Can Paxman put a smile back on Davis’s face?
November 17th, 2005-
Will Cameron survive the “ordeal by Newsnight”?
Six months and ten days after the marathon Tory leadership started the the look on Davis’s face says it all. After being front-runner for so long and then seeing the events in Blackpool turn the contest on its head is there anything he can hope for from the campaign’s final set piece tonight when David Cameron faces Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight?
For if there is going to be a last minute upset then the Paxman interrogation will be the occasion for it to happen. And after putting the label of “shit” to David Davis last week Paxman is not going to pull any punches with the young ex-Etonian who stormed into contention with his speech in Blackpool barely six weeks ago.
Are we going to see much deeper probing of the personal drugs issue which dominated events last month? How is Cameron going to cope with Paxman’s forensic approach to his policy-lite campaign strategy which he seems to have maintained so far. Or has Paxman got an ace up his sleeve that will knock the 39 year old off guard?
With perhaps half the Tory member electors having already sent their completed ballots off it will take a sensational development to change the course of this contest - and Paxman, surely, is the only person who could achieve that.
Given the betting prices on Cameron are so tight - the best you can get is 0.08/1 - it might be worth waiting for the interview before putting money on. If Cameron does slip up then prices could move.
Alastair Campbell says Cameron is the heir to Alastair Campbell. In his rather self-indulgent column in the Times this morning Campbell notes: “…He (Cameron) knows how to craft a line and put it over. He has a feel for what tickles the media’s fancy, what makes a story and how to get it up as a headline, what combination of action and demeanour keeps the photographers happy. He knows how to take a line of attack against him and turn it into a line of attack against his attackers. These are skills all press officers deploy from time to time. And every leader in the media age needs this kind of professional support..There were plenty of times when Mr Blair would take my advice. But not for one second did I ever imagine I could do his job, let alone do it better than he did. I might have thought I did my job better than Messrs Major, Hague, Duncan Smith and Howard did theirs, but I always knew that their job was tougher. I’m not sure that Mr Cameron appreciates the difference. “
With the new register of MPs financial interests several papers this morning look at who has provided financial backing for the two campaigns. The Guardian contrasts the backgrounds of those giving money to the two camps.“..Many of the backers of David Davis are ruthless entrepreneurs, scions of gamblers and shipping magnates, or nightclub owners - and one is a popular thriller writer, Frederick Forsyth.But the backers of David Cameron are more often wealthy philanthropists, stockbrokers, private bankers and media moguls.”
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
it’s ‘Alastair’…
Cameron can be viewed as a modernist and centrist though really these characteristics are quite orthogonal, and there is little real evidence of political centrism. Of course, other politicians such as Portillo, Blunkett and Blair have also undergone Damascene conversions so perhaps we cannot read too much into Cameron’s past policy positions. Even if he is further to the right than many of his supporters imagine, then Davis is also a right winger and Cameron is a better communicator so Conservative members of whatever stripe may still see him as a better prospect.
So far as the drugs question goes, rather than precisely what he took before his rise to prominence, a more interesting question is whether there ought to be a general statute of limitations or whether it applies to drugs only or to David Cameron only. Probably the latter!
enjoyed the article but one would prefer ‘Old Etonian’ (OE) to ‘ex-Etonian’ which implies that he was expelled! Unless you have information that confirms the latter…
The article is one of the best I have seen that reflects why I have not warmed to DC as a leadership candidate. Such a shame that it was written by a man who makes Enron’s auditors look like a model of probity.
I doubt the Paxo has anything that could seriously upset the race. Lets be honest anything less than bursting into tears is a victory when you are opposite Paxman.
I agree that Paxo has nothing that will spoil the race but he might well choose to dwell on his status as a lightweight buoyed by a lifetime of priviledge. It must be irksome for Mr Davis who has achieved everything he has through his own efforts and against difficult circumstances to have to watch Mr Cameron glide through the ranks of the Tory party on a feather bed of ‘Old Scool Tie’, Gentlemens clubs and marriage to the daughter of an Hereditary Peer.
A glimpse of this was revealed on newsnight by Michael Crick. Mr Cameron was a director of a chain of drinking bars. The flagship of which-situated in Leicester Square and aptly named ‘the Zoo’-had the distinction of being in the top ten of trouble causing bars (their bouncer even attacked the newsnight cameraman). But what I found interesting was that he had been recommended for this directorship by his father-in-law the hereditary Earl of somewhere who felt his advisory work at the Home Office would stand him in good stead!
Now if nepotism mixed with a bit of the aristocratic old school tie was as far as it went it wouldn’t be worth Paxo raising the odd eyebrow. But Mr Cameron has been an outspoken critic of our “draconian and outdated licensing laws” which he said should be scrapped and foolishly went on the record many times to say as much.
…….Until of course he gave up this directorship to go for the leadership of the Conservative Party when he did a volte-face and decided that our ancient licensing laws were perfect as they are and voted accordingly!
If Campbell was really so dismissive of Cameron why would he even bother to right such a negative, sneering article. To be honest I don’t think anyone much cares what he thinks any more he’s turning into a bit of a joke figure - especially after the Lions debacle.
As for Cameron changing his position on liscencing laws I would suggest that any Labour leader who was happy to stand on the 1983 manifesto would be in no position to criticise anyone for changing their stance on anything.
er…max, cameron’s comments were made only a few months ago, not 22 years ago! besides, i think you’ll find that only or two members of the cabinet were MPs in 1983.
A quick glance at the cabinet tells you that, Blair, Prescott, Brown, Straw, Beckett were MPs in 1983. Hewiit and Clarke were backroom officials, with Hewitt a losing candidate. Several others were candidates.
But then of course Mrs T was a candidate in 1950 and read that manifesto with the duties outlined for the Minisrty of Supply!!
I thought Campbells article was very funny. It’s easy to dismiss and of course it wont have any impact on the committed. But what it does very well is articulate the uneasiness many Tories must have about him. As all advertisers will tell you it’s impossible (in a limited time) to change peoples perceptions but it’s not at all difficult to reinforce them. For me his article rang true. Incidentally Cameron’s campaign against the existing licensing laws was still going strong eighteen months ago. So who says he hasn’t got any policies!
yeah well the labour party was mad then…I’m doubtful with the exception of maybe beckett whether anyone on that short list actually believed in most of the rubbish in that terrible manifesto. dark days…
also there is a difference between standing on a daft political platform for election and espousing the views of the drinks industry because you’re being paid lots of money to do so IMHO.
“But then of course Mrs T was a candidate in 1950 and read that manifesto with the duties outlined for the Minisrty of Supply!!”
Indeed, Peter. One can find plenty of embarassing material for any politician with a high-porfile poltiical career of at least 15 years - I’ve heard that, somewhere in CCO archives, there’s a paper written by Mrs. Thatcher in the late 1960s as Opposition Fuel and Power spokesman ruling out any private involvement in the coal industry.
10 - Well, Eric, obvious answer to that is then ‘what are bunch of bloody hypocrites they were then, and why should they have changed now’?
13 - Excellent point John O!
The change of heart on the EU Constitution referendum is a more recent example of Labour changing their minds on an issue pretty rapidly.
15, So are the Tories who voted for all the European legislation and now want to reverse it all hypocrites?
Come on people, I think we could spend several days playing the game of who’s the bigger hypocrite to no useful end.
I think one of the recent charms of the Conservative party is the way this once solid fortress now blows around like a wheat field in a blizzard. In ‘97 Hague was chosen from a decimated front bench because he was the least contaminated by defeat. By 2001 IDS was chosen over Clarke and Portillo because not only was he not tainted by defeat but he went further… He was the arch rebel. You couldn’t wipe the slate cleaner than that…… until they realized contamination wasn’t the problem. It was that they were seen as nasty….. So they chose Howard! This bizarre choice was made more so because he had come bottom out of five in ‘97. But they needed someone with lots of experience…… so they’re choosing Cameron who has none!
Do us all a favour, Conservatives and don’t ever change! If you didn’t exist we’d have to invent you!
16 - I’m just pointing out that all politicians change their minds and it’s not the sole preserve of Tory leadership contenders.
18 - Oh Roger, your ever elegant hubris so lovingly invites (and I’m confidently will receive) a caringly adminstered and posterion focused nemisis.
10 - “I’m doubtful with the exception of maybe beckett whether anyone on that short list actually believed in most of the rubbish in that terrible manifesto.”
Indeed. Patricia Hewitt would have regarded the 1983 manifesto as too right-wing.
Interesting piece today in the Post about the potential long-term implications for British politics arising from Sir Christopher Meyer’s book.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111601915.html
It would have been much more sensible for Meyer to wait until the current government he served under Blair (not Labour) was out of office before he wrote the memoirs - such a self-denying ordinance should apply to political colleagues too, in theory.
Chrisco - Thanks. I assume the author of the piece is THE Tina Brown!
But I thought the only point of substance in the review about UK politics, namely:
“….He has broken a tradition that is at the heart of the relationship between senior civil servants with long expertise in their area and their elected bosses. That tradition has enabled British governments to get along without the swarms of self-serving political appointees that afflict Washington. If civil servants can no longer be trusted to be discreet, politicians will fairly soon want to replace them with party hacks qualified only by loyalty — and Brits, too, can then look forward to a plague of Brownies doing a heck of a job….”
…Er, actually sounds pretty close to what has already happened under this govt. Not that the political hacks are any more loyal: Lance Price’s revelations being only the most recent of the hissy-fit tantrumettes from the ex denizens of Chez Tone.
I am unhappy if a politician seems reluctant to ever change her or his mind about an issue.
What is the point of parliamentary or national debates if changes of view or perspective are to be regarded as weakness or being fickle or opportunist.
A politician refusing to learn from personal or national experience is dangerous.
Jsut as are those that change their minds so often that they forget where they put them.
“I am unhappy if a politician seems reluctant to ever change her or his mind about an issue”
Couldn’t agree with you more. As the Conservatives recent opposition to the licensing bill proves “A week is a long time in politics”!
book value - you’re not wrong!
“What is the point of parliamentary or national debates if changes of view or perspective are to be regarded as weakness or being fickle or opportunist”.
Indeed. If no change were possible, we’d have nothing to gain from a neo-Bennite Labour party, for example. As Keynes said: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, Sir?”
Roger - please don’t stop posting. The gibberish/drivel you write is hugely entertaining. You are also a splendid reverse indicator for us punters - whatever your call is, a bet on the opposite outcome is sure to produce a profit.
For anyone interested - Amanda Platell and Lord Heseltine are lined up for a debate on political memoirs on the Daily Politics today.
29. You should perhaps try that and monitor the results.
An Arsenal fanzine a few years ago put £10 on Tottnum to lose each week and ended up well in profit.
So Fred. I’d be interested to know - what is the Tory justification for their volte-face on reform of the licensing laws? Why is it after so much opposition to New Labour’s ‘nanny-state’ they’ve decided to align themselves with Mary Poppins? - ‘it’s 11.00, time for you get off to bed - you’ve had quite enough already - remember you’ve got to be bright and breezy, ready for work tomorrow’
32. As a Tory member I feel there is no justification for our position (except for the electoral capital to be gained, especially from certain ‘traditional’ Tory areas of support). Liberalisation is good, bring it on.
33. On this topic there is an interesting piece in Today’s Guardian, arguing (rather sensibly and obviously IMHO) that a hike in duty on alcohol would go a long way towards reducing the levels of drunken disorder on our streets.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1644259,00.html
It makes sense for the Tories to oppose without intending huge changes to the policy when they next get in. Every Tory candidate at local or national level can now campaign in areas where noisy pubs and clubs and anti-social behaviour rises by pointing out that Labour refused to reconsider the Act when the Tories gave them the opportunity.
[22] Tina Brown’s assertion that “even Guardian readers check out the Daily Mail first” gave me a belly laugh. Shall we nominate her for a gong for services to Anglo-American understanding?
This is one of those issues where my basic liberalism crashes head-on into what I know to be reality. I’ve heard a number of interesting theories on this but I subscribe to the view that the disparity between incomes and house prices has a lot to do with binge drinking. People, particularly the young, earn a lot but, in many areas, nowhere near enough to get on the housing ladder. Stuck at home, with plenty of disposable income, the City Centre puborama looks attractive.
I’m well aware that the vast majority of people are responsible when it comes to alcohol but the scenes witnessed in most town and city centres on Friday and Saturday nights do suggest otherwise. What’s more of an issue for me is that the time and effort spent policing and tidying up and mending after these “revellers” comes out of local taxation. I would like to see the big breweries (often friends of the Tories) compelled to contribute to the policing and healthcare costs. If they want to pass that cost on to the customer, that’s up to them but I would prefer that to a simple blanket rise in alcohol duty. In addition, the latter goes to the Chancellor, the former would go to the local authority.
I also think it’s time to revisit planning and licensing laws so that the big breweries don’t get away with creating encironments aimed at “soaking” (often literally) the customer. Time perhaps for more seating and an end to “happy hour” promotions. We also, I think, need to tackle the issue of underage binge drinking, particularly among young girls.
The Conservative Party is a broad church. Economic liberalism and social conservatism are often uneasy bedfellows, particularly on the drinks issue. With Labour it is the other way round. Notwithstanding the apparent volte-face, these polar opposites are both honourable conservative positions.
This is one reason it would be nice to know more about David Cameron’s philosophy. Is he an economic liberal or a social conservative? Or, like Mrs Thatcher, is he both?
37 - agreed. Most of the binge drinking is due to young adults not facing housing expenses. Likewise club med tourism, mobile phones and so on. House price inflation is indeed boosting the economy but most of it is via this mechanism rather than the increased paper affluence of homeowners.
I agree with Stodge regarding seating. Make any alcohol selling establishment provide one seat per customer. They can always leave their seat to dance or chat to someone elsewhere. It does change attitudes, look at the effect of all seater stadiums in football.
38 - It’s possible that we’ll still be asking that question even in the event Cameron is seated in No. 10 as successful PM. He’s left the option open of a harlequin attitude to policy, with little nods to most groups within the party while not committing himself to any school. He might not take this step, though.
33. Spot on. I feel the same way.
Re: 39 - This makes the reported comments of the Bank of England Governor even more perplexing. I thought Brown was deliberately trying to slow down the economy a couple of years ago in a bid to curb house price inflation and consumer spending. The tax “rises” of various kinds were specifically aimed at cooling spending and the housing market.
To the chagrin of some, I would argue they have succeeded. 1.6% growth projected for next year is still very reasonable. My current fear is the prospect of a cold winter in both Europe and North America and the impact this would have on fuel supplies and prices. One thing guaranteed to hit growth would be a significant, if short-term, spike in energy prices.
13.”Well, Eric, obvious answer to that is then ‘what are bunch of bloody hypocrites they were then, and why should they have changed now’? ”
Exactly John O, we shouldn’t trust the tories, they aren’t changed, you’re always the same of bloody hypocrites
32. Nuisance to neighbours, and drunken disorder in town centres ought to be matters of concern to any Conservative.
43. If Brown wanted to curb house inflation, then he should have looked a bit deeper at the cause. More punitive taxes on the buy to lets and more stringent rules on mortgage lending would be an obvious answer. Since he’s dented the stock market with his pensions tax grab, many people shyed away from investing the majority of their money in the stock market and jumped on the buy to let bangwagon.
38 - The moment any party becomes socially *and* economically liberal I’ll have a party that I want to support.
I’m not holding out too much hope though……….
9,26-Roger-You seem not for the first time to forget parts of recent history when it’s convenient!
If you want to talk about politicians changing their minds lets also talk about political parties not just changing their minds but dumping their entire core values and policies of many decades.
Does privatisation,multi lateral disarament,council house sales,40% top rate for income tax,secondary picketing and clause 4 ring any bells in that space between your ears!
45. The problem is cultural. I don’t believe the 24 hour thing will make a massive difference as most clubs are open until 2,3am. You then get a kebab or some other disgusting food and crawl into bed about 4 o’clock. There is a limit for how long people will want to be out for and I can’t see it extending longer than that. What we need to do is look into the culture of drinking and attempt to educate the new generation by persuasion rather than ban and consider changes to alcohol taxation.
45.”Nuisance to neighbours, and drunken disorder in town centres ought to be matters of concern to any Conservative. ”
Pubs close at 11 PM and people could stay outside them drinking and making noises.
37 - Stodge the Scottish Parliament voted to ban happy hours yesterday - good to see that Presbyterianism is still alive and kicking! - allthough I do take your point. It was all fairly chaotic in the parliament yesterday and they ended up increasing the hours pubs can open (decisions will be taken by local licensing boards) but off sales will be restricted from 10am-10pm rather than 8am-10pm as at present.
Some MSP’s were pressing to have off lisenses open from 3am-10pm which to be honest I think is crazy. Their have probably been a load of times when I would have thought it was a great idea to go to the offy after the clubs shut (usually at 3am) but I’m pretty glad I wasn’t able to.
50-Andrea-That’s one of the already existing problems;people that live in the centre of cities are worried that they will have this throughout the night / early morning and not just after 11pm.
52. well, yes, but the fact that pubs close at 11 doesn’t mean they won’t stay in the middle of the streets making noises until 2 in the night. I suppose they won’t go to bed so easily.
20: I have to say, you get a better class of insult on PB.com…
lol @ Sara
45 … and indeed everyone, Sean. As others have indicated what is required is cultural change in attitudes to drinking - a long and arduous, but necessary, process. The problem is that as we grow richer we can afford to drink more - and that tendency will continue until everyone learns to drink moderately (for their own good, as well as other people’s). However, to see this as necessating opposition to the much-needed reform of our ludicrous licensing laws seems to me to show a wilful misunderstanding of the real nature of the problem.
54 - They can be made to order
Andrea @ 50; in our climate?! I can assure you that no one would have stood around outside a pub for very long last night.
58 - An exception can safely be made for Newcastle….
58. Sean Fear, I didn’t take in consideration your climate…..but there’s always the summer.
60. That’s when we export our culture to places like Ibiza.
61. but poor working class people couldn’t afford to go to Ibiza to spend the holiday…..they’re forced to stay at home and male noises under Sean Fear’s window
OT: today’s Question Time guests are Lord Falconer, David Willetts , Baroness Williams, Alice Miles and Derek Laud.
It wouldn’t happen much in the Summer either, Andrea, as it’s usually raining then.
63. When I spent 2 summer weeks in UK many years ago, it didn’t rain too much. Ok, there was more rain than here, but I was able to get a couple of sunny days too
But then now I recall all those Wimbledon’s matches interrupted by the rain.
62. “make”, not “male”. K and L are far on the keyboard, I couldn’t understand why I confused them…….
Just out of curiosity Andrea, have you visited Britain? And if so, where?
lol - you anticipated my question!
65. I spent 2 holiday in Britain in those summer trip to try to improve your English. I was 16-17 years old (or something like this). The first time I went somewhere near Sheffield and the second time in Kent. I don’t remember the exact places, but I could search (and call some of my friends to see if they recall them).
I went to Dublin too for 2 weeks. I loved it.
Up in Newcastle people seem to be able to stand around outside pubs whatever the weather.
62 - Please tell me that’s not true - anyone but Derek Laud!
69. Max, BBC website describes him as “speech writer and author”.
69/70. Somehow related: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4446108.stm
71 - So you can get refugee status by appearing on big brother, that should boost the number of applications for next years show.
72. You should appear on TV wearing a bikini.
69. He wouldn’t sign my direct democracy petition at conference. He asked what it was about and I explained and told him it had been serialised in the telegraph a couple of months ago. He said he was away and wanted me to say ‘Oh my god, you’re Derek from big brother’. Didn’t give him the pleasure though.
74. Is he already on approved candidates list? So we could see an Adam Rickitt-Derek Laud fight at selection meetings……that’s the future of Tory party!
Andrea - if you ended up in certain parts of Kent, I am surprised you speak any English at all
Most “language students” end up staying either in Folkestone, Margate, Ramsgate or Broadstairs, and I am afraid to say that the Queen’s English isn’t native amongst a significant proportion of the British population in most of those areas….
75. I did read that he was on due to stand for Tottenham at one election but had to pull out for a reason (I’m not sure what). I wouldn’t have a problem with him fighting a seat as he’s been a party worker for years. Don’t get me started on Adam Rickett though.
Adam Rickett…. my god, I have no idea how on earth he got through the selection process - they changed the rules a couple of years ago so that the majority of candidates had to go through a central vetting process, that involved rounds of psychological testing, media training and the such like, yes?
So how a Himbo like him got through is beyond me. Derek Laud has previously been on the candidates list, and I am not sure if you have to reapply to join the list once on it, even if you went through before the new testing came in. I guess this is how certain seats have already re-selected candidates from the last GE (it is also a means of them getting round the change that prevents local candidates applying without going centrally first)
I do also know that party workers can be placed on the list without going through the central vetting also, so that would give him two levels of instant entry to the current list.
But Adam Rickett????? If he gets within sniffing distance of a safe seat, I could consider my position within the Party, even if my partner is selected to run herself….
76.”if you ended up in certain parts of Kent, I am surprised you speak any English at all”
well, you could see the “results”….now I could, at least, say it’s all Kent’s fault.
77. He was charged for drink-driving.
Andrea - no, your English is far too good to have been learned in Margate, Ramsgate or Broadstairs!!!
OT, what do people think of the “leaked” report on pensions. Personally it annoys the hell out of me when people attack the idea that we need to change the current system. The baby boom generation is about to retire and we need to change things. The proposals dont effect anybody who is under 50 so they have a chance to plan ahead. Also those people who complain about paying into a pot and dont feel they get enough, more often than not these people have benefitted from from the massive house price rises over the last few years and are quite well off. Where as young people can’t even begin to get on the housing market.
people need to gte over themselves and realise that a statepension is to garuntee a certain standard of living not to pay for around the world cruises.
sorry dont need to change the current system
Red Flag - I think I agree with you. The state pension should be a safety net, not something intended as a primary means of income. Because the post war generation and baby-boomers have happily worked on the assumption that the following generation will pay for their retirement (thanks guys) we can’t really duck the obligation, but that should be as far as it goes. Certainly no-one 30 (my age) or under should expect a state pension. And there is no reason why state pensions should rise with average incomes rather than with inflation.
And yes, the increase in house prices has been a massive and arbitrary shift in wealth from my generation to the one above it, and from poor to rich.
This will be the first generation for a while that is poorer than its parents.
Three points re. the licensing laws:
a) Reid’s compromise, should it survive a rebellion by the PLP, will mean more people get bladdered when pubs stop serving food, in order to avoid the smoking ban, thus making more people drink on empty stomachs
b)If ending the 11pm closing time will turn British people into sensible Continental drinkers, happy to sip just one glass of wine, then do so many British people binge drink abroad? Some people say it’s because they’re demob happy, with just a fortnight to escape the 11pm closing times they get at home, but I’m not convinced
c) It’s not just British people who binge drink, but other northern Europeans as well. The Republic of Ireland tried what we’re going to unleash at the end of this month, and found the results so calamitous (in terms of disorder and strain on hospitals) that not only did it return to the status quo ante, but introduced regulations harsher than those which pertained prior to liberalisation.
84 - The French may not binge drink but an awful lot of them die of alcohol-related liver diseases (and car crashes).
Are the pension experts who want compulsory savings the same ones who in the 1980s and 90s encourage raids on company pension funds because they were all overfunded anyway?
And even if they are not, can they tell us how company dividends in future will meet a demand said to be too great for the exchequer? Either Britain’s future economy is robust enough to pay pensions or it is not: whether the government acts as middleman is largely irrelevant. Or are we all supposed to invest abroad so it is foreign workers who pay our pensions?
Actually, Adam Rickitt isn’t even the worst candidate on the approved candidates list. That dubious accolade has to go to Zac Goldsmith, of “smash global capitalism” fame. I can tolerate vacuous candidates who get onto the list by dint of celebrity, but I would have thought that, er, actually holding recognisably Conservative views would be something of a sine qua non for running as a Conservative candidate.
87 - Indeed, someone who once said “Miachael Meacher is the only politician I can trust” hardly seems Conervative material. However, his brand of localist environmentalism could link up with a kind of green, traditionalist Toryism, a bit like Prince Charles in his more elevated moments - a strand, however, which is practically dead in the Tory party in the Commons and has veyr little chance of being a vote winner. He might to quite well in a SW constituency, though.
87. I don’t know what to make of Zac Goldsmith being on the list. Perhaps he’s a realistic enviormentalist.
81. Agreed as well. Furthermore, the public sector should not be a Lucky Prize that people get into and “win” a better pension than anyone else at their level of expertise starting at 60, years before their respective workers in the Voluntary and Private sectors can retire.
“and I am not sure if you have to reapply to join the list once on it, even if you went through before the new testing came in. I guess this is how certain seats have already re-selected candidates from the last GE”
You don’t normally, but the old list was wiped clean after the General Election, and everyone who was on the list had to reapply prior to July 30th. Anyone selected since then (there have been at least 7 selections, and I’m told that not all of them are fasttrack readoptions of candidates from last time), would have had to apply to join the candidates list since the election. That said, I have no idea if there were full assessment boards or if candidates who were known to be capable were simply waved through.
91. I think many were waved through without interview (even the incompetent ones)
Getting back to the topic, I have put a piece on the Apolo Project blog about the hustings. It seems that Davis has done relatively well at them.
http://liberalism2010.blogspot.com/2005/11/great-debate.html
I’ve also heard that Cameron repeats/quotes himself in questioning. He may have a rough time tonight. Still he is bound to win.
86 - Eh? I think you are missing the point there. The point of compulsory saving isn’t to ensure that Britain produces more stuff for people to consume in 2025 (or whenever) than it would otherwise (although a higher savings rate does translate into more investment). It is simply getting people to defer current spending when they might otherwise be inclined to spend now and judge that the government will probably raise taxes on the working population when they themselves have retired. In other words it is getting people to enjoy the fruits of their labour in twenty years (with interest of course) rather than now. Whether the money in your pension scheme is invested in companies in Britain or Mongolia is hardly relevant.
While not wanting to restrict people’s freedom to entertain themselves this freedom must be balanced by the cost to others.
There is the nuisance of too many pubs open too long in too enclosed an area, and there is the real policing cost. Other businesses that are valuable to a broader range of people than throng the bars and pubs also often suffer.
Any Tory would want to follow the simple policy of not hurting others when satisfying our own desires.
The pisserati do serious damage to others: noise, public money, medical needs, intimidation, fear and lack of free access to town centres for the more sober citizens.
But most of all, in the usual Nulab smoke and mirrors way, the new legislation seems to take real control away from local people who are left severely hampered in saying no to the nuisance. And that position is not one this Tory can accept.
Localism must mean the very opposite is put in place.
Closing times shouldn’t really be any of the government’s business. If they must be restricted (and probably, in at least some circumstances, they must) then they should be restricted by the local authorities in the interests of the local public, balancing the interests of drinkers and residents. Whether councillors are disinterested, answerable and competent individuals to make this decision is really an argument of the adequacy of our local government system.
B2W, how does the new arrangement move away from localism?
I do agree, though, that the licensing laws where they relate to music are an unnecessary dogs breakfast.
Tories, ready to change (in what?)?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4446864.stm
96 Cookie I do not claim to be an expert but just someone who followed the debate. It seems to me that despite several changes to the bill the presumption that a bar should stay open longer is now the practical starting point, rather than the previous situation that required them to prove that staying open longer was sensible.
It will be very difficult to deny the extended licence and the police no longer have a right to hold the licence if when they object.
The ability of local authority action to close pubs and bars that cause a problem is now more restricted as is the ability to take a real grip on areas of real disorder. These provisions have led many of those that have to deal with the pisserati to oppose this new legislation.
97 Andrea And if you want to see how to lose the next election then you only have to look here.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4446582.stm
97 That report gives no hint that DC ended up on his knees in front of Paxo pleading for mercy. Perhaps Auntie is holding something back?
Blue2win, not only he wants to write the next manifesto immediately, but the 2009 budget too!
The problem with the arguments for changing the licensing laws is that they are the wrong way round. Generally supporters will argue that we should liberalise our laws so that we can develop an alcohol culture more like the French. They ignore the point that our (and the French) drinking laws are a product of our culture and are not a cause. And when (above) Woody argued that “liberalising the laws wasn’t the problem because most clubs are open ’til 2-3 am” - well you are countering your own argument; the proliferation of late licenses across our town centres is a fairly recent development - and has quite a good correlation with the increase in drink related disorder.
And as an aside the French have far greater problems with longterm alcohol related health problems.
“The shadow education secretary, clear favourite at the bookmakers to win the contest, was pressed by Mr Paxman over changing his mind on introducing higher university tuition fees, from being an opponent to a supporter.
He said his original opposition had been because Labour had broken a manifesto commitment in bringing in the policy. “
A pretty pathetic explanation IMO. Top up fees are a disastrous policy and the Conservatives should say so.
103. Alex, I agree, it’s a pathetic explanation.
102 Alex That is very perceptive.
There is a myth that there is no problem with aggressive and obnoxious drunks in southern Europe (an area I know well). It is not as widespread as in the UK but in larger towns it is far from unknown.
But one real difference is the policing. In most of those southern countries the response is not to talk patiently to the pisserati but to tell them to go home and if they don’t they are arrested in no gentle way.
It is societies understood reaction that controls these anti-social behaviour patterns and in the UK it is simply not done to get really tough, is it?
Cos I know my rights, so piss off copper!
103 - On the policy itself, is there really any alternative to fees? Universities in the UK have been gradually suffering in the funding stakes for at least a generation now, and risk falling behind. Without fees, either student numbers are going to be cut drastically, which is going to damage our skill base, the elite universities will concentrate on attracting foreign rather than domestic students, or we’d have to rely on taxation to make up the difference - and universities are so low down the normal expenditure pecking order that they’re not going to be guaranteed funds. The only alternative I can see is a grrduate tax on existing graduates (fees are basically a delayed tax on current graduates).
Why doesn’t the Government do what it did over the 90 days? Let the Police decide. I expect 100% of Chief Constables would like to have the power to decide when pubs in their area can open plus the power to promptly close them down altogether if they don’t like them.
Is the Chief Constable lobby group active on this one?
106. Perhaps only charge fees on useless degrees like media studies. We’ve got too many students doing pointless degrees.
A graduate tax (if that is the only alternative), constructed imaginatively, would be a far better policy.
108. How nice, Woody
110. I worked in a call centre for a bit Andrea and virtually everyone had a degree in subjects like sports science. media studies, leisure and tourism. Not sure what they learnt that helps with banking.
I should say that i don’t object, in principle to students being charged some proportion of the costs of their course - although that would be unworkable in practice because it would kill off science subjects for good. However i object to people being charged for a course in advance of any realisation of any value from that course (and regardless of whether they want to fully realise that value - eg. if they consciously want to go into a low paid profession does that mean that they should steer clear of a “top” course at Oxbridge?), and certainly undergraduate students should not be required to help fill shortfalls in postgraduate education and research.
And it is not right that hundreds of thousands of young people should be facing enormous marginal rates of tax well into their late 20s or early 30s. How is that good for building a dynamic economy?
111. I suppose I’m studying for a “useless” degree (I study Sociology) and I studied all morning and most of the afteernoon…..reading your comment after an hard working day is not very encouraging……
I assumed that Structural Holes were something to to with some branch of physics. How disappointing! (or intriguing, depending on your viewpoint ;))
114. Alex, sorry to have disappointed you. I studied them for the “social capital” course. Building a structural autonomous social network increases people competitive advantage (according to that theory).
117 (con) - if they were paying individually for the cost of their course then this would be justified - but they are not. They are paying collectively for the cost of the whole higher education system, based upon the supposed future “value” of any course they do.
117. Surely the point is to pay for a service (tuition and resources); it’s up to the individual to determine how great the benefit is, is it not?
119. Point taken, that post hadn’t popped up when I typed 120.
118 - They’re not means tested, that’s the point.
OT: Just for Roger, Ruth Kelly Wardrobe Watch: Today we are wearing a cheap, ill-fitting black suit with trousers stuck half way up our clunge.
113. Sorry to dishearten you Andrea.
123. Shame she didn’t take a degree in fashion. Would have a lot more useful for her.
Anyone watching Channel 4 news? They’ve got a Cameron speech with everyone falling asleep
123/124. Ruth Kelly’s wardrobe is not bad. There’re worse things around. The Queen’s dresses for example!
126. The queens 70 something though
126 - How dare ye! The Queen looks perfectly regal at all times! God Save her!
123-Simon-I saw part of her speach on the news,clearly her public speaking skills go hand in hand with her dress code;seems to be way out of her depth in this job and totally lacking in enthusiasm.
Can’t see her facing up to the awkward squad.
129. You’ll be going onto the Roger sexist squad now.
What is the significance of a “green door”?
127. well, that’s why she shouldn’t wear those colours.
Btw, talking about dresses, when I see films or photos from the 80’s, I always wonder how people could wear those dresses. Now I start to find “weird” even clothes popular in early 90’s (no onw still wear fuseaux now!).
The change in fashion habits is very slow, so I don’t realize it immediately and then looking back to 10 years ago there’re lots of differences.
127 - 80 next year.
What’s a fuseaux?
130-Woody662-I think I was a founder member,although from previous communications he doesn’t appear to understand the meaning!
134. A type of pants. Women wore them to go around here in early 90’s, not only in the gym. Now very few still walk on the street wearing them.
http://www.beautynews.ru/img/catalog/big/Lanaform_fuseau_big.jpg
108. Someone else may have pointed this out, but media studies has one of the highest employment rates of any degree.
Paxman interview with Cameron is now on the BBC website.
137. How many of those are in the media?
How many history students become historians?
140. how many economy students become economists?
(is it a new game?)
Alex, do you understand what are the fuseaux? Don’t tell me British women didn’t wear them.
131 - I believe ‘Green Door’ was a reference to the Washington DC based educational institution specialising in ethics and strategic political thought that many members of the cabinet have attended:
http://www.greendoor.org
Ok, tell me the usefulness of a media studies degree.
Pretty solid performance by Cameron with Paxman. Kept calm and in control at all times. No situations arose where Paxman repeated the same question lots of times.
Paxman asked about drugs in a new way - something like “is the country now willing to put into 10 Downing Street someone who took class A drugs?” DC stuck to his usual line about the past being private etc.
I would think DC is happy with how it went.
144. Am I the only one who roots for any politician when he/she is up against Paxman?
84. It is not truet that Ireland’s licensing regime is now stricter than before the licensing laws were changed.
The Commission on Liquor Licensing’s report can be read here.
http://www.justice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/flJUSQ629D2G-en/File/FinalReport.pdf
Paxo didn’t even get close.
What a contrast to the sweating,stumbling DD. DC told Paxo off three times and in each case it worked. Good tactic. Be charmingly nasty to the old badger.
DC clearly learns quickly. Not even the slightest smirk about DD ‘going around the bushes’ as Paxo put it.
The next time DC might eat Paxo with or without the turkey.
Re media studies degrees. Most people in the media dismiss such degrees as worthless. People want to people to have practical experience of doing media work, or, most importantly, journalism experience. At the end of the day, you cannot beat local newspaper training. If not, local radio training will put you in a good position.
I have to say I speak from experience on this one.
I thought Paxman got stuffed tonight. Cameron managed to make JP’s whole interviewing style seem unreasonable simply by keeping his cool and having a few well prepared lines.
The interview is available here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/default.stm
149 - Mike. I think you’ve got it exactly right. Cameron performed admirably and even managed to tell old Paxo off a few times. Looked good on him too. We’ll see what all those who suggested that Cameron was scared to face Paxman have got to say now. I’m sure the various excuses will be quite creative.
151. AHM, do you know what is this ‘A-list’ of top candidates Cameron mentioned a few times in recent times?
Btw, testerday UK national security was under threat: Jim Dowd and Bob Marshall-Andrews met again in the same venue (Annie’s bar).
Thankfully they ignored each other and no blood was spread.
151. I’d agree, a good performance. Dc seems to have a touch of teflon about him. I did enjoy him telling Paxo off.
btw, you never Paxman and Jeremy Clarkson in the same room do you.
152 - Andrea. I believe the idea of an A list is basically a list of people CCO believes to be the brightest and best from the approved candidates list, people who are accomplished in their fields or have achieved some level of distinction. The idea is still in it’s formative stages, but I understand that local parties would be encouraged to choose from this list, particularly marginal seats, but would not be required to do so. Anyone who has more detail is invited to correct what I have written here.
154. So local parties could still chose someone out of this list, right? Is the purpose of this A list just to put “pressure” on local parties to chose the candidates preferred by TPTB?
154. That sounds about right. I’m not sure what I think about it. I think a refining of the current candidates list would be a better idea. I can’t believe the people who are really incompetent and unsuitable for being an MP that have been waved through back onto it.
P.S Question Time now. Lets see what Derek from Big Brother has to say.
155 - Yes, that’s about right.
156 - Woody, I’m not sure what I think of it myself yet, but I’ll wait and see the proposals fleshed out a bit more before making up my mind on the subject. Ideally, you’re right - the approved candidates list itself should be sufficient.
156/157 I think it has been mentioned that the list will be half men and half women.
The fact that local parties could ignore it is right. Otherwise it would have been like imposing candidates from London. It could still seem like a try to sponsor favourite candidates and disencourage of selection of possible dissenters (how many potential dissenters will end up in that list? I’m a bit cynic tonight)
An excellent performance by DC - the best anyone has done in a major Paxman interview for a very long time.
Real class in calling the whole style of interview into disrepute.
I bet Gordon isn’t smiling…
145 - no, you’re not alone. I was hoping Cameron would do well tonight, and I believe he did.
The boy has what it takes. I think he is going to be Prime Minister. He probably doesn’t believe in much but he is certainly electable.
Yes, I agree with the general feeling - DC did pretty well if not very well. Nice tactic to turn the tables and harangue Paxo - wonder if DC’s people had cooked that up beforehand. First time I’ve ever - I think - seen Paxman even slightly discomfited.
DC also gave very straight answers, I thought, as to why he’s not going to be pinned down on specific policy.
Then again, maybe Paxo wants DC to win, because he thinks DC might give nasty, anti-BBC New Labour a real run for their money, therefore Paxman was deliberately less aggressive/effective. Stranger things have happened..
I think Cameron did as well as anyone I’ve seen against Paxman.
I still think DC has a few weaknesses, but at delivering prepared lines he looks the real deal, and the script-writers he has around him are top class.
I see Guido is already complaining that there wasn’t enough blood on the carpet…
163 - John, do I detect a backhanded compliment there?
I thought DC came through with flying colours tonight. The only time he looked discomfited was when Paxman pressed on whether the country would accept a PM who had used class A drugs. Apart from the fact that we probably have already had such a PM, I thought DC still looked a bit shifty on that. He clearly and understandably finds questions about his personal life embarassing. ON everything else I think he acquitted himself well and deflected Paxman’s more aggressive questioning.
DC has