Blair fourth term market goes online
July 20th, 2005
-
It’s 16/1 against him winning a fourth term and staying as PM
If you do not mind locking your money up for several years Ladbrokes have now begun taking online bets on whether Tony Blair will fight and win the next General Election and stay at Number 10.
The price is an attractive 16/1 which we think is a fair reflection of the risk and the cost of the bookmaker and not you holding onto your stake until possibly May 2010. This market was featured in one of the Sunday papers but we have waited until it is available to online punters before giving it a mention. We have been caught out before by bookies announcing political bets which get lots of publicity but which you never hear of again.
-
Blair’s official position is that he will step aside for somebody else before the next election. Much of the speculation that he might go much earlier has come from those promoting a Gordon Brown premiership and not from Blair or his office. On this one we believe the Prime Minister.
Quite whether Blair would go back on his previous statement about standing aside before the next election is a hard call. Clearly it would cause huge problems in part of his party but remember they have followed him thick and thin ever since he became leader eleven years ago. Issues like the abolition of clause 4, the introduction of the New Labour agenda and going to war against Iraq without a UN vote have come and gone and the Labour party has learned to live with them.
-
Blair has given Labour three successive election victories. If it looked as though he could give them a fourth and he wanted to stay the party would, surely, follow behind.
Perhaps the biggest factor that will cause him to step aside will be personal and not political. But Tony Blair is still a fairly young man - what’s he going to do after he leaves Downing Street?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
The odds might as well be 1,000-1. It’ll never happen for a variety of reasons, principally that he and his family have zero intention of going through another general election. I would have thought Gordon’s move on the economic cycle yesterday was the final proof that Blair has decided to stand down in 2007 and that the wheels are already in motion.
Eric 1. Over the past two years I’ve made quite a lot of money betting against the wishful thinking of the Blair-haters in the Labour party. Back in July-August 2003, when the Kelly case and the Hutton inquiry were making the news, the implied probability in the bettings odds of Blair going by the end September 2003 reached well over 50%. In the run-up to that report’s publication there were silly odds about on Blair not surviving and on one day in May 2004 Brown became favourite to Labour leader at the 2005 General Election.
It’s been the same since May 5th. The wishful thinkers pushed the price on Blair going before September 30th 2005 to below evens.
I’m not betting on the 16/1 but I do believe that the Blair switch will take place much closer to 2009 General election than most of the wishful thinkers are saying.
I’m not a Blair hater I should point out. You could be correct about 2008, but I suspect that the Labour party and Whitehall are working on the assumption of an orderly handover in 2007. I think Brown wants a couple of years before an election to bed in and it’s in nobody’s interests for Blair to stay on for too long, which he himself seems to accept from what I understand.
The Key Is Gordon if he becomes dramatically weaker in the next few years, say he is affected by the dark side of the Economy or some other dramatic event, it may be possible. But Mr Smithson tho the Labour Party may have followed him all the way before but like Alexander the Great’s Army on the Banks of the Indus they will refuse to follow him on some time, and the certainty of internal civil war which would follow taking the Prize Away from Gordon forever maybe That Moment.
By the way Mr Smithson, may now be the Time for another look in an Article at KC after his pronouncements on Radio and in a Speech last night? I sense the force may yet be stronger with him than many suspect, although Victory is very difficult to Predict.
Further with last night’s events will the Iraq Factor re-enter British Politics???
Darth - have you been spending time in Germany, or are you German? Capitalisation of Improper Nouns is not yet a Capital Punishment, but is is highly Unusual in Modern English. The next thing you know, you’ll be leaving Spaces after your Punctuation!
Ken’s Big Idea seems to be that he will be the benign patriarch, letting all his Shadow Cabinetettes run around in the Commons romper room, while smiling avuncularly and patting them on the head. (If re-elected, of course
)
5 Good point Darth about KC. Unless anything else happens that will be tomorrow’s main thread. I’ve also got a great picture of him that I’ve been waiting to use!
The Times suggests that Brown moved the spending review to 2007, because he wants to be PM in 2007.
6 - so KC as “deep-lying centre half”? Well, it worked for Harold Wilson in 1974-6. Who would have thought Benn, Jenkins, Foot, Healey etc would play together so well?
9 - the problem was that they were in government so able to do some damage
- although you have to blame it all on the preceding Tory century of course 
As a rugby fan, I suppose he would be someone in the Jon Webb mode - an unglamorous but effective full-back collecting the loose ball and kicking the points.
Mike - I think your last comment is an interesting one, because it had been assumed that Blair was seeking some sort of Euro-job. However, with the ruckus caused by the recent referenda votes that option now looks much less likely.
I would have to say that although TB’s appetite to continue might be undiminished, you wonder whether he could put his family through another 4-5 years.
6: “Darth - have you been spending time in Germany, or are you German? Capitalisation of Improper Nouns is not yet a Capital Punishment, but is is highly Unusual in Modern English. The next thing you know, you’ll be leaving Spaces after your Punctuation!”
Tabman - have you noticed that “Welshman” (=”WelshMan” and sundry variants) has the same approach to capitalisation? And am I right in thinking that “P” and the various other single-letter posters also looked rather similar?
6 , Tabman . Our Ken’s ideas sound grand to me . The jury of Kinkell South awards the song from Kenneth Clarke douze points .
http://www.iaje.org/bio.asp?ArtistID=57
How Ken has changed !
12 - Oxonian (boo, hiss!)the merest speculation hadn’t even begun to think about crossing my mind! Although one wonders what is achieved by having Multiple Identities that so Obviously Resemble one Another.
11. what Euro-job could he want? The president of the EU Commission?
12 - on the Welsh theme, I believe we had Rugby Fan and Dragon as well.
12 , Oxonian . Not guilty !!
13 - Jack, may I congratulate you on such consumate posting from the Afterlife. http://particle.physics.ucdavis.edu/bios/Warner.html
15 - I believe that was the speculation. Beefed up, of course!
18 - though really you should be posting “Jack W is 113″ rather than 102. Lieing about your age at your age, tsk!
18 , Tabman . Well…. many have said that the Tories have been dying since 1985 ! I rest my drum sticks .
20 - and I hope you will take young Kinkell to task (withholding all Emilly-related priveleges perhaps?) for these rather waspish remarks about pater:
Jack Warner Jr.: “At times he gloried in being a no-good sonofabitch.”
Jack Warner Jr.: “If his brothers hadn’t hired him, he’d have been out of work.”
re 15. I suppose that TB might consider the Secretary-Generalship of the UN…now that the Pope’s job has been filled.
Tabbers [14], the Line to Take is not “my alma mater hasn’t produced a PM since before Lord B was a fag, boo-hoo-hoo” but “pity Blair/Thatcher/Wilson didn’t go to Cambridge, they might have learnt something there”
18. Was Blair aware that if he would have become president of the EU commission, he could have not decided all alone?
And poor Mandelson would be jopless (how could he keep an high lifestyle for him, the boyfriend and the dogs?).
Another question of the after Blair is: who will Clare Short attack without Blair?
23 - yes, although I shouldn’t preach having stubbornly resisted learning something there myself!
All this talk of Germanic capitalisation puts me in mind of an earlier age of English, and the time is right for me to reveal to PBers my great academic coup. I have recently discovered a Restoration manuscript which has staggering similarities to modern life.
22. but this Pope is old, a transintion Pope. There’s still a chance for St Tony. In the meantime he’ll continue to serve as PM until the Pope position will be free.
27 - I know he doesn’t let convention stand in the way of things, but isn’t the Pope usually Catholic?
28. but St Tony could finally see the light and score a couple of more votes with swing Bishops.
6 - so KC as “deep-lying centre half”?
This is presumably to ‘balance’ the ’shallow liars’ in the team to defeat Blair, Byers et al?
26.Which Website did you cut&paste that from?
On other point why do you think KC is doing this? Do you think he really believes he can win? Or is it Vanity?
21 , Tabman . “…. At times he gloried in being a no-good sonofabitch”
Heck you must have met some of my producers !!
BTW I’ve had some disturbing news of your activities . It’s quite clear from this : scroll all items
http://www.questx.com/tables/index.html
that you are either this :
http://www.blakeneymanor/images/carryon/feet.jpg
or this :
http://www.woodyworld.com
Can’t see it myself, and 16/1 definitely isn’t value over such a long period of time.
I think even if he knows he could win a fourth term, he must be starting to feel it’s time to step down. I agree that it will be later rather than sooner - this is good for Blair - it lets him rebuild some of his lost credibility, it is good for Brown - the sooner he comes in, the sooner he shows more of his colours, and the sooner he loses some of his popularity and therefore it is also good for the Labour party, for if Brown takes over shortly before a GE, and he’s refrained from saying too much beforehand, and whoever becomes Tory leader doesn’t turn out to be a superstar, Lab are as good as re-elected.
He may have built a career on twisting words and shifting positions, but this is one I can’t see him even attempting to alter
KC is the only candidate that has any sort of image with the 78% of people who did not vote Conservative at the last election. Happily for him the image is generally positive. His problem is his attitude to the EU, in that he seems to be able to take part in the EU and work with it. This seems to upset some of the 22% who actually did vote Tory and those who voted for UKIP.
The other candidates might, given time and a following wind, (the economy going south for example) establish themselves as a credible PM, but what non Tories cannot understand is why the Tories are taking the risk when KC is available.
At the next election the issue must be “the economy stupid” (and arguably should have been at this one) and who better than a reasonably respected ex-Chancellor to fight your corner.
To declare an interest I would show a nice profit on Betfair if KC won and a profit if anyone other than DD wins. As a Lib Dem the last thing I want is Ken Clarke as leader of the Conservatives (or whatever their new name is going to be)
34 - Icarus.
What it seems impossible to get across to non Conservatives is that KC remains absolutely beyond the pall to a significant majority of our party members (who are overwhelmingly Eurorealistic.
His fanatical obsession on this issue and his inability (especially in light of the ‘proof’ that the sky didn’t fall in through us not joining the Euro and the fact that the whole EU ‘project’ is now seen to be in growing difficulty) to apologise for his mistaken opinion (and arrogance) on the matter, puts him way beyond the pall.
The real risk in electing KC would be whether there was a party left for him to lead !!
As a LibDem I would gladly fund KCs election campaign if I could guarantee he would win.
35.”who are overwhelmingly Eurorealistic”
So, eurosceptics have called eurorealitics? I thought that the tories were eurosceptics, while Blair was eurorealistic.
All these names changes: during the campaign “old Labour” became “vintage Labour”.
35 - Tory Boy, whilst like you I find Clarke’s views on Europe slightly alarming, and his condescending manner towards members of the Party somewhat distasteful, I can’t help but accept Icarus’ analysis. “One more heave” isn’t going to cut it, and simply waiting for Labour to lose by default when the economy collapses is a risky strategy that will likely result in a Lib-Lab coalition. I think that a lot of DD’s policies are very admirable - particularly his strong and principled advocacy of lower taxes - but as long as we remain in Opposition these policies can never be enacted. Four years ago, I had the same reservations as yourself about KC, and backed IDS (yes, it’s confession time!) and now we are in scarcely a better position than in 2001. Sadly, KC seems like the only man who can win, and I’m prepared to suck up my reservations on Europe to allow him to lead the Tories back to victory.
What is becoming clearer the further we get away from the election is just how bad the result was for the Tories… a third landslide and they would’ve seen that they just had to skip a generation, dump all the baggage and hope for the best; a better result - even a little better - and Howard would’ve stayed on.
The problem seems to be that there is nowhere for them to go to pick up votes without shedding others - if they appeal to Lib Dems, UKIP smacks its lips and vice versa (and this is not really about Europe as a political entity, but about a view of the world). As I have said before, the only difference between Tory and Labour is that the Tories have got there first. Labour is glued together by government for now, but only by government…
Eurorealsists! Eurosceptics! Europhiles!
Lets do a simple division:
(1) Eurosceptics would really, if push came to shove, prefer to leave the EU
(2) Eurorealists believe there are genuine tangible benefits from being a member of the EU (cheap booze and fags, for instance), but are largely opposed to further integration.
(3) Europhiles believe that it was a mistake not to join the Euro, and think all Britain’s problems come from not taking a more “forward” view to integration.
15% of the population falls in (1), 15% in (3), and 70% fall in (2). The Conservative Party - at times - looks more like it is obsessed with (1), than aligning itself with the general population.
37 - I think ‘realist’ here is being used in its international relations sense – the assumption that other countries are basically just out for themselves. Blair started out as a Euroidealist, but eight years of all give and no take with Europe, making concession after concession and getting nothing in return, seem to have at last shifted him towards the Euro-realism that all Prime Ministers eventually arrive at. Both Thatcher and Major started out intending to work ‘positively’ with Europe, and exactly the same process brought them (rather sooner) to a position of Euro-realism.
Ken Clarke, however, remains a Euro-idealist. I think a KC leadership would bring in votes from Lib Dems, but possibly at the expense of shedding existing votes to UKIP. A lot of Tory voters would think there’s no point voting Tory if by doing so you’re just going to get another pro-European government.
37 Andrea
Sorry - Conservatives (doubters) are/were the original “Eurorealists” it’s was a foil to “Eurosceptic” which is a negative term branded us by our political opponents.
Not totally disimilar to use of the word “Tory” by our opponents which was deemed an insult going back in time but which has now become standard vocabulary for “Conservative”.
As for Blair - he’s a “Euro opportunist” !
It’s similar to
37.”So, eurosceptics have called eurorealitics?”
this sentence makes no sense! It should be: “eurosceptics are now called eurorealistics?”
32 , Tabman . BTW although a Scot this is not me either !
http://www.woodyworld.com/NY%20pic22.jpg
Comment by Jack MacW of Kinkell and Bagpuss - 20/07/05 @ 12:28 pm
38 Another Alex,
I fully respect your opinion, but profoundly disagree with it.
It won’t re - rehearse all the old arguments. Whatever side of the debate all on this site might be - we all know the score.
My view is that his election remains unlikely, but would destroy us.
40.”Eurorealists believe there are genuine tangible benefits from being a member of the EU (cheap booze and fags, for instance), ”
what does “fags” mean in this context?
As someone opposed to UK membership of either EMU or the European Constitution, I find the label ‘Eurosceptic’ perfectly acceptable. There is nothing remotely pejorative about the word sceptic, when it implies rational doubt or questioning.
The labels I object are ‘anti-Europe’ (which implies not so much considered opposition to political or economic union as general xenophobia or dislike of the Continent) and ‘Europhobic’ (when phobia implies irrational fear or dislike).
46 - Andrea - it’s a colloquial term for cigarettes, and nothing more sinister than that.
43 Andrea
Eurosceptics have ALWAYS been called Eurorealists !
It’s a different side to the same coin.
46 Best ask Commisioner Mandleson !!
Yellow card …..
46 - cigarettes.
Re. 46, when a friend of mine went past a shop window in Prague which said ‘Fisting done here’, that’s a good question.
My friend’s wife had no idea what fisting was, so (rather than try to explain) he assured her that they’d meant to say ‘fishing’, but misspelt it….
48.”Andrea - it’s a colloquial term for cigarettes, and nothing more sinister than that. ”
Thanks. The meaning of this word I knew was something someone could say about Alan Duncan. So I wasn’t able to understand.
47 Richard - I personally agree with you and revel in the term ’sceptic’myself. I use ‘Realist’ as it winds up(some)’obsessives’
47 - I prefer EU-sceptic as I wouldn’t regard the EU as identical to the continent of Europe. But I don’t consider it pejorative - its meaning is as you say.
I must disagree with 42. “Eurosceptic” was a term positively adopted by Tory opponents of the Maastricht treaty, some of whom were in no way sceptical but had fixed, strong opinions on the European Union which they no longer seemed to expose to much doubt or questioning.
49 , Tory Boy . “It’s a different side to the same coin”
The difficulty is that the electorate regard the Tories obsession with Europe as chocolate money - too much of it makes us sick !
52. I had once some problems with the meaning of “tearooms”.
57 , Andrea . When you visit Rutland you must try Baines tearooms of Uppingham . A traditonal tearoom of the non Oscar Wilde variety . Excellent cake trolley !! Next door Baines have their own bakery - splendid bread !! Yum yum …..
58. I thought that one was the only meaning of the word “tearoom” until last month….. I was preparing a university exam and at one point the book started to talk about a research about gay casual sex and that the author of the study decided to use “tearooms” as the set of the research. I was shocked, how could those British make this type of things while they’re drinking tea!
59 You’ve obviously never been to Rutland
We do drink tea in most situations, Andrea…
59 , Andrea . I think you’ll have found that “tearooms” is American slang . We British use the equally quaint term “Cottages” . What about Italians ?
Just a bit of random infomation…the Conservatives have selected their first PPC for the next election. Maggie Throup (who fought Colne Valley at the last election and recorded a swing of 3.4% to the Tories) has been selected to fight Solihull and attepmt to overturn a Lib Dem majority of 279 or 0.5%.
Robert @ 40. While I broadly accept your categorisation, I think the proportions are more like 25: 65: 10.
63. A very good idea. Solihull tories have obviously been very rattled by losing the seat. I’m of the opinion that all PPCs in winnable target seats should be in place at least 3 years before the next probable election date to get them known before not during the election campaign.
63&65 - I mentioned this before but I thought that the number of approved candidates was being reduced. Presumably she can only have been appointed if the cut has allready been made. Personally I would re-select every candidate who put in a decent performance although obviously some will want to wait to see if any safe seats come up.
Any news of Rik since his faux pas over the late Edward Heath?
Any news of Rik since his faux pas over the late Edward Heath?
Please, please, let the Conservatives on this site be a representative sample of the whole party membership. If they carry on like this then Veritas may have a chance!
69 - And I’m sure many Conservatives on this site would join me in wishing that every Liberal was like you Icarus!
69 - And I’m sure many Conservatives on this site would join me in wishing that every Liberal was like you Icarus!
69 - And I’m sure many Conservatives on this site would join me in wishing that every Liberal was like you Icarus!
In defence of Rik - Will I have to be nice about the old bat Thatcher when she turns up her toes?
I suppose I could just enthuse about what she has done to the Tory party and praise her for her enlightened stance on Europe which is now being followed by the candidate for the Tory leadership - “He who must not be named”
Sean @ 64 - I think you’d be surprised. Looking at the YouGov poll from Januray ‘05 (http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/TEL050101004_1.pdf), there are considerably more (27%) of people that support a single European currency + the constitution, than support withdrawl (16%). I think the difference is that the 27% are pretty “soft” - it’s not a big issue to them. For the 16%, it is the major issue. And this is the problem the Conservative Party seems to have: too much of that 16% is in their active membership, and this is why they choose to tear themselves up over Europe.
The sensible solution is simple: scepticism of new initiatives out of Brussels (whether constitution or currency), but a recognition that the single market has been a success. (Telling people they can no longer do a booze cruise would not go down well…)
56 I wish that the EU only wasted chocolate money.
That way I’d feel less sick about the billions they squander myself !
74 Sorry Robert you are incorrect.
The Conservative Party does not “Tear themselves up over Europe” any more, those days (hopefully) are gone forever.
We have united around a solidly Eurorealist position of (to paraphrase) ‘this far and no further’.
There is only a small flank in the party that yearns to re open the debate and they are headed by Ken Clarke.
That, in a nutshell, is why he will never lead the party.
On checking the poll though, I see that people were given the option of wanting the EU to do less than at present, so that it was little more than a free trade area, an option which 31% chose (and I’d probably have chosen that option myself). Very broadly, 27% wanted a more integrated EU, 47% a less integrated EU (or none at all). Only 16% wanted the status quo.
I see Mr Blair has come up with another gem.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4698029.stm
So the bad parents who influence childrens bad behaviour the most are being asked to spend even more time with them. Isn’t that like the fire brigade turning up to a fire and trying to put it out with petrol.
I challenge anyone who is about to read this post to keep a straight face!
A Statement by Veritas on their Cheadle by-election “success”
http://www.veritasparty.com/cgi-bin/datacgi/database.cgi?file=News&report=SingleArticle&ArticleID=0357
“The Veritas aim was to continue to raise the profile of the party both locally and nationally and we feel we have succeeded in our primary aim. The future is bright for Veritas in the upcoming Local elections in Cheadle as a result of our endeavours there.”
“Well done to all who assisted the party in the last few weeks in the by election.”
Yes, I have always thought Veritas were the real winners in Cheadle.
Perhaps this makes RKS’s leadership safer. Then again, maybe Les Leggett will run (no pun intended) for the top spot instead.
Tory Boy, Sean… I really don’t think we’re in massive disagreement.
I think the poll proves there are actually remarkably few people who want total EU withdrawl. And these people tend to be the loudest. My point about the Tory party was simply that it refused to contradict those of its PPCs which chose to advocate British withdrawl from the EU, suggesting that it was an issue that was still rather too close to its heart.
Myself: I think the EU has done some terrific things like the financial services directive, the general services directive, the Schengen zone and the clamping down on government subsidies to inefficient national champions. Against that, it wastes a vast amount of money on agricultural subsidies that impoverishes the third world, suffers - to put it mildly - a democratic deficit, and thinks it can prescribe how many hours a week I should work.
So… that makes me about middle of the road too, I guess.
80 - Maybe the logic is like this:
Labour lost its deposit at Cheadle. Kilroy just about saved his at the general election. Therefore Kilroy is more successful than Labour.
As Kilroy himself says in a blistering attack on the PM, because of the “success of the olympic bid and the bombings,” Tony Blair should have been very popular indeed, but only got 1700 votes:
http://www.veritasparty.com/cgi-bin/datacgi/database.cgi?file=News&report=SingleArticle&ArticleID=0360
This is starting to look as if Kilroy is preparing the ground to enter the Labour leadership race. You heard it here first.
If Tony Blair and Kilroy Silk swopped positions for a week, would anyone notice?
65-”I’m of the opinion that all PPCs in winnable target seats should be in place at least 3 years before the next probable election date to get them known before not during the election campaign. ”
It seems a good idea, but not always an early selection of the candidate produces clear benefits.
In Hove the tories selected their candidate well in advance (I think in 2003) and Labour selected Celia Barlow only in Jenuary 2005 and she won with the same swing achieved at national level.
60. I don’t want to know what could happen in a Rutland’s tearoom. Especially after the warning in BV post @ 61.
80. I thought that the clear winner was the independent candidate.
84. I think it all depend on how hard the candidate works. I can only speak from what I’ve found at a local level. If a PPC can get their name in the papers, attend local meetings and generally get known, it can’t do any harm. We’ve seen how well Lib Dems do when they have the same candidates picking away in consistant elections.
83. Cherie might notice
85- I think that all the candidates who improved the tories result should be reselected.
86. She might prefer the more left wing veritas leader for a week. A bet he’s a more than 5 times a night man.
“This is starting to look as if Kilroy is preparing the ground to enter the Labour leadership race. You heard it here first.”
Or the Tory leadership race!
89 - he did say he wanted to wipe out the Conservative party, and how better could he achieve it?
89. No, Kilroy will try to oust Charlie as Libdems leader, while Galloway will enter in the tory race. Ann Widdecombe will try with Labour.
And Helen Clark will lead Veritas.
92. With Jane Griffith as her deputy. What a fantastic couple to lead a party! Try to think what they could come up with during a campaign.
[92] More tea-rooms.
94. I though that was the first point of Alan Duncan’s leadership manifesto.
Re: 63 There are going to be a lot of angry candidates out there… they’ve just been told that they have to reapply for the list (closing date 31 July, so get typing) and suddenly discover that some loser from Colne Valley has been parachuted in to a diamond target seat. How was she chosen? Who was allowed to apply?
Not that I’m bitter, or anything.
More seriously, what is Francis Maude up to? He’s Chairman for how long? Is he trying to establish “facts on the ground”?
96. She is from Solihull. She defeated other 3 candidates.
Colne Valley is a target seat too (a 3.1% Labour majority).
65. Late in the election campaign one of the TV channels showed a picture of Charles Kennedy to people at a motorway service station and asked people to name the person in the picture.
The vast majority of people had no idea who he was. I think about 25% of people named him correctly.
If this is anything to go by, I would think that the number of people who would even know the name of the local candidate in their own constituency would be so small as to have no effect whatsoever on the result.
If I were her, I’d rather fight Colne Valley next time around.
99. I thought the same thing. The Libdems are very difficult to campaign against.
How does this thing of candidates who have to reapply for the list work?
97- I would have thought Colne Valley was more winnable than Solihull. Solihull will have a first-term incumbency effect next time around. There was a row and split in the Tory local party in Colne Valley before the election, which might suggest that the Tories will do better there next time. OTOH Colne Valley has three parties in contention, and most of the councillors in the consituency are Lib Dems.
Still I would think Colne Valley the better bet. Or are there boundary changes working against the Tories?
99+100 International and cross party agreement on this (wish I could type faster!)
101. She did pretty well in Colne Valley: she didn’t reduce the Labour majority only because the Labour vote fell, but she actually increased the tory vote.
I don’t know about boundary changes. While Solihull might be another Guildford or Ludlow, it’s just as likely to be another North Norfolk or Cheadle. I wouldn’t fancy those odds if I was running.
Whereas, coming so close to winning Colne Valley, despite the problems in the association, suggests that it should be really winnable next time - and she’d have a few more years to build up her profile.
96 Nick - Totally agree.
There’s a whole well of irritation building up in the ranks on the back of some seemingly being deemed more equal than others…….
“Positive”(Discuss)Action by CCO via the back door some might say !
Tory MPs have backed the new rules for electing the leader by 127 votes to 50.
104 - agree 100%. The previous Tory candidate joined the Lib Dems after being deselected (skirts too short?). She was a close friend of the Tory MP (Jackson?) who crossed the floor to join Labour. This would be ancient history by 2009/2010.
106. Oh well, we’ll just have to lobby the National Convention to ensure the new rules get voted down then.
23.”Blair/Thatcher/Wilson didn’t go to Cambridge, they might have learnt something there”
But Nick Griffin did!
I heard KC on the radio say that if the party didn’t go for him there wasn’t likely to be a party after the next election. (Or words to that effect).
He’s right. He is guaranteed to pick up some Lib Dem and Labour voters. None of the other prospective candidates can say that.And in the North of England and scotland they can be sure they won’t. So it’s ‘bite your lip and think of England’ or oblivion time.
Is the size of the majority among Tory MPs for changing the voting rules likely to shift the odds against David Davis?
109 Roger.
He’s looking through the wrong end of the telescope !!
There won’t be a Party if he IS selected !!
108 - Sean
Quite so - here we go again - ho hum !!
when was this 109? was it today.
106. I just don’t understand why a “modern” party can’t have one member, one vote elections. Don’t they trust their own members ?
114 do the labour party?
The leadership thing: sounds like the old versus the new MPs to me. I wonder who they think is going to work for them in the next election? The people they have calmly disenfranchised.
They blame the membership for choosing IDS yet they did not want the alternative, and they set up the restricted choice in the first place. If anyone is a poor selector it is our MPs not the party members.
The Convention has to change it and the lobbying starts now.
And don’t be too gleeful Roger. We will still be around and winning in 2009/10.
114. Too be honest as a tory member, I’m not unhappy about the vote being taken away. A lot of the membership are old (or to be PC older) and have views which don’t really tally with modern Britian.
I had a member trying to explain a point about immigration funding and trying to tell me we should have pushed it durung the election. He seemed dissappointed when I told him that the policy probably lost us as many if not more votes as it won. An electorial college might be a good idea in the future.
Alan @ 114, on the one hand, you have MPs who still mentally inhabit the world of Bertie Wooster. They are at least consistent in their opposition to evry form of modernity - which includes giving members a say in electing the leader.
On the other, you have those MPs who are constantly harping on about the need to modernise - but believe that the best way to modernise is to run everything through tiny cliques at the centre. They are hypocrites.
“and have views which don’t really tally with modern Britian. ”
More in tune than much of the Parliamentary Party IMO, Woody.
119. The MPs aren’t all that bad. The new intake seem OK. We do have the Tory taliban though.
Well the Lib Dems have OMOV and PR and look at the disaster that we’ve been lumbered with for all these years. The Labour electoral college approach is probably the best balance between involving everybody buy giving the parliamentary party a big say.
121 - but who would the Lib Dem MPs have chosen in 1999? There were plenty of far inferior candidates.
I think you’re being a bit unfair on Kennedy, Mike. I wouldn’t want him as Prime Minister, but I’m not a Lib Dem. But he has led your party to its best result since 1923.
Woody, I don’t think most of our MPs are that bad, and the new intake seem rather good. I like most of the Conservative MPs I meet, but being cooped up in Westminster seems to bring out the worst in them, collectively. Why do I care so much about this issue?
1. I dislike the air of patronage involved in taking away the vote from members - as though we’re somehow unfit to have an opinion on the leadership. That was okay in the days of Sir Hugh etc etc Lucas-Tooth, Bart., but not in this day and age.
2. I dislike the fact that the system is being rigged in the hope of keeping out one candidate - David Davis. I hold no brief for David Davis - but changing the system to try and keep him out seems disreputable to me.
3. Our supporters in areas without Conservative MPs are shut out of the process. I have a Conservative MP. I can lobby him with my views. Party members in places like Scotland or Greater Manchester can’t.
4. There is a principle of fair dealing here. Taking money off people at the same time as stating that they have the right to take part in the leadership election (which is stated on all our membership cards) and then taking that right away from them without their consent is dishonourable. In any other walk of life, that sort of behaviour would land you in court.
I agree that an electoral college (my preference would be 60:40 MPs/Members) would be a reasonable way forward.
122. Personally, I voted for Malcolm Bruce. But when it came to the crunch, I preferred Kennedy to Hughes.
122 , book value . “… but who would the Lib Dems have chosen in 1999 ….”
A ghost of Liberals past ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/george_david_lloyd.shtml
123. that will be very long coming. the mps were so scarred by the ids fiasco that they flipped to the opposite extreme and tossed out even howard’s mild proposal.
you can see their point last time when they voted for a man no one knew, who walked and talked like a disaster but who was a hard line eurosceptic. for those who argue portillo should have been there, i think the evidence is clear they would have elected ids regardless whether portillo had been on the ballot paper or not, portillo’s social policies would have sunk him as surely as ken’s views on europe sank him.
They couldn’t agree who they wanted, and shortlisted the two most unsatisfactory candidates of the original 5. They have no right to complain of the outcome.
124. You make many fair points Sean. I think we both agree the electorial college is the way to go and hopefully that idea will be discussed in the future. I’m a Davis man myself BTW.
Defending Kennedy, I think the content of his leadership (Iraq, etc) has been generally good. OTOH presentation has not always been good. Like Alan J, I voted for Malcom Bruce last time around, and I wouldn´t want to swap Kennedy for Hughes now. Liberal/Lib Dem leaders have not usually fought more than two election except in cases of necessity. So I expect an orderly transition sometime this parliament.
I remember Malcolm Bruce. Used to be treasury spokesman didn’t he? Is he still around? Not seen him for years.
127, outside those three who else was there again? anyways it is the portillo point often put forward by those seeking to shift blame from the members to mp’s who shouldn’t escape entirely, that if only michael had been on the ballot paper he would have triumphed over ids. i think it’s clear as mentioned that portillo’s eurosceptism would not have saved him as the members would have rejected him anyway re his social stance.
you say they put the two most unsatisfactory there, but if the members would have rejected michael anyway who would you have had them put on the ballot?
i wonder if hague would have done better to inverted the process he developed have every candidate nominated by say 5mps say all went to the country with the top two then being voted on by the mps back at westminster.
130 - yes he is still around, he’s now chair of the Select Committee on International Development.
130. He’s still MP for Gordon.
129 , Hamlet . If of course the Lib Dems go for a living leader they should continue the tradition of electing a leader with an interest in liquid refreshment :
Patron on the Keeper of the Quaich and former Member of the Lords Refreshment Committee. I give you :
http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/biographies/thursoj.htm
131. A none of the above option would have been interesting in members voting between IDS and KC. Wonder what the percentages would have been?
It was Ancram, Davis, Portillo, Clarke, and IDS. The point is that our MPs ended up shortlisting MPs from opposite ends of the party, and can’t complain about the choice members made. IDS wasn’t up to the job, while if Clarke had become leader, it would have been John Major versus the “bastards” to a factor of ten.
If ever a TV company make a programme of Lord Lucans life then Thurso is their man.
134 . Moi . Naturally the fact that the Honourable Member for Caithness , Sutherland and Easter Ross is a fine Scottish aristo is a complete coincidence !
137. Judging from the photo @ 134, Thurso could even play Poirot.
139 , Andrea . Thank you Hastings , or are you Miss Lemon today ?
140. Hustings during the weekdays and Miss Lemon during the weekend.
141 , Andrea . Hustings ?? Freudian electoral slip LOL .
BTW where is Chief Inspector Japp aka Tabman tonight ?
136 fair point, but i still think you’re dodging the point re the members, of that lot maybe just maybe Davis would have had a chance but even his social policies might have got him into hot water being too tolerant and so on. both the members and mps should take the rap jointly.
do you think getting the members to whittle it down to the top two before the mps took over would have bben better? what could not have been?
re clarke yeah maybe the bill cash/eric forth faction would have wreaked havoc, but you know i still bet even then they’d have ended up with more than 200 mps 136!
I’ve just seen Hurd junior putting in a word for the EEC. Quite an impressive politician. Perhaps after you’ve bitten your collective tongues and given Clark a go (you know it makes sense) you could go for the handsome (Sophia?) Master Hurd to take over sometime round the Olympic year?
Interest 115. On radio 4 this morning. He said “If we don’t get our act together there won’t be a party to save!
138 Isn´t he a bit nouveau for you Jack? He’s no Jacobite…his grand dad got it for being Liberal leader, an opponent of appeasement and wartime air-minister. I´ve never met him nor heard him speak, but hear he’s very good indeed.
I honestly don’t know who would have won, if any of the other three had got through. I don’t think the members wanted IDS come what may (although he had fervent supporters). I think they contemplated the alternative, and chose the least worst course.
With Clarke as leader, I think we’d have gone the way of the Canadian Progressive Conservatives.
“you could go for the handsome (Sophia?) Master Hurd ”
Ok being tieless, but Nick Hurd could avoid to show his hairy chest!
http://www.nickhurd.com/images/nhs2.jpg
(ok, better him than Ken Clarke)
147 - that kind of thing belongs in UKIP!
http://www.geocities.com/byelections99/kensington99/hocken993a.jpg
Or rather, Veritas, whence Mr Hockney has now defected. I think he stood against Nick Palmer in May.
148. Nick Palmer couldn’t compete with him in shirtless photos: in the Labour party only Tony has this honour.
you Libdems have Marina Pepper with all her set of photos…..
149 - ah yes. I don’t think they were recent enough to use on her election literature, however.
Given that these rule changes seem designed to stop Davis, this evening’s vote doesn’t seem to have dented his odds. OK, probably already discounted, but even the Betfair positions against him- highlighted by Smithson yesterday- now seem to have evaporated.
I suspect a reduced role for the membership was already priced in. Of course there may be some upside on Davis now if you think this proposal isn’t going to pass the National Convention intact.
146 Oh Sean please, now that is ridiculous by all means think ken is a fool on europe, arrogant etc but the canadian conservatives? if they escaped in 1997 when division were absolutely rife when the party was absolutely hated and i mean really really hated, and everyone felt like roger to draw that analogy is faintly ludicrous. most parties get nashed when they s-are sen as either lazy incompetent or crooked. the pereception of the tory party then thanks to the 92-97 calamities was all three, and yet 165 tory mps survived the holocaust. to say that they then would have done worse out of office over 4 years later seems as silly as some predictions earlier this year of labour making gains even after iraq. i believed you were making sound arguments earlier but i sense the power of your dislike of ken’s europhilia is leading you to make silly polemics.
144 what time roger?
144 Roger,
As you choose to repeat your pro Clarke point at 109, I repeat my contra at 111
He’s looking through the wrong end of the telescope !!
There won’t be a Party if he IS selected !!
Can’t we all agree to disagree over him and save the keystrokes ?
150. yes, she’s pretty different now.
Would have Labour and especially the tories selected a candidate with this “past”?
144 - tsk, I see my name has been used in vain. I only seen Nick Hurd being interviewed once (on election night) and from that brief highlight he looks like he could go as far as his dad.
151 - I wouldn’t worry Wat, it looks odds on that your matinee idle will be leading the party soon.
145 , Hamlet . Thurso not a Jacobite - au contraire . The Sinclair clan have strong Jacobite traditions :
In the 15 David Sinclair of Brabsterdorran and John , Master of Sinclair fought for the Old Pretender .
In the 45 the Caithness Sinclairs fought for Prince Charles Edward Stuart at Culloden , although there was treachery from Sir James Sinclair of Rosslyn who fought with the Hanovarian Royal Scots .
So hardly a “bit nouveau”
156. You’re the only woman here. I think that Roger wanted to have a better judge (than himself) to say if Hurd is handsome or not.
No silly polemic Interest. I don’t think we would have gone down to 2 MPs, but I believe we would have ended up with very major splits within the party. Unhappiness with KC’s stance on Europe extends a long way beyond the Eric Forths and Bill Cashes.
OK, looks wise, Nick Hurd, IMO, is attractive (and defo above attractive for an MP). Quite different from Douglas.
159 don’t agree with it, but is a reasonable argument but by mentioning the canadian conservatives i thought that you were saying they’d have got two mp’s, i don’t think even roger in his wildest fantasy would have thought that realistic.
The relevant parallel with Canada is probably a scenario where the Tories would be eclipsed on the right by UKIP and end up effectively being taken over by them.
There was a chance ukip would have taken enough votes from the Tories to enable the Lib Dems to overtake them in that brief glimmer in late 2003. It was that that prompted tory MP’s to at last move against ids. but it was never certain, and i don’t think it is likely to re-emerge. i certainly don’t think mentioning it to attack ken was ever a plausible line of attack do you think?
I think you could argue that a series of defections to UKIP would have changed the landscape. However, rather than allow myself as interpreter to be caught in the crossfire, I’ll leave it to Sean to expound his thesis.
Interest. I think it was quite early between 7 and 8. It was shortly before your Party chairman if I remember rightly (who as usual talked sense) I vaguely remember Theresa May on also after KC.
73-You would need to praise her for getting the Labour party to adopt all her key policies & ditching socialism,a tremendous achievement for the Leader of a party to get the opposition to do a total U turn all their policies!
73-You would need to praise her for getting the Labour party to adopt all her key policies & ditching soc””’m,a tremendous achievement for the Leader of a party to get the opposition to do a total U turn all their policies!
Actually having seen Thurso he’s quite attractive, but not as much as Rifkind. I’m enough of a realist to realise that Clarke would be a disaster for us despite appealing to our missing voters.
167. Is Rifkind still in the race? Heard nothing from him for weeks.
I hope so … this l