“Cameron’s likeable,” Johnson said in an interview with The Sunday Times. “He’s articulate. He’s a nice guy.” Does Cameron really believe in the National Health Service? “I am sure he is genuine about the NHS,” said Johnson. What is going on? Johnson was articulating Labour’s latest attempt to find a line of attack against the Tories that might resonate with voters.
No 10 spin doctors privately admit that attempts to paint Cameron as a bicycling chameleon, uncaring toff or insincere estate agent have failed. Polls and focus groups regularly find that voters view Cameron as “affable” and “well meaning”.
Now the strategy is shifting. The message is that Cameron may be a pleasant chap but he is a prisoner of an unreconstructed rightwing party that would destroy essential public services if it ever won power. “Cameron’s been very skilful at the way he has projected his own image onto his party. Now there is a feeling that, yes, you are a nice guy, but what is next?” Johnson said.
“Cameron’s genuine, but he is leading the Conservative party. It is not a presidential system – much as we might have disguised it under Tony. This is a party system.”Those in the cabinet with Oxford degrees in political philosophy talk about the “head-body paradox”. The theory is that a split party, with a leader leaning towards the left while the grass roots are pulling rightwards, can never win an election.
Interesting. So the stratedgy shifts from him being painted as a chinless wonder to one of killing him with kindness and sympathy. He's a prisoner of those awful right wingers in his Party who won't let him do what he wants.
Dear oh dear. It's an interesting volte face, but it's a strategy that will fail. Cameron is in complete control of the Conservative Party, more so than any other leader since Churchill, in my opinion. What he says goes. Of course there are voices who disagree with aspects of his policies, but I'd like Alan Johnson to name a single one where he has been forced into a retreat because those siren voices on the right have exerted pressure. Even on grammar schools, it hasn't happened. The policy has remained unchanged.
James Forsyth thinks it is now time to give other Shadow Cabinet members a higher profile. A fine thought, but he fails to recognise that the media just aren't interested in anyone beyond Cameron, Clarke, Hague and Osborne. That's why he was unwise not to bring DD back (more of which in my Total Politics interview with Cameron, out next week).
The other reason the Labour change of strategy won't work (if there is indeed a change) is that Labour politicians are so brainwashed with the line that Cameron is a do-nothing chameleon that they just won't be able to change just like that. Can you imagine Draper's gang changing from attack puppies to chihuahuas? Me neither. Still, I am happy to be providing David Cameron with a lightning rod at the moment!
Labour is incapable of change. And that's why they are destined to lose.
55 comments:
spot on, iain. labour are so desprate they'll try anything.
Labour is incapable of change. And that's why they are destined to lose.
They are also a dreadful Government, incapable of change. To think, they call The Tory Party nasty. "New Pot calling Old Kettle a utensil of colour"!
None the less, I think he would raise the Tories even more in the polls if he did adopt a few more "Right wing" policies! Grammar schools spring to mind! :-)
All political parties have swung left over the past 30 -/- 40 years, David Cameron is a wind-bag, some of the things he says to you in pivate are not the same when he says them in public, hnce I as a Conservative, much as I hate this lot in power, can not vote for Cameron until he improves, and addresses the wrongs of the Last Conservative (Major) goverment.
Till then we have labour, they will only get worse, they always do so, but there is no point in having a change to the Conservatives when they are only another slightly blue-labour.
I like Alan Johnson. He seems to always have the right tone.
I completely agree with what Alan Johnson says - although I doubt anything could save Labour as long as Gordon Brown remains PM.
The biggest change that Labour needs to make is to get rid of their leader. They should worry less about DC and ask themselves why they're losing support. The answer is crystal clear - Gordon Brown.
Alan J is IMHO one of the most sensible and likeable in the Cabinet. Dept of Health people generally rate him pretty highly and from very limited experience I'd agree with them.
Killing Mr Cameron with kindness is probably the only option left after the 'novice', 'toff', 'do nothing', 'nasty' (who is the only person still using this expression...hmm) etcetera stuff has failed.
If Mr Cameron was going to form a GOAT then AJ would be in my wish list.
wv lieur!
Isn't it remarkable that there were constant reports in the media about splits between Tony and myself from just a few years into a Labour government, and yet we still managed a third term?
FireForce.1.17.
I am glad we can count on your vote, despite the fact that you're an idiot....sorry.....I am an idiot.
iain why is draper still going on about you and carol thatcher's unfortunate use of g---------g which so distressed childes. brand and various bbc types
'Yes. I am posting on Iain Dale again. He MUST now apologise'
could it be something you said ?
Although Johnson is probably out of step with the rest of his party, I'd agree with him that much of the Labour attacking of Cameron the man has failed to resonate.
Heck, even I'd be tempted to vote for Cameron. But it's a good thing there's always a MikeyP around to remind me that however Cameron looks from the outside, he is still leader of a party that doesn't think he's anything like right wing enough.
Labour are capable of change (they have proved that), but they are locked in with Brown.
Canvas is right and I bang on about it in my blog, Brown is the issue. However, two unelected PM's in one parliament is not sustainable.
That is way Labour is sunk.
Iain, I think you're missing Alan's point. Since shortly after Cameron became leader I've argued (including to Alan) that I'm very impressed by Cameron and I do believe his 'new views' are genuine. However, the fact is he has not confronted the demons within the party in the same way that Blair confronted the left with the Clause 4 change. Many of those at the top around Cameron probably do think the way he does, or at least are prepared to remain silent in order to gain power. The demons that remain are the unreconstructed Tory grassroots. Living in Yorkshire you see the real face of the Tories in the battalions of local councillors and association activists. It is a minority of them that look at home in Cameron's Conservatives. What Alan is trying to do is demonstrate that whatever the changes at the head, the body is the same old Tories.
Oldrightie said... “To think, they call The Tory Party nasty.”
Err. That was Theresa May MP [Conservative, Maidenhead] I seem to recall.
Iain, if David Cameron is "in complete control", why does he have to play footsie with the ludicrous European policies, which it is a widely known open secret he has no time for personally?
Dear Ms Canvas, 1:17pm
You've converted me! From now on I'm going to approach politics in an entirely different way.
I'm going to embrace wholeheartedly your method of awarding political allegiance and choosing potential Prime Ministers.
Forget all that old fashioned stuffy nonsense about ideology, or that boring, complicated guff about policies, and don't get me started on manifesto's.
Personality politics, that's the ticket. Let's all go for whoever makes us feel all warm and fuzzy. Much less complicated, cuts out all that difficult thinking, no more nasty decisions to make.
That Alan Johnson, he seems like a nice boy. Lovely haircut. Always gives his shoes a good polish; you can tell a lot from a person's shoes I always say. So nicely spoken as well, not too posh, if you know what I mean. And have you seen his teeth? Cost a few bob, I bet, but don't they look lovely? Such nice manners too, always says a lot about a persons upbringing, and so vital in a future PM. And that boyish glint in his eye....
And, of course, that other so important ingredient, as you Ms Canvas were so correct to emphasise, he has such a nice TONE.
That's it for me, Canvas, your argument is overwhelming. I can't think why I didn't discover this approach before. It's Alan Johnson for me now, and 40 years of supporting the Conservatives goes out the window.
How can I ever thank you?
VOTE ALAN JOHNSON
You're right stuartbrucepr - there is no systematic attempt at root and branch reform in the Tories, as can in fact be seen even through the shadow cabinet choices, other than the recent import of the sensibly centrist Ken Clarke.
The sad truth is that when Cameron came in, he realised that the Tory rump left as members (a combination of blue rinse headbangers, assorted xenophobes and nutjob rejects from reality) were in effect un-convertible.
So he set out to establish instead a "party within a party", a sort of thin veneer of reasonably intelligent appearance to cover the fermenting bucket of madness underneath. To some extent this has worked, but only to some extent. As the election draws near, the public will get to see more of the reality.
Oh and by the way, Blair's little troop never really brought about the sweeping change in Labour that one might assume, as can be seen in the return of much more leftish policies, wildcat striking unions, the departure of the Blairite membership, etc.
Britain is effectively returning to the old fault lines of 1960s and 70s politics under pressure from the recession.
"iain why is draper still going on..."
Excuse me, I speak Draper. Allow me to translate: "Look at me! Notice me! Won't someone please visit my blog! *sobs*.."
Ignoring the little so and so is working quite nicely, I think :)
"Personality politics, that's the ticket. Let's all go for whoever makes us feel all warm and fuzzy."
Careful, ex-apprentice! The US tried that recently, and they are already having cause to regret it.. ;)
I'd give that Alan Johnson one any day.
Ex-apprentice says:
"Forget all that old fashioned stuffy nonsense about ideology"
Let's apply Barack Obama's quote to Britain...
"“This is not a time for ideology; this is a time for common sense. This is a time for the politics of pragmatism.
The test of an idea can’t be whether it’s liberal or conservative, the test should be whether it works for the BRITISH people and for BRITISH business. That’s what we should be focused on in the days and week ahead."
too right.
The cold hard truth is that personalities do matter. A political party needs a leader who is persuasive, intelligent, sensible and reasonable. Most of all that leader must be able to connect with people.
I believe David Cameron connects. Gordon Brown can't do this. That is the biggest problem Labour have at the moment. If Alan Johnson was the leader of Labour then the next election would be up for grabs.
David Cameron is doing a good job. He's got it sussed - but it is the rest of his party that causes great concern amongst the electorate. It's a real concern too. The Conservative Party shouldn't be over-confident. They shouldn't forget the reasons why their party has been rejected by the public for over a decade.
"Cameron is in complete control of the Conservative Party, more so than any other leader since Churchill, in my opinion".
Mmmmmmmmm?
Is this an attempt to rewrite Tory history leaving out Margaret Thatcher?
Churchill was the best Home Secretary and has achieved what no one else has, he reduced the prison population by half.
Churchill's experience as a prisoner during the Boer War gave him an insight which I would dearly love more Tory MPs should experience.
In 1910 Churchill made this speech in the House:
“The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilisation of any country. A calm dispassionate recognition of the rights of the accused and even of the convicted criminal against the State; a constant heart searching by all charged with the duty of punishment; a desire and an eagerness to rehabilitate in the world of industry, those who have paid their due in the hard coinage of punishment; tireless efforts towards the discovery of curative and regenerative processes; unfailing faith that there is a treasure, if only you can find it in the heart of every man; these are the symbols which in the treatment of crime and criminal mark and measure the stored up strength of a nation and are sign and proof of the living virtue in it”.
Cameron is no Churchill. Thatcher I hated, but admired her leadership qualities, and was glad when knocked off her high horse in the Night of the Long Knives.
Sadly, I feel Barnacle Bill has got it right here in a comment on my blog:
"One eyed Scottish idiot,
Two Jags Prescott,
Three houses Smith,
Whats the fourth one going to be?
Not a fourth term for sure!".
Nice try Alan Johnson, but Labour don't do 'nice', or at least can't do nice for anything more than a week or so.
If I were looking for a simplistic match for the Tory 'nasty' party I'd have to say it was the Labour 'spiteful' party.
If Call Me Dave has quarantined the 'nasty', who in Labour could quarantine the 'spiteful'? And will they?
Probably not enough time before the next GE for them to do so, and probably no-one capable enough do it - unless the sainted warmonger Tony Blair is brought back. *Shudder>*
Dear Ms Canvas,
There you go complicating things again. I was just getting to grips with your simplistic, but sadly widespread, concept that we should vote for who makes us feel all warm and fuzzy, people like Postman Pat, who have the vital TONE, and you go changing things again. I'm really not sure I can cope, me being just a poor Lithuanian Catholic boy an all.
If pragmatism is to be the new orthodoxy, and I wouldn't put too much faith in Obamalama's sound bites if I were you, then there is only one choice. There is only one political party that sets policy on the basis of what works rather than outdated ideology that has been proven wrong time and time again.
I speak, of course, of the Conservatives. I'm with you all the way again, sod Alan Johnson -
VOTE CONSERVATIVE
Cameron was bounced by Davis on the detention issue, is saddled by a very silly commitment on the EPP which he would ditch in a heartbeat if he thought he could get away with it and has done a 180 on unfunded tax cuts. He has a 12 point lead in the polls, which is the only thing keeping the right quiet. If it narrows they'll turn on him. Labour were always going to portray him as a decent well-meaning chap struggling with right-wing headbangers and out of his depth, partly because it resonates but mainly because it's probably true.
Do you really think your words fool anybody Fireforce?
You will vote to keep Brown in power because Cameron is not (you say) conservative enough??
Pull the other one. Get back to Dolly Towers.
"If Mr Cameron was going to form a GOAT then " .... Frank Field and Kate Hoey would be on my wish list. Johnson sits idly by rubber stamping every thong Brown does.
Jimmy -I as a right wing conservative fully supported the Tory opposition to 42 days and I think the whole party is the same. Davis left the cabinet on a self righteous crusade - he cannot expect just to walk back.
PS, as I mention on the appropriate thread- it seems Jacqui Smiths landlady sister is a BBC journalist. Can we expect the case to be properly reported?
ex-apprentice says: "VOTE CONSERVATIVE"
I think it's unlikely I'll do that. As much as I like David Cameron... I don't trust his party to do the right thing. I remain unconvinced.
If the GE was tomorrow it would probably be a protest vote for the LibDems.
Hey, Trevorsden....
No will not vote to keep brown in, I just will not vote for Cameron unless he changes the policy that has cost me my hard earned, my liberty, my hobby, and started turning this once good country into a police state,
under the last Conservative government, Cameron agrees with me in private but in public tells other people the opposite he tells me!
Both can not be true.
& I voted for D.D. may be that why Cameron tells me porkies?
Strategy? What, like recalling Draper and putting him in charge of a blog? That sort of strategy?
I don't think so. The end of days, Iain, the end of days. They'll all be scurrying around looking for their next jobs soon.
Dear Ms Canvas,
There you go again - "As much as I like David Cameron" - we've gone from personality to pragmatism and straight back to warm and fuzzy again!
I know what they say about a woman's prerogative and all that, but I simply can't keep up with you.
And as for a "protest vote" for the Libdums, that would be pragmatism at its best, would it? That'll really help put the country on the right track.
By the way, your earlier comment:
"The test of an idea can’t be whether it’s liberal or conservative, the test should be whether it works for the BRITISH people and for BRITISH business."
Was this a BNP slogan you were quoting? Aren't such views, within the politically correct cloisters of the Libdum Party, considered to be a teeny bit xenophobic, or headbanging?
I'm sure our resident Tweedledumb and Tweedledumber, AKA DespicableLiberal and Simon Gardner would have a view on this. Only your position as a fellow traveller can explain their uncharacteristic silence on such an issue.
ex-apprentice, you seem to be obsessed with the desire to feel 'warm and fuzzy'. strange stuff.
;)
Say what you like - but times have changed. If anything is fuzzy it is the difference between the political parties in the UK.
A protest vote for the LibDems is also a tactical vote. Surely Labour will lose the next GE with Gordon Brown as PM? Maybe the Tories will win - it seems possible - but not certain. If I can help to dilute the Tory majority then great because as I said earlier I do not trust the Tories to do the right thing.
If Labour managed to get an inspirational leader to turn around their party then I would happily vote for them - but it ain't gonna happen? Is it?
canvas.
I'm sure all you wimmin will fall in love with my Sarah when we wheel her out for the next election, making you feel all warm and fuzzy. It's what the wimmin's vote was invented for.
That strategy will definitely fail as well.
Labour genuinely seem to think that people who are more right leaning are just a few inches from wanting to eat babies on toast.
Derek Draper's ranting is an example of this - his viewpoint seems to be "Tories are racists".
Labour seem to forget that Conservatives are 'caring, sharing' types too.
Watching the new strategy fail will be amusing......
an ex-apprentice said... “Simon Gardner would have a view on this.”
Since you ask... It makes no earthly difference how I or any other particular person in my constituency votes. I live in a rural constituency with a truly massive Tory majority and the proverbial “pig with a blue rosette” would be returned as the hon member*.
But if I were to live in a seat where voting actually matters then - given our corrupt electoral system - one votes accordingly.
• If you live in a Labour seat and want rid of them above all else - vote for whichever party stands the best chance of beating Labour. (That might be Con, Lib Dem, Scot Nat or even Plaed.)
• If you live in a Tory marginal and want to vote against the Tories - vote for whichever party stands the best chance of beating the Conservatives.
• If you live in a Lib Dem (or Nat) held marginal - then it makes a difference whether you vote Lib Dem/Nat or not. This could matter enormously depending, of course, on the outcome. And in the long term the Lib Dems (and Nats) have been trending up since they were formed so it makes a greater difference as time goes on.
• If you are doctrinaire and a committed supporter of your chosen party, then by all means vote accordingly but bear in mind you may end up with the opposite of what you actually want.
• The actual democratic answer is to give money to the Electoral Reform Society so this highly corrupt and undemocratic mess gets sorted ASAP.
I think that covers most eventualities but I’m sure someone will point out any omissions.
*By chance my Tory MP is a bit of a Tory leftie - yes there are still a few around.
"Plato said...
Alan J is IMHO one of the most sensible and likeable in the Cabinet. Dept of Health people generally rate him pretty highly and from very limited experience I'd agree with them."
Mostly because he is quite affable and doesn't challenge them too hard.
A Conservative government might try to drive down costs in the NHS and promote private alternatives, but it is never going to get rid of a state supported health service because so many of its supporters are over 60 already.
There maye be Conservative voters who talk about an entirely insurance driven service, but that doesn't work for those who are either too old or too ill to be insurable.
For similar reaosns Cameron knows that many of the grassroots members on the right of his party are dying out. Time is on his side.
Canvas:
We do not have a president. Much as it appears that you would like it. One can not vote for 'David Cameron' or 'Nick Clegg' or even, were one that way inclined 'Gordon Brown'. You will, I presume, cast a vote in your home constituency for your local MP.
Unlike in the US, where one can 'split tickets' and personality SHOULD, to an extent, matter in the presidential vote, a British voter should be driven by ideology. If you believe in a party's aims, think that your local MP is particularly good at representing their constituents or that the country's direction needs changing, then that should determine how one votes. Not the cut of the party leader's suit or the quality of his voice.
I'm not saying that the leader is unimportant, but it shouldn't be your first port of call in choosing who to vote for.
Mr ex-apprenrice is Henry Root, have a £1.
GWH said... “...a British voter should be driven by ideology...”
Oh Balls.
A British voter should be driven by practicalities.
The real worry for Conservatives is that Cameron is too far to the left and he wont be much better than the socialists.
Dear Mr? Gardner,
"Simon Gardner would have a view on this."
"This" actually referred to the view expressed by Ms Canvas:
"the test should be whether it works for the BRITISH people and for BRITISH business"
The point being made was that such comments would normally have been met by squeals of faux outrage from your goodself, with accusations of racism and xenophobia and unsubtle hints about "the nasty party", and that the reason for your uncharacteristic, though welcome, silence was Ms Canvas's position as a fellow traveller.
You prefer to talk about something else - whether we should have first past the post or proportional representation. I prefer to have a system that allows the elected party to govern decisively, for good or bad, rather than one which seeks the best of all worlds through idealistic consensus, but in practice invariably results in grubby dealmaking, policies no-one voted for, strategic indecision and confusion in accountability.
The suspicion will always exist, in the case of the Libdums, that your attraction to such a system is driven by party political advantage
rather than by altruistic motive.
How people vote in your particular constituency does matter and it does make a difference. It is by a majority casting their vote for the Conservatives that you end up with a Conservative MP. The fact that this result does not suit you does not justify your labelling the system "corrupt".
Cameron and Churchill in the same sentence is just as wrong as can be.
RobertEve, can I attempt to decode your sentence from Tory-speak to public consumption? I assume that by "too leftwing" you mean he will be what the rest of us call "mildly centrist"?
Yet more proof as if we need it of the divine stupidity of the great bulk of Tory rank and file, who still exhibit a full range of interesting lemming behaviours in their rampant desire to be out of touch with the reality of British public opinion.
If only the Quiet Man were still leader - then you would be properly represented! As it is, you now have dangerous socialists David Cameron, George Osborne and Boris Johnson!
Dear Mr Prick,
"Mr ex-apprenrice is Henry Root, have a £1."
Praise indeed, Dick! If only.
Dear Mr DespicableLiberal,
"RobertEve, can I attempt to decode your sentence from Tory-speak to public consumption?"
NO.
Despairing Liberal, you seem to make a classic mistake of believing some of the more ranting commenters on here are a) Conservatives and b) representative of the Conservative Party in general. You are wrong on both counts.
stuartbrucepr ---
"However, the fact is he has not confronted the demons within the party in the same way that Blair confronted the left"
Huh?
Blair sold his soul to Brown.
Brown was the defacto domestic PM - in giving him free rein Blair was a coward. Far from facing demons he led a split party which was happy to pretend otherwise at election time.
Blair was and pushing an open door with clause 4 - where all the work had been done by Thatcher.
Confronted Demons??
The whole 45 minutes dodgy dossier fiasco, a tissue of lies which totally undermined the whole concept and morality of the invasion of Iraq, was done precisely because Blair still headed a pacifist party which was nothing nothing like his own image.
Dream on.
FireForce - keep at it, soon you will not have a nose to cut off to spite your face.
I believe in capital punishment but I know the Tories will not bring it back. But I will vote Tory. Believing in something and being confident about being able to bring it about are two different things.
Democracy is not perfect but its the best system we have. But if you want to vote for say a British Mussolini in the hope of getting your own particular way go ahead. Fatuous is as fatuous does.
Yes Treveorsden,
The Conservatives lost 4 million voters in 1997, I speak for +|- 300,000 of them, how many people can walk away from here and say, well yes change this and that, and that many voters will come back??
The trouble was the Major Government was nulabor MK1, bliar & brown= MK2.
Shame you can't throw a few of the more ridiculous ones off Iain by making that even plainer. How about a disclaimer at the top of your blog stating that you do not welcome the support of x, y, and z, etc?
You can't blame me though for raising it, as the sheer repetitiveness and variety of the extremists posting here does make one tend to think it's more than just a few BNP/UKIP refugees. Could be there is more to the Tory party than even you realise Iain.
trevorsden said... “Democracy is not perfect but its the best system we have...”
Gosh. Well it would be kinda nice if we ever had it then.
an ex-apprentice said... “I prefer to have a system that allows the elected party to govern decisively...”
Aah the Mussolini defence.
I prefer a system that is actually democratic and reflects the will of the varied electorate in the constitution of their parliament. If it wants that to be overwhelmingly for what you quaintly term “the elected [I think you mean your] party”, it can so vote - no problem. If it doesn’t it needn’t. Democracy, you see. Leave the power where it belongs - with the voters.
Are you for Proposition-style multiple referenda then Simon?
DespairingLiberal said... “Are you for Proposition-style multiple referenda then Simon?”
I favour the Irish electoral system. I do not favour their frequent referendums. The Swiss also are not to be envied.
I disapprove heartily of referendums (agreeing with Kenneth Clarke on this one); except in very exceptional circumstances. Referendums are rarely if ever fought or decided on the supposed question they are overtly about - descending instead into whether you are for or against the government of the day. Their somewhat ignominious introduction into British politics was a device by Harold Wilson to stop his party splitting over - what else - Europe.
In California recently, prop 8 was effectively bought by god-botherers. Without all their money from out of State, it is generally accepted, it would have gone the other way.
They have a very unhappy history and what are parliaments for except to decide issues of government? But I concede there may be circumstances where they are needed - very occasionally.
Dear Mr? Gardner,
Forgive me interrupting this Libdum pseudo-intellectual love-in, but if you are going to reply to my post, and there is no compulsion, reply to all of it.
Don't cherry pick a tiny fraction, and then corrupt even that.
That isn't debate, it isn't clever, and you look a prat doing it.
an ex-apprentice said... [incomprehensible mutterings]
I have no idea WTF you are going on about.
Fortunately.
This is almost a carbon copy of the strategy (failed) attempted by labour in NZ, the next stage will be to brand him as inexperienced and then finally the "untrustworthy" meme will commence.
Canvas said:
I like Alan Johnson. He seems to always have the right tone
I am not sure if that is meaningful. His description of David Cameron could be applied to his own position: "Likeable chap, nice, but hemmed in and trapped by his party, etc., etc.)
Post a Comment