With the Tory race almost settled what about Labour?
November 12th, 2005-
The Chancellor’s price tightens as punters sense an earlier promotion?
With today’s YouGov poll of Tory members showing a comfortable 2 to 1 one margin in favour of Cameron the only betting interest left is on the scale of the victory. Even the Daily Mail has now come out for the 39 year old.
Labour, meanwhile, looks a lot more interesting. On the betting market on who will be the next leader sentiment has moved sharply to the Chancellor since the heavy defeat for the Prime Minister on the terror detention provision.
Until now there haven’t been many takers because of the tight price, the uncertainty over when Blair would actually go and the possibility that the Brown succession could be over-turned by events. The rebellion this week has changed all that and many punters now see the Brown premiership as a near certainty.
-
But is Tony Blair going to oblige by getting out early - or could he try to go on and on?
With the best conventional bookie price on Brown at 1/8 and with 0.35/1 available on Betfair we think the prices are still too tight to make this bet attractive.
If Blair does hang on you could be locking you cash up for a couple of years or more and the returns are not much more than you could get from the building society. Far better to have a flutter on one of the “When will Blair go markets. You can get 7/4 against a 2006 change-over and 5/2 against 2007.
For every thing is dependent on when Blair goes so if you think that will happen earlier - take the prices that are available there.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Good to see that, in a week when many of our political assumptions were turned upside down, that the Commons’ tame idiot behaved predictably:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4429040.stm
Kept hearing from John Reid how the public thought Blair
right, the MPS wrong, yet a BBC web site poll on Thursday
had 16,000 votes , 57% saying the MPs were right.
This mornings Guardian article tends to support that.
I do not know why the media let him get away with his
comments, when he speaks I often look for men in
white coats!!!.
Local elections overall this week not good for Labour,
reaction to Wednesday?. Tends to suggest game is still
Labour down, Lib Demns,up,was Rushmoor a one off,
a very local case, can someone advise?.
Seems out of kilter with the weekly trend since the general?
David at 2: It’s a mug’s game to quote web site polls as proof of anything - the electorate is self-selecting. It’s especially pointless when genuine opinion polls are available. Sometimes the web site has ‘form’ (e.g. AOL voters are generally Tory, the BBC generally small-l liberal), so one can make guesses from the trend, but it’s really sheep’s-entrails stuff. The pre-vote national polls showed unambiguous majorities for 90 days. It could be that the public has changed its mind since, who knows? But I expect there will be a poll in tomorrow’s papers.
In the same way, the various MPs’ surveys, including my own, are more interesting for their detailed comments than the headline figures. But FWIW, so far as I know everyone found that their constituents were heavily pro-90, except me - I found a virtual 50-50 split with only a marginal edge for 90, possibly because I put the the case on each side more neutrally than some of my colleagues’ surveys.
Ah, forgot to comment on the subject of the thread, sorry! Blair isn’t going anywhere before 2008. Brown doesn’t want him to, Labour MPs overwhelmingly don’t want him to, Labour voters don’t want him to. The Daily Mail and Clare Short want him to… that’s two good reasons not to let it happen, in my book.
3. It seems to me that you comprehensively make david’s point for him. Tony Blair should not be claiming lambasting opposing MPs for being “out of touch” with public opinion, especially if public opinion is based on biased surveys.
3-Mr Palmer-Why is it that in terms of detaining terrorist suspects without charge for 90 days the Police are right but when it comes to Police opposition to extended drinking hours they are wrong?
3 - I guess your constituents weren’t beeing bullied by police chiefs ringing them up either.
4.” The Daily Mail and Clare Short want him to… that’s two good reasons not to let it happen, in my book. ”
Not the best motivation ever……The Daily Mail is not worse than the Sun and I suppose you’re not a fan of Clare.
Are one of those MPs who are asking for strong actions against the rebels?
Am I the only one who thinks it’s Hilary Armstrong the one who has to go?
3. Diane Abbott’s quote could sintetize the problem:
“If we listened to public opinion, we would bring back hanging tomorrow “
3 Nick , Sometimes it is necessary to override the majority of pblic opinion even the majority view of your own constituents . It does happen that public opinion is based on reaction and gut feeling and seldom on detailed consideration of both sides of an argument .
Would you for example vote for the reintroduction of capital punishment or the birch for example if that is what polls indicated the public as a whole want .
I rather think that if Nick Palmer’s constituency party activists were gung-ho for “90 days” he’d have told us so. And whenever politicians of any stripe come up with two completely unconnected reasons for doing anything (in this case, “the police wanted it” and “the voters want it”) my B/S detector glows white-hot…
But then again, if my party leader had won me a seat I expected to lose, not once but three times, I reckon I too might cut him more slack than prudence would suggest…
A couple of info for an ICM poll for the Guardian:
-55% of people believe the PM should be ready to compromise in order to get reform plans through the House of Commons. 40% wants him to stand up for what he believes in.
- 22% thinks Mr Blair’s authority over his Government had been “greatly damaged” by Wednesday’s rejection and and 42% said it had been “damaged somewhat”; 31% said the PM’s authority had not been damaged at all.
- 24% wants him to step down now, 22% in the next couple of years, 25% just before the next election, 19% wants him to fight another election.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,1271,-5410193,00.html?gusrc=ticker-103704
Btw, Corbyn is already on TV asking for Blair to go. Both he and Simpson will rebel on the smoking ban too, because they want a full smoking ban.
4-Mr Palmer-Two more questions
Bearing in mind the 70 seat majority that Blair has,how many more defeats would force him to resign?
Is it true that the major objection by the Labour rebels is to Labour policies as oppossed to Blair himself;in which case Education,Healthcare & Incapacity benefit reforms would in any case be thrown out if Brown replaced Blair?
9-Mark-Not many years ago both opinion polls and the Police were in favour of bringing back capital punishment,assume that if this was the case again, Blair would go for it?
13 - HI John . That is the point I am making . Public opinion tends to be very volatile anyway depending on headline news events and ( Rarely ) detailed exposure to both sides of the argument . A nasty murder case will increase numbers of those in favour of capital punishment . News of the wrong conviction of someone for murder who could have been wrongly executed will decrease those in favour .
9/13/14. I think all MPs have voted against something backed by opinion polls in their career. I would be worried if the opposite has happened.
Nick Palmer is not an exception: for ex he voted to repeal Section 28 when polls were showing that people wanted to keep it.
14. Mark, more or less what Diane Abbott says in her comment quoted @8
John at 6. Your question is a non sequitur. I don’t know why you keep repeating it. The licencing laws are not simply being introduced to aid the police. The 90 days detention are.
Mark at 9 really makes the best point of all. The electorate can be a mob at times and it’s the job of parliament to hold it at bay sometimes.
Interesting ICM poll Andrea. If nothing else it shows Blair still has his supporters in a way that I can’t previously remember. If the electorate had been asked questions of when they wanted Thatcher and Major to go mid-parliament the overwhelming majority would say NOW!
More from the guardian poll:
-Among Labour voters 47% wants him to stand up for what he believes in, while 51% would like him to come terms with opponents on controversial issues. (55% vs 40% among all voters).
- 46% of people feels either that 28 days was about right, or that even 28 days was too long to hold anyone without charge
- among Labour voters 31% wants him to fight a forth term (only 19% among all voters). 13% of Labour voters wants him to go now, 28% within 2 years, the rest just before the next election.
17. the link:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,15935,1640962,00.html
16. Roger, he still have an high support in his own party in this type of question. I think it’s normal: parties supporters usually show a good degree of protection toward their own leader.
Whenever I read a post from Mr Palmer I am always reminded of Sir Joseph Porter’s “When I was a lad” in HMS Pinafore…
“I always voted at my party’s call,
And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.
I thought so little, they rewarded me
By making me the Ruler of the Queen’s Navy”
Looking for a post in the MoD???
I hope he doesn’t go before Christmas. If he does, I owe my Grandad £5 (the bet was his idea).
20 A bit harsh.
Maybe he just agrees with him.
20. A rather insulting post Andy. You aren’t SeanT in disguise are you?
So according ICM opinions about the period of detention without trial seem more split than previously though (with 46% more or less satisfied with the 28 days). Those ICM figures seem in line with Nick P’s findings in Broxtowe.
They underminded TB’s claim that the MPs are so out of touch with the public.
But nothing is without it’s silver lining Andy…..I just read your ‘Conservative Greenwich website’ and was shocked to read
“Burnt out cars soar by 66% under Labour”
There’s nothing else for it but a swinging tax on matches……
It would have been interesting if people had been asked about their attitude to the Conservative party having voted against the government on 90 days. It strikes me as such a Tory measure that I’m amazed the Tories voted against. My disappointment is Labour behaving like Conservatives. And the phone-in I heard the other day was overwhelmingly Conservative supporters being angry with their own side
26. Roger, I think there’re tories too in that 46%. They couldn’t be all Libdems, Nats, Clare Short’s fans, people against all women shitlist in Blaenau Gwenth, Gal*oway’s supporters and people who wants to save hospitals in Wyre Forest!
27-Andrea-That’s certainly a novel way of describing the Labour selection process in Blaenau Gwenth!
22 the wink symbol was missing
28. ops, it was a typo. I swear it wasn’t intentional.
Btw, Peter Law, Law’s agent and the former MP of BG are all bitching about Maggie Jones’ peerage:
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/newspolitics/tm_objectid=16352920&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=peerage-for-woman-who-lost-safest-seat-name_page.html
29.
25-Roger-There was no mention of a tax on swinging in the manifesto!
Not all Tories want Blair to go, I’d much prefer him to stay and get all these ‘reforms’ in place, then the real Tories can build on them when they get back in. Save a lot of aggro when real Labour comes out of its closet!
A swingeing tax would be more likely but not nearly as interesting as a swinging one.
26 - just because a policy simplistically placed on a political spectrum can be considered to be closer to where the Tory party sits on that spectrum than where one expects to find Labour, doesn’t make it a “Tory policy”. You can’t on the one hand criticise the Tory leadership for consistently operating a strategy of “clear blue water” between them and an ever more right wing Labour Party, and then complain when they decide to make a stand and oppose Labour from the left.
Many core Tory voters may be unhappy, but for a large majority of them the only alternative in elections that could make a difference is to vote Lib dem.
20 -
Nicely put, Andy. No offence to Nick, of course.
What is crucial, I think, is which school of thought Blair cleaves to as he reflects on the week at Chequers. If he’s in a strident “I will be vindicated” mood, in accordance with the “official” line, I’d be prepared to say that the hardcore rebels in the PLP will simply cease to take notice of whips if they offend their own consciences, and this mood will eventually affect the whole PLP. If, however, he’s in a more reflective mood, then he’ll be giving thought to the practical mechanics of a resignation next year.
9. I agree with you Mark, I have been annoyed at the lack of real debate in the media about why we had to have 90days detention without trial. I was surprised that not once did I see a reporter from any of news channels looking at the argument with examples and experiences from other countries where detention without trail is used. Its sad that the outcome of the vote has meant the public are left thinking that it was simply either the government or the opposition playing party politics!
36.”I’d be prepared to say that the hardcore rebels in the PLP will simply cease to take notice of whips if they offend their own consciences”
I think the hardcore rebels are already ignoring the whips.
well, Jeremy Corbyn has probably never paid attention to them (he divorced his wife over the decision to send their son to a selective school, I think he’s ready to “divorce” Hilary Armstrong over the Education White Paper)
21-Richard-If its up to the Labour rebels then it will surely be 90 days complete with sunset clause?
36 - a third way is to remain as leader but to take his colleagues in the cabinet and party with him rather than take them for granted. If this means legislation is more considered then we and Blair’s legacy will be the better for it.
Tony Blair’s gift is to see problems where traditionally Labour saw none or was reluctant to intervene: crime does matter to working class communities, the schools are a mess in many areas, and healthcare is too often an expensive postcode lottery. The problem is that Blair’s entourage comes up with slogans rather than solutions. With a bit of luck this will change, policy will be analysed and debated and we’ll get better schools and hospitals rather than simply giving the articulate middle classes more choice amongst the existing ones.
5 - You’re misinterpreting what I said. I think that some of the surveys around were biased. But Blair’s comments were based on two reputable national opinion polls with different methodology (YouGov and Populus), which showed 70% support for 90 days. The ICM poll in today’s Guardian suggests that this has now lessened, though the online report is tantalisingly incomplete, so it’s not clear whether the 46% figure excludes don’t knows.
6- This gets into detailed policy discussion, which we don’t generally do here. Briefly, though, on terrorism there was a consensus right across the enforcement agencies. On drinking hours there was an all-party consensus the other way from which the police and selected judges dissented (the Tories then reversed their previous stance). You can find more detailed discussion of the issue on my website if you like…
7- Pooh. Name me a politician so feeble that a call from a police chief to give his opinion will make him or her feel ‘bullied’. Why shouldn’t the police chiefs explain their proposal?
8, 9 - I agree, there’s no reason why MPs should always do what voters want - that way lies not democracy but, er, hypocracy. But it’s reasonable to draw attention to gaps between MPs’ views and their constituents: it doesn’t mean the MPs are wrong but it should give them pause. But hey, I favour liberal treatment of asylum-seekers, oppose capital punishment, supported the war in Iraq, campaigned to ban hunting, proposed ID cards, think foreign aid should go up even faster and would like to renationalise the railways. I shouldn’t think there is a single constituent who agrees with all of those, but I’ve made no secret of them and enough of them decided to forgive me for the bits they didn’t like.
12 - I don’t think that defeats in themselves (unless on a vote of confidence) force any PM to resign, so long as it’s clear that there is a majority in the Commons behind his continuing to be PM, which there certainly is. As for specific policies, at present we’re still at the White Paper/discussion stage, with quite a lot still frankly vague, and I suspect we’ll find majority support for the proposals by the time they reach a vote. Well-telegraphed revolts usually have a way of dissipating, because Ministers take sufficient avoiding action.
20 - Um, how many years does one need to be an MP without significant promotion before one becomes immune from accusations of careerism? Look, I support the Labour Government because I’m a Labour MP, I stood on the Labour manifesto, I’ve been a member for 30 years and I think it’s essentially a noble cause, even if I disagree on a specific issue (like some of those above). You’ve got a perfect right to disagree, but why assume that I don’t believe in what I say? I don’t *have* to post here, you know - it’s not as though a significant number of constituents are going to read it. Nor do you. It only makes sense if we accept each others’ bona fides.
41. Nick Palmer, your postings are much appreciated here (at least by me).
41 - no, what your post implied was that when properly presented with the issues in a balanced context an MP’s constituents were likely to be evenly split. Which suggests that public opinion in general (as indicated by “reputable” opinion polls) is poorly informed and therefore liable to be volatile. Thereby showing the ridiculous hyperbole of comments about some MPs being dangerously out of touch with public opinion - after all the whole basis of representative democracy is that MPs should have more time to examine the arguments and make their own judgements in the interests of their constituents.
As long as Labour is still commanding a lead in the polls, there will be enough Nu-lab yes-men to keep him in his job.
However, things may change when Cameron is crowned King of the Tories.
41 Nick - the winky symbol was missed off in error as clarified below - it was a poor attempt at irony for the precisely the reasons you give.
41 - Mr Palmer. What we are looking at is another instance of the government’s case being sexed up, drawing on selective supporting evidence only and trying to suggest all expert opinion agrees.
The hypocrisy is that there is expert opinion that agrees and disagrees with Blair, but he attempted to mislead once again.
Similarly expert opinion that said invading Iraq would create a terrorist backlash was also not presented in Blair’s case for war and caveats in intelligence were removed.
The fact is that the vote of MPs show that Tony Blair is no longer trusted in the commons and they were not going to take the word of cronies like Ian Blair who promoted Labour policies during the election campaign.
You may choose to defend this corruption of our politics, but then you implicate yourself as a co-conspirator.
I was surprised by the Mail’s endorsement of Cameron this morning after their behaviour toward him just before the Parliamentary rounds of balloting. It now seems likely The Sun will back him next week and The Telegraph (despite reported reluctance to do so on the part of the Proprietors) can hardly not follow suit considering the keeness of their Editorial staff for DC and the fact that their own polls show large majorities of party members (who are also their readers) supporting the younger man.
One indication of Blair’s difficulty may be that Hilary Benn, according to Peter Oborne in the Spectator, refused promotion to Work and Pensions, calculating that it would be invidious to fight Blairite battles with the Treasury with Brown in post there. Better to wait until Brown took over the top job, sooner rather than later.
47 - did I detect a certain sulkiness lurking just behind the Mail’s leader column this morning? You know, I rather think I did.
48.”… according to Peter Oborne in the Spectator….”
Diane Abbott reported the same thing on “This Week” last week.
Did not expect my post at 2 to get the immediate reaction it did, quite enjoyed reading the response - wonder about possibly touching a nerve.
1 - It is quite unfair that Government Bills have to be voted on at what is known as the “moment of interruption”, but Private Members Bills can be filibustered by one MP to prevent a vote. The same happened a couple of weeks ago when Geoff Hoon filibustered Clare Short’s bill which would limit the Prime Minister’s ability to declare war.
Andrea - “26. Roger, I think there’re tories too in that 46%”
I suspect when the ICM tables are published you’ll find quite a lot of them are Tories. In the recent Populus poll support for the 90 days option was pretty much the same amongst Labour and Conservative supporters (it was lower amongst Lib Dems, but there was still a majority in favour) - my expectation is that a lot of the change will be amongst Conservative supporters who suddenly like the idea of 28 days now they can see it as a humiliation for Blair. From being a relatively non-party-partisan issue before, my guess (and it is just a guess) is that it will now be less so.
53. yes, it makes sense.
Following on from 1 and 52, it seems strange that a single Tory MP can block sensible legislation which has the support of all three parties, including all three party leaders. Has Eric Forth given any explanation for his strange behaviour? Unless he has a very good explanation indeed, he would seem to be a disgrace to the Conservative Party and to civilised society.
Question to decent Tories on this site: how can you be associated with a man like that?
47 - Andy D: Absolutely. I don’t think they even made an attempt to hide it, but an endorsement is an endorsement. I’m sure eating all that crow is unpleasant for them, and Mr Dacre in particular.
[53] Frankly, aren’t these polls about the “90 days” no better than voodoo polls? Surely polls on issues generally ought as a matter of good practice to ask also how well informed people think they are on the issue and how strongly they hold whatever opinion they do.
55 - Well he’s been doing it for many years so it would be surprising if he changed the habit of a lifetime now. I think he basically objects to the amount of legislation that is passed in this country (not unreasonably) and this is his little contribution to combatting this (more debateably).
I don’t take any notice of them, asking about such matters you get results similar to those film surveys, where you either get the latest Hollywood blockbuster in first place or Citizen Kane because it’s the ‘correct’ answer.
Such polls reflect what people have been told and who by, in this case too many are swayed by The Sun’s tactics, by the PM’s visibility or by some bloke down the pub…….
59 refers to 57.
40 - Yes, that could happen if Blair decides to ensure a manged transition, and the process of government would indeed be better for it. The stumbling block is that the legacy of bitterness from Blair’s years of strength, and the status of Brown, will make it difficult for consensual government to work now. Things could have been very different had Blair won in 1997 with a small majority, needing to work on a consensual basis form the start.
Looking at the outlook for Blair’s legacy reforms, the Opposition will have to be tactically flexible to defeat the government. Even given some backbenchers’ detestation for the education and health reforms, there’s no way the government would lose a vote on second or Third Reading: that would be tantamount to a vote of no confidence. These Bills are also likely to go to Standing Committees, where the Whips should be able to ensure the government has a majority. Where the Opposition should marshal their forces, therefore, would be the Report Stage, where amendements that can unite Labour rebels and the Opposition can be tabled. Even more creatively, the Opposition could seek to prevent any restriction of time motion on the Report Stage to allow the Bill to go through.
61.”where amendements that can unite Labour rebels and the Opposition can be tabled”
It could be difficult to find amendments which are able to unite Labour Left and the tories since the tories will probably oppose the bills becuase they don’t go far enough, while the rebels will probably think they go too far.
Alan Simpson said they were going to table some amendments proposed by left leaning academics to improve (in his opinion) the bills. The tories will probably not vote for those amendments.
William Hague has just announced his backing for David Cameron to be the next leader of the Conservative Party.
63 - ..Bet he won’t be invited hill-walking with DD again
62 - That’s where the tactical dexterity comes into play. It will be opportunistic, no doubt, but if the Tories declare themselves in favour of the Bill in principle, voting for or abstaining at Second Reading, they can act tactically, perhaps (stirctly off-the-record, of course) working with Labour rebels to find out what sort of anti-government amendments they’d support. It would be just like Maastricht, where Tory rebels and the Lab/LD opposition voted for the Social Chapter amendment for totally different reasons.
Yes, that wouldn’t be difficult to arrange.
OTOH, there are occasions where *tactically* it would benefit the Conservatives to vote with the government in order to maximise ill-feeling within the Parliamentary Labour Party.
“William Hague has just announced his backing for David Cameron” and England beat the Argies in the football. What a great evening.
I am hoping Billy is shadow chancellor in the new shadow cabinet.
67 - Splendid isn’t it, Sophia!
I trust you are feeling better?
68 - Indeed! It is amazing what a couple of bits of great news can do for you. I am now feeling 99.99999%!
69 - Glad to hear it. I understand that Liam Fox is set to back DC in the next few days. More to come!
Sean, If you’re still around, have you made your leadership choice yet?
70 - Great news! I am feeling rather content now. Hooray!
Glad to see you in fine fettle, Sophia
66 - Indeed: a situation where Tony Blair had to rely on Tory votes to save his legislative programme would be almost as bad as a defeat.
I do hope, continuing, the Hague theme, that this means he returns to the Shadow Cabinet: his parliamentary skills are so good, that he (and Clarke too, probably) might very well swing votes in the Commons with good speeches.
Yes I have, John O. I’ve voted for David Davis. That said, I’m not one of those people who’ll flounce out if David Cameron wins (which is highly likely, obviously).
I hope William Hague does *not* become Shadow Chancellor as I want to book him as a guest speaker for Hertsmere. As we’re a safe seat, we don’t get senior members of Shadow Cabinet.
74 - Sean, I’ve just realised that I’ve never asked you to email me! Would you kindly do so on alastairmatlock@gmail.com when you have a moment? I seem to be leaving the obvious ones out!
“I am hoping Billy is shadow chancellor in the new shadow cabinet”
Me too. He can count down the number of days to save the pound with his little £ shaped badge and maybe even wear his baseball hat the wrong way round. That should give us all a laugh.
74 - “not one of those people who’ll flounce out if David Cameron wins”
Are there some people like that ? I know people who would have walked if Ken Clarke became leader, but not Cameron.
The reason Hague is quite liked in the country at the moment is because he was a failure. In the UK we just love failures. Remember the calls for a knighthood for Eddie the Eagle? As soon as he gets back into politics he wont be a heroic failure anymore he’ll be that ’silly bald headed Tory Boy who stood on a soap-box and looked like an idiot on a water slide’.
I really don’t mean to rain on your parade or anything…….
77 - John, I think you could find a few on conservativehome.com if you wanted.
AHM - Why don´t you just invite all Tories to get in touch with you? It would save time and space…
Given the position Blair is in, shadow leader of the house and chief whip will be key Cameron appointments. He needs two people with lots of experience and good political instincts. Any suggestions ?
77. I quite agree. I don’t see anyone walking with Cameron as leader although there will be scepticism by some over the specifics of his modernising agenda. I’m sure all us tories on here will give him our full 100% support. I do hope though that should he win, Davis keeps shadow Home Secretary and Willetts and co remain in the shadow cabinet at present rank.
78. I don’t agree with your analysis of Billys popularity now. When he was leader, he had a hostile media to deal with and poor media advisors (baseball cap ect). Since he resigned as leader, he has started being himself. He was the best politician to host HIGNFY (excluding Boris of course), has written a good book and writes a good column in the News of the Screws. I believe you’ll have egg on your face if he does become shadow chancellor Roger. That’s my prediction of the night.
80 - I’ve got lots of time and the space I’m using isn’t yours, thank you very much. Still muddling through in the great Liberal bastion that is Windsor?
People who fail first time sometimes get a second chance, Roger. Helen Clark, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, was the country’s most loathed politician in the early nineties. I imagine that Hague would do better second time around.
81. I read Patrick Mcloughlin was being lined up as shadow chief whip.
David Davis and Derek Conway?
A good argument for why Blair should go soon before he does too much damage
84-”Helen Clark, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, was the country’s most loathed politician in the early nineties”
so maybe the other Helen Clark will a have a comeback too. Naturally with the tories
81 - As a Davis supporter, what would you consider to be an appropriate posting for the man himself after the leadership has been settled, assuming DC wins? My thinking is that if Hague returns as Shadow Chancellor, a full reshuffle of the senior positions may be required. Would Davis be satisfied with becoming Deputy Leader and being given a sort of roving brief to cover issues of interest to him across the spectrum, or do you think that he must be left in place for the sake of party unity?
85 - That would be a good choice. Maybe with Rifkind as shadow leader of the house.
I could see Davis becoming Shadow Leader of the House if he wanted the job, but I have a bit more trouble imagining Conway being offered the Chief Whip’s job. Too many enemies, I think.
86. Everything Brown does is always wrong for the likes of Matthew Parris. If he’s in UK, he shouldn’t be there; if he’s in another country, he should be in UK; if he tries to plot against Blair, he shouldn’t; if he supports Blair, he should plot behind his back,……..
Then how could Parris know they haven’t had the discussion he suggests? Ok, he’s a big gossiper, but he doesn’t know everything.
88 - I think, if it is what he wants, DD should be left where he is, as he is doing an excellent job. I think giving him the additional role of Deputy Leader would help party unity.
90 - If we were in government with a small majority Conway would be the man. Now we want very different skills, that Conway does not have.
Davis has been a success as Shadow Home Secretary, so I think he should stay there, but Shadow Leader of the House would be a good appointment.
Does anyone think it likely that Ken Clarke would be offered/accept the job of shadow chancellor. I think Gordon Brown is going to remain chancellor for at least 6-12 months and I wonder who he would least like to see across the despatch box.
94 - I don’t think he would give up his outside interests to take on that role.
Re. 67, that was one of the best matches I’ve ever seen, never mind friendlies. Unlike our 5-1 defeat of Germany in the 01 World Cup qualifier, our victory wasn’t down largely to the other team being not at their best. The Argentinians were very good, but we were better. It was also good to see the absence of the usual needling from the other side - if they didn’t swap shirts, it was because they slunk off in shock (not like 02 when they actively refused to swap shirts, and swore at our players).
On the other hand, I’m far too superstitious to believe we’ll win the next World Cup…
94 - I have my doubts, personally. A formal return to the shadow cabinet, particularly as Shadow Chancellor would require KC to give up his directorships. He’s shown little inclination to consider that in the past. Perhaps he might agree to participate in important debates more often, but I think that is probably going to be the extent of it.
97. AHM, has your MP a chance of a promotion?
94 and 97. I think Clarke has made it fairly clear that he is interested in government jobs but not in shadow jobs.
98 - We’re all hoping so Andrea - he handlied the recent Terrorism/Detention debate with great skill and aplomb, and has lots of other things going for him!
100. I ask it, becuase he was praised for his performances during the terrorism debate.
Is he supporting DD, right?
Keeping DD shadowing the Home Office would be a good way of closing down questions about the drugs issue.
85&90 - I would have thought we would be as well to keep David McLean as chief whip. He’s done a good job in making sure that any divisions didn’t get out of hand during the leadership contest and he obviously has plenty of experience.
101 - Yes, he is, as is our constituency Chairman. We’re all respectful and tolerant of each other’s decision, hasn’t made much difference within the association itself.
103 - Max: I *think* David McLean has decided to stand down at the next election. The new leader will want somebody new in that job I suspect.
103 and 105. Wouldn’t Davis be a good Chief Whip?!
104. well, I suppose it should be so in every constituency party.
OT: I find this comment by Tory’s Alister Burt quite entertaining:
“The hon. Gentleman proposed that local MPs should play a more prominent role in regeneration initiatives in their areas. That is an interesting idea. I can certainly imagine the Government being interested in giving one or two of their colleagues prominent roles that will engage them fully. The hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Lynne Jones) might be heavily engaged in problems in her area, and the hon. Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) might be very busy away from Westminster”
106 - I mean Shadowing, of course.
103 - He has done a good job, but he has been there four years and deserves a break. Chief Whip is one of those jobs you never get away from, even if the House is not sitting.
106 - That would be interpreted as a bit of a snub, don’t you think?
106. Would House of Cards figure in DCs mind if thinking about that appointment
105. He isn’t very old in terms of age even if he has spent lots of time in the Commons.
111. You might say that but I couldn’t possibly comment.
111 - Francis Urquhart would make a splendid Chief Whip. Can we put Ian Richardson up for Parliament somewhere?
114. I saw him on “The Final Cut”. Great actor.
Alastair - But they’d be quite a few ‘tragic’ by-elections and ‘unfortunate’ Cabinet reshuffles ;). (BTW, thanks to Sean for his answer).
116 - John: Yes, I suppose there would have to be wouldn’t there? I’m just writing you a quick email….
Alastair - Standing by my e-bed
118 - Sarky git..
Message received, Secret Squirrel, and responded! I love it when you talk dirty
120. You don’t know what I’m imagining……poor Lady Matlock, she has all my support.
120 - Oh stop, people are going get the wrong idea about us! Andrea especially!
122- Looks like he already has :P.
123. John/AHM. This young and innocent boy is very shocked and concerned. You’re such a bad example. I think I’ll write to Edward Leigh to keep him update of the direction the party is following.
124 - All part of your education in the ways of the world….
125. I’ll credit you in my autobiography
126 - Chris Bryant Confidential?
127. Nah, I’m really disappointed you haven’t learned the order of importance of my favourites
128 - How about ‘Running with the Hurd’? Or ‘Dancing with Dunky’? That’s the best you’ll get. Now what’s the title of this thread…
129. And where do you leave Glenda!? Those 2 titles are a bit better (CB confidential wasn’t very innovative).
Then the autobio should be about me
Btw, Chris Bryant has really written a biography of Glenda.
129 - Spanking the Dunky?
131
Great title! I’m already imagining the ads: Alan Duncan’s new autobiography “Spanking the Dunky” serialized on “Attitude” (with lots of pics, naturally).
Woody and Sean. It has nothing to do with talent, which I agree Hague isn’t short of just the strange nature of British taste. Portillo; Books were written about the moment he was kicked out. Now he’s everyones favourite. it doesn’t matter which party he belonged to if anyone can remember, we all love Mikey! Tony Benn; The scourge of everyone except Jeremy Corbyn. Now people can’t get enough of him; Edwina, John Major, remember ‘Good old John?’Even Neil kinnock isn’t lampooned anymore. But what of the sucesses? Anyone fancy dinner with Thatch or Tebbit?. HIGNFY’s next presenter? Probably Blunkett because he screwed up TWICE!
95&99. I thought the same until recently. But in an interview he gave during his leadership challenge he said that he had never been offered a shadow cabinet post. He seems much more interested in getting into front line politics again even though he failed in his leadership challenge. It would certainly get the press pack going if those two were facing each other over the economy, might even get the public to take more notice too!
112 - David MacLean is still young by the standards of frontline politicians but, since he has the progressive form of MS, health problems will sadly force him to take a less demanding role than Chief Whip at some point.
There were some reports of him standing down as an MP in the gossip columns, he ruled out the rumours that he might stand down and cause a by-election, but I don’t think he’s actually said anything about the next election. Obviously if he does stand down, Penrith & the Border would be an ideal seat for Tim Collins.
“Obviously if he does stand down, Penrith & the Border would be an ideal seat for Tim Collins”.
In theory - but it depends how much people in Westmorland blame Tim Collins for letting a Tory majority dribble away.
The Sunday Times is reporting that Liam Fox has also declared his support for David Cameron.
Has Ken clark endorsed either candidate yet?
KC leaned towards Cameron publicly last weekend, but didn’t actually endorse him.
139. thanks
Gordon Brown has given an interview to the Indy. “We must listen, learn and connect with the voters” http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article326803.ece
137. Both the Sunday Times and Sunday Telegraph have fairly prominent stories saying both Hague and Fox are backing Cameron.
Hague’s support was reported on BBC TV news on Saturday evening. Looks like Fox’s support came too late for the TV news - hopefully there will be prominent coverage on Sunday!
According to the Sunday Times, 109 MPs are now backing Cameron.
142 - Yes, I’ve just been reading the Telegraph. Jolly good, isn’t it?
134. On This Week this week Clarke seemed to make it clear to Andrew Neill that government was for him because it meant making real decisions, but opposition wasn’t. As I think has been said before on various threads, that attitude does not endear him to the party. It has not helped him in trying to get the leadership. But he still is a formidable figure, I agree.
144 - Many politicans, although in theory all-purpose, are naturally attuned to either government or opposition. You can have a politician like Iain Macleod, at his most successful when dismantling an opposing case and deflating Labour rather than developing and carrying through solid policies, and a politician like Clarke, impatient with the inevitsble Opposition tendency for manufactured outrage, but happy as Larry with a big job, a Private Office and plenty of red boxes. That was one plus-point for Clarke, in every leadership contest: tempermentally unhappy with Opposition, his prime motivation would be to return to office as soon as possible.
145 - I’ve always had an abiding respect for Iain Macleod. I have wondered in the past how the Heath years may have turned out differently if he hadn’t died when he did. In any case, he’d have been far better than Anthony Barber turned out to be.
146 - Indeed. In many ways, he’s the only leading Conservative since Churchill whose legacy commands an equal amount of respect from left and right within the party (apart from the old High Tories who can’t forgive him for decolonisation and the “Magic Circle” article, that is).
I think that’s probably true. His death really was a loss to the entire country when you consider that he was much more hardline in his economic thinking than most people generally assume - an Thatcherite before his time, so to speak. A lot of the economic malaise and the winter of discontent and all of those things may never have happened had he lived to pursue these policies as Chancellor. Unfortunately, any such nerve for this sort of boldness within the Heath administration died with him.
146 - 148. A good thing that would have happened, had Macleod lived, is that the government would have benefitted from his wisdom and experience. He was an equal of Heath. No other Cabinet member of 70-74 rivalled Macleod. Heath was allowed to dominate his cabinet and also latterly retreated into a Downing Street shell. Macleod would have prevented the former.
141. I think it’s time to change the political world, for a more a modern thinking world where ‘we’ pierce’s through me me me! greed sinks further down to where the dinosaurs have gone. ‘We’ is better than just listening to the voters. If there is a politician who actually is a shield and a sword for voters I think Tony would be it. He does listen ‘with’ not ‘to’. The ‘law’ is the voters, and Tony has been tried in all the political areana imaginable! and still stands on the heads of all the politicians.
Hello friends! Really nice place here. I found a lot of interesting stuff all around.
You’re invited to online bingo
http://www.bingoplaying.com