Sunday press roundup, 28th August 2005
August 28th, 2005Weekend words weighed
The Conservative leadership election gets heavy coverage in today’s papers. The Sunday Times reminds readers that the left-leaning former minister Tim Yeo was still in the race, but has now dropped out to back Kenneth Clarke. Clarke is interviewed in the paper and, in a sentence that both his supporters and opponents are likely to enjoy, is quoted as saying: “I find it almost comic the number of people who tell me they would vote Tory if I were leader.” The Observer repeats another quote from that interview – “The Lib Dems are terrified of me” – and also predicts that Clarke will speak out during the campaign on his opposition to the Iraq war.
The once vaunted idea of a Clarke–Cameron “dream ticket” now seems dead, and the Sunday Telegraph has both the former Chancellor and the Shadow Education Secretary saying so. Pro-Clarke sources say that “Ken can win, with or without David Cameron … Something drastic would have to happen to stop him from running now. He is fit, robust and raring to go.” Those outside his inner circle would probably score him two out of three on that. A separate and more comprehensive interview with Cameron, which quotes him as rejecting a pact with Clarke (“I don’t believe that the right way of going about this is talking about doing deals.”) and, on the policy front, calling for compulsory community service for school-leavers. Melissa Kite’s article also describes a “thawing of relations” between Cameron and David Davis.
The Independent on Sunday has a short article making the point that Clarke is likely to run whether or not the system for electing the leader is changed.
The betting markets have upgraded Clarke’s chances to a 6/1 shot, while Davis is at 0.75/1 and Cameron at 4.2/1.
The main coverage of foreign politics in the British papers today is on the German general election, to be held on 18th September. The Observer covers the election and reports that 48% of Germans remain undecided on how to vote. In The Sunday Times’s long profile of CDU leader Angela Merkel [split across two web pages], the paper sees the 4th September TV debate between Merkel and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder as key, and points out that the contrast between Schröder’s assurance with the media and Merkel’s more hesitant delivery could benefit either one of them.
The betting on Germany remains quiet, with Merkel still regarded as nearly certain to become Chancellor after the election.
Philip Grant
Guest editor
Mike Smithson is on holiday until 5th September.
MessageSpace Advertising
Sounds like the final will be between Ken and the Two Davids Dream Ticket of Davis and Cameron.
Ken may be doing us a real service by concentrating minds among the “modernisers”.
Onward to victory in 2010.
1. Wat Tyler. “Onward to victory in 2010″
Regretably for the Tories it’ll be victory for Labour if the y choose Cameron or Davies. Even Ken who I prefer will only bring the Tories into 270-300 territory at most.
Look down the list of 130 seats required for a Tory win next time. It’s not pretty reading. So who is going to bring the Tories into the game for the following election in 2013/14 and bring on the talent . Step forward Kenneth of Rushcliffe.
One of the more interesting points in todays papers is that Ken does not discount a Con/LibDem coalition in a hung parliament.
“The Sunday Times reminds readers that the left-leaning former minister Tim Yeo ”
well, they’ve to remind it to us, because I almost forgot about his existence.
In The Times there’s also a piece by Blair’s biographer about what he wants to introduce (education and health system in particular) in the coming months. After reading the “Blair push for revolution” haedline, I was a bit worried that he wanted to guillotine Gordon Brown (Clare Short is already trying to leave the country before being caught!).
2. Could you ever see yourself voting for a Tory party led by David Davis then Jack. What would he have to do to convert you
2. Jack W, before boundary changes what swing will the tories need to get a majoirty? Do you have the list of marginals?
OT, always for you, Jack: Your Scot Murray is facing Andrei Pavel from Romania in first round at the US Open.
4.woody. They say judge a man by the company he keeps … Derek Conway !! Even allowing Conway , DD doesn’t inspire as a potential PM at this stage . If elected he may become inspirational and bring forward policies that reflect the 21st century . Nevertheless I just have this nagging feeling that in previous Tory governments DD would have made a solid Minister of State and no more.
So in answer to your question , at this stage DD is a no no for me , but time and events may change that . Unlikely but not a never ! And of course one must consider the other right of centre alternative - NuLabour
5 Andrea. Off hand I think it’s a notional of around 5%. The arithmetic for the Tories is made worse by their poor performance in the Midlands , North and Scotland and the Lib Dems pushing the Tories into third place in too many constituencies and their holding of around 60 seats. It’s a terribly tough ask for the Tories and I feel beyond them on current form.
On Andy Murray , he stands a good shot against Pavel who’s not in good form . They play on Tuesday. Murray is in Federer’s part of the draw and if Murray progresses he’d meet the big Swiss cheese in the last 16.
Is Cameron not supposed to represent the liberal Notting Hill crew? All he goes on about these days is the importance of marriage and now compulsory community service. Not to mention the Nazi-Islamist spiel. Is this all just to win over the “traditional” sections of the Party?
Jack…Jack…
He which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man’s company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
Davis believes in the things I believe in. Ken doesn’t.
It’s as simple as that.
What does Davis believe in?
8 Julian. Spot on. DC is tacking to the right to attract support in the belief he’s got a sizeable chunk of the centre and centre left in his pocket. Ken is likely to do the same , it’s all smoke and mirrors and perfectly predicable but amusing anyway.
11. But doesn’t he risk losing sections of the so-called centre/centre-Left to KC? I assume you’re referring to support from the MPs by the way, and that he assumes (if this is how it will work) the members will vote him to the final rounds.
9 Wat Tyler. Idealogical purity above all else. You’ll be sounding like the SWP next, and I thought you were a broad church not a narrow sect .
Remember elections are won from the centre and the Tories are so far from it in the electorates eyes that you’ll stay in your low 30’s box unless you change . Opposition is very frustrating , the more so after 12 years of Labour …. will you bid it up to16 or 20 years. The voters don’t care if you stay there …. but do you , as Ken said today “How badly do you want the red boxes ?” Not enough I’d say at the moment.
7. Thanks Jack.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4192870.stm
Dr Fox urged the party to concentrate on attacking the government and to talk about policies instead of indulging in “endless speculation” about its future. (and IMO he’s not wrong)
He added that politics had become a “glorified, second rate soap opera” with personalities and image more important than policies.
Next on BBC, the hottest soap of the moment “Tory Leadership Race”:
David Cameron as the young charming heart-throb who wants to change the family brand
Theresa May as the young heroine who wants to save the world (in this case the party members)
Ken Clarke as the old family patriarc who run a tabacco business
David Davis as the ambitious man who wants to take over the family business (the tory party)
Alan Duncan as the useless gay character (every soap needs one in these day)
Dr Fox as the good (?) doctor who wants to save all dying people (always the tory party)
Derek Conway as the behind the scene plotter
Malcolm Rifkind as the nice uncle who gives good advices, but no one pays attention to.
After 2 days without going off topic, I wasn’t able to resist this time (sorry Tabamn!)
It all sounds a bit Dallas doesn’t it.
15. Woody, soap writers don’t usually have lots of fantasy. Then Dallas characters could be typical tory voters. I’ll let you decide who will be shot
6 - Jack W, the fact DD is friends with Alistair Campbell is what bothers me. I have concerns about anyone who would befriend such a despicable individual. Perhaps Wat could tell us more about this.
I like Cameron a lot but the more I speak to friends who are a-political (and for the anti-KC people that doesn’t make them Guardian reading Lefties who would never vote for us anyway), the more it seems that Ken is the obvious choice. I’ve got to help the party fight an election in 2007. With KC in charge I think we can make real progress I’m not sure if the same is true of David Davis or David Cameron.
Just looking over the results of the May 2005 election in more detail, am I right in saying that for the conservatives to be returned to power in 2009/2010 they would need about the same sort of swing/number of seats Tony Blair recieved in 1997 or would they require a less of a swing?
18. I think that the tories need 126 more seats to have an absolute majoirty. It means winning seats where they’re more than 10% behind. To have an idea, with the old boundary Norwich North (a 11.6% labour majority) is tory target number 116.
17 - Don’t go wobbly now, Max. You must hold your nerve!
Realistically we’re looking to achieving a hung parliament and work from there I’d have thought.
On a theoretical uniform swing and allowing for boundary changes the national situation would need to look something like C:40%, L:33%, LD: 18% for there to be a chance of a majority tory government.
20 - Alistair, its just such a tough decision. I’m more than happy not to be one of the people who has to cast a vote!
21 - That’s right. We’ve got to be honest with ourselves about these things. Unless Blair and Brown fall flat on their faces or the economy goes into depression, we shouldn’t realistically be expecting to win in 2009/2010. What we should look for is the electorate growing incrementally more and more tired of this lot being in power and present ourselves as the natural alternative to them (which we are). It wouldn’t take much to deprive Labour of their overall majority at the next election and depending on the seat totals, there could be all to play for.
The problem with that is that will, in the current scheme of things, lead to a referendum on PR. That might work in the Conservatives’ favour of course: imagine a position where the Conservatives are the largest party, a Lab-LD coalition is denounced as a squalid attempt to ensure permanent dominination, the referendum is lost, and the coalition collapses in mutual recrimination.
20 - As a member of the Constitutional Convention, I am entitled to vote on the rule changes, but I am hoping to disenfranchise myself as far as the actual selection of the new leader goes. Isn’t that rather amusing?
17 Max. Being a friend of AC shouldn’t put you off DC, as Campbell, for all the rubbish in the media, is a clubable type of chap,who has friends of all shades of opinion , it’s just he doesn’t mix politics, power and friendship.
BTW did you raise half a cheer for Hibs yesterday !! 3.0 away to Rangers !! I think Hearts are as low as 4/1 for the SPL. Are you tempted
Would Labour backbenchers really support PR? Turkeys and Christmas spring to mind.
27. I’m on Hearts at 500-1 Jack. Sitting pretty at the moment.
28 - I don’t think Labour are any more interested in PR than we (Conservatives) are. The only ones to benefit from it will be the Lib Dems, and the strategists in the Labour Party know that, and I’m sure they feel as I do that the Liberals should be left to fight their own battles.
It would be very dififcult to get through Labour, certainly. Even when it looked as if Labour would never win another election under FPTP, there was significant resistance, and Brown may very well prefer a Labour minority government losing a confidence vote and going into opposition to making a deal with the LDs.
28 Andrew. Or government limos and red boxes spring to mind. It’s why Ken would consider a coalition .
29 woody. Lucky dog ! But perhaps think on , as it’s the more than twice the price as Bernard Jenkin becoming Tory leader !!!
It is possible to imagine ways in which PR might help the Tories break the Lab-LD voting bloc, although I wouldn’t recommend it myself. If the current Conservative splits into two parties: one that is Euro-realist, traditionalist, upholds social decency and moral values, and another one that is tehcnocratic, socially and economically liberal, as well as being more equivocal on Europe, then the former under PR could unlock the conservative, but Labour-voting, bloc in the Labour heartlands while the other could appeal to the urban young professional vote. If the two parties come together again in coalition, you’d have effectively have remade a dominant Conservative bloc in two different guises.
To me it sounds as though the next general election will be quite similar to the 1992 GE (UK elect latest prediction has Labour majoirty of 21, the same as John Major got in 1992, http://www.ukelect.co.uk/LatestForecast/) in that the best the opposition can hope for is a hung parliament with the tories as the biggest party. Thats not to say I think a tory win in 2009/2010 is out of the question but as many of you have commented on, it would require the right leader being chosen, whoever that may be, and for the Labour party to mess up in some big way,
Thanks for all your comments on this issue:)
27 - No I never cheer the wee team. 4/1 is ridiculous. Feeling quite lucky after getting three winners at Musselburgh on Thursday so I might see what odds I can get on a treble for the JT’s!
As for Campbell I think he is the last person who can complain about ‘rubbish in the media’.
33 - Observer, I suspect there are enough people in all three parties who could coalesce around a socially and economically-liberal programme, but under FPTP they are condemned to fighting against each other rather than for a cohesive programme.
O/T it looks as though I shall be returning my Test tickets for tomorrow
This is real hide behind the sofa stuff … yesterday’s odds on the Aussies are starting to look like a good bet
The usual mob are at work again here doling out the usual stuff about ‘mountains to climb’ if the Tories are to win in 2010. All self deluding but comfortable stuff from the NuLab songbook.
I suppose its trotted out in the hope that we will give up and take a mogadon and be no more trouble to the Labour ruling classes. Well, bad luck, but it won’t work.
Sadly for that maudlin tendency the figures are rather different. In 1992 the swing against the Conservative government to Labour was (GB) a 1.8% and in 1997 10.2%.
In 2005 the swing against the Labour government was 2.7% to the Conservatives. And so in 2010?
Using Baxter (with all the caveats) it seems the swing needed for a Tory government at the next election is 6.2%.( 5.5% another poster estimates with boundary changes).
So a swing of a little more than a half of that Labour achieved in 1997 would see a Conservative government in 2010.
So forget hung parliaments: we are not going for second prize. And forget fantasies of decades of Brownite gargantuan and insatiable bloated state bliss: it ain’t going to happen.
B2W - and who’s the man to lead you out of the wilderness?
38 - The usual mob seem to include your own esteemed member Alastair Matlock who has many more years of experience of politics than yourself . Yes all things are possible given 4 years even as I said yesterday a large swing to the Lib Dems or perhaps a swing back to Nulab but we can and should be realistic and recognise that the likekiest outcome of the next GE is a hung parliament but carry on with your dreams Blue2win Zzzzzzzzz
38 - B2W
In 1997, the Tories polled 30.6% of the national vote. This surged to 31.7% in 2001. It soared on 5th May to 32.3%. To sum, the Tories increased their popularity by all of 1.7% in 8 years. The party of Disraeli, Churchill and Thatcher appears to be incapable of persuading more than one-third of the British public to entrust them with governing this country again.
Officially, you’re right: the 2005 GE showed a swing of 3% from Labour to the Conservatives. Such a figure is, though, pretty misleading. The layperson would infer from such a statistic that Labour lost support to the Conservatives. Hmmm, not so much.
What it shows is that Labour’s share of the vote dropped by 5.5%, while the Tories put on 0.6%. (Combine the two figures then divide by two to calculate the swing.) It would be a far more accurate representation of the election to show an overall swing from Labour to the Liberal Democrats of 4.5% - because that was the real story of last May.
But please, keep believing what you believe. “Steady as she goes” is just the lesson we non-Tories here and elsewhere want you to cling to.
cheers, stephen
30 - Alastair, as Ken’s interested in a coalition with us I take it he’s also interested in PR?
26 A H Matlock Are you saying you will vote for the proposed changes to the constitution and remove the democratic mandate from party members?
39 Tabman We need someone to build on our improved position (majority of councillors, votes in England, improved performance in Wales is one medium sizzed step for Toridom) and put NuLab where they belong: in opposition.
While I am not one of the ‘mountain to climb’ morbidity, there is a lot of work to do. But it is by no means an impossible task with a good clear four or five year run at it.
Who is best to do this is more difficult than identifying who cannot do this. KC can’t do it. Willis is clever and must have a central policy role but is no leader. May, did well in her constituency but not as Chairman, so not likely. Lansley lightweight and Fox is as stiff as a board on the box and seems striving to be Selsdonman III. Rifkind is a good bloke and a good minister who took some tough decisions in the MoD but is not a leader. He could well be a new Willy Whitelaw figure.
So the choice is down to Cameron or Davis. Either will do the job but which is best I have not been able to decide yet.
40 Mark Senior How do you know what experience I have? Hmmmm. If guesstimating my antiquity is the sole basis of your argument, it isn’t very weighty is it? And of course your constant assertion that the most likely outcome of the next election is is a hung parliament is just that: an assertion.
B2W - I don’t normally like to utter forged documents, but I’d be more than happy to write a letter from Herself or even John Major recommending you to whoever leads the Stupid Party next, as campaign generalissimo
O/T: Bet365 are offering 3-10 odds on Stoltenberg being the next Norwegian PM (i.e. bet 100, win 30). The latest poll puts his alliance ahead by 94-74 seats, with two weeks to go, and his Social Democrats have just shot up by 7%. I don’t usually bet, but I think I’ll have a punt on that.
46. Good luck in getting your bet on Nick. I struggle to get more than a tenner on with bet 365. Not very keen on people who show signs of winning.
44 - Blue2win , Your vast experience of politics is clearly evident in your every post LOL .
Woody: No, I put down £100 using the pb.com link from the scrolling advert and they accepted it without problems, and threw in a £25 free bet to boot (which I’ve also put on the Norwegian outcome). But I’ve never bet with them before (and probably never will again since I try to only bet on certainties) so perhaps they are stingier if you have a successful track record. I’m amazed that they have a sufficiently liquid market for all their Norwegian election bet options - about 15 things you can bet on.
44: It’s all a matter of opinion and you’re entitled to yours. I’ll just observe that your tag on this forum was also blue2win before the May election, and, um… Well, OK, you didn’t say WHEN they’d win - you meant 2009 all the time, eh?
42 - Steve: I doubt it. KC has never said anything to give me the impression that he’s in favour of PR at all, and I would expect if he’s going to go to all the trouble of trying for the leadership and fighting a campaign in four years time at his age, he’s interested in power alone or not at all. He may be open to working with the Lib Dems if that was necessary (and who knows what the situation will be after the next election) but I rather doubt that he is going to be willing to support PR as the price of Liberal support. I certainly would advise against it.
43 - B2W - Yes, I am voting in favour of the proposed changes to return the final say on the leadership to the Parliamentary Party where it belongs. The present one member-one vote system was poorly conceived from the outset and should never have been put in to practice. I don’t think anyone can argue that it has served us well. As far as the democratic element goes, I am willing to consider an electoral college system in the future or perhaps even a primary system, but it’s clear to me that based on the current composition of our membership, one member-one vote has not worked for us. We need to ensure that our leader has the support of his MPs, with whom he has to work on a daily basis, and who have more impact on the political fortunes of the party than any of us in the country do.
Nick Palmer MP, Innocent Abroad and Mark Senior Your posts in response to mine clearly show that the certainties you espouse are rather more fragile than you would have us think.
51 A H Matlock I worry about the MPs only having a say as they do not cover the whole country, and the IDS outcome cannot be laid solely at the membership’s door. After all the MPs chose those two polar opposites. A leader also needs the support of the members and worker too, and completely disenfranchising them will make that task even harder. Is one of the reasons for an aging membership that young people do not feel there is any point in it as they have no say in anything worthwhile?
An electoral college would overcome all those problems to one degree or another.
My first posting since the heady days of May! I’m backing DD,DC & KC for the Tory leadership at a total combined binary price of 69 on IG. The question is, are there any other possible outsiders who can upset this happy applecart?
52 - Blue2win , you seem to mix up the meaning of the words certainty and most likely . At this stage in the electoral cycle a hung parliament is the most likely outcome of the next GE , a Conservative outright majority one of the least likely . None of the possible outcomes are certainties although if your views were widely held in the Conservative party the latter will pretty soon become one .
54 Marchgale. In short no , the rest are no-hopers casting around for a decent position in the shadow cabinet. It’ll be one of DD, DC or KC.
The Tory membership does not necessarily cover the whole country either, certainly not demographically, and there is no reason to assume members of any Party know what it takes for a Leader to appeal to voters who are not members. As a paid-up Tory member I am more than happy for the final vote to be returned to the Parliamentary Party.
54 - Hi Marchgale , Looks a good position to be in as far as I can see . I know they say beware the Dark Horse but the others in the contest are pretty much nags not up to pulling Benny Hill’s milkcart .
Are the tories MPs so better than the tory members in chosing their leader? The last time they voted out Portillo to make room for Duncan Smith. Not a great choice.
Ha, fair point Andrea
60. With only MPs voting, I fear that some of them won’t vote for the best leader, but they’ll vote according to their personal rivalities. Behind the scene plots will have a much bigger impact.
Meanwhile in New Zealand, the nationals are reducing the gap after their tax cut pledge.
There is a risk of personal feuds determining votes, but the MPs will be far better informed as to what the electorate wants than the members. The crux for me is that the members of any Party do not reflect the electorate, in fact are likely to have different concerns, so there is little benefit in having them select a leader. Generally I see no point in internal democracy (to that extent anyway).
Re PR: I’ve always thought that the likely scenario one day would be that the LibDems did a deal with someone to get it at local authority level and review the position after 5 years for Parliamentary. I think this would be hard for them to say no to, and conversely most MPs don’t really care that much how local authorities are elected. But the LDs would need to be careful that the coalition looked plausible in policy terms, since they’d otherwise be accused of selling their souls for electoral advantage.
62.” the MPs will be far better informed as to what the electorate wants than the members.”
I’m not that sure.
“The crux for me is that the members of any Party do not reflect the electorate, in fact are likely to have different concerns”
yes, they don’t represent the whole electorate, but do the MPs represent the whole electorate? They only come from 198 constituencies. The concerns of female voters (the majority of voters I think) won’t be represented very well by tory MPs and the concerns of some areas will be left out.
Mark S & Jack W - thanks! Another tidy profit, then. But it’s never over until the fat lady sings!
50: In fairness, a bit of partisan posturing was evident from all sides…your own estimate of Labour’s majority was a touch on the high side :).
As to the issue in question, the seemingly perennial Conservative leadership debate, the cold hard truth is that, amongst floating voters, Ken Clarke is clearly the most popular candidate. Cameron could possibly grow into the role, but he is inexperienced and it’s a bit of a gamble. Davis has sound policies in many areas (especially taxation and the relationship between the individual and the ever-more-intrusive state) but isn’t going to be able to win the extra 8-10% needed to guarantee a Tory majority government. In a hung parliament situation, I’m afraid to say that Davis will be most likely to guarantee continued Tory Opposition.
The choice isn’t between PM Davis, PM Clarke and PM Cameron - were this the case, I would be reluctant to back Clarke, to say the least. The actual case is that it will be a choice between a Labour government and a Conservative government. In this situation, I’m backing whoever will be likely to get us nearest to power and finish Labour’s spell in office. My instinct - and it’s one that seems to be borne out the more floating/ex-Tory/centrist voters I speak to - is that Clarke is the one most likely to deliver that.
65 Marchgale. I thinks she’s clearing her throat in the dressing room and if I might say so Anne Widdeecombe has already come out for Ken … and boy have you heard her warble
28. Labour backbenchers expressed their support for PR, but often it was not clear what type of PR they would support.
But a bill to introduce PR could face strong opposition from Labour backbenchers, bacuse some of them will lose their seats with PR (like happened when PR was introduced for the Euro Elections)
I also have to admit that like Max I am coming round to the prospect of a Ken Clarke leadership being the best option forward. I am not sure quite why, but I just sense that he would work as the correct antidote to Blair and New Labour and be able to deal with Brown when he becomes PM. Dropping his support of the EURO clearly helps KC. I am even starting to gradually move around to his position on the war as I realise my liberal interventionism unfortunately has limits.
However I do think KC has to start spelling out what he would do as Tory leader, certainly in relation to domestic policies such as taxation and public services. I also hope he drops BAT ASAP.
67. Jack, Widdy in all her glory:
http://www.political.co.uk/annwiddecombe/images/jrpic15_t.jpg
I still have to decide if I prefer her with blonde or black hair.
70 Andrea. Michael Howard …Exterminate … Exterminate …
AHMatlock, JulianH & others: Isn’t the problem with the present Tory system for electing the leader that it puts the cart before the horse? Now if the members presented the shortlist (of more than 2, perhaps, but not more than say 4), and the MPs then decided, that would cover both democracy and practical (Westminster) politics. But I am not a member of the party (or any other party).
71. What is the thing next to her in that photo?
That, Andrea, is a postal voting machine: you insert your envelope in one of the slots, and it *automatically* shifts it to where you *should* have put it to vote correctly.
74. Oh, thanks. I thought it was a very modern stove!
Well, there is a second use; after all, the postal votes ought to be used for some good purpose.
76. I’ve always wondered where all ballots go after the election. Are they distroyed? How long have they to be kept?
69. KC may well have widened his appeal within the Tory party by his U-turn on Europe, but this will now make him less attractive to Lab/LD voters.
Another supporter for Ken Clarke as Tory leader is Neil Kinnock,why:
‘Because it would cause such a deep schism within the Tory party that it would ensure Labour would be in power for another generation’.
Our mythical Helen Clark (has she officially joined the tories now?) said that she would have supported Ken Clarke.
80. Problems with the photo (is the computer rebelling against HC?).
Another try
53 - I’m not convinced that geographical distribution is very important; and surely the other parties don’t have this down perfectly either. As to your second point regarding rank-and-file support for the leader, you have to remember that most of us in the country are far less apprised of political calculation and much less ambitious than our colleagues in the Parliamentary Party. I think most of us are good soldiers who would fall in behind whomever was chosen as our leader for the good of the party. Afterall, the system I support reverting to served us fairly well between 1964 and 2001 when we held power for 23 of the 37 years ecompassed under Heath, Thatcher and Major.
72 - I appreciate your point, but I still feel that returning the determining vote to the parliamentary party is preferable to the present system; though I do think that an electoral college system would be the ideal, unfortunately it isn’t on offer at this time.
The Libdems seem MIA in these days, but it seems that something is movig even among them
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1754925,00.html
46. Nick, are Norwegian elections next month? If so, how many foreign elections will take place in September? Norway, New Zealand, Germany and Japan. Any other?
83 A H Matlock Your point about the system of MPs voting for leader in the past is certainly valid. But that system itself was adopted when the increasing openness of our national democracy made a change imperative. And we found something suitable for the time.
But, another Ben Disraeli aphorism, Change is inevitable in a progressive country. Change is constant.
I cannot see any contemporary party being successful without a broad base of support. Almost all parties have a dwindling membership base. How is that to be rectified? It is unlikely to be so by diminishing the involvement and the influence of party members. They will almost certainly rally round any new leader (won’t we all) but the level of enthusiasm might be greater if the leader was at least partly their creation, they would be less likely to rock the boat too.
But most of all the ordinary members must feel they count for something. That feeling can crate and sustain an enthusiasm and commitment that makes recruitment and retention so much more effective.
On a purely political front how much harder will it be to convince the electorate that we are serious about giving back control of their own lives if we are taking control of the party back to the centre?
83 - B2W, I respect your sincerity, but with all due respect, I don’t think the public give a toss how we elect our leader. Liam Fox had it right this morning when he said that the Conservative Party is far too interested in talking about itself. Let’s select the system that suits our political purposes best and not worry about the publicity of it all when it’s abundantly clear that except for anoraks like us, the wider public is totally uninterested.
We need to keep our long term aim in sight here: to put Nick Palmer (sorry Nick - nothing personal, you know.. just business) and about 100 of his colleagues and a third as many Liberal MPs out of a job. I am interested in getting back in power and taking the shortest route to it as I perceive it to be. Ideaological purity and petty internal issues matter less and less to me the longer we find ourselves out in the cold. To that end, I implore my fellow Conservatives: Let’s have a chance. Let’s work together and do what is necessary to get back and set aside our piddling differences, stop the navel gazing and self absorption and we’ll win again.
The grammar of my last post is atrocious - apologies. Too many glasses of Port, I suppose. And on that note, time for bed!
84 85 A H Matlock Your post was perfectly clear. I heartily agree with you about regaining power and winning back seats lost to the LibDems in the dark days. I have no interest in having purity over power. Definitely power over purity anytime.
That does not preclude debate. I believe the Tory party has not discussed what it is for and what it wants to do for long, often or widely enough in the past. And it shows in our poor performances in the last three elections. The argument should be good and strong until the decision is made and then we should all support that decision: in this case the change of the constitution.
I am sure the general population will not naturally take a vast amount of notice of our constitutional discussion but you can be as sure as eggs that our opponents will make them aware if there is any chance of demonstrating the ‘hypocrisy of the Tories’ again.
You may be interested that tradesports.com has the best price on CAMERON if you are a SELLER.
Surely, Alastair and Blue, what you are saying is simply “power first, and principles second”. Well, yes, I always did understand that that was the essence of the Tory Party. So what has changed?
89. But we don’t live in a presidential system. Whoever wins the leadership will have to work with the same party, parliamentary party and shadow cabinet (more or less). KC would presumably stay on the back benches if he lost, but he would still be in the Commons, DD and DC would surely be in the Shadow cabinet either way. The point being that debates about ideological purity seem to forget that no one person - whoever the leader is - can impose their principles. They have an advantage in defining and steering the debate and that’s it.
As far as the mechanisms go for electing the leader, the parliamentary party is too geographically restricted - not enough urban seats, not enough in the north, Scotland or Wales - and the membership in general is unrepresentative of Tory and potential Tory voters, never mind the electorate at large. Both can (understandably) be influenced by selfish interests - personal with MP’s, ideological with members. Therefore, to mitigate these different instincts, an electoral college made up of MPs, constituency chairmen and other people taking the party whip i.e. peers, MEPs, MSPs etc. would appear to be the way to go.
Re the next election, if it does produce a hung parliament (and with a record number of MPs outside Con/Lab it must be the most likely outcome), my bet would be for a minority administration rather than a coalition and another election within 2 years. After all, the Lib Dems would have to choose between propping up a tired Labour administration that had just lost seats again, and a Tory party whose views and instincts were not shared by their supporters.
Andrea at 83: yes, Norway votes on September 11.
AHM: no offence taken!
Well I for one am rooting for….his name escapes me….Old Etonian who fakes sincerity not very well…….David Cameron! I put a bet on him a few months ago and I’ve just checked and I’m nearly £30 down. Come on Cameron get your act to-gether or I’ll be back at Soho square with my ‘Big Issues’. And anyway from the point of view of a not-dyed-in-the-wool Tory I think he would do nicely!
O/T completely but I’m wondering (this is one for Tabman really, now he hasn’t got anything to do to-day
but I thought I’d share it more widely) if a possible Lib Dem candidate for that juicy Sheffield marginal next time mightn’t be one M P Vaughan (not that I know anything about his politics - but wasn’t Clement Freud adopted before he joined the party?
83.”The Libdems seem MIA in these days, but it seems that something is movig even among them”
This post show why I should not post after midnight! Never. It didn’t make much sense.
91. Thanks Nick Palmer
92. Roger, waht about this dream ticket? From your party’s perceotive it should be good.
Thanks for that Andrea, I wasn’t hungry anyway…..
My tory ‘Dream Ticket’ would be David Cameron with the bloke with the squeaky voice, Osborne as his deputy. We might see the re-birth of Liberal England!
A few items I’ve picked out from “The Times” and the “Gruntfutock”
1. Liam Fox is taking a group of MPs to India this week on an all expences paid trip. This largesse is being paid for by a special slush fund in Dr Fox’s office funded by a group of supporters.
2. Our Ken seems certain to stand and declares “I want to give this a bloody good go”
Ken’s price in the market place has tightened considerably to best 11/2. 10/1 was available last week.
3. Malcolm Rifkind says that if the Tories want a leader who is going to concerntrate on asylum and immigration , then he’s not their man. The party he says should dedicate itself to “social justice and public services.”…. and motherhood and apple pie !
4. David Davies is said to have the support of 70 MPs with both DC and Ken on around 30 apiece. Fox trails badly on 10 and the rest scrabbling around with a few each. Around 50 are undecided , will not say ……… and many are lying !!!!
5. Chris Grayling ….. who ??? …. Shadow Leader of the House , says Tony Blair should come back from holiday because ….. of the mess the country is in ?!?!?!? . Well it is the silly season.
6. Lord on the Razzall has said that Charles Kennedy needs to boost his credibilty as leader with some heavyweight speeches , well trailed in the media. His report to the leadership also states that the Lib Dem policy of targetting older voters was a failure because the Lib Dems still have a credibility gap with the over 65’s.
I haven’t a copy of “The Telegragh” today , any info anybody ?
95. Roger, I think you’re too hard with Cameron and Osborne.
This is for Nuala: http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article308800.ece
I’ve read so many obituaries for the Tory Party over the last few weeks (Roy Hattersley’s being the best) that I’m considering joining the party. Reduced price membership and I couldn’t be far away from being chosen as a candidate?
96. Jack, in the Telegraph there’s a piece about Labour fearing Ken
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/29/ntory29.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/08/29/ixhome.html
Then there’s something about MPs predicting the economy going bad and Blair thiking Clarke is “too soft” (is Blunkett preparing to return to Home Office?). But this second article is merely a report of what Seldon told The Times 2 days ago.
IA - just because I’m not at Trent Bridge doesn’t mean Mrs Tabman hasn’t prepared a long list of chores for me
As to Michael Vaughan, an excellent idea (Trent Bridge - Winning Here! 
), but IIRC the political provenance of England cricket captains isn’t good. I’m fairly sure FEC (Atherton) was a Tory.
96 - re your point 6), perhaps Lord “on the” Razzall should hire Alastair as a consultant, to feel the pulse of the over 65s.
93. Re Sheffield’s new political map after boundary changes.
will the new marginal a lab/libdem marginal or a tory/libdem marginal?
99 Andrea. Thanks. Our Ken is playing a canny (kenny) game. If as I suspect the leadership is chosen by the MPs , Ken chances dramatically improve . DD would still be favourite but the momentum is with Ken. In the end it may come down to a mixture of personal aminmosity and self interest and how serious the Tories are about denting Nulab next time, as against idealogical purity. Previuos omens are not good - Hague, IDS and Howard, perhaps it’ll be fourth time lucky.
100 Tabman . If you took the kilt there’d be no speculation about who wore the trousers chez Tabman !
[100] I took Mrs T’s behaviour as read… I suspect the first England cricket captain who wasn’t true blue would’ve been Mike Brearley (of whom Fenland Poly can be truly proud :)) - Ted Dexter famously fought Jim Callaghan in the 1964 election before flying out to play in South Africa - Athers I’m not sure about, maybe his views are pretty close to Jack W’s, but that’s only a wild guess.
97 Andrea. All Tory candidate must have been quacking at the prospect of an endorsement from Bruce Anderson . So the BAKOD - Bruce Anderson Kiss of Death this time goes to …….. David Cameron
Poor Cameron’s campaign will be devistated as BA’s form …….. yes you’ve guessed it Howard, Ken and Howard is almost unsurpassed. We await the SHITS - Simon Heffer Identified Tory Saviour - Watch out David Davies !!
Good piece on Rifkind, who I actually like , he’s just not the man for the top job.
Atherton’s from Woodhouse Park. He wouldn’t have seen a Tory until he went to University. It’s another Lib Dem slur!
Andrea (I think) asked about other elections in September. See this useful rolling overview: electionguide.org - Poland has one coming up.
107. yes, I’m the one who asked other elections in September. Thanks for the link. Very useful (I didn’t know that St. Helena has in own Parliament).
96.”Chris Grayling ….. who ??? …. Shadow Leader of the House , says Tony Blair should come back from holiday because ….. of the mess the country is in ?!?!?!? . Well it is the silly season.”
yesterday night when I mis-read the headline: instead of “We want you back now, Tories tell Blair”, I read “We want your back, Tories tell Blair”. I was a bit perplexed, only after a couple of minutes I realized the mis-understanding.
108- “St. Helena has in own Parliament”
“its own Parliament”, not “in own Parliament”. Damn, I should re-read my posts at least 3 times or they could look uncomprehensible.
In the second part of my previous post there’s a “when” which has nothing to do with the rest.
I’m so sorry.
105. Jack, I like Rifkind too. He will be very useful in a tory Cabinet, but I’m not sure he’s the man to lead them to win the next GE. He would have been a perfect leader for them at this election to make progress (but with little chances to win the GE): a respected politician who doesn’t scare voters (like Howard).
84/85 - I have to agree with Alistair on this one. I no of no-one who joined the party on the basis of being able to vote for the leader or who will leave because they can’t. I suspect most of the members joined because they have broadly Conservative values that they believe would make the country better off. Those of us who do not aspire to any political office (like myself) are happy just to do our bit to elect more Conservative MP’s. Personally I don’t think this includes casting a ballot for the future leader. To this end I agree with AHM that we should go back to the system that picked so many winners in the first place.
110. Couldn’t it be that in the past this system picked so many winners, because tory MPs were able to understand well the country (and its concerns and needs)? Are tory MPs representative of UK’s main concerns now? If the answer is “yes”, they could pick the right leader, if the answer is “no”, they could pick anyone.
Andrea - There was a time when the entire Tory cabinet had been educated at Eton. I wouldn’t have thought they were particularly in touch with the average Bitish voter. They did know how to pick someone who would appeal to the electorate though.
92-Reminds me of that other public school boy that faked the intelligence reports that resulted in the deaths of 25,000 people & two years after the bogus war ended we have an average of 30 people per day being killed.
Now that’s faking it!
Give me someone who allegedly ‘fakes sincerity not very well’ any day ,that’s safer for us all.
Oh ERM,by the way,the tube bombings in London have nothing whatsoever to do with the bogus war in Iraq,you have heard it both from Blair & Straw so it must be true,they could’t be faking it,could they?
112.they weren’t the average voter, but they were able to understand the average voter’s concerns.
The good thing is that after this election the tory parliamentary group has many new MPs. The new intake seems at least “various” and that’s a good thing.
112 Max. Your right of course about the upper reaches of the Conservative party being educated on the playing fields of Eton. However even in those paternalistic days the Conservatives were never seen in parts as being somewhat extreme and out of touch. There was also a quite sizeable aspirational working class Tory vote and of course the Liberals were very much a celtic fringe party.
Those days are well gone and the trick is to reconnect in a modern vein. However I just get the impression that too many Tory MPs have forgotten the formula for success and prefer the wilderness years and factionalism to government and service to the nation.
110- MAX, just for the record, Mrs T and I joined the Tory party in 2001, specifically so we could vote for the leader. We are very unhappy at this retrogressive power grab by our MPs, and urge A H Matlock and other Convention members to vote against the change.
116 Wat Tyler. The trouble is Conservative Party members can’t be trusted to choose anyone other that a right wing donkey and the MP’s can’t be trusted to choose anyone other th.. …….Mmnnn ?!?!
Try an electoral college !!!
115.”However I just get the impression that too many Tory MPs have forgotten the formula for success and prefer the wilderness years and factionalism to government and service to the nation. ”
Jack, some tory MPs seem not to have realized that world has changed (the political world and the non political world too)and has moved away from them. They seem stuck in the 80’s, unmoved, waiting that everything will come back to them.
The same attitude could be found on the left too. Some of the old Labour MPs on the left seem stuck in a world that doesn’t exist anymore (or that is competely changed in the meantime). Dennis Skinner seems to think that today’s Britain is still a class oriented society. You hear people like Glenda Jackson saying that she doesn’t need to read Labour’s manifesto, because she knows Labour’s values since before Blair and Milburn came on earth. yes, good Glenda, but we’re not in UK’s pre-war society anymore. Those values need to be updated to follow the society’s changes. The same thing applies to conservatives values.
117 Jack W- I’m sure we don’t need to go through all that stuff about how it was the MPs that gave us such a poor choice of candidates in 2001 (the ONLY time we members have ever got to vote), etc etc.
So I’ll just say, yes, fine- let’s have an electoral college. Problem is- that isn’t going to be tabled as an option at the Convention.
Now if you- whoever you are really- could get that changed, you’d do us all a great service, and I’d happily take back with interest any splenetic outbursts I may have previously inflicted on you, or indeed others here assembled.
119 Wat Tyler. “Now if you- whoever you are really- could get that changed, you’d do us all a great service ..”
My god , don’t you think I’ve got enough on my plate with the Jacobite restoration , and you want me to sort out the Tory Party:lol:
[120] Yup, there can be little doubt that at the next election there’ll be a huge demand for a monarch who can speak Hungarian
120, Jack, sooner or later, you’ll be obliged to reveal your true identity:
http://www.brunopress.nl/FotoWeb/FWbin/preview.dll/00485464.jpg?D=4949114BE950F6F578A7A8438D6CF3E04151B8ADD4BC3E3E32A887613B87B58EEAC0D8E9D896BDE0D4293C3EA655701A34805F614804CF89E468BF33AB0C005E98F76812F19388476F86885B0D819D7903E981BD37942637C804270AB49A003F891DF77FAE61CCB1D4201291D789CAE73F785B10CBF15B3F5C7653276867F0F36C566F8FC4C74EF9D90EBD0E09350BB54CD55F2B9BE6339A6E320237D7CF9514362B70CA10B467C413D766813C9FAB9F7FD26FF8AED2CF8499B9FDD4F195D25D
there’s an award for the longest link?
110- The system that produced so many winners? As I see it the record is very mixed as far as tory MP’s picking winners is concerned:
Ted Heath, played 4, won 1, lost 3
Margaret Thatcher, played 3, won 3
John Major, played 2, won 1, lost 1
William Hague, played 1, lost 1
Michael Howard, played 1, lost 1
Overall, played 11, won 5, lost 6
Only one clear winner in that list.
121 IA. They speak of little else down the white ROSE and stuart CROWN !!
122 Andrea. “Jack, sooner or later, you’ll be obliged to reveal your true indentity.” ….. Will I ? ….
http://www.ffbooks.co.uk/images/n24/n124249.jpg
123 - It was a system that was in place long before Ted Heath became Prime Minister.
124. Jack, but will you be the handsome stranger in your link or this type of stranger?
http://www.cinemacom.com/50s-sci-fi/unearthly-stranger.jpg
125 Max. I think Lurker meant Tory MPs voting for the leader , rather than the “men in suits” deciding.
126 Andrea. Well what do you think ?
http://www.shekinah.elysiumgates.com/funstuff/roscart3.jpg
125 Max Before Heath there were no elections just cabals of smoke filled rooms from which a leader ‘emerged’. A system more suited to feudalism than democracy.
Even Alec D Home ( a much maligned PM who did brilliantly in 1964 to lose by a whisker) saw how tacky it all was and when he stepped aside the system of MPs electing the leader was created. Heat hwon the firs telection. The system was later ‘polished’ with additional rules that made it difficult to challenge a sitting leader, and even more so in the Hague reforms.
The ability of peers to divest themselves of their peerages was used to let ADH become PM. He was the last PM appointed from the Lords.
Just a thought but many people (including Tory party members) assume that the Tory Party is full of reactionary, tub-thumping, swivel-eyed sorts.If this is so, doesn’t it make sense for the membership to vote for a leader that they think will not antagonise this section of the party and incite a civil war?
In other words, what if the decision to vote for IDS in 2001 was not a preference for IDS over KC per se, but rather because party members thought that KC would be unacceptable to the rest of the party?
So I guess the question I am really crawling towards is, is KC genuinely unacceptable to half the Tory party or do Tory Party members just think that he is unacceptable and vote against him accordingly?
I think I might have even confused myself with that lot so feel free to act bemused yourselves…
127/128 - Fair enough I’m just not that hung up on whether or not I get to vote. I just don’t believe I’m best placed to do it.
130. MAx, do you have some more news (rumours) about the Livingston by-election? Rumours about when it’ll take place or if Labour/SNP/Libdem has started to campaign?
127. Jack, I’ve solved the mistery: you’re the woman in pink! Next time I’ll ask Italian authorities to bug your phone.
Not really Andrea. I was speaking to a friend through there at the weekend who said he hadn’t seen or heard anything yet.
116 - Wat: The only reason you and Mrs Tyler joined the Tory Party in 2001 was to be able to participate in the leadership election? If that is the case, you must surely be a rare breed. I don’t know of anyone personally who has been motivated on that basis alone to sign up. Having been a member of the Conservative Party continuously since 1950, when I was fourteen (and I’ve got my first membership card to prove it) I’ve witnessed the three systems first hand and I remain convinced that the one-member, one vote system is the worst of them - it’s cumbersome, it’s slow, and it sets the entire party up for scenario like the one we experienced in 2001 when the choice of the party in the country selected somebody who did not have the support of his colleagues in Parliament. And before Wat brings it up again - yes - I realise that party members merely voted on the two choices presented to them by the Parliamentary party. My response to that is that it must be remembered that in 2001 the parliamentary party was at it’s lowest ebb in living memory and had just come off a second catastrophic defeat - I’m not sure anyone was thinking too clearly at that time, not to mention persistent rumours that several IDS supporting MPs voted for Clarke in the final parliamentary ballot to ensure that IDS wouldn’t be facing Portillo in the decisive vote.
2005 is a different story. For the first time since 1983, we’ve gained seats at the preceeding election. Over a quarter of our MPs are new, and the composition of the Parliamentary Party has never been younger. I think we’re better off letting them decide at this time, and advocates of internal party ‘democracy’ should work toward an electoral college for future leadership votes.
Apologies in advance if this seems rambling or disjointed. I’ve got one eye on my grandson ( also called Alastair
) and one on the computer.
130 Max. Quite so, and while we are it let’s repeal the Reform Act and disenfranchise the plebs ! Come on Max, if you an intelligent informed Tory activist (well accountant with a Conservative bent) can’t decide who the next Tory leader is to be, how might the average voter decide on the candidates ability to be PM ?
129 Stephen. The thing is the leader has got to enthuse the swing voters and not just the core, a very simple fact the Tories seem to have forgotten in recent years.
131 Andrea. Pink just isn’t me ….. now lilac and we’re cooking !!
133. It seems to me that a lot of Tories here are now regretting the fact their best potential leader is sitting on a sofa with Diane Abbott instead of sitting on the green benches.
133 - Jack, I appreciate that swing voters are fairly vital - the thing I’m wondering is whether Tory party members are actually making a choice between, on the one hand, electing a popular politician like KC and, on the other, the fear that he would cause the party to fall apart because it is perceived that he is divisive. I’m probably overanalysing it, come to think of it.
OT, I saw a sign pointing to Bishop Kinkell earlier - another one of your party’s shock troops?
132. Thanks Max.
135. At least he’s not sitting on the green benches next to Diane Abbott.
136 Stephen. Your not over analysing at all. Some Tory posters on here recognise that Ken isn’t the King Over The Water for them but neither is he the Duke of Cumberland (spit). Ken is a risk but the alternatives, DC and DD, aren’t a risk because they’re no hopers in 2009. So a risk to win ?? or safety in defeat. Not a wonderful choice, but it’s the only one on offer.
Bishop Kinkell - Just the start of our takeover of the pulpit ! Vicar of Albion beware !