Who’ll go first - Blair or Howard?
May 9th, 2005
-
Who will “win” this final contest?
With leadership issues dominating both main parties in this post-election period Hills have opened a new market on which of Michael Howard or Tony Blair will stand down first.
The current prices are 1/7 on Howard going before Blair and 4/1 against Blair going before Howard. With the pressure continuing to build on Mister Blair, as everybody now seems to be calling him, the 4/1 looks good value.
In the Labour leadership stakes, meanwhile, the best you can get on Gordon Brown is now 1/5. With the Tories David Davis is 15/8 favourite although a lot of money is reported to be going on William Hague - now at 16/1.
An intriguing new spread market has just been opened by Sporting Index’s HiLo off-shoot on how old Michael Howard’s replacement as Tory leader will be.
The current spread is 50.5-52 years old. So if you think that they will go for George Osborne (33), David Cameron (38), Liam Fox (43) or even a return for William Hague (44) then a sell would produce a nice profit. If, on the other hand, you see this going to David Davis (56), Sir Malcolm Rifkind (58) or even the Ken Clark (64) then there could be big profits in a buy bet.
A lot depends in this race on what the new rules are because if the Tory membership has the final say then Davis looks a sure winner.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
A source on the NEC tells me that Christine Shawcroft has long made a habit of calling our leader ‘Mister Blair’.
1. So?
Mr Smithson any odds on Howard remaining leader? Sounds mad and yet Hezza has already said he should stay until the Euro referendumIf he did, and they won, would surely be awfull tempting to stay on, for the good of the Nation etc….. Views Mr Smithson?????
i dont think blair will go for a while because i dont think mr brown wants the job just yet. Let Mr blair take the flack for the ni increases and big changes to pensions as well as some other things and then let bown be the nations saviour.
i think brown will try something similar to what he did with the general election campaign
as for the tory leader my money is going on redwood
Am I right in saying that it’s very difficult for them to actually force Blair out and that the motion couldn’t be done until their conference in October?
If that’s the case and Labour are determined to get rid of him it could come down to whoever can elect a sucessor the quickest following the october conferences seeing as the tories have a similar timescale planned.
Redwood? He does not appear to have widespread support among either MPs or activists. He is not a “unity candidate” who might have a caretaker role. He has not had any impact as shadow minister for red tape or whatever he is. He is not a moderniser about whom people might think “Not my cup of tea but we need to reform ourselves to get elected”. So I am not sure how he could possibly get it.
7 He maty stand in the hope of raising his Profile/Gaining Promotion but i doubt even he would do so in genuine expectation of Victory.
Redwood? Why not? On the principle of Buggin´s turn, of course…. Would he really be worse than any of the others?
I suppose it all depends what Hague’s opinion of Davis is - he is probably the only person who could credibly be seen as both a stopDavis candidate and someone who had value in his own right (and be popular in the party at large).
Why doesn’t Rosindell stand?
4. probably it’s what Brown would like to do, but it would be interesting to see what he’ll do if the Campaign Group will be able to challenge the leadership this autumn.
Redwood? LOL The first Vulcan party leader! Betting on Rifkind is daft enough, but if people are putting money on Redwood I wish I was a bookmaker!
I’m starting to think that whether Blair goes in the near future or not depends on whether the malcontents on the backbenchers go for a trial of strength before the summer recess. If the Campaign Group or the Cook/Dobbo tendency smell blood, a defeat in the Commons (or even a majority of single figures) on any piece of controversial legislation may make the pressure to remove Blair irresistible. He could announce his intention to resign in the summer and Brown could have a stately procession to a coronation at Conference, even if he were challenged b the hard left.
11 Rosindell is a good candidate, but our so-called impartial media would have a field day, condemning the Tories for selecting a populist leader.
9 - yes, he really would be worse than any of the others. They are a pretty uninspiring bunch but (if I must find things in their favour) Rifkind has some gravitas, Yeo offers a modernising agenda, Davis is a b’stard but is a firebrand who would galvanise the core vote, Fox is smooth and Cameron is fresh. Redwood has no obvious qualities. He has no charisma, no talent, no agenda to reform the party and the fact he was trecherous to Major would give a licence to everyone to be as indisciplined as they fancy (ref. IDS).
11 and 15 - could somebody retrieve my jaw from the floor and rush me to A&E for emergency re-attachment surgery? Thanks.
You can back Redwood at 109 to 1 on Betfair - only £2 but would any body be daft enough to waste more than that!
I do hope we dont have more than about 18 months of the Tory party pulling iself to bits over the leadership!!!!!
Blair going early would benefit Labour in thye short term but the “Brown Bounce” would not be long lasting - a year or 2 at the most. If Brown took over next year he would be in trouble by 2009, Labour’s best bet is paradoxically for Blair to sray on for as long as possible.
18. Don’t be a spoilsport. Four years of tory strife wouldn’t bore me in the least.
Who goes first? 1/7 Howard is a bad bet. When the dust settles the tories will realise that he is so superior to the rest, he must stay for 3 years plus. 4/1 Blair is also poor. He said he will serve a full term and he will (if he doesn’t, I will shoot as many of Cook, Short et.al. as I can before they get me). I’d say even money both, would make more sense.
17. I said it as a joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
19 - I agree, Bullseye. Why is everyone coming out saying Blair is an electoral liability now when it doesn’t really matter? He will never fight another general election and will not even fight local elections for another year. Perhaps there is a particularly tricky parish council by-election in the offing in Roughton.
What these malcontent MPs are really saying is that they do not like his policy agenda. To be clear, that is the policy agenda he won the election on (albeit not all that convincingly). I do not support Labour but those MPs should shut up and grow up.
Whatever else you can old against Blair he is a three times election winner. In the latest campaign he played a poor hand brilliantly and to come out with a majority of 66 seats is a major achievement.
The amazing way that the campaign become Brown/Blair and the final week strategy of warning of the “one in ten” were just two master-strokes.
Has Brown got the same skills? Maybe - maybe not.
The Tories and Lib Dems will be delighted to see the back of him. In my view there is nobody better to lead Labour.
I think Mike has a point. When he’s gone how long before the minnows of the party who are again passed over then start on Brown but without the shield of Blair? I also agree that the Labour campaign has been much underestimated in much the same way that the Crosby campaign has been overestimated.
The only point you miss Mike are the large number of Labour party members and MP’s who prefer opposition. They see it as somehow more worthy. Some of them just can’t forgive Tony Blair for winning so often. If Blair is forced out there might be a real day of reckoning for these malcontents
TB is a winner. He has good looks, the trembling lip, the easy turn of phrase and is comfortably the most accomplished politician of the age.
What will he achieve in his third term? What did Mrs Thathcher? What could anyone? He’s done what he was going to do—I think he’ll be mainly remebered for winning 3 GEs in a row, rather than what he did with them. He’s substantially increased the proportion of the GDP the state takes, and spent it wisely/foolishly (delete to taste).
From the labour party’s point of view, the longer he stays, the better. GB (or AN Other) could then be seen to ‘ride to the rescue’ and have the benfit of a honeymoon period.
But why on earth he should want to stay on remains a mystery.
Howard will go first. Labour will regret the day they get rid of Blair, once GB’s honeymoon has worn off. As for Tory leadership, Rifkind is too passe, Fox lacks judgement, Yeo is too compromised, the modernisers too young. As for Alan Duncan, while I would be perfectly happy with his leadership the party I suspect would not. Unlike 2001 when Portillo was probably the best candidate, now there is no clear choice. In the absence of such, I would go for David Davis, provided he can bring a moderniser on board as a running mate. BTW, Iain Dale (sensibly backs DD, knowing DD is good to his friends, he will sort him out with a safe seat) has an interesting post on the leadership issue.
According to the London Evening Standard, Thamesmead MP John Austin wants to do an Anthony Meyer and run as a “stalking horse” - he needs 70 other MPs to sign up, though! Is the salon des refusés that big (and that dim)?
Tim Yeo on BBC this morning.. looked as if hes going as candiate for tory leader. Focusing on compasion and environment
I don’t know what planet the likes of Yeo and Alan Duncan are from. There is no way they can win. So far as I can see Malcolm Rifkind is the only figure on the Centre-Left of the party who has any chance of winning. If the party does want to ’stop-Davis’ then I don’t know who else they can go for.
29 - Apparently the rebels had around 62 signatures in the last Parliament, and because of the slash in the number of Labour MPs, the quota needed drops to around 70.
30 - “Focusing on compasion and environment”
That’ll play well in the Shires
I thought that under Labour Party rules a leadership contest when the party is in government can only be triggered by an explicit card vote at the Annual Conference. The 20% trigger for MPs only applies in opposition. Is this correct?
The criticism of Blair appears to be that Lab won a majority of ‘only’ 66. This for a party that was widely thought incapable of winning any sort of majority after defeat in 1992, and indeed pre-Blair hadn’t won any sort of comfortable victory since 1966. It really is pretty extraordinary……..by contrast Wilson lost an election that should have been won in 1970 and barely squeeked home in 1974 but was allowed to choose the timing of his departure. How times change.
I also do not accept that Blair is the electoral liability that is being portrayed. He is definitely viscerally hated by a minority - the destiny of any third term PM - but his overall ratings as PM were positive. Labour still holds many seats in typical Tory territory. I do not think this would be the case but for Blair’s impact. The Tories are in truth barely closer to regaining power than they were 8 years ago - a few more seats, up a percentage point or so, but no nearer to staking out a political platform that threatens Blair’s domination of the centre ground.
As for the Brown succession, I do not see it happening until after any possible euro referendum. Does anybody have a link to the referendum dates in other EU countries ? Who is after France & the Netherlands ? I think Blair will stick around until either the constitution is defeated elsewhere or until the UK vote (late 2006 ?)
Equally, I would not be surprised, if the economic background is favourable, if Brown calls a snap election when & if he finally takes over - seeking a personal mandate, stamps his authority, turns honeymoon period to immediate electoral advantage etc. A general election in 2007 ?
I agree with 31. I also agreed with the Economist when it said that Yeo came over as seedy and overbearing (the red-faced corpulence doesn’t help). I particularly dislike the patronising way he speaks - just like the dreadful Saira Khan on The Apprentice, he thinks other people are so stupid that he needs to speak very, very slowly. As for his accent, I’m reminded of what Alan Clark said about Leon Brittan - not even Etonians drawl that much. Even Rikfind’s Morningside is preferable to Yeo’s voice. Give me David Davis’ classless accent (and manner) anyday.
That said, if Messrs Osborne or Cameron acquit themselves well in a position such as Shadow Chancellor or Shadow Home Secretary, their education (St Pauls and Eton, respectively) shouldn’t be held against them.
34. John O, the campaign group said they’re reading the rules to understand if they could use the 20% trigger for MPs (and Glenda Jackson has still to read the electoral manifesto).
24. Mike, also Thatcher was a 3 times election winner, but then she become a liability for her party. Blair is a great campaigner (muche better than Brown), but I think that without him Labour would have got a 100+ majority this time.
29 and 32 - I am not clear what Labour rebels really plan to achieve with a “stalking horse”. The point of a stalking horse is supposed to be to embolden a serious contender by showing that there is a good base of “anyone but the incumbent” support. That was why Meyer was quite sensible and effective.
Brown isn’t a man for crazy risks when he can just wait and be guaranteed the leadership, and Blair isn’t a man to simply fold at the sight of a few dozen awkward squad MPs. I wouldn’t be surprised if Blair took bloody revenge on any rebel who lacked 100% support in his/her constituency. It would be quite amusing to watch a bunch of useless flat-earthers being deselected.
I see there are also doubts over whether you can in fact force a ballot when Labour is in power.
John O [34] - that’s what I thought, too. When I checked on the paper’s website they seemed to be backtracking…
Aloysius [35] - I’d go with your last paragraph. A comparison that I haven’t seen made, but works in terms of papabile status, is Eden and Churchill - and Eden went to the country immediately. And of course if the economy is misbehaving, Gordon will be the first to tell Tony he’s just got to stay
Back in power for just four days and all we have is the Labour Party in fighting like never before - they really are nothing but a bunch of grown up schoolkids.
Out of the probable candidates for the conservative leadership I think that Malcolm Rifkind would be the best. He would appeal to the centre which they need to do. My fear with Davis is that he would only get the core vote out and not the swing voters which the tories need. In any case PMQs will not be as enjoyable when Howard goes! Hes has some very good spats with Tony across the dispatch box.
38.” I wouldn’t be surprised if Blair took bloody revenge on any rebel who lacked 100% support in his/her constituency. It would be quite amusing to watch a bunch of useless flat-earthers being deselected.”
and the rebels supporters will start to call deselction votes in all constituencies held by blairites. It would be like a “civil war” in the party. Not a good move.
40 What did you expect Geoffrey? The dissenters get their four days in the sun (or should that be “The Sun”) but then cower timidly when TB lays down the law on Wednesday. All the normal nonsense from the malcontents. Blair will ease slightly left, to ensure enough stay on board, GB ensures all the attack dogs are on hold, let’s TB lose referendum ballot some time next summer and then is annointed at Conference in Oct 06. Next GE May/Jun 09 and off we go again. In the meantime, Tory faithful elect DD but patricians agitate in background when no movement in polls. Maybe another putsch? You wouldn’t put it past them.
40 - Congratulations on the win in Lincoln, Geoffrey.
Richard - The problem I have with Davis is that he still seems to be an unknown quantity. I don’t feel like I really know what he stands for. If its just re-heated Thatcherism then I don’t think its going to widen our appeal and I don’t think its the kind of party I want to be part of.
Agree with everything you say about Yeo, I find it bizarre that he thinks he has any chance of winning.
I know that users of this site don’t have a very high opinion of him but I cannot see past Malcolm Rifkind, probably with Cameron as deputy.
Tabman, you beat me to it
Re Labour Party leadership rules, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4529713.stm
46 - well, you have to recognise magnanimity where you find it, don’t you?
The behaviour of some of the Labour ‘rebels’ is appaling. It must be a bit galling for Blair to have to listen to Bob M-A whining about Blair (nearly!) costing him his seat. As if he would ever have won Medway in the first place without Blair. Is it really too much to ask these MP’s to show a bit of gratitude and a bit of loyalty?
48 Frankly, Max, yes! These are the people that would prefer permanent opposition, so they can rail against the system, rather than the decision-making of government. It’s politics for politicians who never really want to leave their anti-Thatcher local government sloganising in the mid-80s.
IA @46. I think the BBC is wrong on this one. See page 17 of this learned paper by Dr Stuart Thomson of Aberdeen University. He is quite categorical that a challenge to a Labour Prime Minister can only be initiated by a card vote at Annual Conference.
http://www.psa.ac.uk/cps/1999/thomson.pdf
43. I generally agree but, providing the economic situation was favourable, I don’t know why Brown would wait three years before going to the country. Given the presumable ‘bounce’ in the polls upon taking office I don’t see why he wouldn’t call an immediate election - why wait three years at the mercy of ‘events’. He could justifiably claim he wanted a personal mandate. Out of interest, when do the revised constituency boundaries kick in ?
Brown, for all the dour exterior, has a penchant for the grand gesture.
42 - I don’t think they would. You can’t seriously deselect somebody for not being disloyal enough. Brown would probably support any move by Blair to crush the rebels - he is canny enough to know that most of these people are just no-hopers who will equally turn on him if and when he takes over just as soon as it becomes clear that he has no intention of giving them junior ministerial jobs either. Blair would not move on big(ish) fish like Dobson - it is people like John Austin (who I have never heard of until today) who would be for the chop.
48.”As if he would ever have won Medway in the first place without Blair. ”
I think that Labour would have won the 1997 even without Blair.
btw 20 years ago who would have thought that Medway would have elected an MP like Bob M-A for 3 times?
Any odds on CK yet?
One of the main tipping lines has just put up William Hague. Ladbrokes have suspended betting.
James (15) observes tht “Redwood has no obvious qualities. He has no charisma, no talent, no agenda to reform the party and the fact he was trecherous to Major would give a licence to everyone to be as indisciplined as they fancy (ref. IDS).”
If that is true, why on earth did the Tory Party inflict him on the electors of Wokingham? And even more to the point, why did the electors of Wokingham re-elect him?
He surely has all the virtues that embody the present-day Tory Party.
52.”
Blair would not move on big(ish) fish like Dobson - it is people like John Austin (who I have never heard of until today) who would be for the chop. ”
they would probably make the same. some little fish.
Maybe they’re sure enough in their seats. And some of them are old enough to retire.
But I think that nobody won’t try to deselect nobody. The rebels will calm down.
Andrea @ 53. In fact Rochester and Chatham (Medway’s nearest incarnation) was a classical marginal seat held by Labour 1945-59, and then from 1964-70, and again 1974-79. And although NO ONE can be quite like B M-A, its most recent Labour MPs (Ann Kerr, and IIRC Bob Bean) were on the party’s left.
58. John O. Ok, I made my gaffe of the day. I didn’t look back to results previous 1983.
Hard luck Geoffrey….and after the charm and elegance you showed to your opponents!
It would be slightly ironic if Hague became leader - the whole plan for the Howard candicacy in 1997 was to stop the rot, make a limited recovery in 2001 … and handover to Hague!
4 years after plan…
John O - the BBC website says what you say if you go down far enough. It’s full of sloppy journalism…
IA @63. Thanks. Yes, I took umbrage at the first half of the report and didn’t wait to read the small print!
45 - Max - I just don’t see the appeal of Rifkind. Another prominent ex Thatcher / Major minister like Howard, with all the baggage that goes with that.
If we choose a Scot to fight Brown and Kennedy, wouldn’t we limiting our appeal, creating the impression of a Scottish elite dominating British politics post-devolution.
Howard will go first, and I would imagine he’ll be gone by the end of the year While he is there it feels like he’s lingering and what is still a heavy electoral defeat means he lacks credibility. As for Blair, he always performs well under pressure. He will answer the challenge to his leadership and lead the party into this potentially awkward referrendum (assuming the French vote Oui). If all other European countries pass the constitution then it is highly likely Britain will - if the YES campaign conducts itself half-decently. Once that is one, Blair can set his eyes on retirement and the new leader, who by then may not be Brown (he too is aging) should be free to build up towards a 2009 election.
Bet on Howard at 1/7 if you must. But my money is going on David Cameron at 9/1. The Tories need a young charismatic leader, and whilst Cameron only really satisfies part one that criteria, i think he is the best they have.
I cannot believe Hague would come back! Its a serious pay-cut for a start!
Massive money for Hague. Down to 2-1 with paddy power. I was on Alan Duncan at 25-1. Reckon I’ve done my money though.
35 All. You make good comparisons with Wilson so why is Blair under attack? Because Wilson at least made a pretence of trying to be collegiate. Ok he still did pretty much what he wanted but he tickled his Collaegue’s egos made them feel important, pretened to take them seriously etc notice by having marathon Cabinet Sessions. Maybe because he never enjoyed the Ginormous first two Blair Landslides, although 66 was pretty big. Still…..
TB on the other hand doesn’t bother to give his Cabinet full WAr Advice. Governs from the Sofa brings inunelected mates like Falconer and Derry. Makes clear his CAbinet are there only as glorified Civil Servants to implement the will of Number 10, not to develop Policy Propsals of their won. To top it off he seerially bungles reshuffles managing to annoy everyone even those he’s suppposed to be promoting. Finaslly he betrays even the loyal Millburn and Frank Field.
While he was invincible these People had to bide their time. Now he’s in trouble and looks for Friends, there’s blunkett and er that’sit. Old saying be careful whom you kick on the way up because they’ll be waitingto kick you on the way down Again.
I think John Redwood and Andrew Rosindell would make perfect Tory leaders, ideally in rotation with Boris Johnson.
The Labour leadership ‘debate’ is IMHO froth. Nothing will happen before Blair and Brown want it to, for the very good reasons that other posts have mentioned. As for rebels getting us loyalists deselected - it simply wouldn’t happen. At my last reselection, the number of opposing votes was zero. The people who would support deselection of loyalists nearly all resigned years ago when we changed Clause 4.
Was Bob Seely very dissappointed when he realised he’d lost Nick?
P.S Good to see Oliver Letwin keep his seat. Is a return to the bakbenches on the cards though.
68. Nick, you are the wisest man on the site - by a mile. Do you happen to know, by the way, how many current MPs were against the abolition of clause 4?
68.”As for rebels getting us loyalists deselected - it simply wouldn’t happen”
Is there any chance that the rebels will be deselected (or at least that they’ll face a deselection vote)?
(Considering her lately erratic behaviour, Clare Short’s reaction would be a must see)
64 - John T My views may be coloured by the fact I am a Scot (living in Scotlands only Tory constituency!). I think Rifkind has quite a broad appeal coming as he does from the centre of the party and would help us to win back seats outwith the South East. Despite serving in past governments I don’t think he is divisive a figure as MH was. I just cannot see DD’s appeal outside of our core vote.
43 “Blair will ease slightly left, to ensure enough stay on board,”
*No he won’t nothing he’s done suggests that, and he’s already signalled a shift RIGHT. Blairites are saying they lost too much to the Tories.
It’s very clear there will be no concessions to the left of centre as long as blair is in power.
John Bercow or Eric Pickles would be my choice. Have to say that Douglas Hogg is probably the Tory Party’s most effective back-bencher. As for the Blair to Brown nonsense: it matters little as they are both becoming grubbier by the day. Brown’s saving of Blair during the election campaign will have endeared him to few of those who deserted the party for the LibDems, and even fewer of those who went back to the Tories - if anyone did, that is. Could it not be that former Tory abstentions voted this time around and former Labour voters just abstained. I don’t think many flop between Labour and Tory parties any more.
I would like to see a new face in charge, someone not tainted by the Major years. So that rules out Rifkind who is from the same mould as Major and Howard, and also Redwood who has “something of the asylum about him”!
My choice would probably be from David Davis, David Cameron or Theresa May.
Forget Alan Duncan, Tim Yeo, Ken Clarke or Hague. Hague doesnt want it; the party doesnt want Clarke; no-one has heard of Tim Yeo (despite what he thinks); and Alan Duncan…….well!
The shame of Howard announcing so soon that he will go is that it probably doesnt give Cameron a chance this time to establish his credentials. I therefore suspect that we will see a final of Rifkind vs Davis, and Davis will win.
Re. 51, I remember Heseltine saying that, had he won the Tory leadership contest of 1990, he would have asked the Queen for a General Election so that he could seek his own mandate.
RE 75: Then get behind Davis and get his backing in picking up a seat for next time. Bad luck by the way in S&C. What are your reflections on the result and do you plan to have another crack at going for Parliament?
75.”and Alan Duncan…….well!”
conclude the sentence, please.
If it goes to the members then Alan Duncan has no chance which is a great shame
77 - I probably would back Davis. He has vision and the “normality” factor that Hague and even Howard lack.
What are the chances of Blair actually winning a fourth term in 2013? Let us say that he steps down in three years time, to be replaced by Gordon. General Election in 2009 produces a hung Parliament. (or worse a Tory win). Labour says to Blair: “Please come back Tone, all is forgiven”. Blair returns and wins again in 2013. (After all, in 2013 he would only be 60. That’s not old by modern standards.)
Is this a nightmare scenario, or what?
What rik could be referring to is an old kiss and tell story I remember reading in the MoS (my mother gets it) by an ex boyfriend, which would no doubt be repeated in full accross the media. More seriously, there are questions over his oil trading in the early 90s (to do with the Gulf War and working for Marc Rich) and over a deal he did to buy a council house, for which he had to leave government (read about it in Gyles Brandreth’s diary). In short he probably has too much of a colourful past to be a future leader.
81. And what does Tone pay his mortgage with. He’ll be away in America by then reaped the fruits of his Labour (if you’ll excuse the pun)
I think defenders of Blair (23, 35 etc) on this thread, particularly the unremitting 6th form rhetoric of “John Riley” on the subject of how 66 is not a small majority, are being either ludicrously naive or, more likely, disingenuous. The basis of their arguments seems to be that a 66-seat majority is not small, a fact which is true in the context purely of itself. However, what critics fearfully or gloatingly but nonetheless rightly see, is that this situation does strike at the very heart of the matter, namely the inherent fragility of the so-called ‘New Labour’ project. Blair has never been Labour, and Labour has never been Blairite. A majority of people in his own party, up to and perhaps including Brown, are thoroughly uncomfortable with Blair’s agenda, particularly after Iraq. In a historical sense, his only relevance to the party which he nominally serves is that he is someone who can deliver large majorities. It follows therefore that with every diminished majority, his relevance as a political figure in the Labour Party also diminishes. There is no end game beyond majorities for either the party or Blair himself.
I am not saying his place in the history books won’t be significant, or that he will be deposed before the year-end (though I hope so). However to downplay the impact of such a reduced majority on his government is a nonsense. Blair cannot govern with a majority of less than 100, and whatever happens this will find him out.
83. Mortgage - what Mortgage? A couple of years on the rubber chicken dinner circuit, plus his wife’s immoral earnings as a lawyer, and he’ll be loaded. Plus he’ll be refreshed and ready for a comeback.
“Blair II - this time it’s personal”
(Obviously this is all tongue-in-cheek, with just a hint of genuine fear of the bogeyman)
84 - Also there is a reason why small majorities tend to enforce some amount of discipline upon Governing parties; ie. the alternative of an elecion is likely to mean them losing their seat.
Most of those opposed to Blair believe that Brown would lead them to a crushing election victory.
I think David Cameron would be a great leader.
Have also heard on the grapevine that Alan Duncan is almost certainly going to throw his hat into the ring too.
82 - I am not referring to anything in the past - I just dont think he is leadership material
Changing the subject, it’s nice to see that in Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein lost their seat in the Short Strand (where the McCartneys live) to Alliance.
Agree with Rick (commiserations on S&C allthough I suspect you did better than some of the LD’s on the site predicted), Alan Duncan just doesn’t appear to have the leadership qualities required.
As I said above all I know about Davis is that he’s on the right of the party and seems to be a bit of a hanger and a flogger. I’m sure there is more to him than that but I would like to see what else he stands for before voting (if i get to!) for him in a leadership contest.
Does anyone have any anecdotal evidence of this bizarre idea that Davis is “attractive”. On BBC news the other day they interviewed someone on the street in his constituency, who came out with the immortal line that Davis would be “the ladies’ choice”. Since then, my girlfriend’s mother has said the same thing, while one paper labelled him as a candidate with “matinee star looks”. I just can’t believe it myself. He looks just like a normal, perhaps marginally better-than-average, mid-50s businessman to me. Anyone differ?
I think the Tories ought to inverse the current leadership contest rules, and let the membership choose a shortlist of, say, three candidates. The parliamentary party could then elect from there.
88.”I am not referring to anything in the past - I just dont think he is leadership material ”
Thanks. I got a different impression from your first post and I wanted a sort of explanation before drawing a wrong conclusion.
Btw, I agree he’s not PM material.
89 - It was Sean. But another set of bad results for the UUP (I see Ken McGinnis lost his seat) and another set of good results for the DUP and IRA/Sinn Fein.
Its very sad to see whats happened to the Ulster Unionists in general and David Trimble in particular.
Well done on the results in Hertfordhire. Does it include the seat of Kerry ‘I’ll only win by 2000 this time’ Pollard?
88 are you related to Richard Willis who was elected MP for Sutton and Cheam?
Image is (almost) everything in winning elections and David Davis, in my opinion, hasn’t demonstated that he can inspire a nation, nor do any of the other top contenders.
David Davis isn’t a particularly powerful public performer. He’s OK on a one to one interview, but nothing special.
Tim Yeo would be an utter disaster. He looks barely awake. He has a face of a sad droppy-eyed dog.
Liam Fox looks too self-assured, too slick maybe, doesn’t make that connection.
George Osbourne has youth, which I think would play well with creating a new image for the party.
Malcolm Rifkind looks too much a boffin (Clive Sinclair anyone?)
Ken Clarke can’t be considered because his views on Europe are the opposite to most of the party.
Caroline Spellman looks promising for me, looking from a public perspective.
The Tories need to redefine the party’s “personality.” Voters look at parties in an emotional way more than on policy alone. Like a person, the party has to make people feel good about it to be liked.
In my view another middle aged man in a grey suit is not a good move.
The party needs a new identity. A woman at the top, or an ethnic minority leader, or a younger looking leader would quickly change perceptions of the “nasty party.” A more caring inclusive image is needed to reach beyond the core vote. The party has to SHOW that it has changed.
91 - My girlfriend said the same thing! She said he had a bit of a ‘Michael Douglas thing going on’! It worried me.
91.”He looks just like a normal, perhaps marginally better-than-average, mid-50s businessman to me.”
that’s perfect. He wants to become PM, not Mister UK.
Could not agree more Printz.
Yes. Pollard lost by 1500, and we won 9 out of 11 seats in Herts (and were about 5000 votes away from making it 11 out of 11).
FPTP exaggerates the swing against the UUP, which will still retain a substantial local government presence. At least Sinn Fein didn’t do as well as they had been predicting. It was sad to see Trimble lose by 5,000. His downfall is entirely due to this government’s indulgence of the IRA.
Icarus, do I detect a hint of bitterness towards Richard for pulling off a very respectable result in Sutton & Cheam?
84 - agree.
Blair groupies talking a good game about deselection of his critics - dream on.
I don’t often agree with Bruce Anderson, but
‘Never has victory yielded such bitterness. Politically, the PM is an unburied corpse.
Mr Blair has not only lost his ability to run an effective government. He has lost the will.’
right.
99. Made my night seeing Anne Main beat Kerry Pollard in St Albans. Was also very pleasing to see Grant Shapps oust Melaine Johnson in welwyn Hatfield too.
I did think it was unbelievably daft of Kerry Pollard to say in advance that he was going to win the seat. Just hope the success in the South starts spreading Northwards!
89. No they didn’t SF/IRA Hold West Belfast, the SDLP the South and the DUP the rest.
Does anyone know how many women were elected for the relative parties? Don’t think we increased our number of women by very much.
The party needs a new identity. A woman at the top, or an ethnic minority leader, or a younger looking leader would quickly change perceptions of the “nasty party.”
Hmm. Electing a woman as leader. Now where have i seen that before …?
As for an ethnic minority leader. Just like that!
103 - Sean was talking about the council elections.
103 - i assume we’re talking local elections
I see Beverly Hughes has been brought back in as Chilldrens Minister. Seems like a very odd decision.
Yes, Short Strand falls within East Belfast, and makes up part of Pottinger DEA. Sinn Fein won it in 2001, and lost this time.
84. Peering through your rhetoric (no easy matter), I perceive that you believe 67 is not a working majority. I am surprised you find my disagreement so disagreeable. Not because we won, is it?
TB does love to stick two fingers up. Adonis at education, Hughes at children and ex commie Reid at Defence. Even more surprising is Lord Drayson (he of funding fame) at Defence. Poor Nick has not been rewarded (which strikes me as being a bit unfair), unless he becomes a PPS. I heard May on Today, she is decent but not leadership material. I am always impressed by Spelman whenever I heard her during the campaign though. Easily the most talented of the female MP’s at the moment.
BTW, the link for government ministers is:
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page2988.asp
Just seen what looks like the full list of Ministerial appointments - there’s no mention of anything, not even the most junior of junior whippers, for Nick Palmer
;). Blair should resign for this alone.
Andrew, I think Caroline Spelman is indeed impressive. She deserves go a lot further. OTOH, I am not an admirer of Theresa May.
Amdrew Milne @ 111 - Clearly time for a “Tories for Palmer” campaign
It’ll be interesting to see the make up of the next Tory shadow cabinet. It would be good to have Rifkind and Hague back and Caroline Spelman should be given one of the top jobs.
116 - Max - a Shadow Cabinet of all the talents (incl Clarke, Rifkind, Hague etc) would make mincemeat of this new Labour lot!
my comment about redwood was, as a labour spporter, something i would want. Blair wont go for a while there is a lot of unpopular stuff that needs doing. brown will let him do that let him take the flak, then ride o the rescue, why would he want the right wing press on his back so soon.
if i was a tory i would push for a very left wing gender and aim for a hung parliamnet next time. let that fall apart and then go with a slightly right wing agneda for the win whne people would prefer tax cuts.
in my opinion the lib dems had the worst election. the seats they won of lab will return when the war and balir are not an issue. they have to move to the right as lab will move slightly to the left to firm up there core, other wise they will ose there con/lib seats to the tories.
Richard - I think these people have a responsibility to do their bit for the party. If everyone pulls there weight, there is the nucleus of a very good team. Any thoughts on who should be shadow chancellor?
119 - SHadow Chancellor should be Clarke while Brown is still in post. Most people would see him as an equal to Brown. He is the only one with that credibility. Hague as shadow Home Sec. Rifkind as Shadow Foreign Sec. It is a shame Soames wont stay on because he was great as Shadow Defence Sec. At least he knows about the subject unlike “Buff” Hoon!
New Shadow Chancellor should be Rifkind (has gravitas and experience)
New Foreign Secretary should be Hague (solid on the War and Europe, speaks well)
New Home Secretary should be Letwin (v.good there before he went to the Treasury)
121 - What, the inventor of the fantasy island? The tories could have done without being saddled with that! Getting good reviews in the Guardian is not quite the same thing as having done “a very good job”. Compared with Davis’ successes he can’t compare.
Letwin - should do Health or something cuddly like that!
Richard Willis @ 117. What like you made mincemeat of Paul Burstow?
BTW an entry for the Polly Toynbee award: From Yasmin Alibhai Brown in the Indy today
I quote “The election ushers in the first “black” Tory MP, Adam Afriye (half Ghanian and half English) and Shailash Vara, the Ugandan Asian who has done time as deputy chairman for a party which has repudiated equality and diversity policies and produced a string of racist politicians including Winston Churchill.”
“So is this nasty party shedding its repulsive past? Not a bit of it. These results, for me, are a damning manifestation of the splintering of the anti-racist struggle, a triumph of uncle Tomism and worse. To witness the son of illegal Jewish immigrants strategically mobilising mob instincts against immigrants was bad enough. To then have the sons of an African and Ugandan Asian reiterate these obscene prejudices made me suicidal.” (Don’t you just love that line)
(It gets better)
The say it isn’t racist to control immigration. But they know how a racist stence rises when they flash such statements across the land. The victors deserve to be despised by egalitarians and people who believe in human rights, just as Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice are by millions of Americans of colour.” (So every EM must be a left winger)
Did someone mention Duncan’s dodgy council house deals? Just seen Christinen Hamilton admitting that when Maggie brought the deal in, she bought a flat for £4,500 and sold for £45,000 in the same week!
117. Why didn’t they do so when they were in government then?
does no one else think that the lib dems made a big error by going to the left of labour. they could have won lab seats without the 50% tax etc, in the south west there was a swing against them, i really can’t see them holding on to places like leeds north west with brown and no iraq.
I wondered how long it would take for the Rick-baiting to begin. I think most people can see that he achieved a very respectable result (how many people were forcasting a Lib Dem to Tory swing). One of the few unedifying aspects of this site is attacks made on those who stand for national elections by those who don’t.
i agree max even as a lab supporter who probally has very little in common with rick, it aint right to rub it in. having seen how hard it is not to win he doesn’t need everyone going on at him. running for office is a ver expensive tiring and stressful time. he deserves respect not abuse.
Andrew, that’s probably even nastier than anything than Polly would write. More than one asian Conservative has commented to me about how they are accused of “betraying” their people by joining the Conservatives. There is a curious coincidence of views between racists on the extreme right, and anti-racists on the Left. Both of them believe that if you’re not white, you’re obliged to be on the hard Left of the political spectrum.
Tom Watts. There wasn’t a swing against the LDs in the south. In the South East they increased their vote share by 1.9% (net loss of 2 seats), 0.5% in the SW (net gain of 1 seat) and 4.5% in London (net gain of 2 seats). Their mistake was underestimating the Conservative core vote strategy in some marginal seats. There is no dobt that the Conservative strategy had some success in playing the electoral system to their advantage, but that is not the same as having a swing against the LDs in general.
consodering this will be the best chance they will have in a gneration to win seats of the tories this really is a disastr for them in my opinion. i think they will be below 5o seats com the next election.
What shocking dreadful nonsense from Yasmin Alibhai Brown. Typical leftie nonsense.
The article goes on to slag off the people who voted for Peter Law in Bleanau Gwent for being sexist and criticises the new crop of EM labour MP’s for being unprepared to speak for their community (a frankly patronising comment in itself). She nearly slags off GG as being a white bigot crushing black hope, before saying he is okay because of the war.
When you’ve got friends like these, who needs enemies. This gets back to my problem with many commentators on the left, which is there authoratarian tendencies and their tendency to resort to abuse to put their arguments across. I remember a great conservative poster with a black briton, with it going “Labour says he is Black, we say he is British.” It sums it all up I think.
CHeers Max - comments like Paul lloyds really are not worth rising to (most of the time!). People like him can hide behind relative obscurity whereas Nick P and I put our necks, wallets and lives above the parapet!
re my 126. Should anyone think Mrs Hamiltons sharpish practice is any way associated with Neil, wrong, it was before his time. She learned all she knew from one Gerald Nabarro, to whom she was secretary long, long ago. Anyone old enough to remember Nabarro will understand that he alone would be sufficient reason for my never voting tory, even to save my life.
Rik, are you going to stand again? You should do, you achieved a good swing against the Lib Dem. BTW, you called it right on Reading East.
No problem - noticed there was also a swing to the Tories in Carshalton but not in Twickenham. Is there much of a difference in demographics between the seats in South West London.
Very good result in Orpington as well.
The paraphrasing of Yasmin Alibhai Brown generates one accurate sentiment, namely the one about a particular ‘white bigot’!
Tom. normally I would agree with you - and I don’t think what I said was abusive anyway - but Rik has demonstrated a continual contempt of people from other parties on this site. He accused (although backtracked later) his opponent of misuse of public funds, he continually boasted about how he was going to win and generally showed little in the way of humility. It is obvious from his comments above that he is unable to recognise that people from other parties may be able or skilled even if he disagrees with their POV or actions. I am no fan of NuLab myself, but I feel it is right to recognise that they have in their ranks some of the most dominant and skilful politicians of this generation.
If Rik had acted with more humility, like Jon Underwood or Charles Anglin, both of whom contributed, but never made wild claims of impending victory, no-one would be able or want to taunt him in doing something that we all recognise to be a valiant or worthy thing. Perhaps now he will learn that candidates should keep their own council on whether they are going to win or not and leave the mouthing off to us partisans.
Reading West was also a good result considering the big swing to Labour last time.
yeah george galloway is a total t****r, i really do hate that man. they way he played his pro islam anti war card was a joke in the 70’s he went over to afganistan to congratulate the russians.
I think the 67 majority isn’t as slender as it seems. The opposition is pretty disparate and includes Sinn Fein who don’t turn up. The BBC reckoned it amounted to a majority closer to 80.
Though I can see the attraction of Caroline Spellman she really does come across as a lightweight and not a particularly bright one. I heard her with John Humphrys and she was seriously out of her depth. If it was possible to hear someone perspiring that was ewhat I heard.
Rik. Commiserations. As the election went on did you have problems with Michael Howard on the doorstep? Voters just didn’t take to him?
103. I suspect you need to read up a little bit more on Northern Ireland politics P, ignoring the fact that Sean was talking about the local elections. The result of the Westminster election was not that “SF/IRA Hold West Belfast, the SDLP the South and the DUP the rest”, but rather ‘Sinn Fein hold West Belfast, Mid Ulster, West Tyrone, Fermanagh & South Tyrone, and Newry & Armagh’, the SDLP South Down and Foyle and won South Belfast, the UUP held North Down, and the DUP the rest…’
109. It would be misleading to give the impression that SF lost its seat in Short Strand to the Alliance Party. 6 wards make up the Pottinger district electoral area, electing 6 councillors under STV across the entire DEA. Without having seen the figures it is hard to tell whether Sinn Fein suffered a drop in their first preference votes within the Short Strand, or whether they failed to get transfers from other parties (mainly the SDLP, though possibly Alliance also) from across Pottinger. Those unfamiliar with STV may be lead to believe that it was a case of SF voters suddenly starting to vote for the Alliance Party! Alliance won a seat in Pottinger at Sinn Fein’s expense, but it is not true to say that Alliance won Short Strand which had been previously held by Sinn Fein.
Andrew (82) and Rik -
You have got me rather confused. Who are we talking about? David Davis, John Redwood or Alan Duncan? Or do your comments apply to all three?
“What rik could be referring to is an old kiss and tell story I remember reading in the MoS (my mother gets it) by an ex boyfriend, which would no doubt be repeated in full accross the media. More seriously, there are questions over his oil trading in the early 90s (to do with the Gulf War and working for Marc Rich) and over a deal he did to buy a council house, for which he had to leave government (read about it in Gyles Brandreth’s diary). In short he probably has too much of a colourful past to be a future leader.”
If they all have a colurful past, please tell us once and for all - just to help clear the air. I know John Redwood´s ex-wife has been spilling the beans recently, but is there more to come?
I must say it did seem to me that Redwood would have been the ideal leader for the Tory Party.
146. Put it this way he is not talking about anyone in the SAS or on the Star Ship Enterprise!
The demographics of the SW London seats are different. Twickenham is quite affluent but fairly far out, with a lot of public sector workers and some grotty areas in Whitton. As for Richmond it is v.affluent, but there is a residue of rich civil servants, combined with a huge legal and media class. The Tories should win Richmond comfortably, but they never have since the 1970s (they nearly lost it in 83 to the liberals). As for Sutton and Cheam and Carshalton and Wallington (includes big St Helier council estate), they are a bit more downmarket, but should both be solid Tory seats.
142.”Reading West was also a good result considering the big swing to Labour last time. ”
maybe the big swing to Labour last time is the reason of the big swing to the tories this time. Some seats (not all) where the tories achieved a better than average swing this time are seats where last time Labour got a better than average swing (for. ex. Stephen Twigg’s seat)
The inrerchanges between Lib Dem and Con need much more study to discover the reasons for the completely contrasting results in similar seats . Postal votes certainly were a big factor where the Lib Dems do not appear to have got their act together and I suspect holding the Local Elections on the same day gave some voters the chance to hedge their bets . In Eastbourne for example the Conservative vote was 4% lower and the Lib Dem vote 6% higher in the local elections .
Can Scottish posters answer me this query : A number of comments before the election suggested the Lib Dems would suffer in Scotland because of the power sharing with Labour in the Scottish Parliament . As it turned out they performed very well in Scotland rather better than the SNP and Tory opposition . Was this good performance because of or despite the power sharing
146.-Former boyfriend and oil it’s Duncan.
148.Andrew Milne, do you know something about what happened to the tories in Solihull to have such a bad result?
Andrew at 125. I agree that Y A-B went way over the top but Shailash Vara was a Ugandan Asian and to act as a Tory spokesman on race and to hear him explain why there should be a cap on asylum seekers makes those of us who know anything about Idi Amin and the Ugandan Asians feel pretty sick. He is my least favourite Tory MP by a long mile.
My favourite one and my choice for leader would have been the excellent Michael Gove. But I suppose he has to put in time on the back benches first
Rik, commiserations. I do not share your politics but respect anybody with the courage to put themselves on the line for their beliefs. However, I do wonder how your party can really try to spin their third worst result since 1850 as a partial victory. The brutal truth is that you have barely put on two per cent since 1997. I assume that, just as in 97 and 01, you will react to a desperate result by lurching further to the right (Davis). If the 80s and 90s are to have any relevance, surely you must follow Labour’s path and tack to the centre…?
I can’t imagine it was because of there involvment in the Executive allthough labour do take most of the flack. Charles Kennedy’s popularity allied to a Tory campaign that lacked relevance to Scots probably helped. No idea why the anti-war protest vote went to the LD’s and not the SNP though.
I still don’t think they’ll do as well in 2007 when they’ll be held to account for there record in government. And here’s a tip they’ll lose Roxburgh and Berwickshire to the Tories. You heard it here first! Only two years to go to see if I’m right.
Anyone know whether Hazel Blears is still there? She’s not listed on the Downing Street website, however the Home Office looks light.
141 - Paul for some reason you really do have a bee in your bonnet!! I dont recall abusing anyone on here. What I have done is occasionally react to some hysterical anti-Tory postings from people like you! If that is contempt then maybe you earned it.
For the record I have NEVER accused my opponent of acting in any way illegally. I DID point out that as a sitting MP he used Parliamentary stationery to bombard constituents with mailshots just prior to the election - something that I cannot do at tax payers expense.
If you think that I should be humble when prats like you are posting complete rubbish on here (now proven rubbish) then you have another think coming! Get over it