As with every morning I popped into the news agents at the end of my road and picked up a copy of the Telegraph to read on the tube. On the front cover I was greeted by the powerful image of Lady Thatcher standing next to Gordon Brown outside number 10. To the right of the picture was a less than glowing piece about Cameron’s pledge for a radical green shake-up. Taken together of course a simple message is conveyed to the Party faithful – Cameron is not your guy.
But what of the effect on the Labour faithful? Paul Kenny, General Secretary of GMB union, labelled the visit by Thatcher as “a huge political mistake” which would do massive damage to the core Labour vote. But the reality is that whilst the Labour faithful won’t like anything about the visit they will nevertheless still vote for whoever, or indeed whatever, has a red rosette on it. The Labour base isn’t going anywhere.
The Conservative base on the other hand doesn’t know where to go; something Brown is acutely aware of.
As Iain points out in the post below his piece in the Telegraph today argues that Brown’s objective is to annihilate the Conservative Party – and given recent events, culminating in the Thatcher visit on the day the Quality of Life report came out, it’s difficult to disagree with that evaluation.
So, if as appears to be the case Cameron’s back is up against the ropes and he’s taking clunking fist after clunking fist from Brown, seemingly unable to defend against them, how does he get back into the fight? Iain quite rightly suggests Cameron needs to go on the attack. But any attack made needs to be coordinated; a flurry of wildly flung fists will only leave him open to a knockout blow. So if you were Cameron’s corner man, what would you advise him to do? Over to you…
26 comments:
Ask David Davis
Curious isn't it that Iain has been telling us for years that Gordon Brown was going to be a hopeless leader who wouldn't be able to counter the Cameron romp in the polls. And some of the people who comment on this blog imply that Dave's campaign is still going along just swimmingly. Whistling to keep their spirits up perhaps?
What would I do for Cameron as his Cornerman?
I would finance a spine transplant. And whilst we're at it, a common sense implant.
Come out fighting by all means but remember this...
The Conservative Party, in one guise or another has a 400+ year history. Given the immense social and economic change over that period any search for a unifying theme or a detailed set of beliefs is exceptionally difficult. It would be utterly astonishing were there not to be some fairly stark contradictions in the policy positions a party of that vintage adopted throughout it's history - even the rhetorical device usually used to bring that history under one theme, principles, usually ends up settling on something remarkably lame that everyone would agree on anyway.
So it's against this background then that Cameron's reforms need to be properly understood, not some rehashed Thatcherite election broadcast from the 1980's. Consider this: Conservatives were legislating for trade union rights a generation before the Labour party was founded, establishing public health projects before Aneurin Bevan was born. The 'middle way' ethos of Macmillan's government was expanding the welfare state in the late 50's / early 60's before David Cameron was born. When the Conservatives suggested there might be merit in some of Polly Toynbee's analogies on social cohesion earlier this year (analogies mind, not policies) the histrionics from some in the Tory party were pathetic and simply confirmed the fears among the wider electorate that they weren't fit to govern. The recent over-the-top reaction to Mercer & Bercow's decision to advise Brown on some issues was similarly misguided.
The Conservatives have long been a broad church and the party's ability to switch between different strands of ideas is not simply the product of electoral calculation - it reflects genuine tensions within conservatism as a body of thought and has actually been critical to the electoral success the party has enjoyed over the last few hundred years. To my mind Cameron needs to be even more adversarial in this debate and confront his internal critics head on - the party needed rescuing from the coterie of selfish, homophobic, xenophobic and narrow-minded idiots who rose to prominence during the 80's & 90's. Thatcherism did a lot of good and had its place (largely borne of economic necessity) but it was no more 'true' as a conservative creed than anything Cameron is proposing now (or Heath, Macmillan etc.) Just as critics on the left are wrong to label Cameron's reforms as some clever triangulation device designed purely to win elections, critics on the right are equally erroneous in their characterisation of his efforts as somehow an affront to the very soul and ethos of conservatism.
There is room for a robust, historically-informed and no-nonsense defence of liberal conservatism, aimed, not at the country, but at those in his own party who remain stubbornly attached to an outdated and thoroughly malign understanding of what Conservatism actually means. Yes it's about small government but not ever-decreasing government. Take the tax argument - as the economy grows tax cuts may be possible but not at the expense of pre-school education for some of the poorest people in our society, not at the expense of drug rehabilitation programmes that may actually cut crime in the future, not at the expense of benefits and support for people who have come to this great country because their lives were in danger back home, not at the expense of world-class health provision for everyone regardless of their ability to pay - we already have one of the lowest tax takes as a % of GDP in Europe. He needs to openly say there is no place in the Conservatives for people who believe homosexuality should be illegal, sexual orientation should have any bearing on where someone is employed or that a gay couple can't provide a stable home for a child. No place for people who think immigration is an unalloyed evil and should be stopped, no place for people who aren't interested in relative poverty or social cohesion.
Even within these parameters there are still left/right arguments to be had about solutions and how we prevent certain problems from arising but we need to be more prescriptive about the no-go areas and not pretend that the elderly visitor to No.10 yesterday was the very embodiment of the party's soul.
Go talk to the TUC about a referendum
All this panic about Brown is stupid and self defeating. While Brown is being lauded by partisan hacks it's best not to feed the 'Tories in trouble' spin.
Here's a dirty dozen or so to attack Mr. Brown on...
1) Again ask why Hizb-ur-Tahrir isn't banned as Blair promised given they want to overthrow governments and install an islamic caliphate?
2) Ask why if Mr.Brown claims that the UK has been a huge economic success that 5.4M people are economically inactive, one third of families depend on state benefits for at least half their income and 1.25M young people are not in full time education or employment?
3) Ask why the goverment still persists in ploughing epic sums of money into Brown's New Deal and Surestart when both schemes have been painful flops as the NAO has chronicled?
4) Ask why NHS productivity is substantially down and measures such as cancer treatment success, adult mortality have berely moved yet whe have doubled NHS spending in real terms since 1997 to the EU average?
5) Ask why our measure of cancer treatment success are still appalling by European and International standards..it's not an issue of money?
6) Ask why our brave servicemen continue to get killed in Iraq and Afghanistan because they lack basic equipment such as an adequate number of helicopters and they travel in "snatch" Landrovers that provide the same level of protection from bombs as my Volvo?
7) Ask if Mr. Brown continues to support the introduction of ID cards at vast expense and loss of civil liberties?
8) Ask why British troops are pulling out of Iraq, have we succeeded in creating civil government in Basra?
9) Ask why the overall tax burden is the highest it has ever been since the mid-70s and what has been achieved with the money other than spending it (or as NuLab calls it investment)?
10) Ask is Mr. Brown intends to apologise to junior doctors because their recruitment process within the NHS was a disaster?
11) Ask Mr. Brown if he will hold a referendum on the EU Consitution / treaty as NuLab previously promised - We though Brown would user in a era of honest government?
12) Ask Mr. Brown why our level of educational success are frankly appalling with less than 50% of pupils leaving school with good GCSEs (including English & Maths)?
13) Ask Mr. Brown why the level of educational attainment in state schools falls far short of public schools yet the spending per pupil is almost the same (and state spending will be higher within the next 5 years)
14) Ask Mr. Brown if he has ever seen a new tax or regulation that he didn't like
Brown's so-called "miracle economy" is coming apart at the seams as many of us knew it eventually would. You can't run an economy on debt-fuelled consumer spending indefinitely, it's simply unsustainable.
The credit crunch, that's only just beginning, will destroy more than Northern Rock. It will devastate the UK economy, cause a house price crash, mass unemployment, recession etc and totally destroy Brown's undeserved reputation for economic competence.
The question is: does Cameron want to inherit a posoned chalice?
Resign.
Ah - but fear not - Ming is now offering a referendum on Europe !
He is obviously the man for us !
Yay !!!
Pensions
PFIs
Immigration.
Human Rights.
Taxes. (+ Tax credits)
Defence.
For the Leader of the Conservative Party to actually write an article to say he IS a Tory was, for me, worrying. By that statement he knows that he is upsetting the core conservative voter and for him to give the Goldsmith/Gummer report the credence he did, and say that most of it will appear in the Tory manifesto, convinced me that he is NO tory!
Brown may well be out to 'kill off' the Conservative Party but he is well assisted by Cameron and Boy George!
Your first contribution -'Ask David Davis'is spot on. A HUGE mistake has been made. I dread the immediate future.
Some in the Labour Party are brooding I saw this up on the Compass site which is typical of a lot of Brown baiting
'Anyone who has seen the photo of Brown and Thatcher together in today's newspapers, must wonder if there is anything remotely resembling a Labour Government left to support.Where is the social democratic project in all of this and just what is the Compass role in it ?'
Does anyone have any explanation as to why the Labour Party base vote are going nowhere. Ok some obvious points . The public sector just get paid off in pensions and pay rises and the Scots the same ( £30 billion to Barnett its way up North next year so revise that £14 billion figure up). That’s 8000,000 in the public sector and their dependants 5500,000 of working age on benefits and 1500,000 on disability benefit . Sprinkle a few Guarianistas on the stew and that your labour vote. Most of it just voting for your money to be given to them .
There are however quite a lot of Labour activists who believe they are on the side of Personal Liberty often they talk about the seminal linguist and dipsy political daydream doodler Chomsky. Orwell gets a frequent mention despite having demonised “Engsoc” for all time . With Brown presiding over the DNA base the ID card fiasco …oh sorry that hasn’t happened yet ( Cost 5 billion says brown 20 billion say independent sources) . His plans to move into the post democratic age and replace votes with a PR pantomime and Show Trial citizen’s juries are chilling . ( With his record of manipulating results as well)
I am frankly astonished to see some of these prepared to support this terrifying figure lumbering out of the Warsaw Pact of the 60s, It is unreasonable to assume that about half the country is so deranged and evil that they actually desire the end of the country , the end of free will and the end of democracy. Why will they not join the Lib Dums ? They talk garbage and behave like reptiles at local elections but they are not Stalinists 8n the way Brown is ?
ANYONE BUT BROWN----Is absolutely brilliant
my opinion on gordo is when you take away the stunts and cheap shots there is nothing there.Gordo is all tricks and no substance he has not realy done anything to improve the country except shoot at cameron.Gordo is the little greasy haired boy at school who everyone bullied and now has some power and is proving he was just as big a shit.
"Restore us, and regain the blissful Seat"
Ask yourself, "Why Thatcher is history writ large? Why is She part of the canon? If she were a book, Thatcher would be Paradise Lost.
Ask yourself, Dave, why you are leaking friends faster than a leper with body odour.
"Who first seduc'd them to that fowl revolt?"
You did, Dave, you did.
"Th' infernal Serpent; he it was, whose guile
Stird up with Envy and Revenge, deceiv'd
The Mother of Mankinde, what time his Pride
Had cast him out from Heav'n, with all his Host
Of Rebel Angels,"
The rebel angels were denied a voice and Patrick Mercer, among others were cast into the outer darkness...
You duty now, Dave, is to seek forgiveness for your terrible deeds, and prevent your party from imploding like a Vindaloo fart.
"To bow and sue for grace
With suppliant knee."
(This week, I shall mainly be writing fortune cookies.)
Cassilis' common sense about Cameron... and then Newmania's sycophantic rambling drivel, and there's your problem.
More brilliance from Cassilis although I do not agree .....
I do not actually agree with your points on tax which assume that lowering tax will will lower revenue . No , not if it increases growth and reduces avoidance . See Ireland . You also assume there is no waste in the system ...well thats just a bit silly isn`t it Mr. Cassilis hmmm?
I also disagree with your inference that the way to close up the widening clas gaps is through the welfare state . It is through the slow careful removal of distorting reliance on the welfare state Although this is a separately difficult and slow process. I approve of your mention iof La Toynbee though . Without better access to opportunity the moral case for a smaller state becomes emerded with inequality
I also disagree with you that tax poured into education is a zero sum game . I think the spending is about 80% up in real terms since 97/8 and we have achieved a position far behind our competitors where you can obtain enough A s to cascade down the page like a suicidal scream by spelling your own name . Discipline , accountability teaching practice and social mix are just as cheap as getting it wrong
I agree with your socially Liberal remarks -ish but to say there should be no place in the Party for those who think immigration is an unalloyed evil is itself rather a fascist attitude . It is an entirely reasonable point of view to take,.The economic advantage has been misrepresented. The cost to cultural capital ignored and its has also been allowed quite undemocratically . It is now mainstream thinking that immigration has been handled appallingly badly and if some are a little enthusiastic in their defence of the country`s culture and integrity I dispute utterly that there is no place for them in the Conservative Party
So it would appear I agree with little of what you say but that is not the case I recognise the sort of Conservatism you are describing and ( here again I take issue) I believe Margaret Thatcher’s clean little secret was that she was also far less doctrinaire than her own rhetoric although her views changed with time . I would put it this way . The coalition of views required to get Brown out must consist of Liberals at the left of the localist Green and Libertarian sort, One nation Conservatives and what I take to be the Cassilis view as described in the book After Blair . It should stretch through nationalists , traditionalists , tax cutters and small business interest, Euro sceptics and , yes the socially illiberal . At the moment every fine detail of difference is howled out to the moon when it is entirely clear that David Cameron is a straightforward Conservative.
My view is that the Party should be more comfortable with difference return to compromise and pragmatism and stop grandstanding when we have a leader doing a magnificent job who deserves support from a broad spectrum . It is a welcome relief to see some support for David Cameron here though and your long view of Conservatism is one that I relish.
It's time to remember that Tories don't ponder, don't consult, don't show weakness. They DO.
It is always the feeling of strong leadership that wins it for them.
People will vote for a strong leader even if they're not sure of the policies.
Leadership, decisiveness. That's what Cameron should be showing now.
Wanting to be liked won't work.
the trouble is that Cameron doesn't believe that the core Tory vote need wooing, because he asks "who else will they vote for", whereas Gordon Brown answers by saying "vote for me".
Brown has more in common with old style Tories (authoritarian, anti-instability) than many people realise. I believe that authoritarian Tories are more likely to feel warmer to Brown than a 'liberal' Conservative. If Brown takes a firmer stance on Europe, I can see him winning over many more Tories than Blair did.
Ironically, Gordon Brown doesn;t care much for his core vote either, as he knows it is continuing to decline. And he is right - it is.
The battle ground now is the centre and soft centre-right.
Ironically, I can see a few liberal minded (Blairite) soft centre-lefts voting Cameron ahead of an authoritarian Brown!
God, it's all so confusing!
It's political triangulation.
Cassillis - what a fantastic post.
Conservatism is not an ideology, but a set of sentiments, inclinations and principles which losely correlate around (a) the value of tradition (b) progressive change rather than violent revolution (c)the nation state (d) liberty, and a few more besides.
20th century 'conservatism' has had several aspects to it. The one-nation ideas which were based on Disraeli's analysis of why national disunity was dangerous, the post-war consensus which was largely based on one nation thinking, and the economic liberalism of Thatcher was, to many high Tories, utterly indefensible because it destabilised the country - yet was equaly defended by other conservatives who saw the real threat to the country in the slow socialisation of the UK.
What Cameron is quite skillfully doing is taking certian core aspects of Conservatism - those particularly relevant for this period of history - and bringing them to the fore. Besides this, he is looking at national and international problems and asking "what would a conservative responce to this be". He doesn't always get the answer right, but he is asking the right questons.
I have no doubt that Cameron is a Conservative - the question, which of the many 'sentiments' which make up conservatism appeal to him most?
I think he is instinctively someone who believes in people working together to achieve solutions to problems - but believes this should actually be 'people' and not the state or its many arms.
I think he does believe in personal economic freedom, but simply that the wealthier have a duty to aqssist the less well off.
I think he clearly believes in the nation state, but asks what is our role in the world.
On the whole, I think he is a fairly decent guy, is not by nature someone who believes in meddling at a micro level, and that his heart is in the right place. The question is, can he communicate this, and his policies?
Anyonebutbrown - superb post.
Newmania - likewise. However, the comment 'they are just voting so that they get given more of your money' - isn't that what socialism is all about!
Lady Thatcher just sent a message to "The Heir to Blair's Conservatives": Cameron is a liability.
My advice for him would therefore be that he should go. He will otherwise go into the history books as the man who singlehandedly wiped out the Conservative Party.
All Cameron needs to do is stand calmly by and watch as Brown's Boom turns catastrophically into Brown's Bust.
Unlike many of the Prime Minister's friends and advisors, I am not wealthy enough to maintain a bolthole abroad for me and my funds, but I am very glad I'm past the age of needing a mortgage, because I don't think the debacle is going to stop at Northern Rock.
Bob as a man who supports a Labour PM who is cuting the pay of public service workers but letting millionares pay little or no tax can you really call anyone 'sycophantic'?
"It's time to remember that Tories don't ponder, don't consult, don't show weakness."
I WAS ELECTED TO LEAD, NOT READ.
Ahem.
Cassilis' post was good, though aren't these very similar points to those D.C. made in the Telegraph last week (and again in his Q & A)?
Re: taxes, from the Telegraph Q & A Mr Cameron said that, though he intends to keep up Labour levels of *spending*, he is going to spend that money on *different* things. Presumably defence will be an important one, plus building more prisons.
Post a Comment