“Ken Clarke ready to ditch support for the Euro” - Guardian
August 11th, 2005
-
Would such a U-turn be enough to beat David Davis?
After our thread yesterday on Ken Clarke’s bid for the Tory leadership comes a report this morning that the former Tory Chancellor is prepared to ditch his long-standing support for the Euro in order to position himself better in the campaign for his party’s leadership.
Many observers believe that Clarke’s support for the Euro and being ready in 1999 (above) to sit alongside Tony Blair on a platform on the issue cost him dear in the 2001 leadership campaign. Whether he would have beaten IDS in the ballot of the membership is not clear but he would, surely, have come a lot closer if he had been prepared to dilute his position.
According to Michael White in the Guardian a Clarke campaign for the leadership “..reinforced by a series of autumn policy speeches which could include a retreat from his commitment to the euro, will probably be to displace the second placed candidacy of David Cameron.”.
The White report goes on “…the one development that would cause him to withdraw would be if the Tory constitutional convention on September 27 - the day of Tony Blair’s Labour conference speech - decided against revising the leadership rules to give MPs, not party activists the final say.”
-
There’s little doubt that this news, if confirmed, will have an impact on the betting markets and we expect to see the Clarke price harden. You can still get 14/1 with a conventional bookie but we do not expect that level to stay very long.
The problem for Clarke is that this sort of policy u-turn could be portrayed in a bad light by the David Davis camp and we saw yesterday on the site how one of the people linked to Bloggers for David Davis was ready to rush in and put the boot into the former Chancellor. In fact some of the language used was possibly defamatory and for the first time in several months I had to moderate a comment.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I can’t help thinking that what ever Clark does he’s yesterday’s man, don’t get me wrong I like the guy he’s affable and intelligent but not only is he too old for the leadership he could potentially split the Tories in half his social liberalism, opposition to the war and Europhilia could prompt the Tory right into open revolt where he to become leader. While he’d have some good showings at PMQs so did Hauge and so did Howard, yes he’s more likeable than both but still he would in all likelihood preside over a divided party.
Cameron’s ‘campaign’ has been very effective in restricting the debate in the media to casting the contest as Cameron vs. Davis, this has effectively starved Clark’s campaign of any air time and its likely that Cameron’s team would still be able to defend his position as the “anti-Davis” in the minds not only of the press but also of Tory MPs.
The Tory Party has changed since 1997 or 2001, Clark daining to play down or drop his support for the euro is unlikely to resuscitate his campaign especially in the face of an articulate, approachable and energetic candidate like Cameron already beating him to emerge as the champion of a brand of “progressive conservatism”. With prominent Clark supporters already openly backing Davis and Cameron it will be a difficult task for Clark to claw his way back into contention and I don’t see it happening.
Beautiful quote from a Tory MP (who says there are no great speakers left in Churchill’s party) “David Davis is IDS with hair”. Harsh.
I would have thought that such a massive retreat would count against a candidate, rather than in his favour. It begs the question what the man would not do in order to advance his own interests?
Clark is the only candidate who can start to rebuild the brand. For that reason I suppose we can assume it won’t be Clark. Is Theresa Gorman still around?
While for an outsider Clarke seemed a no brainer (a Labour MP said to me just before the 2005 election ‘you know if Clarke was their leader we’d be about to lose power’) he might be too old now? He would be asking the public to be Prime Minister well into his 70s. A Clarke-Cameron alliance might solve that problem though.
re 2. But is DD’s hair his owm?
Well, this is a betting site - at least, Our Genial Host set it up as such - and if you like that sort of thing 14-1 is surely worth a flutter… interesting that Labour still doesn’t know what to make of him - compare and contrast [1] and [4]
Is it not possible that KC has had second thoughts on the Euro over the past 5 years? It would be odd if he hadn’t had some doubts. I was and am in favour of joining the Euro in principle but I can see that the case in favour is a lot weaker now.
We seem to have been more successful economically in the past few years than the Euro area which as yet doesn’t seem to have benefited from the common currency. At the very least we haven’t lost anything by staying out.
The pragmatic view, always advocated by Blair and Brown of ‘wait and see’ still seems to be the rational approach. Will the Euro area shoot ahead economically? Will the tensions caused by a common currency in places like Italy get worse and apply to other countries? I don’t think it at all unlikely that KC would rule out joining the Euro before the end of the next Parliament whilst not ruling it out in principle.
I’m sure in some sense I should feel honoured to have been moderated yesterday. But I actually feel horrified. The expression I used was not in any way intended to be taken literally- it is one that my sons and their friends use routinely to describe someone who lives life to the full in an endearing roguish sort of way. Which seems to us to capture the essence of cigar chomping KC. In fact it’s his core appeal- he comes across as a real bloke who says and does what he feels, irrespective of social pressure. (I’m not saying he is like that, you understand…maybe he’s completely pc. In fact yes, let’s say he is. There.)
But as for his European U turn…every serious economic analysis I have ever read always said the one-size-fits-all Euro would be a disaster. Which was what those Five Tests were saying between the lines.
Ken and others chose to ignore this analysis in favour of their political desire to participate in the European Grand Design. Let us give thanks that we Tories managed to keep him away from the leadership controls while Tony was trying to take us in. Who knows what they would have stitched up between them.
Obviously no disrespect intended, so please don’t chop me.
(Informed readers will know that ‘the New York trio known as the FLC’s hit the alternative airwaves with a blend of hip-hop beats, alternative style, and bluesy rhythms.’ Right up jazzman Ken’s street I should have thought.)
Wat [9] - you’re clearly no jazz buff - my next-door-neighbour and I are into different kinds of jazz and we never discuss it… a bit like the Tories and Europe, really
9 Right up jazzman Ken’s street - Nice!
What price a Clarke/Cameron dream ticket?
If we assume that KC does eventually become leader, what portents does that have for the future?
Jack, amongst others, has intimated that KC is exactly the type of leader to make Labour and the LDs sweat. Let’s just unpick this a bit. His distinctive characteristics are supposed to be:
- blokeish ability to connect
- europhilia
- anti-Iraq
- Social liberalism
Taking each one in turn:
(i) I have seen this at first hand, there is no doubt that he comes across very well in person, and has a wider perception of being a “good bloke”. Yet, in 2009 he will be pushing 70. Furthermore, it will be 12 years since he was chancellor, so even the most politically aware 18 year old will be 30 at that time. Reallistically, you can add another 10 years or so, which means that his recognition factor will probably only be a factor for those approaching 40 and beyond. Which, admittedly, is the group most likely to vote.
(ii) It seems as though this will be ditched, and to be honest the recent referenda have dulled this issue’s salience. It might re-emerge, but looks to be neutralised. This is a bigger obstacle for him within his party than outside.
(iii) anti-Iraq. If Vino, and Nick, are to be believed, this is not necessarilly a plus point for the working class Labour voters the Tories need to win back (197-1992 passim). However, who knows what the issue might be like by then. Could be spun back at him though.
(iv) Social Liberalism. Again, I recall seeing some analysis based on voting patterns and Clarke fell squarely into this camp (along with 9 others out of 165) in the 2001 parliament. Yet, its all very well him being seen to be socially liberal if the rest of the party hasn’t changed. Look at Labour in 1992 - Kinnock et al talked the talk, but the voters didn’t believe they’d walk the walk, and I think the Tories still have this big perception battle to overcome here.
6… the remarkable thing about DD’s hair is that it always looks exactly the same. (It’s also interesting to note that the top of his hair is definitely less grey than the sides…)
So - either he has a great hairdresser or…
I really do not get the appeal with Clarke. I am young Conservative and to me I just do not know what he stands for.
Furthermore if he dumped his support for the EURO, it would come across as a short term political stunt, suggesting the man has no principles.
I also do not like how he has refused to help the party since 1997. How a man can expect to lead a party whose members he does not like or trust is beyond me.
Finally can anyone actually tell me what Clarke stands for outside of his now (perhaps extinct) european views?
Our Genial Host (OGH), you have an excellent new nickname!
Obviously it would be opportunistic for Clarke to drop support for the euro. I’m sure he’d manage to do it as elegantly as is possible in the circumstances.
It’d be something like this: over the years it had become apparent that he’d been over-optimistic about the prospects for economic convergence. The disadvantages to faster economies like Ireland’s and slower ones like Germany’s within a single interest rate had been more pronounced than he’d thought. The ECB’s set-up was not ideal (he won’t mention that Brown’s set-up for the Bank of England is better). Nor had cross-border trade benefited as much as he had predicted. He’ll particularly stress recent evidence. He might even name a couple of (supportive) colleagues who’d helped to persuade him; but on the other hand that would be to suggest he was bowing to peer pressure.
The question is, which would disadvantage Clarke more: being opportunistic, or being out of line with party and public opinion? I think if he can manage to do the U-turn relatively elegantly and convincingly, he may well get away with it. After all, Blair was clearly opportunistic, either in standing for Labour on its 1983 platform, or his current platforms, or both, and look how much harm it’s done him!
Clarke does have a lot of momentum to regain. However he’s a recognised heavyweight. And declared supporters of the other candidates could certainly come over to Clarke without too much trouble, though not as easily as if he’d done it a year ago.
I don’t think it matters too much that he’s old. Until recently we often had old PMs, and it’s hardly as if Clarke is becoming visibly frail, however unhealthy.
Perhaps Wat Tyler (9) is close enough to David Davis that he will be able to shed some light on my question at number 6. It might sound trivial but this information does say a lot about someone’s personality.
I agree that ‘Europe’ is a major issue within parties but not for voters. It’s mentioned from time to time on the doorstep but most people are bored of it. I don’t think Iraq is likely to be a big issue for voters at any rate by the next election tabman. It might nonetheless be big in the media. Of course that depends on what the military and political state is in Iraq by then, and whether there are lots of Brits being killed. Few voters voted on it last time though.
I think Clarke’s appeal comes from slightly different sources from you Tabman.
He talks as if he’s saying what he thinks, a trait he shares with David Davies. By coming down against the party line sometimes over the last few years, he’s made this much more so, and that lends a lot of credibility with voters (at least, those few that have noticed). He sounds like he knows what he’s talking about, and on the economy he certainly does. And he’s not associated with the Tories’ failures of the last few years, which I put down to designing policies seen as primarily for the rich. There were lots of failings of the Major government but it did at least govern for the nation, albeit not as many would have liked. Even Thatcher was governing for the nation as a whole.
16 - Gavin, I think we’re talking about different aspects of the same thing. By “Blokeishness”, I mean an ability to transcend being a politician - people see him as being more than just an MP or minister, “someone they might share a drink with”. He shares this ability with CK (is it something to do with those two initials?), but has an additional gravitas borne of his age and experience, not least mnisterial office.
This image is supported by him, as you say, saying what he thinks. So many politicians always toe the line that anyone who comes on the wrong side of it once in a while is looked upon as a rareity, almost a non-politician.
Sounds very sensible from KC if its true. People are free to attack him for changing his mind but perhaps not those who are now New Labour but were happy to stand on the 1983 Labour manifesto.
It was commented last night that KC’s public appeal is superficial and only based on name recognition. The fact that very few people know who David Davis and Liam Fox are, despite them holding front bench poositions for a few years perhaps tells its own story.
Would some of the Clarke’s europhile supporters drift away though?
The Other War… It’s not over yet.
Wat Tyler It was not just the particular phrase that was inappropriate but the whole piece. If we have learnt one thing it is surely not encourage the image of the Tory party being ferrets in a sack going over Niagara Falls.
I would have thought a rather different style is appropriate. More measured?
Its alright for us plebs to be casual and have a blast at candidates and other parties but as the chief blogger cheerleader for DD ( running a blog called David Davis for leader) I must assume that the style, which is reflected in your blog, is compatible with the candidate you support.
As such you may have just made up my mind for me about who is not suitable as leader.
Blue2win - who’s being petty now?
Wat is spot on in his assessment of Clarke. If anything, I reckon he’s been overly restrained.
Frankly the man doesn’t deserve to call himself a Conservative after having stabbed leader after leader in the back all these years.
His views are basically those of the liberals (if liberals have ‘views’), however much he tries to hide them.
If our MPs are stupid enough to vote for him (and it looks more and more like it’ll be in their hands) then he’ll rapidly discover he hasn’t got a party left to lead.
22 Iron Lady I am not defending Ken Clarke, indeed I have been fairly brutal about him myself on this site. My problem with W Tyler’s post and his blog too, is that if we have learnt anything it should have been that when arguing a case (between ourselves or in a campaign) tone matters. There are ways for candidates to do things and in this new millennium it is not to sound so shrill. It simply encourages the ‘nasty’ tag which is so unjust in regard the mass of the party and our supporters.
Blue 2 Win, you’re right. “Nasty” is a bit too insipid to do you justice!
Blue2Win - if we Blues ever are to win, we should cease being petrified about being ‘the nasty party’ and instead return to our core beliefs and principles. We don’t need people to like us; we need them to respect us.
Frankly, while the likes of Clarke and his fellow travellers are still within the Party we’re a laughing stock.
It’s not often that I’d take a lesson from a Socialist, but I think we need to do what Kinnock did to the militant tendancy in the 80s.
We need to purge the liberals and quasi-socialists from our ranks and then at last not only can we campaign on a Conservative agenda, we can also look like a Conservative party too. If that involves some vlood-letting, so be it.
I sincerely hope that the first thing DD does (assuming he’s elected) is to turf out the chaff.
Re: 25 - Why do you Tories fail to grasp even the most simple political happenings ? The one thing Kinnock did NOT do was to purge the Left in order to follow a wholly Labour agenda. The removal of Militant and its supporters allowed Kinnock to begin the reform of the Labour Party and begin its move toward social democracy.
What you advocate is the complete opposite - purging the “left” while maeching with a Right-wing rump ever further into the political wilderness. As a non-Tory, I’d like to see the next Conservative leader purge the Right-wing, especially those advocating unilateral withdrawal from the EU, and start to take the Tory Party back to the centre ground. It sounds as though you won’t be a member of that Party - I’m sure UKIP will be very welcoming !!
Stodge, Iron Lady sounds like a troll, but if she really represents the thinking within the Conservative Party, isn’t that just better for the rest of the parties?
Clarke’s background would play into the hands of the socialists. That is why Rifkind is the man. By being out of Parliament for 8 years he has avoided being associated with the drift of the Hague and IDS years. He is much more urbane than Davis and a better thinker.
26 - Stodge, thats a wild generalisation. Most Tories on this site haven’t argued that we should have a move to the right. The idea that none of us ‘grasp the most simple happenings’ is quite frankly insulting. And clearly ‘Iron Lady’ is just trying to wind people up.
As to what B2W said about Wat I think some of us in the party are probably more concerned about his (DD’s) supporters than the man himself. Its like the old adage of judging a man by the company he keeps. The fact that he’s friends with Dereck Conway, Eric Forth and Alistair Campbell does not fill me with confidence.
Also I know some of his detractors have criticised Clarke for being a Director of BAT. I still don’t know what the big deal is. Its a product many people, especially myself, enjoy and surely as Tories we should be railing against the PC brigade who want us on a diet of lettuce and tofu rather than Marlboro’s and Tennants!
I’m most certainly not a ‘troll’ (whatever you mean by that) but I think it pretty much proves my point when the Socialists at 26 & 27 respond as they have done. Once again - to whom do you entrust the future of the Conservative party? Labour and Liberals? I think not.
As for Nuala, I must say that Rifkind is rather wet for my taste, but at least he’s a Tory and has been loyal to the party.
31 - And presumably you think David Davis has been a beacon of loyalty within the parliamentary party?
30 - Max, I think the objection is that BAT are alleged to have been slightly less than ethical in their eagerness to push their products on the children of the Third World.
I have no problem with consenting adults enjoying their products, although I’d hate to think you were on a mission to reduce the number of Tory supporters in Scotland
I tend to agree with Blue2Win and Max - it is tone and presentation that the Tories are really lacking (a lot of the policies are popular - until people find out its a Tory policy) and sites such as David Davis for Leader* and Derek Conway do not indicate that DD’s supporters have grasped that, although the man himself seems alright.
Consequently, although I like alot of what DD says, I think Cameron has the better skills at tone and image, while not being too leftwing. Another leader portrayed as an extremist right-winger by the BBC will not win the next election no matter what his actual policies are.
* by which i mean bile about the corrupt party pinkos like “Chairman Maoude” and traitors, etc.
“31 - And presumably you think David Davis has been a beacon of loyalty within the parliamentary party? ”
Yes I do, actually. What evidence do you have to suggest otherwise?
35 - Tabman I take you’re point. I’m also planning to give up when I’m 27 so I’ve only 2 and a half years of smoking left!
Jon G - You’re right about a leader who won’t be demonised by the BBC. I know a lot of people on the left feel it is balanced and beyond reproach but I think the prevailing attitudes at the BBC are extremely damaging to the Conservative Party and the centre-right in general.
31, Iron Lady, for Troll, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
BTW, yjos is probably the first time I have been refered as a “socialist”.
36 - give up for a week, and put the money in a jar. Then go out and buy something tangible with it (like a copy of the Orange Book
) to remind you how much money you’re burning.
If the BBC really is biased, won’t it treat any leader of the Tories as a dangerous right-winger? In which case, you as well get your money’s worth
(Which proves my point about a troll.) yjos - this.
36 - or alternatively think how much money you’d get if that was invested in a pension! You can practice your perpetuity calculations working it out
39. “If the BBC really is biased, won’t it treat any leader of the Tories as a dangerous right-winger? In which case, you as well get your money’s worth”
The BBC likes Cameron, but i dont think he’s as lefty as they think he is - his speech about the importance of marriage was fairly povitively presented, but I bet would’ve been unfavourably compared to Major’s “Back to Basics” or “victorian values” if Davis or Fox had tried it!
I wish we would just pick a leader and be done with it. I’d love to get back to policy discussion rather than the mines better than yours discussion there has been since the election.
41 - Tabman, I passed my final exam so I’ll hopefully never have to do those calculations again! Unfortunately I now have to pay nearly a grand in joining fees and subscriptions. Think thats what I’ll have to save up for! Ahh, the joy of accountancy.
3. Hold on Stuart did ditching CND for expanding our nuclear detterent harm Blair? Politics is the art of the possible, wherher KC has changed his views on the Euro or not is ireelevant he knows thanks to Blair it is now politically impossible for any PM to take us in. Blair had a window of opportunity in 1997-2001, that opportunity isw almost certainly gone forever, thank heaven.
I’m so happy KC appears to have seen sense. Maybe now the Tory Party will too. Tabman makes a good point at 11. My prediction, expect the Clarke-Cameron Camps to start doing a lot of talking. So let’s watch for the outcomess.
Ps Stuart as our man in Haggis Land. Can you report on the By-Election in the Autumn?
Re: 29 - me, insult a Tory !? You’re too kind - it makes getting up in the morning worthwhile. Nowadays, I find most Tories (and especially the young, frustrated and bitter ones) very thin-skinned.
31: You can call me a Socialist all you like. That doesn’t alter the fact that you have absolutely no understanding of politics or of what happened in the Labour party in the 1980s. Kinnock ditched the extremists in order to reform the Party. He recognised that pandering to the Left meant electoral oblivion for Labour. In the same way, pandering to the Right has meant electoral oblivion for the Tories. Throwing out the Europhobes would be as good a start for Cameron as chucking out Hatton was for Kinnock.
11-Tabman, you mention anti-Iraq war may not appeal to potential working class Tories. Do you really think social liberalism would?
46 - I can assure you that whilst I may be young I am neither bitter or frustrated. I just think it would be nice if people from all parties using this forum didn’t feel the need to make petty, partisan posts.
46 - Stodge, were Cameron to “throw out the Europhobes” he wouldn’t have any party left! Admittedly, you could argue that he could then replace them with new blood (much as Labour did, but in their case it was easier as they at least had some Social Demcorats left in the party).
47 - Peter (which Peter?) - I can’t really speak for the working class (ask Vino), but observation tells me that society has changed quite a lot in the last 30 years or so (single parents, gay couples, ethnically-mixed marriages etc etc) and those changes are equally prevalent in the Working Class (if not more so). Whilst some may hark back to a more conservative age, they probably wouldn’t want to see their relatives stigmatised.
Not me, mate! I agree that Iraq was a plus for Labour among core voters (net). (Just as it was for Major all those years ago).
Not me, mate! I agree that Iraq was a plus for Labour among core voters (net). (Just as it was for Major all those years ago).
25 - The two situations are not in the least bit comparable. Kinnock’s purges were aimed at the Militant Tendency, a Trotskyist sect external to Labour who were attempting, through entryism, a takeover of the Labour Party. By contrast, the One Nation left of the Tory party predate the Thatcherite neoliberal wing, so one might claim that those you deride as “quasi-socialists” have more of a claim to be real Tories than you do.
It seems that Iron Lady isn’t alone with her ideas in the Conservative Party, after all:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4141294.stm
“… Brian Binley, Peter Bone, David Burrows, Philip Davies, Robert Goodwill and Mark Harper represent a “new generation” of Tory MPs, they say.
They blame “woolly-minded” liberal thinking for society’s sliding values. …”
54. New Tory MPs launch an attack on “decadence” and “licentiousness”. In the Spectator, of all places
I don’t know I bimble away for a slightly generous lunch at the taxpayers expence and mighty nice too , and what do I find - that the “Iron Lady” has returned with an appeal for idealogical purity and 3 more election defeats . And to cap it all , the tories start to fall out !! I thought we were back in the good days of grey Y fronts and garden peas .
BTW I’m coming to the conclusion that the licence fee is jolly good value !!
Re: 48 - To be honest, Max, I’m happy to turn off the vitriol when the Tories (and it is usually the Tories) do the same. If every time someone called me a “woolly-minded liberal” I replied “it’s better than being a hard-hearted mean-spirited Conservative” I suspect the insults would rapidly die off.
It is my experience on this Forum and elsewhere that the frustrated Conservative reaches for the insult far quicker than anyone else. Maybe when you’ve been out of power for a hundred years, you’ll be more relaxed.
54 - these would be “the friends of Edward Leigh” I presume ? I look forward to hearing their solutions to this imagined decline and some rudimentary solutions behind their self-serving invective. They sound like Cromwellian puritans from the 1640s. Long live the Republic!
54 - you couldn’t make it up, could you?
56 - Jack, you are Charles Prentiss and I claim my £5! Either that, or you’ve been in the pub watching “Vaughnie’s” century.
Iron Lady I am not petrified of being called the nasty party, I am petrified we will not notice that the mud has stuck and take action to wash it off.
The non-Tory posters that say we are stuck with the hard core we do not seem able to break out of are largely right. To win we need to be attractive again to those that used to support us and give us 42 to 46% of the vote. When we were the largest party in Scotland, when we held inner city constituencies that were strongholds. And that is not ancient history I am talking about.
To do that we need to listen to what people say not once but always. We used to be so successful at that, Churchill, Macmillan, Thatcher and even John Major when he started out. We can never tell the voters what to think, we can only lead them to our conclusions by persuasion. And when last were you persuaded by someone shrilly shouting at you?
When we were a winning party we were not pure and unsullied, we were always a coalition of various views from Unionist to National Liberal from left to right Tory, free marketeer to state interventionist. Everyone of Mrs T’s Cabinets was a mixture of wet and dry, right and left, libertarian and dirigiste. Howe lived with Keith Joseph, Clarke with Tebbit and so on.
What has happened with Blair is that he has not only stolen our policies but, and more important, he has stolen our strategy too. He dropped the ‘better pure than in power’ left wing agenda Labour stuck to in the 70’s and 80’s and moved to ‘better power than purity’ on the basis that in power he could change things but without power he can only protest at what is changed.
I want the policy of Macmillan and Thatcher, Baldwin and Churchill: power not purity.
54/55 Hmmm/Lorcan . Back to the Future with the Conservatives : This product is brought to you by Stanley Baldwin Enterprizes in conjuction with Bonar-Law Associates !!
59 Blue2win . At the risk of damaging your Conservative credentials on the site may I say …… agreed . Oh dear have I shocked you .. lie down for a few minutes and consider the implications of an endorsement from the Leader of the Jacobite Party !!
61 Jack W Don’t ever say a thing like that again! Where did you learn such language?
57 - Well, they said that “Muslims who criticise the ‘decadent’ nature of British society are right”, so if we look at solutions to decline which have been used by like-minded muslims in certain countries, maybe they are up to introduce obligatory burkhas for women, or something alike.
59 - if someone was shouting at me shrilly and looked like this I might be persuaded.
63 - Hmmm, I made a point a few days ago about the resonance of traditional Muslim and Conservative values, and how the Tories were missing a trick.
64 Tabman But of what would you be persuaded? That he was not getting your vote even if his name is Jack?
B2W - I was obliquely making the point that shouty people can be very persuasive if they ahve an insane gleam in their eye, a nicely sharpened blade, and are standing between you and the exit of the room you’re in
64 - Tabman, well they seem to have taken heed of your advice.
59 Blue2win . We might have the wrong “Iron Lady” :
http://www.at-sheringham.co.uk/issue46/images/ironlady43.gif
59 Blue2win . We might have the wrong “Iron Lady” :
http://www.at-sheringham.co.uk/issue46/images/ironlady43.gif
66 - Would you find this man persuasive?
70 Stephen . As he’s just hung up a newly severed arm …. yes.
70, 71 - can I suggest some
by
Tabman
August 11th, 2005 at 4:53 pm
72 Tabman . A tempting offer , but I must demur , as I’m catching up on the Sky plused cricket !! 252-2 presently …. nearly there !
72 - Sorry if I’m missing the point but did you miss out a URL on that last post?
I find this report very intriguing and if confirmed, I think it could change the dynamics of the contest considerably. As mentioned on previous threads, I backed KC in the final ballot of members in 2001 against IDS as I felt it was in the best interests of the party, despite my fervent disagreement with Clarke’s position over Europe. In the intervening years, however, KC’s seeming indifference to the party and his unwillingness to serve it in any meaningful way has been a bone of contention with me. However, if - IF - KC were to modify his position on the single currency and integration, I would certainly feel at ease with his leadership. This doesn’t mean I will endorse him, but I certainly wouldn’t tear up my membership card should he prevail. I think there are a great many party members who would take this same view. Further, if some arrangement could be worked out with David Cameron on this basis, I think the bookies would soon have a new favourite. Interesting times…
59. Spot on BLUE2WIN.
75. Yes a KC win could bring a dilemma though the ooposdite to what they’ve had for a few years when the Shadow Cabinet had no talent, KC’s problem will be trying to fit all the talent in Hague, Rifkind, Cameron Davis and Willets and Osborne etc and of course Himselfs. Perhaps he could ask Jose Mourinho how he does it? What mightyou think?
77 Conspirator . A coat of many colours !
http://www.tiedyes.com/images/labcoatrainbowspiral.jpg
78. Nice one. Continuing the Mourinho theme maybe he could introduce a Shadow Cabinet Subs Bench, so if one is turning in a poor performance in the House he can carry out a half time subsitution for Fresh Legs. That Would Fox Labour!
79 Conspirator . I’m afraid Fox wouldn’t even make the subs bench . A free transfer to Monday Club Rovers …. perhaps.
79 Can I suggest, were you to form a party, your cabinet?
PM - Conspirator
Chancellor - Interest
Home Sec - David
Foreign Sec -WelsHMan
Defence - P
Education - I
Health - A
W&P - N
Industry - Darth Vader
Culture - Yoda
And you are Tabman 81? I would have thought you would have had more interest in political matters. apparently not.
Mr W, that is one thing that we can agree on. Fox, whilst a Scot, would do damage to our party whereas Rifkind would not.
Glad I’m not the only one to have found the preponderence of postings by this one individual something of a P - A - I - N.
cApitaL post, Inspector Morose!
Mindless abuse 84. Disagree with something, why don’t you say so? Where personal bile like this enter from, a mystery. never mind i’ll leave the field to you. All the Best.
83 Madam Nuala . Kind felicitations dear lady . However despite Sir Malcolm’s sonsy disposition I fear his nasal sonerous articulation is his undoing in this media and image over conscious age !
A good lieutenant but not first prize . I fear for you he will be the Lord George Murray to anothers Prince Charles Edward Stuart .
Far too little, far too late.
Not only does everyone know he doesn’t really mean it, if you’ve been
that wrong for that long over THE key economic and constitutional issue facing your Country, allied to being a smug, arrogant know it all whilst standing aside from the mainstream of the party and shadow
cabinet, why on earth could anyone ever be expected to value your judgment when you come seeking election.
Not to mention BAT !
As a DD supporter I hope he stands, it guarantees DD the crown.
All those who think the election is over had better take a second look. At the moment, the election is wide open. The CDU (42%) and FDP (6%) have a combined 48% of the vote. But the left-wing parties, the SPD (29%), the Greens (8%) and the New Left (11%) have the same percentage. If the CDU and FDP cannot gain a majority of the seats in parliament, a “grand coalition” will almost certainly be formed between the CDU and SPD. This is due in large part to the fact that major leaders in the SPD and Greens would not accept a coalition with the New Left, a party formed from the marriage of the Communist PDS of eastern Germany and the far left WASG of western Germany. At the moment, with the media fixated on Merkel’s armpit and largely oblivious to Schroeder’s long list of failings and shortcomings, the likelihood of a “grand coalition” seems quite high. And we don’t expect much to change on that front as the media will certainly continue to pound away at Merkel’s image. After all, it is election time and a conservative is in the lead…at least for now…
Hmmm @ 63: I hope I shan’t offend you when I say that your post was exactly what I feel that non-Muslims shouldn’t say. The comments by Muslims that have been made in public (who knows what’s said in private, whether in truth or in jest?) have been along the lines of “We’re worried about promiscuity and drunkenness being socially acceptable”. Muslims are certainly not alone in such worries; the difficulty is to make sure that attempts to prevent the *imposition* of such acceptability don’t turn out to be worse than the problem. If you suggest, even in fun, that Muslims would like to impose the wearing of the burqa (or amputation for theft, etc.), you make it more difficult for each Muslim to drive a line between the fanatic and the racist. Do you remember how the LibDems were sent up in the GE campaign for ’supporting 16-year-olds’ making pornographic films’? Yet it was hardly a central plank of their policy. Reasonable people don’t like having their silliest supporters’ comments exaggerated.
Home from work to find the Conservative leadership campaign making some posters more than a little tetchy and 1 poster seeming to be so schizoprenic he is arguing between himself on several aliases .
87 Tory Boy . “… As a DD supporter I hope he (Ken Clarke) stands it guarantees DD the crown .”
It also guarantees another Tory defeat in 2009 . Who’s your next pick of unelectable right-wing leaders - another 3 and you could have a sevens team.
You really have to wonder at the crassness of the Tories , as if you haven’t got the message from the voters after 3 crashing defeats and a fourth in the offing . Are you expecting the voters to come to you ? How many defeats will it take ?…. 5 maybe 6 . Is it true , have the Tories really become the stupid party ?!? I hope not but I fear so.
A H Matlock @ 75: I stand to be corrected, since you’re obviously far more knowledgeable, but should Clarke really be regarded as disloyal or even indifferent to the party? When he was a minister in Major’s government, his euro-position (if I may so call it) was govt. policy, though over-enthusiastic; it was Duncan Smith and others who were the rebels, the ‘b*stards’. When Hague and then IDS made quite a point of their opposition to (nearly) all things European, Clarke surely did well to keep from getting in their way as much as he did. (’Baldwin said on his retirement: “I promise not to distract the pilot or spit on the deck”; Margaret Thatcher spat on the p[ilot’s head.’) I know that this doesn’t make him right, but it makes him consistent and loyal rather than the reverse: Thomas More (film version)?
90 Mark . I’m glad I’m not the only one who found the earlier spat confusing !! I re-read the posts several times and came to the conclusion that I was having a bad day in the dyslexia department.
http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/iba0047l.jpg
re. 45 - Conspirator
- “… Ps. Stuart as our man in Haggis Land. Can you report on the By-Election in the Autumn?”
As an SNP haggis-eater, I did give my tuppence worth at the Robin Cook strand 3 posts ago. I had only been lurking, but as Book Value had referred to me in my absence, I thought that I had better stick my hand up, rather late in the proceedings, so maybe you missed it. As my contribution was stunningly insightful, I reproduce it here, and ask for our host’s indulgence. Before I do, a thought occurred to me subsequently: the LibDems on that strand were puffing up their chances in the Livingston by-election from a base result in May 05 of 15%, while simultaneously attempting to diminish the SNP’s national vote share of 18% (and 22% in Livingston Constituency). How is 15% for the LD’s in Livingston a solid foundation for victory, but 18% for the SNP in Scotland a massive setback? - just doesn’t stack up.
Here is a facsimile of bits of my comments at
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2005/08/07/robin-cook-1946-2005/#comment-80102
“… I strongly suspect that it will be the SNP and not the LibDems challenging Labour - we have a solid electoral record in West Lothian - but I would say that wouldn’t I? But as someone else has said, this one is really for Labour to lose - their choice of candidate is fundamental. Don’t forget that from September onwards we will be properly into the run-up to the Scottish Parliament General Election 2007 - a completely different ballgame to the recent Westminster GE - and in that contest the LibDems, Labour and SSP are all “on the back-foot” (the SSP especially are in profound difficulties), with the SNP, Tories and Scottish Greens all looking in strong positions to progress (remember, the LibLab Scottish Government has a majority of just 2… yes, that’s right: two). Therefore, will the voters of Livingston vote on Holyrood or Westminster issues? I reckon the former - and that is very good news for the SNP.
Here is the result from Livingston Constituency (which has slightly different boundaries) at Holyrood GE 2003:
Livingston Const - First Past The Post - 2003
1. Lab 44%
2. SNP 32%
3. Con 9%
4. LD 9%
5. SSP 5%
6. Scottish Peoples Alliance 1%
Livingston Const - Regional Vote - 2003
1. Lab 34%
2. SNP 25%
3. Ind (Margo MacDonald, former SNP) 9%
4. Con 8%
5. Scottish Green Party 6%
6. LD 6%
7. SSP 5%
(followed by ten other candidates, including UKIP at 0.39%)
Those statistics are not at all bright for the Laberals.”
(stats courtesy: http://www.alba.org.uk/scot03results/lr08.html
54- Nothing new in that artical, these 6 are (Brian Binley and Peter Bone are certainly so) members of the Cornerstone group and are, therefore, liable to frantic headbanging. If this ‘new generation of Conservatives’ can only muster 6 signatures in a letter to the Spectator then liberals and libertarians can probably still sleep easy in the knowledge that the Conservatives still have a semblance of sanity left.
59,
Blue to win, couldn`t agree more with your analysis.
That it is better power than purity.
It took Labour a lot of election defeats to take a reality check and eventually realise this.
I for one was glad Blair took the totem of clause four and changed the perception in one go.
Thus giving the party chance of real power again.
I realy do hope the for sake of the country a new conservative party takes your advice, on the road back to power.
94 Stuart Dickson . What is your analysis of the SNP election GE results . Surely losing several % and falling into third place was a disapointment to say the least .
BTW Excellent christian name !!
Tempora Mutantur Et Nos Mutamur In Illis
Blue2Win @ 59 - Very well said. Clarke is probably the only serious contender that can take back that extra 10% of former Conservative voters that we have lost, with a possibility of Cameron doing the same. Whilst the predicament that the Tories are in can be much exaggerated - I am extremely sceptical that they will suffer the fate of the post-WW1 Liberals - we urgently need to broaden our appeal to floating voters.
The one key piece of good fortune that we have benefited from is the LibDems’ continued pursuit of a “soft left” agenda under a semi-serious leader. Were it to follow the route outlined by Tabman et al. - one gaining increasing currency in the party itself - the Tories could be in real trouble breaking out of the 30-33% box. The real battle will be for libertarian-leaning voters who could well be pushed away by the musings of the Cornerstone group.
re. 97 Jack W
When did 2% start earning the adjective “several”? I thought the common descriptor for two was “a couple”.
Not a disappointment in the least. Indeed regular readers of my blog during April and May will tell you that I was happy as Larry. You see, the SNP were victims of their own success! (Stop tittering in the back row, I am being serious.)
In one word: targetting
in two: excellent targetting
We increased our seats from 4 to 6, turning Moray from a super marginal into our second safest seat, and giving the Tories a very bloody nose in Angus. Western Isles was the cherry on the cake, and Dundee East a great relief. Perthshire remains solid SNP territory, with the Lab-Con alliance in Clackmannanshire being the only fly in our ointment.
I’m afraid that money and media exposure are critical, and the SNP were out-spent by the Unionist parties and out-spun by the 100% Unionist press and broadcasters. In that context, the fact that our national share held up was impressive. Contrary to arguments on this blog, the pollsters generally predicted the actual SNP vote very accurately, give or take a couple of %.
PS. I do try desperately to appreciate the merits of the supposedly “enlightened”, “liberal” Hanoverians, but I have too much of the highlander in me. Cannot say that I find the Jacobites a very attractive bunch either though. If only Charles Edward Stuart had stopped in Edinburgh and been happy with the Scottish crown, instead of pillaging his way through northern England. Bruce and Wallace had made the same mistake, embarking on foreign exploits in Ireland and England.
89, pobedonoscev - I didn’t choose my word by coincidence. Read again, I said “like-minded muslims”. That didn’t imply that all the muslims would think like the “new generation Tory MPs”. Or are you know saying, that all muslims are liberal, while all Westerners aren’t?
I would appreciate very much, if you’d pay some more attention to the finer nuances of my words.
99 Stuart Dickson . 2.4% drop to be precise , but I accept your point. The surprise of the night must have been the 6% rise of the Lib Dems . Prior to the election the Scottish polls were all over the shop and it was difficult to assess the situation with any degree of accuracy . I thought that the Lib Dem position in government would have hindered them but it seems to give them added credibility . The next Holyrood elections will be most interesting.
On the Jacobite march into England . It really was inevitable , there was no way that the Elector of Hanover and the Liberal Democrats (Whigs) would allow an independent Scotland and ally of France on its’ northern border . So it was all or nothing !! We should never have stopped at Derby - We’d outflanked the English armies and London lay open to us , but that we’d had known that !! And the Elector had his bags packed for Hanover !! Such is fate .
Jack
I disagree about the Scottish polls being “all over the shop”. If you only look at the bona fide British Polling Council pollsters - YouGov, ICM, MORI, System Three - they were all pretty good, especially regarding the SNP and Tories. I carried a Scottish Poll of Polls (using those pollsters findings) in my sidebar during the campaign, and the final poll of polls was very close to the actual result, with the exception of the LDs. Probably can be put down to that old classic excuse - “the late swing”.
The only polls that really were “all over the shop” were the disgraceful charlatans calling themselves “Scottish Opinion” (sic) as used by those other digraceful charlatans The Daily Record/Sunday Mail. “Scottish Opinion” (sic) are not members of the BPC, and oh boy, did it show!
re. Jacobites and Hanoverians: yet more reasons to be a republican. Incidentally, you imply that it was Scots versus English - I beg to differ - there were many Scots on the Hanoverian side, and a significant number of English Jacobites.
The trouble with Clarke standing is that he’s probably unlikely to get a majority of the MPs behind him (although it isn’t impossible, I suspect that if it had been just up to the MPs in 2001 he would have beaten IDS, albeit narrowly), but he probably will come second, and the winner (David Davis) will rather unfairly spend the next four years being labelled as another unelectable right winger who they picked when they should have picked Clarke, when in my opinion he isn’t that much less charismatic than Clarke and would probably be even better at handling, for example, a 7/7 situation, and he certainly has some fresh and interesting ideas. So my position is I would only wish Clarke to stand if he’s almost certain to win, because I think he would make an excellent leader but if he comes second again it could do the party serious damage.
102 Stuart . Scottish Opinion Polls ” … with the exception of the LD’s …” - Big exception , but again good points about “Scottish Opinion” . Great word charlatan . We should use it more often !!
Yes your correct about the the opponents on each side - in many ways it was a UK wide mini civil war . However I’m concerned about your Republican leanings , it’s bad enough having Tabman as a nasty little puritan but a Caledonian Cromwell is hard to bear !!
91 Jack W - Only in your subjective and biased opinion.
If you think a fourth “crashing” defeat is in the offing who gives a damn - you’re clearly never going to vote Conservative in any event
Who or what gives you the God given right to shout the odds about what might or might not happen in 2009.When were you declared a ’seer’or this now the Jack W blog spot?
Regarding the length of time it takes for a return of a proper and
sensible Government - simple - as long as it takes to do it properly
on a principled basis with proper policies that the party membership believe in.
Far better than on the do anything and say anything shambolic basis that the curent incompetents operate on.
Labour lost 4 times on the spin, we’ve lost 3.
Tides change, values shouln’t ( or they were false to begin with)
See you at the count!
92 - Pobedonoscev: I don’t disagree with some of what you say - you’ll note that I never referred to KC as ‘disloyal’ in my original post. I fully respect his democratic right to hold whatever views on Europe he wants, but we as a party have the right not to elect someone who doesn’t share the views of most of our membership on such a vital question. If he moderates his position, he comes further back into line with mainline thinking on Europe and the Single currency within the party, and therefore he becomes a more realistic leadership contender. What has really angered me about Ken over the last 8 years has been his unwillingness to put himself at the service of the party when we so clearly and badly needed somebody of his stature and talent. He could have had his pick of Shadow Cabinet jobs and I would like to have seen him taking a more active role in holding this government to account. This is really want I was driving at in my earlier post.
Having said that, I’m quite prepared to set that aside and get behind KC if he becomes our leader. I’ve already committed to supporting David Cameron and I think for various reasons that I’ve gone into before that he is still in our long term best interest, but if the much mentioned teaming up between KC and DC were to happen, I would be comfortable with that, provided today’s reports of KC’s re-evaluation of his position on Europe are true.
105 Tory Boy . Conservatives - out for the count ….. if you have your way !
Comment by The Sooth Sayer of Kinkell
By Appointment Charles Edward Stuart , Prince Regent . 25th December 1745 .
104 Jack W
As we were talking of opinion polls and republicanism: the overwhelming survey evidence, from all recognised pollsters, is that the vast majority of Caledonians are republicans. Maybe that does make us a nation of nasty little puritans, but I could name several monarchist societies that are far more unpleasantly puritanical (Japan or Sweden anyone?) - our good liberal monarchist neighbours the English being an exception, of course.
108 Stuart . Not sure about Sweden ?! Most of the European Monarchies are pretty liberal within the usual constraints of Constitutional Monarchy - Spain , Belgium , Netherlands , Norway and Denmark.
BTW what is the SNP’s latest policy on the monarchy in an independent Scotland .
When speaking about the benefits of monarchies, people often mix the reasons and consequences. I doubt that monarchy would make a country more stable or liberal (if they would be stable, there wouldn’t have been revolutions in the current republics in the first place). I think that it is the other way around - monarhcy has been able to survive in stable, democratic and relatively liberal countries, where radical change isn’t that urgent.
Jack
BTW what is the SNP’s latest policy on the monarchy in an independent Scotland .
Post-independence referendum.
(SNP favours Commonwealth membership - there are many republics already in there.)
A lot has been talked about the LD’s by-election track record but in Scotland its not great. Other than Strathkelvin & Bearsden they haven’t significantly increased their vote. And Livingston is nothing like Strathkelvin & Bearsden.
I agree with Stuart that it is Labour’s to lose but I can’t see it happening. The one big issue could have been the downgrading of St Johns Hospital (where my flatmate was a doctor) but this is in the past and Robin Cook came out strongly against it. On top of that the downgrading was executive policy so the LD’s can hardly campaign against it. Their may also be a bit of a sympathy vote which will make it harder for the challenger.
104 - Jack, news may not have reached Kinkell Towers (Herts) since the C17th, but these days one can be in favour of abolishing the monarchy without being nasty, little, or a puritan.
113 Tabman . Mr & Mrs Tabman prepare for a trip to their local Tesco.
http://www.siue.edu/COSTUMES/images/PLATE60AX.JPG
111 Stuart . Will the SNP recommend a Republic within the Commonwealth or is this an issue that the SNP regards as one of individual conscience within the party.
114 Jack, left, (and young friends) says Hello Sailor!.
116 Tabman . Somewhat more fetching that your own drab Lib Dem garb , seen here canvassing delicately for votes in West Bridgford :
http://www.chnm.gmu.edu/history120/images/puritans_engraving.jpg
Hmmm @ 100: Yes, I think I see what you mean. Sorry. I hope you see what I mean, too.
105 Tory Boy . Conservatives - out for the count ….. if you have your way !
Comment by The Sooth Sayer of Kinkell
By Appointment Charles Edward Stuart , Prince Regent . 25th December 1745 .
Comment by Jack W — 11/8/2005 @ 10:32 pm
Dear JW,
Sorry, been far too busy fighting the battle against insane licensing laws to post of late….speak soon…
The meeting on 27th Sept has been cancelled