Why Labour Fears Ken Clarke

James MacIntyre, who is in pole position to succeed Martin Bright as the New Statesman's political editor, has written an interesting article on the return of Ken Clarke in this week's magazine. He says Cameron should be praised for bringing back the old warhorse and explains why Labour fear him.

Labour strategists envisage two serious problems that Clarke could cause Cameron in the coming months. The first is how the Tory leader will cope with being outshone, either in the Commons or on television, by the new shadow ­business secretary, who may be 68 but whose appetite for politics has not diminished - he amusingly tells friends he is in mid-career. The second problem will come if and when Ireland votes "Yes" in its second referendum on the Lisbon treaty later this year. Even before Clarke's recall, Cameron faced sharp questions about whether he would then reverse his commitment to Britain's holding a retrospective referendum on the treaty. With Clarke, whose firm position is well known, having to field questions on the issue, the pressure on Cameron will be all the greater.

For now, however, Cameron should be praised for surprising his critics - including this one - with a bold move that, in a stroke, does as much to "decontaminate" the brand of Conservatism as have all his superficial image changes since 2005. The Clarke camp's slogan during the last leadership contest, after years of refining the message, was, simply, "Change to win", and his presence goes some way to addressing the lack of any Cameron "Clause Four moment".

Clarke is one of very few politicians with genuine popular appeal: what strategists call "cut through", an ability to connect. It is arguable whether Labour has anyone as popular. ­Although Brown, Alistair Darling and Mandelson - "serious people for serious times" - represent a heavyweight team on the economy, the Tories appear to be on the front foot for the first time since the Business Secretary's recall. Suddenly, it is harder for Cameron to be criticised from the left by those who believe he has done nothing substantial to change the Tory party. The "nasty party" image has faded more this week than in any other in the past decade.

Leaving aside the fact that "Change to win" was Cameron's slogan, not Clarke's, MacIntyre's general analysis is spot on, and reveals just how much Labour fears Clarke. They will try their damndest to drive wedges between Clarke and Cameron over the next few months. Tories must not allow that to happen.

Read the whole article HERE.

Ken Clarke Should be Cameron's Chancellor

Government is something which should be conducted without sentiment. This is especially true in tough economic times. For some time I have toyed with the idea of writing a column suggesting that David Cameron should make Ken Clarke Chancellor when he wins the election. The very idea will cause some spluttering in certain quarters, and I understand why, but let me explain.

The idea of making Ken Clarke Chancellor should in no way be taken as a criticism of George Osborne. I think George has grown into the job in a way many people doubted he was able to. And in normal economic circumstances I wouldn't be suggesting a move for him. However, we are no longer operating in normal circumstances, and I doubt very much that normality will have returned by the time of the next election. We will be entrenched in a recession. And that's why Ken Clarke should be brought back

Ken Clarke got us out of one recession when he was Chancellor, let him do it again. Clarke is popular in the country, in a way that no other Tory Shadow Cabinet Minister is. They like his blokiness and his apparent willingness to call a spade a spade. He is a reassuring presence, and in a government inevitably full of people who are not household names, that's a vital quality.

Part of the issue here is whether David Cameron forms a Cabinet on the basis of wanting the best people in the right jobs, or feels that those who have earned their passage in opposition should be given their chance to shine in government. ConservativeHome explores this issue today, suggesting that many of John Major's Cabinet may be brought into a Cameron team. I think they go too far with some of their names. Stephen Dorrell, for example, is someone few people realise is even still an MP! However, the principle is sound - bring in a few people with experience of government.

Is it Time For Ken Clarke to Make His Choice?

The News of the World reports that if the Conservatives win the election David Cameron will bring Ken Clarke into the Cabinet in charge of the Cabinet Office. The argument in favour of this centres around he need for a few greybeards around the Cabinet table, and there are few with more Cabinet experience than Ken Clarke. The arguments against are simpler and more numerous.

1. Would he sign up to Cameron's European policy?
2. Is he really in touch with the zeitgeist?
3. Can he really be a team player?

However, there is another issue. Who exactly would make place for him? Imagine you've been a diligent member of the Shadow Cabinet for three or four years. You've worked your knackers off, for little thanks. You haven't been raking in a six figure salary from outside interests and you've sacrificed a lot for the wider good of getting the Conservatives elected. You're then told, sorry mate, there isn't room for you at the top table. Your place is going to a 69 year old with a history of 'being difficult'. You'd be pretty hacked off.

There are indeed arguments for people like Ken Clarke being brought in, but if they are, they need to work their passage. I suggest that if this move is serious, David Cameron should bring Ken Clarke into the Shadow Cabinet at the next reshuffle. He can then, like the rest of them, demonstrate his commitment and talent in advance of the election. If his outside interests prevent him from doing so, that tells us what we need to know.

UPDATE 12.20pm: Some of the comments in this thread demonstrate that people only read the first half of this post. I am quite happy for Ken Clarke to be in a David Cameron Cabinet (as long as he is not Minister for Europe!) but only if he has previously agreed to serve in the Shadow Cabinet. I think that's an entirely reasonable view to take.

I Had That Ken Clarke in the Back of My Cab Once...

Ken Clarke's Democracy Task Force has issued its interim report today. It's not the most exciting report I have ever seen but it does set out the parameters for a return to proper Cabinet government and a respect for Parliament. He wants to strengthen the Ministerial Code and also ensure that Parliament would always vote before the armed forces were ordered into action. Crucially he also wants to see the number of Special Advirsors halved, something we should all welcome. Here's his chat with WebCameron from the back of a cab...



The report makes the following recommendations...

* A system to entrench a process of collective Cabinet government. This will require a new and strengthened Ministerial Code, covering the required procedures for approval of policies by Cabinet
* To give the new Ministerial Code authority it must be approved by a Parliamentary resolution
* The responsibility for monitoring the Code should be taken out of the hands of the Prime Minister and placed in the hands of a body with powers comparable to those of the National Audit Office, reporting to a Parliamentary Committee
* The Committee on Standards in Public Life to establish a code of conduct for government publications and advertising campaigns
* Decisions to go to war or to commit troops to areas of conflict should require Parliamentary approval. Decisions on war making should no longer rest solely on the unfettered use of the Royal Prerogative by the Prime Minister
* Treaties with financial, legal or territorial implications for the United Kingdom or its citizens should require Parliamentary approval before ratification and should no longer involve the use of the Royal Prerogative