Has Brown found a way to turn his ratings round?
October 17th, 2006-
Will the unfunded pledge charges stick on Cameron?
After seeing his ratings steadily deteriorate against the Tory leader Gordon Brown has now found a new line of attack in the hope of bringing about a change. His Treasury team are claiming that David Cameron has made 40 unfunded spending commitments since becoming leader which would require billions of pounds of extra taxes to fund.
In what sounds like the way that Prime Minister Brown would seek to deal with the new Tory leader Cameron is going to be challenged and pressed on expenditure commitments. If effective this could isolate Cameron from parts of his party and reinforce the doubts on taxation policy.
According the the Independent this morning the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Stephen Timms, is quoted as saying: “The Tories are simultaneously promising to cut public spending while making dozens of unaffordable new spending promises. It shows they have learnt nothing from the mistakes of the 1990s, when David Cameron was advising Norman Lamont in the Treasury…”
There is no doubt that Brown needs to do something because 2006 has seen his ratings against Cameron plummet and he needs to show Labour that he can land blows on Tory leader.
The following are from the ICM’ archive and show changing responses to the highly relevant question of “Who would make the best Prime Minister - DC or GB?” . This is how opinion has changed.
ICM February 2006: Brown 45% Cameron 33% - Brown +12%
ICM April 2006: Brown 37% Cameron 32% - Brown +5%
ICM October 2006: Brown 34% Cameron 45% - Brown -11%So with the same pollster and the same question there has been a 23% turnaround in Brown’s position in the wrong direction.
Even taking into account that the October poll was carried out in the immediate aftermath of the Tory conference and might flatter Cameron the trend is clear - the likely Labour leader’s comparative position is getting progressively worse. Brown’s looking like a loser - not a winner.
Labour’s hopes rest with this all being different when Gordon is in charge. It’s argued that the negative impressions that he sends out are because of the position he finds himself in. Rightly or wrongly Brown thinks he should have been leader in 1994 and clearly that has had an effect on his whole personality.
Brown’s also had to stand by, almost helplessly, as Cameron has been able to gather momentum. He has wanted much tougher attacks against the Tory leader but has not been able to over-rule Tony more softly-softly approach.
-
It will be interesting to see if this latest line of attack does damage - for so far Labour have struggled to find a way of dealing with the Tory leader.
In the Labour leadership betting Brown’s price has continued to tighten. As to who will succeed him the money on the next Chancellor has been going on Stephen Timms - the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and, interestingly, the one who is closely involved in this latest attack on Cameron.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Brown’s USP is that he’s a substantial politician with a proven track record who has given this country the longest period of sustained prosperity since the war. He is therefore in a unique position to point out Cameron’s weaknesses……
…..That he is a politician who makes promises based on focus group findings without thought to the cost or spending implications being one of them.
I would be surprised if his world travels which have taken in India Afghanistan the USA and Iceland while trying to prevent carbon emissions isn’t also touched on.
I look forward to the time when the country is asked to rate substance against flim flam. Pointing out that Cameron has built his castle on sand with 40 examples looks like an excellent start
This latest line of Labour attack seems pretty pathetic to me. They seem to be missing the point: we’re in Opposition (for now!) - there’s no obligation on DC to come up with a fully-costed set of plans. We can do all that when we’re back in power.
For now it’s far more important that DC continues to work on changing our image - something he is doing very successfully, I might add - and actual policies, let alone costed ones, are very much a secondary consideration.
I don’t think this attack will resonate with the public - that’s not what interests them. On the other hand, as the polls show, they’re very interested in DC himself.
How else are politicians who have to be active on the global scene in order to ensure Britain is represented at international conferences etc, supposed to get around without flying. It’s such an absurd line of attack. If they were to follow the critics advice and never fly, Britain would lose some of its international prescence, and even important climate change agreements may never be signed between countries because face to face negootiations would be impossible.
When are the next major polls out, Mike?
4 - I know Guardian/ICM is due out any day now
The problem with living by spin is that you are judged on that basis. Being filmed covered in garlands of flowers with your mate George Osborne while an elephant in the background looked on isn’t too clever when trying to show how green you are. A mistake that a genuine environmentalist like George Mombiot wouldn’t have made.
2
> … there’s no obligation on DC to come up with a fully-costed
> set of plans.
Roger,
Gordon Brown may be the most disastrous Chancellor in living memory. His inane overuse of PFI has racked up debts that the UK will be paying off for thirty years and they are only off the books because of cheap accounting tricks.
Why are our hospitals closing and wards shutting after record investment of public money?
Because Gordon got his sums wrong, that’s why.
Why did the Telegraph run a front page story on Sunday on how bad the pensions crisis Gordon created is - far, far worse than expected?
Brown has been successful in only one thing - keeping debt off the books. But you can’t hide a rubbish balance sheet forever. Ask Enron. As NHS wards shut, it will all come home to roost.
Give up praising Brown. He is a disaster for Labour of epic proportions.
2
> … there’s no obligation on DC to come up with a fully-costed
> set of plans.
The obligations are set by the public. If they demonstrate in polls that they want them and that votes will be affected, such an obligation exists.
ISTM that the Liberal Democrats benefit from producing a schedule of costings with their manifesto. (I can’t prove that, of course.) But who’s to say it won’t become the new norm?
“Gordon Brown may be the most disastrous Chancellor in living memory”.
While Norman Lamont is still remembered that would be unlikely!
You can say this all you like Commentator. But the experience of the public tells them something different. It’s difficult to persuade people that they’re badly off when everything points in the opposite direction.
[9] This question of “do the sums add up?” is a problem for any party which is likely to supply the Prime Minister after an election - and, no, that no more includes the Liberal Democrats than it does Gorgeous George or Nigel Farrago.
Labour are sometimes accused of “wasting” their first two years in office. I think there’s something in that, partly because so few incoming Ministers had any experience of Government no doubt, but also because a crucial element in their electability was Brown’s determination to stick to the Major government’s spending plans (which he did) during that period.
Both parties know that there are a significant number of voters out there who long to “spend a tax dollar twice” in the vivid American phrase, hence all the periodic cant about “waste” that has been a feature of British political life since, oh, Gladstone…
The Tories will produce a costed set of plans, and I predict that there will be reputable “independent” experts who say they add up, and another lot who say they don’t - rather as the principals in a forthcoming lawsuit comfort themselves with Counsel’s Opinion…
If people think that it’s time for a change, they’ll elect Cameron. If they prefer to keep a hold of nurse for fear of meeting someone worse, they’ll stick with Brown. And Brown will do whatever he can to pour salt in the Tory wounds, and there’s not a Tory here or elsewhere who’d expect anything else.
Roger - “Brown’s USP is that he’s a substantial politician with a proven track record who has given this country the longest period of sustained prosperity since the war.”
But the “longest period of sustained prosperity” started when Lamont was Chancellor and Cameron was his advisor!!! So the key decisions were taken then and not under Brown!
Presumably Mr Brown will at some point soon be suggesting that the Chameleon advised Norman Lamont of when to pay his credit card bills?!
On the timing of the next polls my understanding is that we’ll have to wait until next week for the ICM Guardian survey. There might be other non-regular surveys at the weekend and the MORI poll for October might appear somewhere.
The ICM monthly series is probably the most respected survey there is and certainly the one I take most seriously - whatever it is reporting.
YouGov in the Daily Telegraph usually comes out on the final Friday of the month - but there’s been yet another change of editor there and we might see something different.
On the big question of whether the Brown move will have an impact my view is that it will be quite small. Cameron-Osborne can easily deal with this. Labour has yet to find the magic bullet to deal with the new situation.
The sewage being leaked on on David Blunkett continues to spill over. In the Express today, one reads the former head of the prison service saying of the Dear Leader’s shameless acolyte:
“He shrieked at me that he didn’t care about lives, told me to call in the Army and ‘machine gun’ the prisoners and - still shrieking - again ordered me to take the prison back immediately.
“I refused. David hung up.”
“He surely cannot have intended us to take (this) seriously?”.
But he said the incident demonstrated that when Mr Blunkett was under pressure “he could be almost impossible to work with”.
“I found him always unpredictable and inclined to rush to a decision [b]sometimes on the basis of what had been read to him that morning from the tabloid press [/b],”
Surely a sign of a most suitable successor to the Dear Leader. especially when some of the drivel in the tabloid press he has actually (allegedly) written himself. But perhaps he thought the rioting prisoners possessed bedpans of mass destruction?
Mike Smithson. I think you are 6 months out of date. The impression that Cameron will say any old rot to get elected is already setting in amongst people who were originally attracted to him. Cameron is already soiled goods.
11. A very sensible post…if you remember back to 1997, when the Tories asked how Labour’s spending promises would be funded, the apparently absurd line ‘by reducing the bills of economic failure’ was trotted out. But the public wanted a change and so this technocratic line of attack by the Tories failed..as it likely will for Labour next time.
16 - is that why he is so far behind in the polls?!
The excellent Roger is right about GB—the public see his record as chancellor as much more good than bad. The truth is immaterial.
There is a seamless jump to assume that it also means that he will make the best PM. We don’t know, as it is such a huge promotion. All we can judge on his modus operandi so far. GB’s approach and style has been hectoring and nitpicking. His off-balance sheet sleight-of-hand is adroit (GB fans), or storing up trouble for the future (the rest of us). Can DC make that charge stick? I doubt it, though the MSM could if they wanted. GB cannot afford to upset many there—he is more vulnerable than he thinks he is.
Rupert Murdoch’s confidante Irwin Steltzer has a very unflattering piece about GB in the Guardian today, referring to his tax policies as being defined by ’sheer pettiness’. Although the article ends with a moan that the Tories are currently offering no alternative, this suggests Steltzer’s boss is clearly ready to jump ship should he think it appropriate.
18 But it is why his lead in the polls is less than it was 3 months ago just as his lead in support amongst female voters has evaporated .
21 Mark his lead amongst female voters hasnt evaporated. I keep telling you not to just look at one poll or pollster!
“Treasury team are claiming that David Cameron has made 40 unfunded spending commitments since becoming leader which would require billions of pounds of extra taxes to fund.”
So after the claims that the conservatives would slash public spending in the last two GE’s we now have Brown claiming that Cameron is going to put up taxes?
After dave the chameleon, Sion Simon’s efforts last week and now this attempt to push home David Cameron’s message of NHS, they have not got a clue.
Incompetence and lack of delivery while wasting vast amounts of money, and that’s just tax credits! Gordon Brown needs to find a credible way to tidy up the spending habits of this Labour government before trying to accuse the conservatives of a “spending” agenda for public finances. I take it they will be dropping the “same old tories” charge.
Interesting artice Mike. I suspect Cameron already has an answer to this line of attack, but we will see.
22 - Rik have any polls asked why female support is higher than that of men?
Was it his initial new, young and good looking(if you like that floppy hair, public school, looks the same as when he was 15 look)
Do some women want to “mother” him and others just think he “Nice….”
Do they or men folk belive in anything he actually says, his policies if you will…sorry forgot has none of them yet, just the looks then!
22 I haven’t looked at just 1 poll Rik , I have looked at all the latest 4 polls from 3 polling companies !!!!
Ih and while on on government competence look at the control orders fiasco. Two absonded! We have this silly system because we will use Belgian wore tap evidence if we did not ask for it but won’t use our own. See:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
So I think that by the time of the next general election there will be a larger “time for a change” feeling than there is now.
27. Yes, they are soooo dangerous that we had to change the law to contain them without trial or charge but when they escape the Government shrug their shoulders and say ‘Oh well, they weren’t that much of a risk anyway, thats why we haven’t done anything about them’.
Re 28, Marcus, yes, but also I am amazed we can use belgian wire tap evidence but refuse to use our own. What a shower.
I see. Well I think I do.
Dave is a charming chameleon who has no policies and is just PR hot air but is a disaster because he has promised additional spending to apply policies he has not got.
Have I got that right?
loved the photos, thought you could have stretched Gordo’s canines,
just goes to prove that the Tories did’nt have the monopoly on vampires with Howard, as for Cameron’s pic. ‘the thinking mans Dale Winton’, what a choice we are going to have at the next GE: sublime.
22. Rather a sexist post.
Andrew Rawnsley said this last Sunday and as so often I think he has it about right
“Unless it is allied to some sense of the challenges facing the country and some policies to address them, Mr Sunny Delight will sound vacuous. David Cameron said in his speech that being Prime Minister involved making tough decisions and painful choices. He then avoided making any.
Opinion polling may have him besting Gordon Brown when it comes to personality, but voters also say that they’d feel much safer in the hands of the Chancellor in the event of a crisis. Whether the politics of optimism works for David Cameron will greatly depend on the mood of the country and what sort of weather it expects. The Tory leader sounds attractive when he invites Britain into the sunshine. In a storm, voters say they’d rather have Gordon Brown holding the umbrella”
So, first we learn that Blair thinks that “Innocent until proven guilty” is a 19th century concept that is no longer relevent in justice today; not we learn that his favorite Home Secretary thinks that prison riots should be solved with machine guns. It’s becoming clear that the New Labour leadership is a bunch of very dangerous people.
Roger, what was that you were saying about Labour being “liberal” last night? I hope you’re beginning to realise how ridiculous that was…
Great photos
34. Remember ‘Roger the liberal’ also believes in class justice whereby anyone who works in the City must automatically be guilty of fraud if so charged.
Thanks for the comments on today’s pictures. As you know I always like to show our leaders and potential leaders at their very best.
After finding the one of Cameron, which is a peach, I had to search long and hard for a Brown one that matched it.
Mike S
20 PM It sounds to me, from that damming article on Brownian taxation, that the Murdoch mob have already lined up their fast launch alongside the leaking SS Blair ready to speed way past the SS Dour.
Saw Gordon at the Cheltenham Literature Festival. And he went down surprisingly well. The word spread because someone I spoke to a week later had heard the same view.
Gordon got much applause for his stance on third world debt and talk of “internationa foreign policy”. Watch out for “the international foreign policy” idea as the form of words to distance himself from Bush administration.
Gordon spent ages afterwards chatting to people who wanted signed books. He was in full “you must love Gordon mode”, standing up, shaking everyone’s hands and chatting before signing books. It was a real family outing. Sarah and the boys were there also.
Interesting situation developing in Sweden, is that our future too?
Re 37, Mike, I am sure I can speak for both Brown and Cameron when I say you are a bar**rd!
(good photos though)
Yup, who needs political satire when we’ve got Our Genial Host’s phtographs…
40. do you mean having already 2 ministers resigning in the first month?
I suppose they’re trying hard to beat some Mandelson’s record.
43 andrea
I mean after a long period of political stability, a general election, brings in a new government, with a fresh faced leader, lots of promises and the whole thing falls apart.
44. Yes but that’s the history of the UK over the last decade, surely?
I am no fan of Cameron - and find his smugness and affected new-age credentials totally nauseating. But I fear we on this site are in danger of forgetting one thing. He is incredibly clever. He got a top first from Oxford and his politics don has described him as the cleverest pupil he ever taught.
Sure, the best education money can buy will have helped. But he is still very, very cunning. Probably far cleverer than any of us here on this site - judge how far our careers have got in comparison.
Tactically, I think it’s hard to argue he has a put a foot wrong so far. Gordon Brown is clearly fairly bright, possibly almost as bright as Cameron in an academic way. But it is abundantly clear that he lacks anywhere near the guile shown by Cameron.
People point to his failure to announce solid policies as a signal of his waning appeal. But I am sure this is based on rigorous polling evidence and a carefully thought-through strategy. I would argue that his refusal to back down on this issue and cave in reveals his extraordinary inner self-confidence which proves that he - unlike prickly past leaders like Major - is quite happy to totally ignore the bleats and comments of pundits who are offering him “advice” in their columns.
He probably takes the view - rightly - that these so-called commentators have never “done” anything and that their views are therefore worthless.
What is more, they have a vested interest in luring Cameron to making a tactical blunder of policy commitments in a desperate bid to find more hot air to fill their following week’s column.
Based on second hand reports, as far as I can understand Cameron’s PR career past is littered with tales of arrogant people who have consistently underestimated him and got beaten.
I don’t like the look of him, but he appears to be made of steel underneath and I cannot forsee how anybody from Labour or his own party will ever manage to outflank him.
44. Coldestone…ok, I understand
” Mike Smithson. I think you are 6 months out of date. The impression that Cameron will say any old rot to get elected is already setting in amongst people who were originally attracted to him. Cameron is already soiled goods. ”
The things is, no matter how far Cameron is dipped in sh*t, Labour have been scuba diving in it since the last GE. I know who my money is on to smell better when the next one is called.
Matt.
46. Bazz, even Machiavelli, perhaps the all-time ‘brand leader’ in cunning, claime that a prince only could influence half of his fortunes, the rest relied on chance. Even Cesare Borgia eventually came a cropper, and he was far steelier than Cameron.
I can’t help but feel that the Tory leader’s biggest electoral difficulty will be the Tory party itself.
Roger at 1. Sorry mate but can you think for yourself?
I think this is a good line of attack to take, Camerons sucess is based on being all things to all people - vaguely infering rather than explicity defining what he would do.
Most of us seem to agree that that is exactly the right thing to do in terms of rebranding the conservatives, however Just lately some of his ‘infering’ has become less vague and hence attackable.
Kaletsky in the Times and a growing number of commentators since have picked up on some of the implications of Camerons conference speech ” the longest shopping list in History”
A recent example would be the Con response to overcrowded prisons -They avoid the liberal argument that the govt is being too tough and putting too many people in Prison for longer periods than they need to.
However they quite rightly criticise the govt for not building extra prisons nor rehabilitating enough offenders. Davis says that a con govt would put more into rehabilitation.
Unless they effectively U-turn and ‘clarify’ what they are implying the general impression is that the Con are saying they would build more Prisons (if the govt doesnt build enough by the next election)and increase Prison and Probation funding,
Both are potentialy massive spending commitments.
It’s this sort of vague positioning that Cameron has been able to make capital out of so far, but he has also begun to start supplying rope.
49 HenryG You are quite right. In any venture skill, cunning, courage, patience, and nous are all essential, but luck has to be in the mix. The old quote by Napoleon is often trotted out, about there being clever generals and lucky generals and he will take a lucky general any time.
I am a Dave fan i agree so far he has had a lot of luck as did Blair until recently when the government simply gets it wrong again and again and there is no distraction as there used to be.
The lucky political lodestone has moved residence to Notting Hill perhaps.
“Gordon Brown is clearly fairly bright, possibly almost as bright as Cameron in an academic way”
I don’t think you’ll meet many people who would agree that Cameron is ‘brighter’ than Brown. Probably not even Cameron!.
Yokel at 50. Is that some sort of code?
Not quite the same thing Bazz
“His tutor at Oxford, Professor Vernon Bogdanor, described him as “one of the ablest” students he has taught, whose political views were “moderate and sensible conservative”
53. Brown is indeed reknowned for his awesome intellect. But this is politics and perhaps it’s much better to be astute than bright.
I say this as a Brown supporter, demonstrating his human is vital. It’s simply not enough for him to be ‘clever’. If he can’t successfully do that, rightly or wrongly, it could get difficult.
50. Yokel - have a read of last night’s thread and you will see that Roger is far from the shallow recycler of Nu Labour propaganda you assume…there were some really meaningful insights into the nature of ‘liberalism’
2. “there’s no obligation on DC to come up with a fully-costed set of plans. We can do all that when we’re back in power.”
Eleanor, that’s not how it works. If you make a series of pledges, people want to know the cost before they put you into power. And Cameron has been flinging around spending pledges like confetti - he’ll spend more than Labour on the NHS, pay grandmothers to babysit (which they do free at the moment out of love), more money for social workers, more money for occupational therapists, more money for border controls etc etc. It’s all very expensive. So the question arises, how will you fund this, which tax will you raise to pay for it. He can’t really turn round and say, “oh, I didn’t mean any of it, I was just saying those things to trick yer all and create an image, like”. The public take a very dim view of that sort of thing.
I would say his NHS pledge is pretty much set in stone, given the amount of time he’s spent going on about it. And the NHS is the biggest govt expenditure. Trying to get the trusts to learn to stick to their budgets is only the half of it - and he says he’s not going to bother, if they overspend, he’ll just say, ok, here’s some extra cash, instead of taking Labour’s line, which is that you have to stick to budget and won’t get bailed out. Add to that an aging population and new expensive wonder drugs being launched every week, and the Cameroon plan means tax rises and hefty ones at that.
PM at 56. Though it’s flattering to have someone make a study of me why don’t you try to couple it with the occasional interesting post?
57. If Cameron is matching Nu Lab NHS spending which has to rise as you say - does that mean Gordon will be putting up taxes to pay for it too ?
Brown and Cameron are increasingly looking like polar opposites.
There are several really revealing (and quite funny) anecdotes about Gordon Brown in Tom Bowers book about him which convince me that, faced with a choice between him and Cameron, people will choose Cameron.
Gordon Brown lacks basic human empathy, he is hopeless at understanding people - take, for instance, the revelation by a previous girlfriend that that not only did she have to drive him everywhere (GB has never learned to drive) but he had a habit of listening to his music on headphones when they were in the car together and worse, he was surprised when she pointed out that this was rude.
Another good and again revealing piece is the revaltion that Gordon is hopelessly untidy and disorganised. When his Edunburgh flat was burgled the visiting police officer was tutting ‘why do these burglars always trash the place? this is the worst case I’ve seen’ to which a surprised Brown said ‘they didn’t touch anything’.
These are illustrative of him and reveal a man who is never going to be a good manager of people; the glare of publicity as he becomes PM will reveal much of this kind of stuff to a public who won’t like it.
In short, substance and no style versus style and no substance.
If the no substance lines sticks, Brown could surprise us all.
Why should I as a patient suffer if my local trust has managed things badly? The members are not elected and there is nothing I can do but move
59. Jamie, I think Cameron is pledging to spend more than Labour on the NHS isn’t he? He won’t hold any of the trusts to their budgets, but will bail them out with extra cash if they overrun, more spending on occupational therapists and so on. If he was merely matching Labour on spending, there wouldn’t be an issue. But he wants to outdo us.
60 Presumably, having lost an eye Brown wouldn’t be allowed to drive even if he wanted to.
60-Marcus Wood
Actually the loyalty within the treasury to GB is huge. People like working for him, they like him, they find him inspirational- he has a tremedous reputation across this huge public body. 10 years as Chancellor- not one insider treasury story against him. Compare that to Lamont- universally loathed by the same department.
65. Rubbish, the treasury leaks like a sieve.
You’ve made him sound really interesting Marcus! The British love an eccentric! I love the idea that he didn’t learn to drive and who cares whether his people skills are limited. Give me someone like that over a well polished BMW any day.
67 - I’m glad you can get (almost) to the top without having to be able to drive! It gives me great incentive to be a lazy ass and not learn!!
Tyson - type ‘leaked treeasury document’ into Google and enjoy a trip down memory lane of embarrassing leak after leak by disgruntled treasury employees.
Roger- only you could find having a leader who is a disorganised obsessive loner with a track record of bearing grudges a ‘winning formula’!
Anyway thank goodness the real battle has started after a year of Labour sleaze stories and infighting. At the end of the day Labour know where the challenge is, and squabbling amongst themselves has only distracted them.
And by jove what a huge target they have to aim- difficult to know where to go for;
-Cameron’s complete lack of experience of any kind of anything that has any use or resonates with the British public
-The sham of the Tories starting to be all things to all people- costing it out is only the start
-The fragility that Cameron holds with the mainstream press- he is pretty much disliked by his Tory heartland press, but I get the feeling the Murdoch is waiting to pounce
-The complete lack of talent and experience on the Tory front bench
-The fact that the Tories have no policies, and if they do create policies that differentiates them from Lab they are likely to be p… poor (as per the last election);
I could think of many, many more but I have to go.
marcus - anyone who was unfortunate to come across cameron during his time at carlton remembers he was one of the biggest t**ts around.
a deeply unpleasant person, almost universally loathed outside the boardroom.
I think when the time comes Brown will be seen to have quite a story to tell. Losing an eye for a start. I believe he was a talented rugby player. At the moment Cameron is being given a free hand but when the profile writers get going it might not just be substance over style it might also be depth over shallowness. Read the excellent study of Cameron in the Guardian. He biggest claim to fame is seven years carrying Michael Greens bag for him.
64. Being blind in one eye is not a bar to driving.
66-Marcus- not one that has stuck though. And although I haven’t had any recent work there, in years gone by I have been dumbstruck by the almost universal idolisation that treasury civil servant have for Gordo.
69.”only you could find having a leader who is a disorganised obsessive loner”
Have you already got Maude’s call for your next session of the “How make sure your PPC doesn’t sound like Clare Short in a bad mood day” course?
73. His sight in the remaining eye isn’t very good either - hence all his speeches are written with felt-tip in giant letters. I doubt he’d be able to see the number-plates of the car in front. Which means he can’t drive for legal reasons. But hey, if you want to bash him for losing his sight in an accident, go ahead.
63. Best to cut back on services then - as you are doing in Conservative seats ?
The passion for Gordon on here this morning from Labour posters makes me absolutely certain they are going to choose him whereas before I wasn’t convinced they would be that stupid.
The law of unintended consequences could have been written to define GB’s time at the treasury.
This is the man who thought 75p was a fair settlement for pensioners in the same year that the average council tax increase was 7%. From tax credits, through pensions ‘reform’ to computer cock-ups he has been crass, inept and incompetent on a biblical scale.
And now you think this man is fit to run the whole country?
77. Labour has increased spending on health by a very large amount - all we’re asking in return is that the trusts stick to their generous budgets, which is very reasonable - name me one organisation that disregards budget discipline. Yes, some NHS managers are finding it stressful, given that they’ve never stuck to a budget in their lives before. But once they learn how, they’ll find it easy, in the way every other manager in the world does. Therefore this is a temporary situation. Patients won’t suffer thanks to the expansion of the service to date, which provides a buffer - it’s just the hospital staff who will have to work a bit harder to manage what they’ve got.
But the Tories say that won’t ask anyone to stick to any budgets at all - that’s the essense of your NHS campaign isn’t it? Plus they are going to get the NHS to do more things if you believe David Cameron. That means a massive extra spend. Or you could take the line that Cameron doesn’t mean what he’s been saying. As a Tory, you are in a better position to judge this - in your opinion is he a liar or not?
76. Well that might explain his appalling dress sense at least.
It doesn’t entirely surprise me that Tyson and snowflake are such admirers of someone who sees the world through only one eye.
In the Kingdom of the Blind the One Eyed Man is King….
80. Probably, not worse than the British average
78. yes, they’re all stupid, Marcus Wood.
Not one of your best days…
82 - any more digs about brown’s personality? i don’t mind trotting out a few more personal attacks on cameron, if that’s the way the site is going today?
84 - Since when does having one eye define your personality - aren’t you being a little bit discriminatory there?
Just an idle thought - how many of the above posts about personality would be precisely reversed if Gordon were Tory leader and Cameron the expected next Labour leader?
There are two ways for them to deal with the Cameron=likeable style Brown=experienced substance perception. They can try to be more like each other (DC can make weighty speeches, GB can cuddle huskies), or they can try to make their perceived strengths seem the more important. The costing of Tory spending promises is in the latter category. If the Tories say “whatever, we’ll work it out when we get in”, as Eleanor suggests in post 2 (readers can check if this paraphrases unfairly), it reinforces the perception that they lack substance.
84 - There are regular personal attacks on Cameron on this site. It’s a bit much for someone like you who decibed hima as a tw*t to suddenly head up to the moral high ground.
84 - Never stopped you before.
snowflake5 - while you may be making good points they rest on principle the Opposition needs a costed shadow budget to campaign effectively. This has been practice since 1992 when John Major conned John Smith into issuing one (and so won the election) but general practice has been for Oppositions to pledge that during the first term they intend to….. A sensible opposition will give policy direction but not be tied down to costed specifics - it’s always worth the gamble and if they win then they can always say “Oh gosh now we’ve looked at the books…”.
Gordon & Tony didn’t fall into the trap but opted out of argument by saying they would keep to Clarke’s plans for first two years.
We’re all only an accident away from having eyesight as bad as Brown’s.
As for the tidiness, I have to say it’s not the first thing I look for in a leader. Neither is the ability to do the washing up.
I think Cameron does still have plenty time to get rid of dithering empty image. (Of course this will onyl work if he does actually have some substance to replace it with.)
well marcus wood, tory ppc for torbay, seems to think that the fact brown can’t drive (he can’t because he’s blind in one eye and has very poor vision in the other - do your research) has some relation to his political career. i’ve yet to understand what he’s going on about.
87 - Shorely shome mishtake - I’ve not “decibed him as a tw*t” - please please dear posters, you must have me confused with another Anthony.
79. All stalinist organisations disregard budget discipline, as any student of the former communist economies knows. These organisations will always absorb any increase in resources going and still come back for more. The NHS has even greater scope for doing this as it can always tug the heart strings of the public with tales of closed wards, redundant nurses and suffering patients. The other old nationalised industries like coal and steel didn’t quite have the same place in the affections of the public, hence their attempts at shroud-waving were ultimately less successful.
92 - You didn’t post anything at 84. It was 85!
91 - Blind in one and poor vision in the other, I wonder what his vision for our country will be, tunnel perhaps or Nelsonian?
87. Max, yes, there’re some personal comments on politicians…some are actually good IMO. I think there’s a difference between addressing something about the personality of a politician in a serious way , having a little go with a tongue in check comment (that can even be funny) or going down in a pretty nasty way.
Then naturally people react according to their views. Tory posters get angry at attacks on DC (whilst I would probably skip them), Lab voters will be annoyded by comments on GB and so on.
94 - So right Sir. My error, apologies
what a waste of a thread - ‘Cameron is awful’ ‘Brown is terrible’ - oh dear oh dear oh dear, and then added into the mix is snowflake’s usual misrepresentation of the latest tractor production statistics.
91. bally eric keep your hair on. I never said that brown not driving was relevant to his political career, read my post at 60, the issue was about the way he behaves with people.
Personality *is* an issue, the way in which you interact with your peers and colleagues, especailly if it affects a persons ability to do a good job. There is much evidence that Browns personality makes him a poor leader; that is my point.
96 – I think you’re quite right Andrea. I do think people on both sides go too far sometimes and none of us have a monopoly on niceness or nastiness.
I do think personality is important, maybe more now than ever before, but it’s certainly not the be all and end all.
89. If you are going to take the line of “we’re not going to be tied down to costed specific”, then you must make no pledges at all. As soon as you make a specific pledge, then it’s legitimate to ask, a)how will you pay for it, and b), if you didn’t intend to pay for it and therefore deliver on the pledge, then why make the pledge in the first place, is it just an exercise in fibbing? Cameron has been making dozens of specific pledges - more occupational therapists, the state paying grandparents to babysit, more border patrols, no budget discipline in the NHS, and so on. We’re asking a) if he means it, how is he going to pay for it and b) if he doesn’t mean it, why say it, is he one of life’s fibbers?
As I said in my previous post, only Tories know him well enough to know if he means what he says or if he is fibbing. I note no one will venture an opinion on this
I personally think he means it (it’s way too risky for the leader of the opposition to turn round and say, “Nah, didn’t mean it, I was just saying those things for effect”).
Crikey, looks like we’ll be going the same way as the White House. Books with extra large pictures in No.10 to help Gordo figure out which route to take. And no wonder he likes stealth taxes, we can’t see @em and you can be rest assured he can’t either.
What about personal attacks on Alan Duncan Andrea? Or indeed the hotty who used to represent Peterborough?!
97 Anthony, your apology might have been better-addressed to your remarks regarding Gordon Brown’s disability, which were in dubious taste I feel.
Bearing in mind the state of Pedr Cek, it is worth reminding ourselves that these disabilities in Gordon Brown arose following a horrendous rugby injury as a kid.
There is, however, an issue of personality and leadership, which goes way beyond technical competence. I cannot see that never driving a car makes one particularly ’strange’ but at the same time it does mean that you have rather less in common with a lot of voters’ perspectives on life than you might otherwise do.
100. Max, maybe we should be more creative in personal comments….I had to think a couple of minutes before replying to Marcus Wood’s comment at 69 without sounding harsh
103. Max, they’re naturally inadmissible!
snowflake - sorry but oppositions don’t need to be answer your logical questions, they want to win and so why be really honest? - oppositions just need to say “its time for a change” ” look at how they’ve messed up” “it’ll be a fluffy, wonderful world under us”. The biggest mistake is to let the Government lay down the rules of debate - which is what Gordon is trying to do. Ignore the questions on how to pay and keep hammering home what you will change. This isn’t a debating chamber with rules.
104 Zebidee, dubious taste? Who cares - soldiers have died and are maimed in an Iraq war for which the omniscient Gordo voted for. His Tresury department also managed to curb the defence budget.
Interestingly who in this Cabinet has any direct Military experience, yet they have committed the Armed Forces to more theatres of operations whilst systematically reducing it’s size.
107. The voters want to know, that’s why. It’s like choosing something in a shop, would you buy without looking at the price? There is this myth that Labour had no policies before they came to power - actually, the party had thrashed out and voted on a number of policies - the minimum wage (which was developed by Blair under John Smith’s leadership), devolution for Scotland and Wales, reform of the Lords etc.
109 - exactly, they did just what I said - gave policies (as Cameron will ) but said it’s OK we won’t raise taxes and we’ll keep to spending plans. Didn’t say this policy will cost X and we’ll pay for it by Y (except I’ll admit for the specific on utilities windfall and youth employment). Chancellors try to argue costs etc because that’s what matters to them but Oppositions just say it’ll be all right on the night. It’s a real mistake to try to detail exactly how you will fulfil your pledges as the Treasury provides the Government with a huge resource that oppositions can’t match.
109
The voters didn’t really care about costing in 1997, which is why they won’t really care at the next election. Of course specific policies will be developed, but costings are different.
98
whs … I’d wondered whether to post such a comment
istm that the value of this site is diminishing because of all the dross we have to wade through these days. Not the lead articles, of course, but the off-topic assertion and counter-assertion.
Cry for policy all you want snowflake, until the time comes when your lot cannot pilfer and consequently mismanage it I don’t expect anything specific to be forthcoming.
However to sate your incredible curiosity, think upon this: Quangos currently cost this country passing 100 billion a year, what do you imagine could be financed without these idiots?
He didn’t say pay grandparents from a new public purse he said parents should be allowed to choose where public money given to them for childcare goes for example giving to grandparents.
Stronger border controls instead of a currently admitted at 5.5 billion quid I.D. card scheme.
109. Ted, all the pledges that Labour made, they costed, (as you said, youth unemployment initiatives, utilities windfall to pay for it, min wage etc). Labour just didn’t make very many pledges! Cameron on the other hand is pledging new stuff like it was confetti all over the place plus he’s pledged to match what Labour will do too, which equals spending more than Labour.
111. Raj, voters were very much interested in costs in 1997 - they always are. They understood that when Blair said “we campaigned as New Labour, we’ll govern as New Labour” it was a covenant with the voters (which has been kept). If the covenant hadn’t been kept we’d have been out on our ear. Voters displayed the same regard for cost in 2005 - the Tories were rejected because they pledged spending to stay the same and taxes to fall, and the voters said, “doesn’t add up”. The idea that Labour came to power in 1997 muttering sweet nothings only, is a myth propagated by Tories to console themselves for their losses.
107 Sorry Ted - Little lapses in honesty turn into bigger lapses! This (Ukpaul’s usual mantra) is what turns the electorate off! Now we all know who have been in active politics that dishonesty is to some extent like beauty, in the eye of the beholder - but for goodness sake don’t start off on the wrong foot!
114 - Snowflake do you think maybe the rest of the voting public - who you appear to think you represent - maybe don’t think in exactly the same way as you?
113. “Cry for policy all you want snowflake, until the time comes when your lot cannot pilfer and consequently mismanage it I don’t expect anything specific to be forthcoming.”
Flavious, I’m not crying for policy, because Cameron has supplied plenty - he’ll not hold the NHS to any budget discipline, he’ll pay grandparents for babysitting, he’ll pay for more border patrols, he’ll build more prisons, he’ll increase the number of occupational therapists in the NHS etc etc. We’ve now had policy galore from him since his speech to the Tory conference.
What we want is to know how he will pay for it. Or do you believe he was lying when he said all those things at the conference?
115 - Tim I didn’t say it was my preference but, perhaps with jaundiced eyes, I really don’t believe all this fully costed rubbish is any more true than pledges & policies without the detail. Until the Chancellor sits down in the Treasury and looks at the boks, consults with advisors, looks at the current state of markets, investments, house prices etc and best forecasts there is no way any politician can know what is really affordable. To say we intend to….. is just as honest as saying this pledge costs X, we’ll pay for it by Y.
Interesting article on the deputy leadership campaign in today’s Times. Seems like the trend for journalists using odds to be part of the story continues.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-2407073,00.html
One bit of interest was the bit that said Jon Cruddas’s “first public parliamentary backers are Jon Trickett, chairman of the Compass group of MPs, and David Crausby, chairman of the Amicus group of trade union MPs.”
Both Crausby and Trickett are heavily networked, respected and have clear powerbases - so this is quite significant.
Although the Times report William Hill’s odds on the contest, http://www.paddypower.com has Cruddas at 16/1s, double the Hills price.
119- There is a growing buildup of internal traffic (emails,training days etc) within NULab that seems to be gearing up for a concerted anti-BNP campaign(I think the current Veil/social cohesion stuff is also linked), Cruddas is a pivotal figure in this and has written several well recieved articles in the past on how Nulab is in danger of deserting the Working Class.
One to watch !
Jack Sraw having a go at Muslims, Blunkett wanting to machine gun prisoners, the things this government will do to get an applauding column off Melanie Phillips!
120. Yes Crossland, that was the first topic on which I’d come across him - an article he wrote for Renewal a while back on the limitations of the knowledge economy, particularly for more traditional working class communities.
Whatever your thoughts on it, it certainly chimes in a number of key Labour areas where the prospect of a ‘cappucino society’ seem quite distant indeed.
Crossland – Am I right in thinking his seat is in one of the areas where the BNP did quite well at the last local elections?
He came across extremely well on the radio in the couple of times I’ve heard him interviewed although I wonder if he has the stature and support within the party to mount a challenge. Given I don’t know much about the internal workings of the Labour party I can’t really comment.
123. Yes he’s MP for Dagenham. BNP got over 9% there at the GE as well, almost overtaking the Lib Dems.
123. I think only Andrea could give the definitive assessment on Cruddas’ chances!
124 – Thanks for the info. I was thinking more of the last local elections and whether it was just in Barking that the BNP made gains or whether it was in his seat too.
125 - I think your probably right. Honestly he’s never here when you need him!
127. I’m sure many of us on pb.com don’t mind chipping in for a pager for Andrea to let him know when he’s needed.
126, 127
Would have thought a more enjoyable, although less useful for us present would be a plane ticket to the next pb.com get-together… 
128.
I’ve listened to Cruddas being interviewed, and he articulated his position passionately and articulately, regardless of whether you agree with him. Perhaps he should be sent an email to start contributing to pb.com!!
126 The BNP won one seat in Village ward, which will remain in his constituency. Had the fielded more candidates, it’s highly likely they would have taken at least one other seat in that ward, as well as seats in wards like Eastbrook, South Hornchurch and Elm Park.
The three wards which are being transferred from Dagenham to Barking all returned BNP councillors.
The following wards in the current Dagenham constituency have BNP councillors:
Alibon, Parsloes, Valence and Village
Nope snowflake I don’t believe he was lying at conference. I do believe that perhaps you can’t or won’t see the obvious solutions a number of which I pointed out quite clearly to you.
However, I have little to do just a this moment so let me extrapolate for you a little.
100 billion pounds + which is what part of our taxburden is used for goes to those things called Quango’s now pre Blairtime, that work was done by the civil service, which btw has been increased satffing levels by stupid amounts since this shower got in power. I find it impossible to believe that they could not shoulder the work again given the huge rise in staffing levels.
So that gives us 100 billion to “play with” think we could afford a bit more for the NHS then? maybe even squeeze a few occupational therapists out of that cash as well? Thats before you even look at running that huge megalith with a modicum of efficiency.
Again at the risk of repeating myself he actually said give parents the choice of where to spend ALREADY granted childcare monies, for example paying grandparents instead of some state-run and subsidised care facility.
He also said that he would get rid of id cards in favour of stronger border controls, now call me naive but I’m assuming the dropping of the 5.5. billion white elephant that is the I.D. fiasco will in some way pay for a goodly chunk if not all of the strengthening of our borders.
130 & 131 – Many thanks Sean and Peter.
128 – On a meagre accountants salary Lennon – I think not!
Out of interest are there any plans for a Pb.com get together anytime soon?
132: Without getting into the detailed argument, Flavious, just a note that you can’t pay for an ongoing programme (e.g. stronger border controls, most of the cost of which would presumably be recurrent staff salaries for more immigration officials etc.) with a largely one-off saving (e.g. not introducing ID cards, most of the cost of which will be the equipment). Also note that the share of employment in public service has not risen under Labour - it is exactly the same as before 1997 (both public and private employment have risen sharply, and at the same pace).
I don’t think you can seriously sustain a position that the Tories can cheerfully make uncosted spending commitments and get away with it. A more reasonable defence is that they’ll let us know nearer the election.
132, I thought we’d been through this. If ID cards are paid for by a charge for issuing them, not introducing them, and therefore not charging for them, is cost neutral. Unless David Cameron is going to charge us for NOT having ID cards…
Also, you complain repeatedly about quangos, perhaps you would give us a few examples of the ones DC will actually be abolishing? If the waste is so blatent I’m sure you’ll be able to tell us easily…
133 - On this deal, how about you pay for the flight, and try and get someone else to pay for the tax.
134.
Are you concerned Nick about the attacks against labour stating the country is heavily in debt, but GB is paticularly adept at hiding this from the public? Whether there is truth in the argument, it sounds like an argument that will gain momentum and perhaps resonate with the wider electorate.
132. £100 billion is a large amount to bandy about - it’s larger than the entire NHS spend (including NHS admin and managers), which suggests to me that you just plucked it out of thin air. Given that the NHS is the largest govt expenditure, the idea that there is a mysterious even larger expenditure to cut is dubious to say the least! Do all Tories live in la-la land like your good self?
As for ID cards, they haven’t even started work on them - funding has been frozen indefinitely, so that even the tenders for the IT contracts have been put on hold. You can’t say “I’m going to cut something that doesn’t yet exist, and even though not a penny has beeen spent yet, cutting this project will magically release money to pay for xyz”. Abolishing ID cards just means the current status quo is maintained. No you have to find new money for Cameron’s wheezes. Which means a tax rise. Which tax though? VAT?
135.
The DTI.
139. DTI’s budget is just £6 billion - a far cry from Flavious’ £100 billion - and £3.3 billion of it is spent on science. a) it’s not enough to pay for Cameron’s wheezes and b) are you really going to scrap the science budget after all Cameroon nd co said about competing with India and China?
No Cameron’s policies mean a tax rise, and you are all in denial about this.
The “Quangos are costing £100bn a year” line is one that I’ve seen in a number of reports in the past couple of days - I think that the line is a bit of a distortion of what’s going on, though.
Whilst I find it perfectly possible to believe that £100bn a year is channeled through Quangos, this is a very different thing to saying that Quangos cost £100bn a year: the implication being that if we removed the Quangos then this expenditure would cease - it wouldn’t. Many Quangos carry out important functions that are essentially devolved from government.
Should this expenditure be scrutinised to see that it i