I think that'll be enough... And this ad's from me...
Friday, June 09, 2006
A New Marketing Strategy for the Tories?
Those nice people at B3ta have been holding a little competition to design new marketing posters for the Conservatives. Sadly, I can only reprint a few of them here, and if you visit this LINK you'll see why. Don't do so if you a) have lost your sense of humour or b) are easily offended.
I think that'll be enough... And this ad's from me...
I think that'll be enough... And this ad's from me...
Alastair Campbell's Dodgy Blog
Alastair Campbell has a World Cup Blog on the Labour Party website. I have had great arguments with myself over the ethics of linking to it, but here goes, if you must. He's only managed to pen one entry so far, but it is attracting some hilarious comments. Here is my favourite...Alastair, if Iran find themselves behind at half time, do you think they'll be able to launch a counter-attack in the following 45 minutes?
I must also share with you these words of wisdom from Ally C...
When training for Soccer Aid, I had a chat with Terry Venables who said that the Prime Minister is probably one of the few people who can understand the media and public pressures on the England manager, because he is the one person in the country who is under even greater scrutiny. Tony Blair has survived a fair few frenzies too, and manages to keep focussed on the big picture and the big policy changes needed to take Britain forward. I think one of the reasons so many in the media loathe him is that he has survived so many tons of their bile, not to mentions their calls on him to go at a time of their choosing not his. The public all have their own individual views of high profile people like Tony and Sven. But whatever those views are, they tend to admire people of strength and fortitude who just keep going.
Indeed we do, Alastair. Indeed we do. But we still remember David Kelly. Incidentally, I am most grateful to the Labour Party for making clear on the blog that "Views expressed in this blog... are the views of the individuals and are not those of the Labour Party".
The Cult of Dave is the Right Approach
George Pascoe-Watson gives an assessment of David Cameron's first six months in today's Sun. Essentially he says DC has made a flying start but there's a long way to go. Not hugely insightful, but there you go. GPW then trots out the usual canard of how anonymous most of the Shadow Cabinet is, and how most people wouldn't recognise them if they sat next to them on the Number 42 to Clapham Junction.It is true that several of them are all but invisible and that Adam Rickitt has become better known as a Tory figurehead than 80% of the Shadow Cabinet. The only truly household names are probably Cameron himself, William Hague, David Davis, and Theresa May. Alan Duncan, Liam Fox and George Osborne are probably reasonably well known too, but the rest are not. I don't think this is a problem, although it would be good to see those occupying the main public service briefs raise their profile somewhat. But we should remember that David Willetts and Philip Hammond are in their jobs because of their brainpower, rather than their PR skills.
If we think back to the Labour Shadow Cabinet of the mid 1990s they had the same problem of realtive 'invisibility'. Apart from Blair, Brown, Cook, Straw & Mowlam most of the others were pretty anonymous - remember David Clark, Tom Clarke, Derek Foster and the like? No, nor do I. Constructing a strategy around the persona of a new leader is exactly right. It's the strategy that the LibDems were going to adopt, but have had to change tack very quickly for obvious reasons.
The Cameron strategy became clear with the coining of the phrase "Cameron's Conservatives". It's not a particularly snappy repost to "New Labour" but from a PR viewpoint it does what it says on the tin. The new Conservative Party will be shaped by its leader and not the other way around. This will cause a certain amount of teeth grinding in some quarters but as the only saying goes, you don't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs. So far, it's remarkable how few eggs have been broken.
Thursday, June 08, 2006
A Brussels Perspective on the EPP
I've just had an email from someone who I shall refer to as a Brussels insider, whose perspective on the EPP I thought I'd share with you.
The EPP is not a coherent group in the sense that the socialists are. It is more like one of the industrial conglomerates that were popular in the 1970s, combining tobacco, insurance and department stores. It has become the largest group in the Parliament by an agressive policy of growth for growth's sake and by simply appealing to people that by being part of a large group you have more influence.
As such it combines a number of parties, ranging from liberalisers (eg Swedish Moderates) to populists (the Italian Pensioners' Party). However, its dominant feature is social conservatism, to which its leadership subscribes, and which is very often of a religious and in particular Catholic nature.
The EPP is rightly described as the most pro-integration Group. But it is also very protectionist and poujadist, and this fits very oddly with the former. They are very supportive of the CAP and fisheries policy at a time when the Commission wants to reform them and they have obstructed attempts to liberalise services in Europe. They are also very unhelpful in the fight against fraud, and support export subsidies and trade barriers. Their position on economic issues is often to the left of the Labour Government's.
Of course, there are within the EPP many MEPs who think like we do on liberalisation and deregulation. And on some committees the EPP view is not far from our own. But they are normally outmanoeuvered by Hans-Gert Poettering and instead are thrown scraps: the EPP loves talking about the need for economic reform but they never do anything about it. Indeed, the two most important dossiers, on chemical regulation and on services liberalisation were both given to the socialists who have only just over a quarter of the MEPs, and who proceeded to dominate the outcome.
Instead, the EPP are most agitated by moral issues and issues of integration, like abortion, stem cell research, the constitution (and especially God's place in it). They are obsessed by Turkey and deeply hostile to its potential entry into Europe.
As for our influence, claims of such are spurious. They were of very little help on the Working Time Directive, and indeed a substantial minority (enough to ensure a defeat for the UK) voted against the EPP's voting list on this as they opposed Britain's opt out. Their watering down of the services directive (to the point where it is not worth the paper it is written on) was a craven piece of manoeuvering to satisfy the needs of the Grand Coalition in Germany. What influence we do have is a number of meaningless offices - a vice-president here, a coordinator there that satisfies individual members that they have personal influence, despite evidence to the contrary. The conventional wisdom here is supported by lobbyists, who prefer to deal with as few groups as possible and like saying to their clients that they know someone who is a member of the largest group.
Incidentally, it has been claimed that a number of our potential allies are unsavoury. But they are not more so than those we are set to leave. Berlusconi's recent campaign was openly anti-gay and many in the EPP are very hostile to Islam.
I could go on. In essence, the Conservatives need to form an alliance with those whose main focus is on Europe's chronic need for reform; and if some of them are not eurosceptic, so be it. Until then we are stuck in a group dominated by a Rhineland mentality that is as outdated as the Cold War.
The EPP is not a coherent group in the sense that the socialists are. It is more like one of the industrial conglomerates that were popular in the 1970s, combining tobacco, insurance and department stores. It has become the largest group in the Parliament by an agressive policy of growth for growth's sake and by simply appealing to people that by being part of a large group you have more influence.
As such it combines a number of parties, ranging from liberalisers (eg Swedish Moderates) to populists (the Italian Pensioners' Party). However, its dominant feature is social conservatism, to which its leadership subscribes, and which is very often of a religious and in particular Catholic nature.
The EPP is rightly described as the most pro-integration Group. But it is also very protectionist and poujadist, and this fits very oddly with the former. They are very supportive of the CAP and fisheries policy at a time when the Commission wants to reform them and they have obstructed attempts to liberalise services in Europe. They are also very unhelpful in the fight against fraud, and support export subsidies and trade barriers. Their position on economic issues is often to the left of the Labour Government's.
Of course, there are within the EPP many MEPs who think like we do on liberalisation and deregulation. And on some committees the EPP view is not far from our own. But they are normally outmanoeuvered by Hans-Gert Poettering and instead are thrown scraps: the EPP loves talking about the need for economic reform but they never do anything about it. Indeed, the two most important dossiers, on chemical regulation and on services liberalisation were both given to the socialists who have only just over a quarter of the MEPs, and who proceeded to dominate the outcome.
Instead, the EPP are most agitated by moral issues and issues of integration, like abortion, stem cell research, the constitution (and especially God's place in it). They are obsessed by Turkey and deeply hostile to its potential entry into Europe.
As for our influence, claims of such are spurious. They were of very little help on the Working Time Directive, and indeed a substantial minority (enough to ensure a defeat for the UK) voted against the EPP's voting list on this as they opposed Britain's opt out. Their watering down of the services directive (to the point where it is not worth the paper it is written on) was a craven piece of manoeuvering to satisfy the needs of the Grand Coalition in Germany. What influence we do have is a number of meaningless offices - a vice-president here, a coordinator there that satisfies individual members that they have personal influence, despite evidence to the contrary. The conventional wisdom here is supported by lobbyists, who prefer to deal with as few groups as possible and like saying to their clients that they know someone who is a member of the largest group.
Incidentally, it has been claimed that a number of our potential allies are unsavoury. But they are not more so than those we are set to leave. Berlusconi's recent campaign was openly anti-gay and many in the EPP are very hostile to Islam.
I could go on. In essence, the Conservatives need to form an alliance with those whose main focus is on Europe's chronic need for reform; and if some of them are not eurosceptic, so be it. Until then we are stuck in a group dominated by a Rhineland mentality that is as outdated as the Cold War.
The Art of Political Crossdressing: Your Nominations Please...
Today David Cameron is interviewed in the New Statesman and Jack Straw is interviewed in The Spectator. We continue to live in a parallel universe. This set me thinking about unlikely political interviews...
Chris Byrant in Country Life
John Hayes in Gay Times
John Prescott in the Almanac de Gotha
Peter Mandelson in My Caravan & Me
Ming Campbell in Club 18-30 News
And now, dear reader, it's down to you to come up with more... I have every faith...Gulp...
UPDATE: The best suggestion so far comes from phonce cam foolery who rather unkindly suggests Margaret Beckett for an interview in Horse & Hound as she fits into both catagories...
Chris Byrant in Country Life
John Hayes in Gay Times
John Prescott in the Almanac de Gotha
Peter Mandelson in My Caravan & Me
Ming Campbell in Club 18-30 News
And now, dear reader, it's down to you to come up with more... I have every faith...Gulp...
UPDATE: The best suggestion so far comes from phonce cam foolery who rather unkindly suggests Margaret Beckett for an interview in Horse & Hound as she fits into both catagories...
Raising Taxes is Part of the LibDem Gene Pool
I ought to be welcoming the Liberal Democrats' conversion to low taxes. Well, I would if it were true. Ming Campbell and Vince Cable - the grumpy old men from the Muppets - are desperately trying to ditch the LibDems' reputation as the high tax party, but it will be very difficult to achieve that. If I thought they had transformed themselves into true, old-fashioned Liberals, who always believed in people's ability to spend their own money better than the government, then I'd think true progress had been made.
But taxcutting is like supporting a football team. You have to believe in it within your soul. It's part of your political being. Unfortunately for most Liberal Democrats raising taxes is part of their political gene makeup and most voters know that. They remember the 1p on income tax "for education". They remember the spending commitments that would have bankrupted the country. They remember the 50p income tax rate. So although the LibDems will want to concentrate on the headline of "2p off income tax" (are they suggesting 2p in the Pound off the education budget?) it's the other measures which ought to be examined in minute detail, as they will dramatically increase the tax burden on the middle classes - just the sort of people the LibDems need to keep hold of (and attract) if they are to repel the Cameroonian advances.
We're all supposed to be saving for our retirement, yet the LibDems are proposing effectively a new tax on savings, by abolishing the Capital Gains Tax taper relief allowances. They say this will hit the "seriously wealthy". No it won't, because they can afford tax accountants to get round it. It will hit middle England - the kind of people who own a few shares, or maybe a second home. This measure alone will raise £5 billion, they say. They're going to reduce tax relief on private pensions, raising a further £7 billion. Granth Thornton have calculated that this could cost some people £26,000 a year! Feel those pips squeak! Denis Healey will be nodding in approval.
In addition, they're going to hit us with £8 billion of green taxes. Ming Campbell is quoted in the Daily Telegraph saying: "I see no reason for any increase in the overall burden of taxation." Really? Well he could have fooled me.
And what of the Local Income Tax, which acording to briefings is not mentioned in Ming's speech. Is it still LibDem policy or not? Because again, for middle England, it would cost an average family an extra £2,000 a year.
It seems to me a great mistake for the LibDem leader to announce such definitive proposals three years out from an election. It merely gives Conservatives and Labour something to attack - and believe me, it's an opportunity that won't be missed. These proposals are so extreme that I don't think it's going too far to say that they are the most left wing tax proposals since Labour's 1983 "longest suicide note in history" manifesto. If the LibDems were purely going after Labour votes I could understand the strategy, but the fact remains that if the LibDems are to gain extra seats - and indeed retain the ones they already hold - it is Conservative voters they need. And there ain't many Tories who are going to swallow this tax manifesto, unless they want to emulate a Turkey voting for Christmas.
LibDems in their defence will try to say that it's all very well for Tories to criticise, but David Cameron won't commit himself to tax cuts. What they don't understand is the point I started with. Either you have an innate belief in low taxes or you don't. People know in their hearts that people on the right want to cut taxes and people on the left want to raise them. Conservatives do not need specific commitments yet. But we do need to make the case for lower taxes, an overall lower tax burden and explain why high taxes are threatening to ruin entrepreneurial spirit. Unwittingly, the LibDems have just presented us with an opportunity to do just that.
But taxcutting is like supporting a football team. You have to believe in it within your soul. It's part of your political being. Unfortunately for most Liberal Democrats raising taxes is part of their political gene makeup and most voters know that. They remember the 1p on income tax "for education". They remember the spending commitments that would have bankrupted the country. They remember the 50p income tax rate. So although the LibDems will want to concentrate on the headline of "2p off income tax" (are they suggesting 2p in the Pound off the education budget?) it's the other measures which ought to be examined in minute detail, as they will dramatically increase the tax burden on the middle classes - just the sort of people the LibDems need to keep hold of (and attract) if they are to repel the Cameroonian advances.
We're all supposed to be saving for our retirement, yet the LibDems are proposing effectively a new tax on savings, by abolishing the Capital Gains Tax taper relief allowances. They say this will hit the "seriously wealthy". No it won't, because they can afford tax accountants to get round it. It will hit middle England - the kind of people who own a few shares, or maybe a second home. This measure alone will raise £5 billion, they say. They're going to reduce tax relief on private pensions, raising a further £7 billion. Granth Thornton have calculated that this could cost some people £26,000 a year! Feel those pips squeak! Denis Healey will be nodding in approval.
In addition, they're going to hit us with £8 billion of green taxes. Ming Campbell is quoted in the Daily Telegraph saying: "I see no reason for any increase in the overall burden of taxation." Really? Well he could have fooled me.
And what of the Local Income Tax, which acording to briefings is not mentioned in Ming's speech. Is it still LibDem policy or not? Because again, for middle England, it would cost an average family an extra £2,000 a year.
It seems to me a great mistake for the LibDem leader to announce such definitive proposals three years out from an election. It merely gives Conservatives and Labour something to attack - and believe me, it's an opportunity that won't be missed. These proposals are so extreme that I don't think it's going too far to say that they are the most left wing tax proposals since Labour's 1983 "longest suicide note in history" manifesto. If the LibDems were purely going after Labour votes I could understand the strategy, but the fact remains that if the LibDems are to gain extra seats - and indeed retain the ones they already hold - it is Conservative voters they need. And there ain't many Tories who are going to swallow this tax manifesto, unless they want to emulate a Turkey voting for Christmas.
LibDems in their defence will try to say that it's all very well for Tories to criticise, but David Cameron won't commit himself to tax cuts. What they don't understand is the point I started with. Either you have an innate belief in low taxes or you don't. People know in their hearts that people on the right want to cut taxes and people on the left want to raise them. Conservatives do not need specific commitments yet. But we do need to make the case for lower taxes, an overall lower tax burden and explain why high taxes are threatening to ruin entrepreneurial spirit. Unwittingly, the LibDems have just presented us with an opportunity to do just that.
EXCLUSIVE: Tessa Has Her Pic Taken...Then Buggers Off
Yesterday around eighty MPs ran a mile for Sport Relief. Some, like Labour Minister Jim Murphy, covered themselves in glory and ran it in a very fast time indeed. Others, like octagenarian Labour MP Piara Khabra covered themselves in glory by doing it in 15 minutes. Sadly, one Labour Secretary of State who could not cover herself in glory was the vainglorious Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell. Never losing an opportunity to appear on our TV screens boasting about how her Ministerial car has the English flag flying from it, she dutifully turned up to the Sport Relief photoshoot bedecked in a T Shirt. But as soon as the photo op was finished she buggered off. At first I thought she had to send another breathless text message to David Beckham on his Blackberry, or perhaps she had some Italian legal papers to peruse, but the truth is somewhat more prosaic. She's hurt her knee. At least it wasn't a metatarsal.
Right Wing Blogs on the Today Programme
The Today programme carried a piece just before 7am this morning on the influence of right of centre blogs in this country, featuring an (all too brief!) interviewette with your humble servant. Also featured were Michael Gove and Tim Montgomerie of ConservativeHome.com. If you'd like to listen to the piece click HERE and click on the 6.30sm to 7.30am segment of the programme and then scroll forward 23 minutes to 6.53am.UPDATE: BBC Online also have a piece on this HERE.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
What is Compassionate Conservatism?
Compassionate Conservatism is a term wich means many different things to many different people. So Jesse Norman's book, published next week, is a welcome development. It's published by Policy Exchange (of which I am a trustee) and is probably the first attempt by anyone to seriously define the Cameroonian political philosophy. Jesse has written a piece for Comment is Free today, which you can read HERE. Here's a short excerpt...Good politicians succeed within the boundaries of the possible. Great politicians change the boundaries of politics itself. After six months, we can already see that David Cameron is changing the basic terms of the political debate. Not merely at the level of language, as New Labour did, but at the level of ideas. This is what is so confusing to commentators such as Neal Lawson. Today... we need need a conservatism that is neither paternalist nor economically individualist; a conservatism that does not say either "big brother is looking after you" or "you're on your own". In a new book for the thinktank Policy Exchange, I and my colleague Janan Ganesh show that there is another, all-but-forgotten, conservative tradition that fits the bill perfectly. It has its roots in the work of Adam Smith and Edmund Burke, and its modern flourishing in that of Michael Oakeshott and Friedrich Hayek...This tradition is not paternalist, because it is realistic about the capacity of the state to improve our lives; and because it does not assume a relation of subservience between "we" and "they", between governed and governor. It thus rejects the unreflective statism of Gordon Brown... This tradition is a distinct and substantive one, unnoticed in political debate for decades. It is recognisably conservative in its scepticism about the power of government, its respect for institutions, its pluralism, and in the scope it accords for individual energy to flourish. And it is compassionate both in the root sense of acknowledging our fellow-feeling with each other, and in drawing the circle of our moral concern around those with whom we are, and have been and will be, interdependent. It is by intuitively seeing the social need - and the space within current politics - for this tradition that David Cameron and the modern Conservative party are changing the terms of the debate. He is showing, not that Britain is a not conservative country, but precisely that it is. It is a measure of his success that commentators such as Neal Lawson are still seeing these things in the old terms of left and right, and of language rather than ideas. On the contrary, it is egalitarian. It sees our elected politicians as the Ancient Greeks saw them: as citizens first and foremost, in whom a temporary, limited and qualified trust has been placed to exercise public power on our behalf. This trust in turn implies mutual consideration and respect, and a pushing down of power and accountability away from the centre and towards the people."
You can buy the book from Politico's HERE. It costs a tenner. Jesse Norman has more his website HERE.
Ming Gets it Right at Last
Ming Campbell finally got it right in the House of Commons today at PMQs. He asked a question on extraordinary rendition which clearly had the PM rattled. Blair totally avoided answering the question. Indeed, his answer was read out word for word and had clearly been rehearsed. He said the Council of Europe report said nothing new. Without knowing much about the subject, even a cursory reading of the report would suggest that is clearly not the case.
John Prescott Squats in The Admiralty
It seems that John Prescott has kept his grand office of the First Lord of the Admiralty, despite losing his job and his department. The office was the scene of his steamy affair with his diary secretary, Tracey Temple. Despite losing his department to Ruth Kelly, John Prescott has kept his hands on his private office in the Admiralty building of 26 Whitehall. The rest of the building continues to be used by the Department of Communities and Local Government. Ruth Kelly, who should have rights on the office, has been snubbed and forced to run her private office from Eland House, located away from Whitehall near Victoria station.The beleaguered Deputy Prime Minister is even using Ruth Kelly’s press officers to fire-fight the ongoing public controversy about him. His grand office is located in the Ripley building, completed in 1726, and which has historically been the office of the First Lord of the Admiralty. Mr Prescott and Miss Temple used the private office to conduct their affair, often with the door open – in breach of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’s official rulebook. Oliver Heald, Shadow Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs & the Cabinet Office, said: “Despite being stripped of his department, John Prescott is desperately clinging onto his perks. Like David Brent, he’s been sacked from his job but he’s still hanging around his old office. Whilst our health service is in crisis and foreign criminals roam the streets, Labour ministers seem fixated with the trappings of power.” The information about Prescott's 'squat' was revealed in parliamentary answers to Oliver Heald.
Want a New Job at the Electoral Commission?
Last night I scanned through the Guardian Media section, as I'm wont to do on a Monday, and spied an advert for a job as Director of Communications for the Electoral Commission. That looks interesting, I thought (not for me, you understand!). So I read on. A salary of £85,000, hmmm, not bad. And then I read...
"You will be leading a team of about 30..."
Come again? Now before anyone accuses me of slagging off the public sector, let me make it clear that I support the existence of the Electoral Commission. I believe it has quite a difficult job to do, which is sometimes made more difficult by the government's total refusal to implement many of its recommendations. I know some people that work there and they are people of great talent.
However, no one could persuade me that the Electoral Commission can possibly justify a Communications team of 30 people. When I had some dealings with them in 2001-2 their Communications team was a fraction of that. What has changed? If I were an MP, I'd be asking some very serious questions about both the funding, remit and structure of the Electoral Commission.
Or am I wrong? If someone from the Electoral Commission (possibly from their Communications team!) would like to get in touch and persuade me of the error of my ways I'll be happily to post their viewpoint.
UPDATE: I am told that expenditure by the Electoral Commission was £7 million in 2001-02. In this financial year it will be £26 million. Quite astonishing.
"You will be leading a team of about 30..."
Come again? Now before anyone accuses me of slagging off the public sector, let me make it clear that I support the existence of the Electoral Commission. I believe it has quite a difficult job to do, which is sometimes made more difficult by the government's total refusal to implement many of its recommendations. I know some people that work there and they are people of great talent.
However, no one could persuade me that the Electoral Commission can possibly justify a Communications team of 30 people. When I had some dealings with them in 2001-2 their Communications team was a fraction of that. What has changed? If I were an MP, I'd be asking some very serious questions about both the funding, remit and structure of the Electoral Commission.
Or am I wrong? If someone from the Electoral Commission (possibly from their Communications team!) would like to get in touch and persuade me of the error of my ways I'll be happily to post their viewpoint.
UPDATE: I am told that expenditure by the Electoral Commission was £7 million in 2001-02. In this financial year it will be £26 million. Quite astonishing.
Calm Down Dears - It's Only the EPP, Not the End of the World
A certain D Davis of this parish could be forgiven for looking a bit smug at this morning's Inner Shadow Cabinet meeting. During the leadership campaign he refused to bow to demands from the right to give a firm guarantee to withdraw from the EPP Group in the European Parliament. Not because he didn't want to, not because he agreed with the aims of the EPP, but because he could see no way of doing it without reneging on a firm and binding commitment that Liam Fox and Michael Howard had made only a year earlier.
Even when Liam Fox made the same commitment as David Cameron to boost his flagging campaign, and when Dr Fox's little cubs went around spreading their poison about DD's supposed europhilic credentials, DD didn't cave in to a demand that would have undoubtedly won him the support of more MPs on the right. I remember one day a whole stream of MPs filing into his office to persuade him to reverse his position. He didn't, because he knew it would all end in tears. And it has. William Hague has confirmed that he has "parked" the commitment to withdraw from the EPP and that negotiations with other parties have so far failed. The Shadow Foreign Secretary will now adopt the original Davis position of aiming to withdraw at the time of the next European elections.
I have little doubt that the readers of ConservativeHome will be in a state of fury this morning and seeking to heap derision and scorn on Messers Hague and Cameron. Don't get me wrong, I would also want to withdraw from the EPP at the first opportunity. Its European policy stands for everything I am against - the constitution, the euro and more integration. But Liam Fox signed a contract and if you can't see an honourable or practical way of withdrawing from it, it's wise to think of the longer term rather than the short term political gains it might get you from your own supporters.
The only other point I want to make is this. Last night I had an MSN conversation with a friend whose support switched from Davis to Cameron during the leadership contest at least partly because of the EPP issue. He was spitting blood. I sought to calm him down by pointing out that this issue is only of interest to core Conservatives and means nothing to voters out there. There are a few thousand people in the Conservative village for whom it is a hugely important factor, but out there in the real world if you asked voters on the street what the EPP was, probably only one in a thousand would know. So people should calm down, put a cold wet towel across their foreheads and get on with their life and not throw their toys out of the Tory pram. Is that too much to ask?
Even when Liam Fox made the same commitment as David Cameron to boost his flagging campaign, and when Dr Fox's little cubs went around spreading their poison about DD's supposed europhilic credentials, DD didn't cave in to a demand that would have undoubtedly won him the support of more MPs on the right. I remember one day a whole stream of MPs filing into his office to persuade him to reverse his position. He didn't, because he knew it would all end in tears. And it has. William Hague has confirmed that he has "parked" the commitment to withdraw from the EPP and that negotiations with other parties have so far failed. The Shadow Foreign Secretary will now adopt the original Davis position of aiming to withdraw at the time of the next European elections.
I have little doubt that the readers of ConservativeHome will be in a state of fury this morning and seeking to heap derision and scorn on Messers Hague and Cameron. Don't get me wrong, I would also want to withdraw from the EPP at the first opportunity. Its European policy stands for everything I am against - the constitution, the euro and more integration. But Liam Fox signed a contract and if you can't see an honourable or practical way of withdrawing from it, it's wise to think of the longer term rather than the short term political gains it might get you from your own supporters.
The only other point I want to make is this. Last night I had an MSN conversation with a friend whose support switched from Davis to Cameron during the leadership contest at least partly because of the EPP issue. He was spitting blood. I sought to calm him down by pointing out that this issue is only of interest to core Conservatives and means nothing to voters out there. There are a few thousand people in the Conservative village for whom it is a hugely important factor, but out there in the real world if you asked voters on the street what the EPP was, probably only one in a thousand would know. So people should calm down, put a cold wet towel across their foreheads and get on with their life and not throw their toys out of the Tory pram. Is that too much to ask?
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Ben Brogan Has a Blog
Daily Mail political editor Ben Brogan has started a blog - and he says it's all down to Guido and little old moi. He writes...
In the past few months Westminster has woken up to the blogosphere, thanks in part to the invaluable and often mischievous work of pioneers Iain Dale and Guido Fawkes. But it is the readers out there who have turned it into a dynamic and often provocative global conversation.
Ben Brogan, we salute you. Just avoid the mistakes of your esteemed colleague Trevor Kavanagh, whose blog started to much fanfare. It has hasn't been updated since 16th May. Ben, we're expecting more of you... Guido, however, may take a different view and advise political editors to stick to what they know and leave the Interweb to us!
In the past few months Westminster has woken up to the blogosphere, thanks in part to the invaluable and often mischievous work of pioneers Iain Dale and Guido Fawkes. But it is the readers out there who have turned it into a dynamic and often provocative global conversation.
Ben Brogan, we salute you. Just avoid the mistakes of your esteemed colleague Trevor Kavanagh, whose blog started to much fanfare. It has hasn't been updated since 16th May. Ben, we're expecting more of you... Guido, however, may take a different view and advise political editors to stick to what they know and leave the Interweb to us!
EXCLUSIVE: Jon Snow & Those BBC Rumours
Jon Snow has contacted me to deny rumours circulating on Popbitch and in the Comments section of THIS post earlier that he is to leave Channel 4 News for pastures anew at the BBC. He told me exclusively this afternoon..."Popbitch has just discovered a piece of information - 22 years old. The then editor of BBC news, Tony Hall, met me in a Japanese restaurant in the bowels of the Hilton hotel and offered me an equally subterranean job on the lunchtime news." He added: "The BBC would die rather than ever hire me."
I think that's fairly clear then.
Sold Out - Little Red Book of New Labour Sleaze
It's official. The Little Red Book has sold out. Gone. Finished. Ain't got no more left, matey. It's amazing to think that it was only 36 days ago that Guido first had the idea! Will there be reprint, I hear you all clamouring? Not at the moment. A lot will depend if Waterstone's return unsold copies, but I won't know that yet. Both the main book wholesalers have some copies left which will mainly be supplied to Amazon, and I have a few left through Politico's, but otherwise that's it folks. To those who have Amazon links on their blogs, keep them going so we can build up new orders. If we get to 1,000 it's worth doing a reprint.
First it Was Jews, Now Ken Livingstone Insults the Scots
Last night Ken Livingstone hosted the leaders of the political groups on London's Local Councils at City Hall. During his speech he was keen to emphasise the importance of building Crossrail to the whole of the UK's economy. His turn of phrase is unlikely to impress his friends in Holyrood:
"We need Crossrail to keep London's economy ticking over so that we can continue to pay for the Scottish to live the lifestyle to which they are accustomed."
Ouch. Do I feel another Standards Board referral coming on?
"We need Crossrail to keep London's economy ticking over so that we can continue to pay for the Scottish to live the lifestyle to which they are accustomed."
Ouch. Do I feel another Standards Board referral coming on?
Bruce Anderson Should be Pensioned Off
Bruce Anderson has never been a columnist I've either liked or felt I had to read. He's certainly not in the class of Matthew Parris, Michael Brown or Peter Oborne. And his fatuous effort in yesterday's Independent confirmed my view of him. To his credit he was one of the first to identify David Cameroon's potential as a Tory leader, but his subsequent slavish adoration of all things Cameroon has made him look so ridiculous that you wondered if he had a picture of Dave over his bed. Let's not take that thought any further...
But yesterday he took things one step too far. He took Tory Party Chairman Francis Maude to task over the 'A' List and concluded his article (if it can be called that) by calling on David Cameron to sack Francis Maude. His reason? He alleges that Francis Maude has "come to blame the Tory political culture of the 1980s for his brother's death...Francis Maude seems to wish to take revenge for his family's problems on the Tory faithful. David Cameron wanted an 'A' List in order to encourage women. Mr Maude wanted to use the 'A' List to humiliate the traditional Tory Party".
I almost want to apologise to Francis Maude for having to repeat that rubbish here, but for some reason the media take Bruce Anderson seriously. Surely to God this passage ought to make some people revise their opinion. The man is nothing but an oaf and is not known as "Brute" for nothing. During the Tory leadership contest his vehement diatribes against David Davis perplexed even DD's bitterest enemies. Perhaps this little snippet from The Guardian may shed some light...
Why this uncharacteristic animosity to the likely next number one? Could it, as Davis supporters suspect, have something to do with an incident when John Major put his leadership on the line and asked his MPs to re-elect him? When the man who is known to all as "the brute" turned up uninvited at a meeting of Major supporters, not it seemed to them in the first full flush of sobriety, and made himself such a nuisance that he had to be ejected - a task assigned to the only former SAS man present, Davis?
So having been thrown out into the street by David Davis, Anderson got his revenge. I wonder what it was that Francis Maude did to upset him. Whatever it was, good on Francis. He rises in my estimation. Perhaps Bruce Anderson could try in the future to write a column free of personal rancour or revenge. But then again, pigs might fly. Anderson has reached his sell-by date. Quite how the article in The Independent got past the editor is a mystery, but if anyone on the Indy thinks that Anderson's articles are taken seriously by most thinking people on the right, they're very much mistaken. Time to pension the old brute off.
UPDATE: Just had this from a correspondent. Re: the Guardian snippett - Funnily enough, he burst into a Cameroon gathering in DC's office (immediately after the final MPs' ballot) in a similar state...
But yesterday he took things one step too far. He took Tory Party Chairman Francis Maude to task over the 'A' List and concluded his article (if it can be called that) by calling on David Cameron to sack Francis Maude. His reason? He alleges that Francis Maude has "come to blame the Tory political culture of the 1980s for his brother's death...Francis Maude seems to wish to take revenge for his family's problems on the Tory faithful. David Cameron wanted an 'A' List in order to encourage women. Mr Maude wanted to use the 'A' List to humiliate the traditional Tory Party".
I almost want to apologise to Francis Maude for having to repeat that rubbish here, but for some reason the media take Bruce Anderson seriously. Surely to God this passage ought to make some people revise their opinion. The man is nothing but an oaf and is not known as "Brute" for nothing. During the Tory leadership contest his vehement diatribes against David Davis perplexed even DD's bitterest enemies. Perhaps this little snippet from The Guardian may shed some light...
Why this uncharacteristic animosity to the likely next number one? Could it, as Davis supporters suspect, have something to do with an incident when John Major put his leadership on the line and asked his MPs to re-elect him? When the man who is known to all as "the brute" turned up uninvited at a meeting of Major supporters, not it seemed to them in the first full flush of sobriety, and made himself such a nuisance that he had to be ejected - a task assigned to the only former SAS man present, Davis?
So having been thrown out into the street by David Davis, Anderson got his revenge. I wonder what it was that Francis Maude did to upset him. Whatever it was, good on Francis. He rises in my estimation. Perhaps Bruce Anderson could try in the future to write a column free of personal rancour or revenge. But then again, pigs might fly. Anderson has reached his sell-by date. Quite how the article in The Independent got past the editor is a mystery, but if anyone on the Indy thinks that Anderson's articles are taken seriously by most thinking people on the right, they're very much mistaken. Time to pension the old brute off.
UPDATE: Just had this from a correspondent. Re: the Guardian snippett - Funnily enough, he burst into a Cameroon gathering in DC's office (immediately after the final MPs' ballot) in a similar state...
Channel 4 News Morning Report Podcast
My first PodCast for the Channel 4 Morning Report went out this morning. I did a three minute round up of political blogs, which I'll now be doing every week. You can listen to it HERE - my bit is about two thirds of the way through.
The Ups & Downs of a West Ham Nutcase
The words below were in an email which was shown to me over lunch in Cardiff on the day of the FA Cup Final. I wasn't alone in having a tear in my eye after I had read it. It's written by a guy who, like me, belongs to the West Ham Internet mailing List, Don Perretta. Don, I salute you for summing up what it is like to support our team through thick and thin. I now challenge someone to write something similarly moving on what it's like to support the Conservatives!
In 1999 West Ham were chasing an Inter-toto place with a squad full of some of the best young players in the country. In many ways what has happened in the seven years since is a microcosm of the history of West Ham United Football Club. Up, down, delight, disappointment, great wins, horrendous defeats, excitement, misery, tension, boredom, great players, mediocre players, 'Brown Out', 'Good old Mr. Brown' (Ok - just joking on that last one) and then at the end, as if by magic, one of those days that make supporting West Ham the
defining life choice it undoubtedly is; a day you will remember for the rest of your life.
Liverpool v West Ham United in the FA Cup final! Sounds good doesn't it? And believe me, whatever happens on Saturday, it will be good. Being associated with West Ham means that whenever the good days arrive they will be enjoyed to the maximum because, if the East End teaches you nothing else, it sure as hell teaches you how to appreciate life's salad days; it also teaches you how to party.
Just being a part of the final game of the season day is a source of great pride and constant wonder. I'm still finding it hard to understand why the 'Wig and Pen' in Colchester has the Boleyn Castle and crossed irons painted onto its window and I have to pinch myself when I realise they are trying to pull punters in to watch...the 2006 FA Cup final.
Similarly, the Cup final advert on the BBC; tune in at 11am and get to see a day in the life of Nigel Reo-Coker; watch Marlon Harewood walk his dogs; see the players - yes OUR players - walk out to inspect the pitch. It's great - just great!
Don't bother explaining this to your Arse supporting work colleagues. Don't waste your time trying to get your feelings across to a ManUre fan. You have to support West Ham and have some affinity with the East End to understand what is going to happen on Saturday May 13th 2006.
I fancy West Ham to win on Saturday - there's a real 1980 feel about it - but even were we to lose, in a sense, it's a still a match we've already scored some sort of moral victory in. The Hammers are virtually everyone's favourite second team and it seems even the hardest heart is welcoming us back to the top table. There would inevitably be some anguish in defeat but nothing like we'd experience if it came at the hands of a London rival, a ManUre, or a mid-table side we'd already thumped this season. Playing Liverpool - the best team in Europe last season - adds a certain cachet to a footballing feast that the whole world watches.
West Ham and Liverpool, like Newcastle, are the last bastions of old-style working class football where heart, soul, passion and entertaining football mean more than corporate boxes and sponsoring the players' socks. Dump any of these teams in League One and they would all still be pulling in 30,000+ because the fabric of the club is based on the loyalty and love of the fan not the availability of a hotel room or a training facility. It's not a coincidence that these are the only three clubs in the Premier League was a 'proper' song for an anthem (Errrr...no! at the back there 'Good Old Arsenal' and 'Blue Is the Colour' do not count!).
In what has been a fantastic season for everyone associated with West Ham the final has thrown up a match that everyone can be proud to be involved in. We've had a fantastic run to the final with barely an easy tie along the way and we're in Cardiff on merit; we're also in Europe regardless and we can, hopefully, turn up and play the type of football for which we are rightly renowned and make the final a spectacle for all those watching around the world (although if it is a tedious 0-0 draw until the ball bounces off of Marlon's bum and into the Liverpool net in the 92nd minute well - then ces't la vie!).
For those of you who've seen this before then you know what to expect and just how great Saturday is going to be. Keep a place in your heart for those who were around for the last time but not with us now. Remember that this day, this club represents your community and your birthright. Stand tall; sing loud. For those of you who've not been this way before, remember every minute, be proud, be happy - and have a hankie ready for 'Abide with Me' - you may think you're a bit of a hard nut but you will need it.
If you have tears on Saturday prepare to shed them. Wherever you are going to watch the game; whoever you are with; whatever you do; enjoy the day - and believe!
In 1999 West Ham were chasing an Inter-toto place with a squad full of some of the best young players in the country. In many ways what has happened in the seven years since is a microcosm of the history of West Ham United Football Club. Up, down, delight, disappointment, great wins, horrendous defeats, excitement, misery, tension, boredom, great players, mediocre players, 'Brown Out', 'Good old Mr. Brown' (Ok - just joking on that last one) and then at the end, as if by magic, one of those days that make supporting West Ham the
defining life choice it undoubtedly is; a day you will remember for the rest of your life.
Liverpool v West Ham United in the FA Cup final! Sounds good doesn't it? And believe me, whatever happens on Saturday, it will be good. Being associated with West Ham means that whenever the good days arrive they will be enjoyed to the maximum because, if the East End teaches you nothing else, it sure as hell teaches you how to appreciate life's salad days; it also teaches you how to party.
Just being a part of the final game of the season day is a source of great pride and constant wonder. I'm still finding it hard to understand why the 'Wig and Pen' in Colchester has the Boleyn Castle and crossed irons painted onto its window and I have to pinch myself when I realise they are trying to pull punters in to watch...the 2006 FA Cup final.
Similarly, the Cup final advert on the BBC; tune in at 11am and get to see a day in the life of Nigel Reo-Coker; watch Marlon Harewood walk his dogs; see the players - yes OUR players - walk out to inspect the pitch. It's great - just great!
Don't bother explaining this to your Arse supporting work colleagues. Don't waste your time trying to get your feelings across to a ManUre fan. You have to support West Ham and have some affinity with the East End to understand what is going to happen on Saturday May 13th 2006.
I fancy West Ham to win on Saturday - there's a real 1980 feel about it - but even were we to lose, in a sense, it's a still a match we've already scored some sort of moral victory in. The Hammers are virtually everyone's favourite second team and it seems even the hardest heart is welcoming us back to the top table. There would inevitably be some anguish in defeat but nothing like we'd experience if it came at the hands of a London rival, a ManUre, or a mid-table side we'd already thumped this season. Playing Liverpool - the best team in Europe last season - adds a certain cachet to a footballing feast that the whole world watches.
West Ham and Liverpool, like Newcastle, are the last bastions of old-style working class football where heart, soul, passion and entertaining football mean more than corporate boxes and sponsoring the players' socks. Dump any of these teams in League One and they would all still be pulling in 30,000+ because the fabric of the club is based on the loyalty and love of the fan not the availability of a hotel room or a training facility. It's not a coincidence that these are the only three clubs in the Premier League was a 'proper' song for an anthem (Errrr...no! at the back there 'Good Old Arsenal' and 'Blue Is the Colour' do not count!).
In what has been a fantastic season for everyone associated with West Ham the final has thrown up a match that everyone can be proud to be involved in. We've had a fantastic run to the final with barely an easy tie along the way and we're in Cardiff on merit; we're also in Europe regardless and we can, hopefully, turn up and play the type of football for which we are rightly renowned and make the final a spectacle for all those watching around the world (although if it is a tedious 0-0 draw until the ball bounces off of Marlon's bum and into the Liverpool net in the 92nd minute well - then ces't la vie!).
For those of you who've seen this before then you know what to expect and just how great Saturday is going to be. Keep a place in your heart for those who were around for the last time but not with us now. Remember that this day, this club represents your community and your birthright. Stand tall; sing loud. For those of you who've not been this way before, remember every minute, be proud, be happy - and have a hankie ready for 'Abide with Me' - you may think you're a bit of a hard nut but you will need it.
If you have tears on Saturday prepare to shed them. Wherever you are going to watch the game; whoever you are with; whatever you do; enjoy the day - and believe!
Bloggers4Labour
Bloggers4Labour have taken me to task for saying there were only 17 Labour blogs on their Blogroll. Well, when I looked, there were, but I am happy to put the record straight. There are far more! However, I still stick my my point that they just don't have the impact of right of centre blogs. They don't get the hits and they don't influence the agenda in the same way as those of us on the right. Labour blogger Mike Ion agrees in a post yesterday on his excellent blog. Some of the blogs listed on Bloggers4Labour are not blogs at all - they are normal websites. Look at THIS, THIS, or THIS. There are also a lot of dead links. Among the most popular blogs at Bloggers4Labour are the following, that you might like to investigate.* Normblog * Harry's Place * PooterGeek * Bloggers4Labour * Jo Salmon * Cllr Antonia Bance
* Cllr Bob Piper * Gauche (Paul Anderson) * Recess Monkey * David Miliband (only joking)
Links to them are on Bloggers4Labour. Sadly I couldn't bring myself to visit them all...
Labour Party to "Lose" 46 Staff & Prescott Slams Blair
A correspondent from the Labour marginal of Wallasey has sent me notes of the last Labour Party National Executive meeting. And a very entertaining read it is too. It clearly shows that the funding crisis in the Labour Party is beginning to bite. On 23 May the Party's National Executive ratified plans to lost 46 members of staff by the end of June through voluntary severance. Lapsed members are being telephoned to ask them to renew their membership. Labour has only 198,000 members. Angela Eagle MP emailed 50 lapsed members asking them to rejoin. She received 5 responses, all negative.At the same NEC meeting John Prescott spoke on the PM's instructions to Hazel Blears to reorganise the Party by the end of June. Prescott apparently was vociferous in arguing that the Prime Minister could legitimately set goals for Ministers but party organisation was the responsibility of the NEC. Ouch. It's become very clear why the Ultras in Number Ten have launched a briefing campaign against Prescott.
Later in the meeting Party funding was discussed. it was proposed that State funding would be acceptable if the governing Party received the same "Short Money" as the Opposition and also for education and training! Quite astonishing.
The NEC decided to start selecting General Election candidates in 35 seats, with 9 of the most winnable 17 seats using all-women shortlists.
UPDATE: I should make clear that I was sent this from a reader, but then through Google found it was all posted on the website of Ann Black, an NEC Member. Openness is all well and good, but I suspect she might be regret being quite so open...
Cherie Joins Prezza in Toronto: Is There Something We Should Know?
Continuing his climate change junket in Toronto, John Prescott attended the summit dinner last night, where he was introduced as Britain's "Vice Prime Minister". I always thought the Canadians were people of great insight.And according to Richard Littlejohn, Cherie Blair is off on her mortgage repayment tours again, following Prescott to Toronto. If I were her I'd wear a trousder suit, just in case. She will be speaking at a conference alongside a topless model and a mad woman in a viking helmet who tells jokes about knickers. Rumours that she and Cherie are one and the same person have been hotly denied. Her fee will be paid by a man called Salim Khoja, who was jailed for fraud a few years ago and ordered to pay his victims £100,000 in compensation. And Cherie's reward for this half an hour of humiliation? £30,000. One month's mortgage repayment.
Monday, June 05, 2006
If They Won't Stock Our World Cup Shirts We'll Bounce Their Monthly Cheque
Charlie Whelan lives in Inverness. He might like to take up THIS story with his local Matalan store. And if he doesn't get very far, he might like to give his old boss a wee tinkle. Gordon could threaten to withdraw the Scottish monthly subsidy cheque!
Twenty Questions for Adam Rickitt...
In the first of a series of interviews with some political personalities Adam Rickitt has agreed to answer your questions for this blog. I'm calling the interviews 'Twenty Questions for...' And the questions will all come from readers of this blog. Please email me your questions to iain AT iaindale DOT com. Do not put them in the comments section. I'm not going to use anonymous questions so please give your name. I want to try to make these interviews as personal as possible so feel free to ask some unusual questions which he might not be expecting. If you are a reader of 442 Magazine, or The Independent you'll know the kind of interview I'm looking to achieve. Feel free to suggest other people I should approach in the future in the Comments Section. Within reason!UPDATE: Adam has written an article for the Telegraph today (Tuesday). Click HERE. to read it.
PodCast 9: Iain Meets Edwina Currie
Three years ago I interviewed Edwina Currie for 30 minutes on my Oneword programme about her diaries. I thought it was worth airing again as a Podcast, so here it is. I remember asking her what she saw in John Major with replying: "Well how explicit do you want me to be, Iain?!" If you haven't read her diaries, you should do so. They're about so much more than her notorious affair. You can listen to the Podcast by clicking on the icon in the left hand column - or it can be downloaded from iTunes.NEXT WEEK: PodCast with Tony Benn!
Public Good, Private Bad?
So the latest piece in the Cameron jigsaw of attracting back the centre vote is to enthuse about the merits of the public sector. As a dyed in the wool Thatcherite you might expect steam to be coming out of my ears, but it isn't and I'll tell you why. In essence I still believe that unless there is a damned good reason for something to be run by the government, it shouldn't be. However, the private sector has failed to live up to the opportunities provided by the Thatcher and Major privatisations in so many areas that it is only natural now to enter into a debate about why that was and to learn the lessons from it. There's no doubt that the cumbersome privatisation structures and ensuing regulatory framworks put some real barriers in the way of entrepreneurial initiative, but the outright greed displayed by some executives in a few of the privatised companies has done real harm to the reputation of the private sector. The private sector has also been lamentably bad at its own marketing and PR - almost as bad as the public sector.
But the other problem for Conservatives has been the language we have used in attacking public sector inefficiencies. We have made people who work in the public sector feel that we are attacking them personally rather than the system they are working within. Would you want to vote for a Party which constantly told you you were rubbish? Of course not.
None of this means we should be reticent about pointing to public sector failures where they occur, but just as we should be more open about the failures of the private sector we should also be prepared to say so when the public sector gets it right too.
If we're to win next time we need the votes of more teachers, nurses, local government workers, civil servants. David Cameron's speech won't win their support on its own, but it signals that the Conservative Party is continuing to change. And isn't that the whole point of the Cameron strategy of building the bigger tent? In six months he's already added 6-8 points onto our poll levels by attracting more support from the centre ground. There are far more votes to be harvested from the centre and I firmly believe this can be achieved without compromising our principles or philosophical heritage. It won't be achieved overnight but it's been a bloody good start. No doubt what I have said will be seen as heresy by those who belong to the scorched earth tendency in our Party, but do they really think there is an alternative? There isn't and we'd better all get used to it.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
Adam Rickitt on Tory Radio
Jonathan Sheppard has a four part Podcast interview with Adam Rickitt on Tory Radio which you can download HERE. It's well worth listening to. For the Adam Rickitt doubters out there, you might be pleasantly surprised by what you hear.
Tories Surge into Ten Point Lead
This has just appeared on the Press Association...
David Cameron has steered the Tories to a massive ten-point opinion poll lead in just six months at the helm of the party, a new opinion poll showed tonight. As he prepared to mark his half-year as leader on Tuesday, theIpsos/MORI survey for tomorrow's Sun put the party on 41% - up four points in a month and ten since he took over. Labour fell a point to 31%, giving the Conservatives their biggestlead in the poll since before John Major led the party to victory in the 1992 general election. The Sir Menzies Campbell-led Liberal Democrats slipped three to18%. The popularity of Mr Cameron's party coincided with a slump in Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal rating which slipped to -41,it's lowest ever. Only 26% of voters declared themselves "satisfied'' with the PM's leadership, with 67% dissatisfied. Labour supporters have been particularly unimpressed according to the survey, with satisfaction rates for Mr Blair halved since March,the paper said. Tory party chairman Francis Maude told the newspaper: "Under DavidCameron's leadership people seem more willing to give us a hearing. "One poll - or even a series of polls - isn't enough, but we willdraw encouragement from the findings.'' The poll was carried out between the May 25 - 30 and 1,984 people were spoken to.
David Cameron has steered the Tories to a massive ten-point opinion poll lead in just six months at the helm of the party, a new opinion poll showed tonight. As he prepared to mark his half-year as leader on Tuesday, theIpsos/MORI survey for tomorrow's Sun put the party on 41% - up four points in a month and ten since he took over. Labour fell a point to 31%, giving the Conservatives their biggestlead in the poll since before John Major led the party to victory in the 1992 general election. The Sir Menzies Campbell-led Liberal Democrats slipped three to18%. The popularity of Mr Cameron's party coincided with a slump in Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal rating which slipped to -41,it's lowest ever. Only 26% of voters declared themselves "satisfied'' with the PM's leadership, with 67% dissatisfied. Labour supporters have been particularly unimpressed according to the survey, with satisfaction rates for Mr Blair halved since March,the paper said. Tory party chairman Francis Maude told the newspaper: "Under DavidCameron's leadership people seem more willing to give us a hearing. "One poll - or even a series of polls - isn't enough, but we willdraw encouragement from the findings.'' The poll was carried out between the May 25 - 30 and 1,984 people were spoken to.
Writing for Tribune Magazine
Now who's the person least likely to write for Tribune magazine that you know? Correct. Me. This week I've got to write an article about why the right wing blogosphere is far more active than that of the left. I'm fairly ecunemical in my blogging tastes, but it is very difficult to find many Labour blogs, especially Blairite ones. Even Bloggers4Labour only has 17 members, compared to 80 on LibDem Blogs and 120 or so Tory blogs. Do let me know why you think this might be and I'll quote you in the article.
Iain Dale's One Minute Guide to Today's Blogs
The Conservative History Blog looks at the career on Sally Ward, MP for Cannock from 1931-35. EU Referendum has a tirade against Nigel Farage (Conservative by-election planners please take note). Ellee Seymour's betting instincts are not to be trusted. Antonia Biance reflects on the new civil partnership row and her new life as a councillor. Spin Blog has a go at Ian Blair & the LibDems. Trevor Ivory reports from the Holt By Election in North Norfolk. Chris Whiteside conducts the Prescott Memorial Acronym Competition. About Whose News looks at how to influence who your MP is and holds his nose. Is Peter Black AM going to cheer on England or not? FibDems are asking whatever happened to Willie Rennie? Political Hack finds Ming in worse trouble than he thought. And EU Serf celebrates Tax Freedom Day.
My Part in the New Channel 4 News Podcast
Tomorrow I record my first slot for the new daily Channel 4 News podcast. Each week I'll be doing a slot on what's new in the world of political blogs. I've just written my script and I'll be mentioning the following blogs - Lynn Featherstone, Tom Watson, ConservativeHome, Tory Radio, David Miliband, Nick Robinson, Adam Boulton, Trevor Kavanagh. Each week I'll aslo be featuring a Blog of the Week - and this week (cue drum roll) it's Bob Piper! I'm feeling benevolent...You can download the Channel Four News daily podcast from HERE from Tuesday morning. When it's up, I'll provide a direct link.
Bob Neill Needs All Our Support
A little late but here's what I think of the Bromley & Chislehurst selection. I wrote a week ago that I thought Bromley Conservatives should play safe and if they had a good local candidate they should pick him or her. And that's exactly what they've done. Driving up to the BBC last night I was laughing out loud as Mike Seargent, BBC Political Correspondent told John Pienaar on 5 Live that ihis selection represented a "slap in the face" for David Cameron. Yeah, right. Bob represents Bromley at the GLA. He is leader of the Tory group on the GLA. He's well regarded by virtually everyone. He was also a vocal supporter of David Cameron in the leadership campaign (as well I remember!). OK, he's not black, gay, disabled or any other minority. So what. He's the best man for the job and they were right to pick him. It's very frustrating that some of the posters on ConservativeHome don't appear to believe that we're all in the same Party. Let's just get on with the job and give Bob all our support. Let's also remember that two of the three people in the final were A Listers. From what has been posted by people at the selection meeting Bob Neill outperformed the other two by a mile. I'm sure he'll repeat the performance during the by election campaign. I hope to see many of you down in Bromley during the course of the week.
Labour Selects its Bromley PPC
Labour has selected Rachel Reeves for the Bromley & Chislehurst By Election. She fought the seat at the last election. I'll be doing a piece on Bob Neill and what his selection means later on today. Promise!
David Davis Quote of the Day No 94
Just been speaking to David Davis about all the runners and riders who are throwing their hats into the ring to succeed John Prescott as Labour Deputy Leader. The story is still leading the BBC news bulletins. DD came out with a great one-liner..."It's a bit like visiting the death bed of a relative and saying 'can I have the car please'.
Classic.
Help End the Brussels/Strasburg Waste of Money
Do you agree with the following statement...?
"It costs European taxpayers approximately 200 million euros a year to move the Parliament between Brussels/Belgium and Strasbourg/France. As a citizen of the European Union, I want the European Parliament to be located only in Brussels."
...then sign the petition here!
"It costs European taxpayers approximately 200 million euros a year to move the Parliament between Brussels/Belgium and Strasbourg/France. As a citizen of the European Union, I want the European Parliament to be located only in Brussels."
...then sign the petition here!
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Not Danny Finkelstein's Proudest Boast!
As you know, I give in to the occasional bit of football commentary on this blog and usually live to regret it. At least I'm now not alone. Take this piece of commentary from Times political columnist Daniel Finkelstein this morning..."Choosing Peter Crouch over Darren Bent looks very odd".
Four goals in two games would seem to answer that one! And yes, if you look back in the archives of this Blog I too accused Sven of losing his marbles by selecting Peter Crouch. I am suitably repentant. Mind you, I still stand by my comment that it's madness to take only four strikers when two of them are not fit and one has to be in bed by seven.
Final Three For Bromley & Chislehurst
ConservativeHome is reporting that Bromley & Chislehurst Conservatives have whittled down their shortlist of ten to three, who will face a meeting of the whole Association tonight. The three are said to be Bob Neill, Julia Manning and Syed Kamall. Carroll Forth sadly didn't make it. My experience of these situations is that the local candidate will need to win a majority on the first round of voting. If Bob Neill fails to do that tonight, one of the others will come through the middle. This happened when I was in the final three in Beverley. Robert Goodwill was the local MEP and had been expected to walk it. I remember whispering saying to Graham Stuart that whichever one of us came second to him in the first round would win. Happily for Graham, it was him!
Check Your Facts BBC Online!
I know it's a little thing, but couldn't the BBC employ people who know what they're talking about when writing political stories on their website? Look at THIS from this morning on the Bromley & Chislehurst candidate selection...
"Others include Tory London Assembly leader Michael Harris and A-listers Syed Kamall and Julia Manning. A decision will be made on Saturday evening."
Last time I looked, Bob Neill was the Tory London Assembly leader and Michael Harris was chairman of Bromley & Chislehurst Tories. Now, how long will it take for someone at the BBC to read this and get it changed?!
UPDATE: Still no update on the BBC page - and as Kevin Davis points out in the Comments, the least they could if they're lifting whole chunks of a David Cameron interview is to credit the source - ConservativeHome. I am sure Tim Montgomerie will be sending in an angry email.
UPDATE: It's now been corrected.
"Others include Tory London Assembly leader Michael Harris and A-listers Syed Kamall and Julia Manning. A decision will be made on Saturday evening."
Last time I looked, Bob Neill was the Tory London Assembly leader and Michael Harris was chairman of Bromley & Chislehurst Tories. Now, how long will it take for someone at the BBC to read this and get it changed?!
UPDATE: Still no update on the BBC page - and as Kevin Davis points out in the Comments, the least they could if they're lifting whole chunks of a David Cameron interview is to credit the source - ConservativeHome. I am sure Tim Montgomerie will be sending in an angry email.
UPDATE: It's now been corrected.
Matthew Parris's 10 Reasons Gordon Brown Won't Inherit
Matthew Parris demonstrates again in this morning's Times why he is Britain's best political columnist. He believes that Alan Johnson will succeed Tony Blair, not Gordon Brown. By the end of the article, even I was convinced! He lists nine reasons why Gordon Brown will not inherit...
1. He is not a persuader
2. He is not a visionary
3. He is not a diplomat
4. He is not a deal-maker
5. He is not a peace keeper
6. He does not soothe
7. He is not a trailblazer
8. He is not a fence mender
9. He is not a salesman
Later in the article he add's a tenth reason: he's not English. To read the full article click HERE.
1. He is not a persuader2. He is not a visionary
3. He is not a diplomat
4. He is not a deal-maker
5. He is not a peace keeper
6. He does not soothe
7. He is not a trailblazer
8. He is not a fence mender
9. He is not a salesman
Later in the article he add's a tenth reason: he's not English. To read the full article click HERE.
Paper Review on News 24 Tonight
Tonight I'm doing the newspaper review on BBC News 24 at quarter to midnight. The co-reviewer is John Torode from the Daily Mail. It's normally shit or bust with me on paper reviews. Either there's absolutely nothing in the newspapers or the Queen Mother dies. So tonight it'll either be a new Prescott scandal or Shabaz going back into the Big Brother House!
Something for the Weekend
* Had a nice email from someone this morning who received their Little Red Book from Amazon yesterday. He ended it by saying: "Next time make it hardback to ensure it will withstand continuous reference and handling."* Yesterday I was searching for some papers in the garage (as you do) and opened up a trunk only to find a huge collection of Spy cartoons I'd forgotten I had. So I spent last night cataloguing them with a view to selling them. There's about 250 altogether so I hope I can get a decent sum for them. I found a dealer in Worthing so we'll see what kind of pittance they offer!
* I shall sadly miss the England v Jamaica game this afternoon as I'm playing golf - fantastic weather here in Kent today so I'm greatly looking forward to it.
Friday, June 02, 2006
Peter Kilfoyle a Brownite? Don't Make Me Laugh...
Stephen Tall has a fascinating post about Peter Kilfoyle, as a result of his article in today's Guardian. I published Peter's book Left Behind a few years ago. He was a brave man to fight Militant in Liverpool in the 1980s and he's been one of the few Labour MPs brave enough to speak out against Blair. However, Stephen's wrong about his supposed positive views of Gordon Brown. As I remember it, he can't stand him and thinks he's unfit to be Prime Minister. But then people's views change over time...
LibDem News Review the Little Red Book
Jonathan Calder, who writes the excellent Liberal England blog, has written a review of the Little Red Book of New Labour Sleaze for LibDem News HERE.
EXCLUSIVE: Ex LBC Chief to be Labour's Candidate in Bromley?
Labour seem to be taking the Bromley by-election rather seriously, despite the fact that their vote is likely to collapse. Apparently there was quite a bit of interest in the seat. Local councillor Jon Getwood is in contention and I’m told that one of the five shortlisted candidates to be paraded before Bromley & Chislehurst Labour Party (membership: 32) on Sunday include former LBC Radio Managing Director Mark Flanagan. A savvy media performer, he’s currently an adviser to the Downing Street and the Labour Party on new media (that's the Interweb to you and me). He’d certainly go down well on the doorstep and would be able to defend the government eloquently on the media. But he must have some kind of psychological flaw (copyright Alastair Campbell 1998). Why on earth would anyone willing want to stand for Labour in the current climate? Pass the straight-jacket…
Is Number Ten Trying to Force Prescott Out?
So what now for John Prescott? Alan Johnson has stoked the story up again by saying he'd like to be Deputy Leader when the time comes (sooner than you think, Alan). I detect strange things happening in Whitehall at the moment. I was tipped off about a rumour this morning that there will be a Prescott-related story in the Sunday newspapers. However, as I haven't been able to stand it up I won't go into any more details. But if indeed there is another story on Sunday it's difficult to see how Prescott could survive another media battering. There is now, I think, an inevitability about his departure from the Government - it's not a question of if, but when. Perhaps someone in one of the tabloids will make public the details of one of his numerous other affairs, which up to now they've not printed. But the real question is this. If he was forced to resign from the Cabinet, would he automatically resign as Deputy Leader of the Labour Party? I can see no rule which would force him to. There is a school of thought that it's in Gordon Brown's interest for him to stay in situ, as Brown wouldn't want someone like Alan Johnson to be able to build a power base from the Deputy Leadership. The same school of thought believes that the Ultras in Number Ten would be quite happy to throw Prezza over the side as he has now outlived his usefulness. Number Ten has developed such a bunker mentality that anything is possible. And let's face it, they've got form in this area. Desperate people do desperate things. There is a whiff of Berlin 1945 about Number Ten at the moment. So if indeed there is a Prescott story in the Sundays, you can rest assured that it emanated from Number Ten. I'm very pleased I'm doing the Sunday newspaper review on NEws 24 this Saturday night! Hat tip for graphic to Beau Bo D'Or
Prisons Inspector Lays into Home Office
Mary Riddell has a superb, and very worrying interview with HM Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers in this week's New Statesman. Click HERE to read it. It appears she warned Ministers three years ago that there was a growing problem with foreign prisoners not being deported. "If we wrote our prison reports by computer, which we do not, you could push any button and find a reference to the lack of a foreign nationals strategy. I could hardly have made more clear the absence of a strategy for managing foreign prisoners. I could also hardly have made it more clear, when I was looking at the immigration side, that there were enormous administrative failings."She also lays into the government for abolishing the Prisons Inspectorate in three months time. "Home secretaries have as their resource people who know prisons from the inside out. They need to make use of that expertise, rather than dilute it. I cannot see that [as the legislation stands], it will be anything other than diluted."
If I were John Reid reading this, I'd be even more worried about developments in the Home Office than I was already.
Quentin Letts Reviews the Little Red Book
Quentin Letts' review of the Little Red Book of New Labour Sleaze in today's Daily Mail. Paul Linford has pointed out that they list the editors as Iain Dale and Guido Hawkes. I was going to say that Guido has never been so insulted... but I know he has...This pocket-sized volume, the opposite of a Greatest Hits compilation, lists the top 100 New Labour Sleaze scandals. I counted only 99, but the rest of it seems accurate enough. It is what we newspaper hacks would call a 'cuttings job' - and no worse for that. Cuttings jobs collate forgotten details, reminding you of the numerous vignettes of corruption which moulded your suspicion that the current crowd in Downing Street are the seediest, most contemptible crew since Del Boy and Rodney set up business in their Reliant Robin three-wheeler. Derek Draper's astounding arrogance as a New Labour henchman, Tony Blair's £2 million entanglement withindustrialistt Lakshmi Mittal, John Prescott's chipolata, and the £50,000 'insider betting' scandal when Michael Martin became Commons Speaker: this book is a wedding buffet of dodginess. Cherie Blair/Booth makes numerous appearances, as does Stephen Byers. These two have been the Edrich and Compton, the Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire, the Ant and Dec of Blairite sleaze.
There is nothing new in the shor essays which have been written by various members of the blogging world. The prose is unexceptional with only thoccasionalal flare of anger and wit. The editors, who worked quickly, did not waste time excising minor duplications.
It is striking (though not surprising) how many Labour scandals have involved Scottish Labour. I could have read more about the links between big money and Blair's No 10. there is surprisingly little on the PFI projects, on Capita, and on the way the BBC and some other parts of the media have been persecuted and harried and beaten into submission. The editors will argue that there simply wasn't room. Still, at the rate Cherie and Co are moving there shoiuld be plenty of material for a second volume of sleaze before Christmas.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Alan Johnson was Dorneywood's Postman!
Alan Johnson, the man who could succeed John Prescott as Labour Party Deputy Leader, reveals on GMTV on Sunday that he used to be Dorneywood's postman! Speaking to Gloria Del Piero he says...Well look I know John Prescott because he’s my neighbouring MP in Hull. I also know Dorneywood because I was a postman there for five years before I was an MP, and I remember seeing Merlyn Rees who was the Home Secretary at the time sitting in the Beech Tree Pub in Dorneywood Road with all his special branch people around him having a pint of beer, and nobody made that a huge story and thought “why aren’t you at work?” He was drinking in the pub, which was great! Merlyn was perfectly entitled to his pint of beer! So let me tell you, the thing I’ve found most astounding about this is the suggestion that John Prescott was taking it easy. He works harder than probably anybody I know. It’s a very nice place Dorneywood. I only went into the servant’s quarters to deliver the mail but it looked very nice from the outside.
Alan Johnson goes on to say that him being Prime Minister would be like putting beagle on Mars. He also says he fancies the idea of being Deputy Leader, but wants Prescott to continue for as long as he wants to. Translation: Get Prezza out and let me beat that Harman woman!
Tax Freedom Day Should be a Bank Holiday
This graph says it all. I'm sure my friends at the Adam Smith Institute will tell me if I have got this wrong, but at the end of the Major government in 1997, Tax Freedom Day fell on 25 May. This year it's on June 7th, a full 13 days later. Translated this means that you now have to work a fortnight longer before you earn a penny for yourself. It also means you're paying 9% more tax than you were in 1997. Going back even further, in 1963 Tax Freedom Day fell on 24 April. halcyon days. Obviously the day fluctuates according to economic fortunes, but surely if our economy was doing so well it should be getting progressively earlier in the year, not later. As someone has said on KiwiBlog ..."Dogs bark, cats meow, bears shit in the woods and Labour raise taxes".
Actually I added the 'bears' bit on for dramatic effect! There has been some debate recently about what the Whitsun Bank Holiday should be called. Personally I'd change it from the last Monday in May to whatever day Tax Freedom Day falls on. It might bring home to people how much they are actually paying in tax, and persuade them of the virtues of keeping more of their own money. Hmmm. Keeping more of your own money... That's spelt Tee Ay eX C U Tee. Hat-tip to KiwiBlog for the graphic.
FIFA Gunning for Arsenal
I've always loathed Arsenal. It's totally irrational, but I hate them. Even more than Tottenham. Their reaction to losing the European Champions League Final was a lesson in how not to lose gracefully. If you support West Ham or Tottenham, watch Newsnight tonight. And then tell me you've tried desperately to wipe a smug smile off your face. Bet you won't succeed. And if you can't wait that long, click HERE.UPDATE: 6.48. Just received this charming email from a Gooner. "You're a f****** ugly, boring c*** aren't you. I bet you have a miniscule penis." Feel free to email him back at gooner_strood@yahoo.co.uk with your views. He's just reminded me why I hate Arsenal.
UPDATE: 6.58 It gets better. Click HERE to read the Arsenal Message Board. Nice to know this blog is read so widely. It's amazing. I never thought gooners could read. Another choice excerpt... "Look at the c**t's forehead - you could show a film on it". Actually that's quite funny. Unlike this one... "I f**king hate c**ts like him, I'll stab the c**t".
UPDATE: 7.13 If you are brave enough to go to the Comments Section it contains some 'interesting' language from our Gooner friends.
UPDATE: 21.24 Glad to see Chelsea (aka West Ham Reserves) coming out in my support HERE.
The Future of This Blog
I'm having to do some serious thinking about the future of this Blog. As you can probably tell, I love doing it and the feedback (both on the blog and privately by email) is great. However, it's taking an increasing amount of time, and if I fail to upload something new every couple of hours you all start emailing to ask if I've died or something! I've broken several exclusive news stories, and, I think, influenced the direction of a few others over the last few months. On the negative side, doing a blog if you're in active politics is bound to make you a few enemies. More than a few people believe the blog is at least partly to blame for me not being on the 'A' List. That's as may be, but hasn't affected what I write, and it won't. 
As you can see from the Hit Rate Graphs, the number of people who visit the blog every day has grown hugely, since I restarted in December. More than 114,000 individuals visited the blog during May, with 188,000 multiple visits. This was more than double April's total. This is a phenomenal performance for a blog that is less than 6 months old. Guido outperforms me, with 150,00o unique visitors and 211,000 multiples and I suspect that ConservativeHome does too. I'm sure we all share many visitors.
So what of the future? If I was working in a normal full-time job, I doubt whether I could keep the momentum up. It is almost impossible to earn money from a blog - the adverts you see down the sides of the blog generate very little if anything and I will probably do away with them. The only way to generate revenue is to attract sponsorship from those who wish to "get at" the political community. Virtually anyone who's anyone in Conservative politics (and beyond!) reads this blog - I'm told that the Party Leader and Party Chairman have been known to visit, along with many other members of the Shadow Cabinet. Most of the political lobby look at it once a day at least. The same goes for Guido's and Tim Montgomerie's blogs. Guido's post today makes clear that like me, he's feeling the strain and even thinking of taking on a "Mini" Guido to help him. It seems to me that the only way we can survive, improve and expand what we do is to take on some degree of financial sponsorship. So if anyone out there has any ideas on what they'd like to see here in the future or their company might fancy some kind of sponsorship deal, please do get in touch.
In the meantime, thanks to all of you for visiting so regularly and making it so enjoyable.
As you can see from the Hit Rate Graphs, the number of people who visit the blog every day has grown hugely, since I restarted in December. More than 114,000 individuals visited the blog during May, with 188,000 multiple visits. This was more than double April's total. This is a phenomenal performance for a blog that is less than 6 months old. Guido outperforms me, with 150,00o unique visitors and 211,000 multiples and I suspect that ConservativeHome does too. I'm sure we all share many visitors.So what of the future? If I was working in a normal full-time job, I doubt whether I could keep the momentum up. It is almost impossible to earn money from a blog - the adverts you see down the sides of the blog generate very little if anything and I will probably do away with them. The only way to generate revenue is to attract sponsorship from those who wish to "get at" the political community. Virtually anyone who's anyone in Conservative politics (and beyond!) reads this blog - I'm told that the Party Leader and Party Chairman have been known to visit, along with many other members of the Shadow Cabinet. Most of the political lobby look at it once a day at least. The same goes for Guido's and Tim Montgomerie's blogs. Guido's post today makes clear that like me, he's feeling the strain and even thinking of taking on a "Mini" Guido to help him. It seems to me that the only way we can survive, improve and expand what we do is to take on some degree of financial sponsorship. So if anyone out there has any ideas on what they'd like to see here in the future or their company might fancy some kind of sponsorship deal, please do get in touch.
In the meantime, thanks to all of you for visiting so regularly and making it so enjoyable.
Carroll Forth to Stand in By-Election?
ConservativeHome reports on the Bromley & Chislehurst shortlist, which has been published in today's London Evening Standard. The surprise name on the list is Eric Forth's widow Carroll, who yesterday passed the Parliamentary Assessment Board. People have done remarkably well to keep quiet about this for so long - very unusual in the Conservative Party! Carroll could well be the best placed candidate for this by-election. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at Saturday's selection meeting. She is certainly a feisty character and a lady with some definite opinions. If the local Party are looking for someone to take on Eric's mantle, then who better could there be? With the LibDems having picked a local candidate I would be astonished if the Conservatives didn't follow suit. Go Forth, Carroll!PS Apologies for the quality of the photo, but I scanned it from a leaflet I helped deliver in the constituency a couple of evenings ago. The fold is in exactly the wrong place!
In Defence of Adam Rickett
The hounding of Adam Rickett, both by the media and disdainful Conservatives, has gone far enough. It's time to stop. It's a disgrace that he has been villified in such a disgusting manner by people who should know better. He has become the lightning rod for the whole 'A' List saga, and it should stop now. Surely the Conservative Party should be welcoming a 28 year old into its fold rather than ritually slagging him off? I have never met Adam Rickett or spoken to him, but I know a witch hunt when I see it. Of course people will question his experience and why he should be on the 'A' List, but it's gone way beyond that now. The latest example comes in today's Daily Mail, where Jonathan Holborrow has the following to say: "I think it is unlikely that Mr Rickett will advance much further in the selection process in Folkestone & Hythe, which is a very traditional Conservative seat." Well, it's a point of view you might say, and what's wrong with that? What's wrong is that Jonathan Holborrow is the constituency chairman in Folkestone & Hythe and has no business commenting in public on either the selection process or the people who have applied. I trust his wrists will have been well and truly slapped by the powers that be at CCHQ. Adam Rickett is no one's fool. He had a place to study law at Cambridge before deciding to take the part of Nicky Tilsley in Coronation Street. He's been successful. Surely as Conservatives we ought to be welcoming that. While his appearance on Question Time was not an unqualified success - as I am sure he would himself admit - it was hardly a disaster. He actually answered the difficult questions reasonably well, but was weaker on the easier questions. Surely that's the best way round for it to be! As everyone reading this will know very well, I think there are probably a number of people who ought to have been on the 'A' List in preference to several of those who are actually on it. But that's life. And it should not provide the excuse for people who should know better to publicly slag off a fellow Conservative. We should have learned from the past how far that gets us. So let's call off the dogs and wish Adam Rickett well. End of lecture.
Labour Do Not Do... But If They Did
Tim Montgomerie has launched an excellent new website this morning - labourdonotdo.com - which is the first project of ConservativeHome's Chameleon Army. labourdonotdo.com aims to catalogue Labour's number one failing - its incompetence. Shouldn't be too difficult then...
The Conservative Thoughts of a Labour MP
Gisela Stuart has always struck me as a quasi-conservative. It was she who turned against the European Constitution and did more to scupper it than probably anyone else. She has written a long article for the Institute of Economic Affairs, which the Daily Telegraph published today - Click HERE. I haven't seen the full length version but I challenge any Conservative to disagree with a word she says in the Telegraph version. Quite amazing. I was alerted to this by a readr who wonders if she is about to jump ship. I doubt it very much, but she'd definitely be quite a coup.
MAYDAY! A Date for Dr John Reid's Diary...
Shadow Home Secretary David Davis has calculated that it takes him an average of 11.9 months to dispose of his opposite number. So May 1st 2007 should be a particularly awful day for Dr Reid. MAYDAY! MAYDAY!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)