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.
18 comments:
Theresa May recognisable by households in the UK? Iain, give us a break. She has been one of the most consistently poor performers since she entered the Shadow Cabinet. Let's not forget what weighty positions she has held and what a cock-up she made of them. Her total failure to pin anything on Byers comes to mind. How she continues to hold a position heaven only knows. She is a poor media performer and comes across as shrill and often pretty dim.
Cameron's obviously doing something right becuase I know several people who complain at how right wing Blair has taken Labour who say they are considering voting Conservative at the next GE.
After years of Blair contriving to pick very public fights with his party I think voters might be tired of egg breaking - it's this approach which has caused people to start thinking of Labour as a divided party on issues such as schools.
Cameron would be better off not being seen to antagonise elements of his party - having Norman Tebbit taking to the airwaves denouncing the latest Cameron initiative is more likely to remind people of what they disliked about the party and reinforce Labour's claims that if you scratch the surface the Tories are the same as ever than it is make look DC look 'strong'.
David Davis and Theresa May "truly household names"?. Get real, Iain.... and the Number 42 doesn't go to Clapham Junction, by the way.
Anonymous - May's biggest problem IMO is a failure to consider fully the impact of a particular policy or stance.
Appearing before the DCMS select committee she expressed some support for top slicing the licence fee to fund PSB output on the commercial channels.
An admittedly brief exchange of correspondence with her on the matter made it clear she'd not considered the questions of who would own the copyright in the publicly funded content or receive any commercial receipts generated by the exploitation of that content.
To my mind these would have been key areas one would need to consider when formulating a policy position so I was slightly surprised at May having no answer - or least none she was prepared to share.
And where's David Willetts when the wife of a Home Office minister has just been given the job of Chief Inspector of Schools at a tidy 150k per year?
If a Tory administration had made an appointment like this, New Labour would have crucified us! It's pathetic. We've got the biggest bunch of sleaze merchants running the country that we've ever had and what's Willetts doing? He's drinking a glass of orange squash and reading Logarithms Monthly. Pathetic.
"Does exactly what it says on the 'tin'"
The sell by date
open other end
Made in the EU
No calorific value
Dispose of in a safe place, Not recyclable
I'd suggest that none of the Shadow Cabinet are remotely familiar to the general public with the possible exception of William Hague (because of his previous leadership and HIGNFY appearances).
No its not. The Conservatives need to present the next government in 2009, not a one man spin machine devoid of economic policy
I thought David Lammy came across very well, actually. His natural humour and authority impressed me a lot -- more than any Labour politician I've seen for some time, in fact. I agree that I didn't think much of Gove or Fox as performers.
I think "Cameron's Conservatives" is more significant than merely a reposte to "New Labour". Granted, they both act as a way to ring the changes and to give people permission to believe in the new product. But Labour underwent a massive reinvention as New Labour, with a Clause IV moment and rebranding, a radical policy shift and so on.
But the Conservative party has a long and proud tradition and never needed to be "New Conservatives" or, dare I say, "Modern Conservatives". It just needed to move from one proud period of its history -- an era where Margaret Thatcher and Thatcherism dominated political discourse -- to the next period. Over the years, we've had Peel's Conservatives, Disraeli's Conservatives, Salisbury's Conservatives, Churchill's Conservatives, Macmillan's Conservatives, Thatcher's Conservatives and now Cameron's Conservatives -- all different variations on the same themes. I think it's a terrific branding exercise because it doesn't claim any kind of permanent revolution or grand break with the past. When Cameron leaves, the party will be The Next Guy's Conservatives.
Conversely, New Labour was a genuine attempt to permanently change the Labour party. On the one hand, future leaders may want to escape the shadow of Blair... but on the other hand, unbranding New Labour would create a lot of unease in parts of the party.
Yes - but how many Conservatives are Cameron Conservatives?
An anonymous Shadow Cabinet?
It's only what they deserve. Phrases such as "rose to obscurity" or Churchill's "A modest little man, with much to be modest about", spring to mind. Let's face it, it's not impressive - except *potentially* for DD and wee Willie H, who I suspect are on a tight leash lest they outshine the Glorious Leader - which wouldn't be difficult.
As happened to the other lot in the mid 90s, there's a risk that a fissure will open up: Cameron's Conservatives on one side, trad tories on the other. The older bunch mostly saw politics as something other than real life, a supplementary occupation to be taken up once you'd made your pile (or failed) in your real job. The new crowd see it as an end in and of itself, a profession (no other experience necessary) whereby once aboard the gravy-train you've got it made - even if you lose your seat.
No wonder they balls-up everything they touch.
God rot professional politicians.
Iain
"the only saying goes, you don't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs."
True but just because you break (only a few) eggs it doesn't necessarily mean you've made an omelette - it may just mean you've broken a few eggs.
Umbongo - that made me laugh out loud!
Martin claims that Labour is divided on schools.
Probably right on this issue but if this is to Cameron's advantage is debatable.
Come the election I will be reminding Conservatives that they have all (to a man) dropped Grammar schools.
Trust me, I will be scratching the surface of the Tory ranks to see what's underneath.
PS Dr.Fox on question time reminds me of nuclear weapons each time I see him. I don't know why but he really scares me.
Gary
Gary - we have not all droppped grammar schools and we will be reminding people of that in Kent and elsewhere. What happened to those defectors? All gone a bit quiet.
BTW Iain, do you see how one of the problems with the A List is that, when someone like you writes a post like this, the cynics, so unfairly, will hiss that you're only doing it coz you're 'sucking up'?
Anyway, back to more important stuff: c'mon Germany!!!
Anonymous at the top, I wasn;t commenting on performance, I was commenting on recognition.
Stalin's Gran -David Davis household name. Er, yes.
Sceptic, well, do I look bovvered? I've given up worrying what people think. If people want to think I;m arselicking they'll think it wahtever I write, frankly. I call it how I see it.
Oh and by the way!!
"we haven't all dropped Grammar schools".
Look, 'anonymous', in the Labour party we have members who we keep in a cage for a rainy day.
They hate Blair and want to Nationalise everything and return to the 'good old days'.
They aren't interested in the delivery, only in how its delivered.
You should be put in a cage.
It won't be long till 'Dave' commissions one. It works, it worked for us and could work for you lot. Excluding you of course.
You're waiting for 'Dave' to fuck up. By my honest reckoning, he hasn't.
It's my job to expose the duplicity of it all and 'Dave', to his credit, is making it hard for me.
I'm well up for it!
Gary
Post a Comment