cameron that Davis has chosen to release looks as though it may well have had some input from the Labour press office. So I wonder if some of the commentators on ConservativeHome may have the wrong idea. This is not a statement about Europe from a die hard pro-European. There is more that binds members of the Tory Party together than that one issue. If that were not so, many more would have left during the Hague and IDS administrations.
There are several others there who comment on Davis’ failure to reach a top office and then wonder about whether he is about to make it to the Lords as a thank-you from the new PM.
I would suggest that with Gordon Brown stepping into those big shoes tomorrow and announcing a new series of ministers, Davis may be looking for a pay-off earlier than a retirement seat in the upper house. Brown has mentioned several times that he was hoping to draw in people from across the political spectrum and maybe this was his Tory. What’s more, the job he is rumoured to have offered Paddy Ashdown was as Northern Ireland Secretary. This is an area where Davis has worked before, having been shadow to that job under IDS, and perhaps he fancies a return to the active side of things.
We should not be worry about the wobble created by the move of Quentin Davis. Calm will resume shortly. Cameron has the Conservative Party set on broadly the right course and that will be rewarded at the ballot box.
For sometime it has seemed to me that the Conservative Party has, for whatever reason, not always made the best of news opportunities. In some cases we have not been able to get the key messages of a policy announcement or other event into the media in a way that maximises the potential impact. This occurred, for example, when ideas for potential green taxes that were discussed in the spring were portrayed as a series of six additional taxes to be combined together, rather than the intended list of six alternative ways of achieving what needs to be done. Another case was the failure to make clear in the media that Greg Dyke had approached the Conservative Party about running for London Mayor, rather than the other way around.
I didn’t see that the problem was the fault of one person or team, although it is hard to know why this has been the case without having been involved, but it is good to see that some decisive action has been taken by the leadership team to address the situation.
Let’s hope that the appointment yesterday of Andy Coulson, former editor of the News of the World, as the new Director of Communications, will do what needs to be done. Best of luck to him.
Graham Brady’s decision to resign from the shadow cabinet yesterday cannot be seen as a total surprise after the rebuke he received from the whip’s office. I would also never criticise a member of parliament who resigned from a post over a point of principle - indeed, I suspect there are generally too many principles that are ignored.
However, my initial sympathies for his position go further.
In theory, I have long been a supporter of Grammar Schools. I did not attend one myself, but they always seemed to me a good way of helping to pull some of the brightest youngsters upwards. But hidden in some of the comments by David Willets and David Cameron on this subject are reasons for me to change my mind and, I think, for Graham Brady to at least consider his views, too.
Essentially, the argument is that selection of school based on one particular year of achievement is divisive in the long-term. It is great for those who make it but not so good for those who do not. Secondly, middle class parents have manipulated the system by buying houses close to grammar schools to the exclusion of working class ones. Thus, the argument is now that grammar schools prohibit social mobility rather than promoting it.
If this is the case, then my main reason for supporting them has turned out to be false and I am happy to look for a new way of promoting education. Key to what is needed, however, and was part of what worked for grammar schools and in private education from which we must learn, is the benefit of setting within schools. This allows children to be stimulated and educated at the level that best suits them but recognises that their ultimate potential will be realised at different ages, so over coming the main weakness of the grammar selection cut-off.
This is hardly a radical step in party policy, though. The initial announcement on grammar schools came over a year ago and no Tory government has opened a grammar school for over thirty years (that is to say, not in my lifetime!).
Whatever the media likes to think, thought, this is a Clause Four moment for the Conservative Party. The party’s leadership was not gunning for a showdown and I am pretty sure they have been surprised by the depth and breadth of the opposition to what has been said.
What is most important, as W. F. Deedes pointed out in the Telegraph last week, is that on this issue, the party’s leadership is right and that must be held upper most in our minds as we plan our future policies.
During his spot on GMTV’s political show this morning, Iain Dale, Tory Blogger extraordinaire, suggested that in the next shadow cabinet reshuffle, which he predicts will be mid-June, David Cameron should pull in a couple of heavy-weights with real experience of politics to ensure they look credible to the electorate.
Interestingly, the two names he suggested were Lord David Trimble and Ken Clarke. Now I was pleasantly surprised by his selection, and would wholly endorse both. As if it needed pointing out, Ken Clarke is the TRG’s President and Lord Trimble (this bit is news!) will be the TRG guest of honour at our up coming summery party!
Perhaps we should offer Iain a ticket?
It is hard to say something about the local election results that has not been said by others elsewhere. Labour had a harrowing time and the SNP and Plaid Cymru picked up many of their distressed voters in the Labour heartlands of Wales and Scotland.
The Lib-Dems had had a torrid time, too. Where they go next is far from clear, but was is certain is that they have lost any momentum that might have taken them on to a serious position in British politics and even their role as the party of protest has been shaken.
The Tories had some symbolic victories in the North of England, Wales and some major cities. There is still someway to go, but David Cameron’s first major test at the ballot box has shown that the polls are no aberration. The Conservative Party is really challenging for power. We now hold over half of all the council seats in the country. A truly astonishing position.
The TRG sees all of this as a validation of many of the decisions that David Cameron and his team have taken. The change in mood that has been created had been fast and, this vote shows, real. The emphasis on the environment, public services and a constructive approach so long advocated by the TRG has been shown to benefit us as that ballot box. Now we need to show how those intentions can be converted into actions when (no longer if!) we return to power.
Welsh Conservative Leader, and TRG Patron, Nick Bourne AM writes about policies that are made for Wales.
With the Assembly elections almost upon us, all the political parties in Wales are in full campaigning mode. However, the journey leading up to the election has stretched back a year or more. Over the past year, Welsh Conservatives have consulted widely. We have engaged with many organisations and individuals. Most importantly, we have listened to what people want. I believe that period of stocktaking and reflection is paying dividends. Welsh Conservatives are changing; and through that change we are broadening our appeal. The Welsh public are very interested in what we have to say and what we have to offer them. As we gather momentum on the campaign trail, we are determined to ensure that no doorstep is off limits.
Scottish Conservative Leader Annabel Goldie MSP highlights what the Conservatives could do for Scotland.
We are now entering the final phase before the elections to the Scottish Parliament and all 32 local authorities in Scotland. We have a clear message to the people of Scotland - that we care about the real issues that matter, namely: crime, escalating drugs abuse, mounting NHS cuts, slipping education standards and a lack of affordable housing. Our policies for the elections are focused on these areas that go right to the heart of Scottish priorities.
The story has been revealed that Greg Dyke, formerly of the BBC, has considered running for London Mayor.
However, a key detail is not being widely reported by the press and that is that Dyke approached the Conservative Party, not the other way around.
Dyke’s idea was based on his disillusionment as a long-term Labour Party supporter and (I believe) donor. He wanted to stand as an independent and had asked the Lib-Dems and the Tories to endorse him while not putting forward anyone of their own.
It was wise of the Conservative leadership not to dismiss a successful figure with wide name recognition, like Greg Dyke, out of hand. The Lib-Dems are apparently not able to entertain the idea because of limits in their constitution, but with no such limits on the Tories it is right that the party leadership considered all of the options.
In the end, I think it would have been wrong if we had chosen to be part of this plan, but it would have been worse to have said no without thinking.
|
Conservative Party News
