Why does Tony feel he has to apologise to Cameron?
June 10th, 2007
Will this be the first row of the Gord-Dave era?
Reproduced above is the start of the main political story in today’s Observer and looks set to be the first Labour-Tory battle ground for Brown’s arrival at Number 10.
With both new leaders jostling to assert themselves this could be very dangerous territory. For, according to the report, one of the big ideas outlined from Brown last weekend was part of a package of suggestions put by the Tories in confidential discussions between Blair and Cameron on the best ways of dealing with the terrorist threat.
Clearly establishing what went on is difficult but the paper notes that “…an embarrassed Blair instructed senior officials to convey his regrets to Cameron after sympathising with Tory complaints that Brown’s intervention had at least given the impression that the terms of the Cameron/Blair meeting, held on private privy council terms, had been breached.”
This tells us two things about the ending of the phoney political period that has gone on since Cameron became Tory leader: Brown will be ruthless in pursuing a strategy of policy triangulation to leave the Tories with little to talk about and that Blair is not going out of his way to be helpful to his successor.
For that Blair “apology”, if that is what it is, could give the Tories ammunition for a long time to come.
Meanwhile, on the betting markets, the price on whether Labour or the Tories will end up with most seats at the election has continued to converge. The Tories have eased to 0.81/1 while Labour have tightened to 1.18/1. In the aftermath of the May elections Labour was at 1.58/1.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Depressing reality is that Brown’s “ideas” are all driven by the desire to beat the Tories; as in 1997 to 2001 the agenda will be winning the next election. So we get continuation of stealing enough of the clothes of the opposition to check any obvious advantage : so Bill of Rights (didn’t Cameron suggest that early last year?), anti-Terror legisalation (revealed as already fully formed in Blair discussions with Cameron).
I say depressing because it results in lower turnouts because at the level of sound bites there is no clear divide between the parties and turns the election into even more of a personality contest.
It’s also depressing that in a matter of great public concern, civil liberties and response to terrorism Gordon Brown decided, for short term political advantage, to preempt Reid announcement and the outcome of Blair’s discussions with the opposition parties so as to make it look like his policy, his ideas.
Perhaps we will not see Cameron change tactics after all; he’ll continue the two track oposition; great show of support where ideas are close to the Tories, in hopes of stimulating discontent on Labour back benches, while Osborne & co continue to attack Brown’s personality.
Triumph for Iain Dale and embarassment for Patrick Hennessy
On Dale’s blog Henessy and some tabloid reporter defended themselves saying they “didn’t need” even to go to the Tories and LibDems for a quote on Gordon’s terror plan!
Even though David Davis had said strongly that Gordon might have blown the deal, they did not report that at all - even though their story was “Big Gord wins cross-party co-operation”
Now they are severely embarassed by finding out the breach Gordon made, which they chose not to report at all, is so big the PM has to apologise to the Leader of the Opposition
What do they have to say for themselves - hope Dale blogs this!
The other Observer story of note, is this one:-
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/comment/0,,2099472,00.html
I am in the middle of reading that article. It is explosive.
Amazing that the Home Sec would say this about Brown announcing Cameron’s idea like it was his own
“An irritated John Reid, who has been holding cross-party talks with Davis and Nick Clegg, of the Liberal Democrats, confirmed that the telephone tap idea had come from the Tories. ‘On intercept, I can confirm that the idea of looking at the matter in privy council terms arose from a suggestion made by the leader of the Opposition in discussions with the Prime Minister,’ the Home Secretary told MPs on Thursday. ‘I was happy to accept that and I announced today that, in principle, we will do that.’”
3. Mirror hates the Tories - can’t see it making any difference at all
But the Telegraph has the other really major story. Cameron demands referendum if Blair wants to sign stripped-down EU constitution.
That will absolutely delight the ConHomers and most other wings of the party too. Every Tory is a Eurosceptic
Way O/T - one for Punter & Mark Senior - Missed discussion on Montgomery the other day.
FWIW, if an election were to be held today, LDs would lose Mont - not just becasue of Lembit, but more because of the recent debacle over LDs indecision over the Rainbow coaltition.
BUT a lot will happen over the next 2 months that will decide whether LDs keep Mont. By September, Wales will either have a Red/Green coalition or a Rainbow coalition, and the fall out from either of these two options will be pretty major, and blood will be spilled…..(not real)
Way O/T - one for Punter & Mark Senior - Missed discussion on Montgomery the other day.
FWIW, if an election were to be held today, LDs would lose Mont - not just becasue of Lembit, but more because of the recent debacle over LDs indecision over the Rainbow coaltition.
BUT a lot will happen over the next 2 months that will decide whether LDs keep Mont. By September, Wales will either have a Red/Green coalition or a Rainbow coalition, and the fall out from either of these two options will be pretty major, and blood will be spilled…..(not real)
Allowing phone tap evidence was the principle demand from those against 90 day detentions when it came up in parliament in 2005. The Lib Dems and even Michael Howard’s Tories used it as their main argument. I even remember Shami Chakrabati arguing for it as a better alternative to detention.
To describe this as “the Tory leaders new initiative” which he shared privately with Tony Blair two weeks ago is so weird that I don’t believe Nicolas Watt’s story to be true.
5
‘Every Tory is a Eurosceptic’ does that include Ken Clarke, who seems to be Cameron’s, ‘new best friend’?
8 - it’s not phone tap evidence that is suggested is Cameron’s idea. It’s the idea of a Privy Council Review. It’s such an unusual story that to suggest that it is untrue seems particularly ridiculous, IMO.
It’s got to be said that watching John Reid’s past few weeks in office is providing far more entertainment than Tony Blair’s!
He is writing some diaries? I can’t see many people being spared.
Well said, Roger (8). A Bill of Rights is also something that the Lib Dems have been going on about for ages. When did Cameron first come round to that one? It isn’t just Brown that takes over other parties’ policies without giving due credit.
9 fair comment, but when I say “every Tory” I mean every member of the party. There are a handful of Europhile MPs, MEPs and peers but they are totally unrepresentative.
Cameron promising a referendum on the signing of the stripped down constitution will go down a storm across the party spectrum.
Ask Sean Fear if you don’t believe me!
11 - surely the LibDems nicked that one from the Americans…
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=119869
Deja vu! This is from the Tories own site discussing a meeting between Blair and HOWARD about allowing phone tap evidence. I just can’t understand this morning’s story
8 and 10 are both right - the substantive idea is an old one, the apparently minor addition of having a Privy Council discussion of it is new. If DC suggested it, it’s fair to acknowledge it, but I suspect his office is blowing up a courteous apology for not doing so into part of their anti-GB effort.
10 Alex, that is quite wrong
Both the idea itself, and the holding of discussions of PC terms, were suggested by Cameron, just look at how the piece opens:
“Tony Blair has been forced to issue an unprecedented apology to David Cameron after a *Tory anti-terrorism initiative* was unveiled by Gordon Brown weeks after the Conservative leader *passed on the idea in private* to the Prime Minister.
An embarrassed Downing Street gave the Prime Minister’s apologies to Cameron’s office last week after the Tory leader expressed his anger when he found *his idea* trailed by Brown as a new tool for tackling terrorism.”
15, No Nick - the idea itself was Cameron’s, please see my 15.
But then, Alex (13), the Americans nicked it from the proto-Liberals…
4. So explosive it is not on the News at all this morning.
Shock horror, a politician nicks the ideas of another. If anything it should be encouraged. If it is a good idea lets use it now
4. So explosive it is not on the News at all this morning.
Shock horror, a politician nicks the ideas of another. If anything it should be encouraged. If it is a good idea lets use it now
Test at 12: Ken Clarke is not a member of the Conservative Party?? That’s worth a headline or two. The chair of the European Movement in the East Midlands and my predecessor as MP (Jim Lester) are also both prominent Tory Europhiles in my area.
Generalisations are always wrong.
Nick, anybody in a Tory Europhile movement will be europhile! I am drawing the distinction between the unrepresentative handful.
Europhiles in the Tory party are as typical as Better Off Out Labour MPs - there are some!
Test. If both ideas are Cameron’s how do you explain my link at 14 from the Conservatives own site describing a meeting between Michael Howard and Tony Blair on exactly that subject dated 2005!
Alex. The thrust of the story is the phone tap evidence one. The Privy Michael Howard suggested the same thing using a high court judge (see my link at 14 dated Feb 2005). Looks to me like Cameron’s trying to link himself to a policy however shop soiled!
I’m unclear as to whether Test is trying to defend Cameron or bury him…
Fortunately for Cameron, I don’t quite see how Test forms his interpretation from the quote he’s given.
The “story” as such here isn’t IMO the apology but confirmation of Gordon Brown’s famous disregard for basic parliamentary courtesy (usually manifesting itself through giving his opponents 5 minutes advance notice of any statement he makes), to make him look good in the Commons.
Surely anyone can see that it is not appropriate, other than for his own image, to wander about “pronouncing” on terrorism policy at a time when detailed cross-party discussions on the various issues have been ongoing in private for several weeks, and a few days before they were intended to be made public by John Reid?
15 Its the timing of Gordon Brown’s intervention that is revealing. Since Reid decided to retire rather than serve in a Brown Cabinet the Dr Demento side of his character and need for headlines, which often detracted from his real virtues, seemed to have gone into abeyance. His speech on Thursday was a strong one, laying out a number of proposals with recognition of both the liberty issues and security risks. Two of his cabinet colleagues though seem to put party advantage before the approach Reid has worked through with opposition parties.
Gordon Brown wants credit and ownership - he sees the War on Terror and playing the hard man putting national security above civil liberties as a winning strategy against Tory weakness, demonstrated by their unwillingness to support detention without trial (either 90 days or the imprisonment of specific individuals for indeterminate time, without charge or indeed knowledge of what the charges are). So rather than wait 4 days for Reid’s statement Gortdon presents “his ideas” and his spokesmen claim he had no idea that Reid was going to say the same (spin, spin and more spin from the man who wants to move away from spin)
Peter Hain proposes stop & search to the HO then attacks it when the floating of the proposal shows principled opposition from those who’s support he wants.
Roger, erm - did you actually read your link?
It shows that the phone tap evidence idea was a TORY one. Michael Howard suggested it, Labour said no. Cameron suggests it AGAIN, and asks for PC terms. Blair says yes to both.
Boorish Brown announces both Tory idea (see Roger’s link!) and PC terms as his own.
(This post answers Alex too!)
Roger, erm - did you actually read your link?
It shows that the phone tap evidence idea was a TORY one. Michael Howard suggested it, Labour said no. Cameron suggests it AGAIN, and asks for PC terms. Blair says yes to both.
Boorish Brown announces both Tory idea (see Roger’s link!) and PC terms as his own.
(This post answers Alex too!)
26 - Quite. You would have thought that even if Gordon “didn’t know”, he might have given John Reid a call, just on the off chance that the Home Office might have been doing some work in the area over the last few months
“Both the idea itself, and the holding of discussions of PC terms, were suggested by Cameron, just look at how the piece opens:”
27/28. Do you read your own posts! How could ‘the idea itself’ be Cameron’s own when Howard was discussing it in feb ‘05 when Cameron was but a shining silver spoon on the horizon!
Roger for heaven’s sake. It is a TORY idea. Suggested by Howard and Cam in succession.
That’s why the Observer’s headline is about Brown nicking a Tory terror initiative and announcing it as his own. If Cameron re-presented Tory policy, it’s still Tory policy, rejected by Labour!
I’d like Nick Palmer to comment on Roger’s link and cede that, contrary to his post, both the policy per se and the PC terms were Conservative ideas that Brown announced as his.
31 - Yep, I think one thing we can all agree with is that it definitely wasn’t Gordon’s idea!
The big question and the one which will have the most long-standing impact is the one I posed in the heading - Why does Blair think he had to apologise?
In one stroke he has given Cameron a lot of what he needs to beat off the expected Brown attack on the Tories being soft on terror. If there’s to be a sound-bite war, and that’s almost all that matters in a modern context, the Tories can attack Brown for blowing the consensual approach that was emerging. It’s Brown that is playing politics with terror and Blair’s apology proves it.
The political impact will be a little bit like the budget tax cut. A short term win for Brown that turns out to be an own goal.
Ken Clarke no longer advocates the Euro. Now he’s bemoaning the diminishing of Parliamentary authority. When will the penny finally drop - if it hasn’t already?
He’s a formidable operator, and still full of vigour (he’s been out of the front line for a long time). It would be good to find him admitting more strongly he was wrong on the Euro, and on handing so much power to Brussels.
It is tragic that Ken Clarke, the most Parliamentary and British of characters, has done more than anyone to destroy his own country’s once vibrant political culture.
He has paralysed the Conservative Party on Europe when it should have been fighting for better terms every inch of the way. If he hadn’t sat on the same platform as Blair pushing for the Euro, and instead had opposed him, Blair would not have so easily conceded as much as he has.
Now even Ken Clarke’s beginning to see what he’s done. Maybe he’ll come full circle.
33 Blair worries more about Brown dismantling his “legacy” than he does of Cameron doing so. When Brown is being seen as more unpopular than Blair - probably by about Day Three of him being in the Big Bother House - then I suspect there will be many more such interventions by Blair. Plenty of “helpful advice” will be offered from the back-seat driver. Brown will of course studiously ignore it all, right up to him losing the next election. Whereupon Tony can say “if only you’d listened, Gordon, you too could have been a winner - like me…” And how Cherie will laugh….
Ming just on BBC. In response to poll question he cracked the one about buses joke. Groan. Circa 1905 that one I think.
so Brown doesn’t have any of his own ideas, doesn’t respect due process and seeks to undermine colleagues he doesn’t like - can’t see anything new in this.
6. I think Lembit’s behaviour will have a lot to do with it between now and thhe Election. On those two Coalitions, how would each affect that
33. Yes, Blair’s apology does rather suggest that those seeking to defend Brown on here might be on shaky ground. As for the long term impact, might the biggest not be the poisoning in relations between the two front benches? If Brown can’t be trusted to respect confidences between leaders when they’re cooperating on matters of national security, there’s not that much they will be able to cooperate on.
33 Could it be Blair apologised because he thinks Islamist terrorism is a very scary thing and that the UK will be stronger in response if the major political parties are united on the basics? As both Labour & Tory governments attempted to do with Northern Ireland.
I know its outrageous to suggest Blair and Reid might occasionally support the national interest and might seek cross-party consensus and easier to say its part of the TBGBies but perhaps Blair apologised because he thought it the right thing to do.
38 Punter. If the Lib Dems were in danger in Lembitshire I’d have expected some sign of discontent in the Arsembly elections …. about 1% swing to Tories IIRC.
Presumably if Limpdick is in trouble as a single chap with a penchant for cheeky girls then Bonking Boris is in for several recounts in Henley !!
40. Indeed, that was the thrust of my point at [39]. The problem is that Blair and Reid are going and Brown is getting promoted.
41. Two very different constituencies Jack W. While Boris is making the journey from celeb to politician, Lembit seems to be crossing him the other way. His local Party certainly wants an image adjustment
So… Cameron gets all upset when Brown picks up an idea which Cameron himself has taken from the Lib Dems….
http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/cameron_furious_over_theft_lib_dem_proposal
And in the other key story, Cameron gets all upset with the Daily Mirror, for portraying him like he is.
He will surely go to pieces completely when the media really start to get to work on him.
But presumably that won’t happen until he starts to produce some policies instead of just soundbites.
40 iirc, Iain Dale heard that there were deselection mutterings when Lembit droppped out of coalition talks for the Assembly in favour of filming HIGNFY
6/43 Still maintain that you have assessed the Lembit position incorrectly and I am prepared to put my money where my mouth is , if you want reasonable odds on a Conservative win in Montgomeryshire let me know what you are looking for .
Boris is a self confessed cocaine user and it will still have no effect on his chances of reelection in Henley . Voters tend to be rather tolerant of and sometimes even secretly proud of having shall we say an eccentric MP .
The real story is that Brown ignored Privy Council protocol in using ideas generated in a discussion between the PM and Leader of the Opposition taking place under PC protocol. Made worse by the very serious subject covered.
This PC protocol is taken very seriously because it is the channel through which all parties can discuss key issues outside the normal adversarial discourse. It is a vital channel to keep the state working effectively. That is why the PCs come from all parties across the spectrum. government and opposition talk communicate this way regularly.
Brown broke this protocol so he will be avery unpopular boy indeed in many quarters, and Blair’s apology was unavoidable. Brown should do the same.
Brown has treated cabinet collective responsibility the same way in stealing Reid’s thunder, but that is minor to any exploitation of the Privy Councillor discussions between Blair and Cameron.
43 Punter. All constituencies are different !!
Limpdick has always been an asteroid short of a black hole and the punters of that bit of Estonia-by-Offa’s Dyke seem to enjoy his level of independent fruitcakeness.
Interplanetary Lib Dem Hold me thinks !!
………………..
Meanwhile … over at Toryheadbangers-R-Us aka ConHome there is news that Shagger Norris is still in the market to lose for the third time to Red Ken !!
46. No thanks. It would be knife edge stuff, and even that is predicated on Lembit carrying on, exactly the same and anatagonising Welsh Lib Dems by HIGFNY events again. But I don’t think he will. I think either he will tone things down and really go back into Politics, or if he does want the Portillo lifestyle he’ll step down. At present I think his impulse is still just towards politics.
Is this an early example of compassionate Conservatism LoL:
Conservative Victory in Stafford By-Election, 1837
Robert Farrand’s Victory Speech, as reported by Staffordshire Advertiser
He had been frequently interrogated, during his canvass, respecting his views on the subject of the new poor law which appeared to have created some uneasiness here. He thought the new law objectionable, particularly the clause which compelled the separation of man and wife (great cheering). He considered that the clause was inhuman and contrary to the injunctions of holy religion which enjoined that, “Whom God had joined together, no man should put asunder” (cheers). He thought it extremely hard to compel an old couple even to go into the workhouse, after a life of toil and penury; he thought they should have some allowance at home as formerly; but to separate them when there was, in his opinion, an act of the greatest cruelty (loud cheers)
He considered that the law was defective because it treated lightly the claims of a class of persons who were amongst the most valuable in the community; he meant the working class (cheers). Who constituted the great bulwark of the country and an important source of its greatness ? Who filled the ranks of our armies and manned our vessels of war and commerce ? Who were the means of production of our domestic comforts and national wealth ? The Working Class, most certainly. They ought , therefore, to be protected and as he thought their claims were infringed upon by a portion of the new Poor Law he should unite with those who would amend the objectionable clauses.
31: Test, no offence, but you’re evidently a bit late to this idea. It’s been around for as long as I can recall anti-terrorism discussions. I’ve suggested it myself, so have countless others in all parties, Liberty, the press, etc., and I’ve no idea who first raised it. There is a standard debate that goes like this:
Home Secretary of the day: “Let’s introduce this new curb on suspected terrorists whom we can’t bring to trial.”
Critic: “That’s outrageous! Why don’t you try them in the normal way?”
HS: “Because we’d have to disclose intercepts in court and we don’t want to show what sort of information we’re able to get.”
Critic: “Well, can’t you do in closed court?”
HS: “The security services say it’d be a bad precedent.”
Critic: “Oh, nonsense, and anyway you could do it sometimes, why rule it out altogether?”
The Observer article does not say that it was Cameron’s new idea, but if it had it would have been mistaken. What is a new idea is having a chat about it on the Privy Council.
The way the courteous apology for not crediting him with that (IMO rather minor) point is being exploited and interpreted to death is a good example of why politicians so rarely apologise for anything.
To be fair to Blair, he didn’t have a choice. Refusing to apologise or pretending he had done nothing wrong would have meant he left office on a rather sour note.
Gordon Brown should have known better if he knew where the idea came from, so unless Blair tried to trick him in pretending it had come from him/someone else it’s the Chancellor’s own fault. Greedy men often shoot themselves in the foot.
Any updates on John Prescott’s health?
If he is still on the high dependency unit, the situation must be worrying.
Whatever one’s political stance, he is someone who kept us entertained - I hope that his successor can live up to that.
This is all part of Brown’s vaguely desperate and comic “Britishness” pitch - entirely facile and self serving and perceived by most voters - including swing voters - as such. It seeks to remove attention from the West Lothian Question, which will have greater resonance in the South and Midlands in England as we get closer to the General Election, to Labour’s disadvantage.
Reading the whole Observer article I don’t think there is a story here. “Brown emphatically denies doing anything wrong because he knew nothing of Cameron’s proposal when he made his comments last weekend.”
Whatever people may think of Gordon Brown, I think he is an honest man and would not lie about this. My feeling is that he has either developed the idea independently or else he has learnt of the idea from Blair’s office without being aware of it’s original source. With Blair feeling the need to apologise then the latter explanation may well be the case.
Haha, re-read the article more closely and it implies Brown didn’t know. Well I guess that’s what happens in this era of “briefing the media before Parliament”. If he had sat down with Cameron and said “right-o, I’ve got some new ideas about anti-terrorism”, Cameron would have informed him he had floated the same idea with Blair and the whole fiasco would have been avoided.
So he was still being greedy because he wanted to boost his image, rather than keeping it under his hat and talking things over with MPs.
34. Absolutely right. It’s a minor tragedy for the Tory Party that its most gifted politician of the 90s - Ken Clarke - scuppered his own chances with his absurdly pro-European views.
Why was such a pragmatic and intelligent man so slavish and idiotic on this one point?
I think there is a generation of politicians - of Britons, even - which is now mosty late middle aged or old, or dead, for whom Europe is a kind of sacred cow. The saviour. The solution. Look at the old Europhile Tories - Hurd, Heseltine, Howe, Heath, other ones beginning with H - they are all in this bracket.
Why? I think it’s because they grew up in the 40s, 50s and 60s, when Britain seemed to be in inexorable economic decline, due to a poisonous mix of class-hatred and socialist incompetence. Scarred by this they saw the EU as the only possible way out - they looked at France and Germany and saw success.
Of course since then things have changed a lot. No one sensible grows up in Britain any more looking with piteous envy at the continent. The only possible reason to be passionately Europhile these days is if 1. you dislike America and see Europe as a counterweight, or 2. you simply dislike Britain, Britons and expressions of British patriotism, and would happily see this country’s identity extinguished in a supranational EU.
Unsurprisingly, most Europhiles are now on the left.
56. Raj. If Brown develops an idea independently and he thinks it’s a good one which could wrongfoot the opposition, why on earth would he choose to discuss it with Cameron before announcing it to the public at large? Although it’s about national security, there was no need for Brown to seek Cameron’s approval on floating the idea, in the interests of national security.
The issue here I suspect is the poor communication that persists between Brown and Blair’s offices as a result of their dyfunctional relationship. Soon to be resolved.
54 Stewart J. The only polling evidence on the WLQ shows that it has as much resonance with voters in importance as yak dipping regualtions in Ulan Bator !!
However we all look forward to Conservative forays on WLQ, especially from such Tory constitutional experts with a track record such as your neighbouring MP - Hunky Dinky Dunky !!
48. Hey Norris did pretty darn well in 2004. Let’s not forget the Tories were barely out of the IDS era, had no opinion poll leads to really write home about. Ken should still be favourite, but if Dave is still leading in the polls next year, Ken won’t find it easy going.
51, I appreciate your replying, but that is simply not so.
In your example the Tories play the role of the suggestors and the Labour govt has played the role of the critic.
To quote from Roger’s link
“Mr Howard insisted that…ministers’ refusal to allow evidence obtained through phone-tapping and other interception of communications to be used in court remained “unpersuasive”.
He said: “I entirely reject that notion. Phone tap evidence can and should be used in court. Of course we need to protect sensitive intelligence, and its sources. That is why I have proposed that a judge be given responsibility for assessing the evidence and ensuring that a balanced case is presented to the court.”
Tory leadership yes, Labour govt no. That’s crystal clear. Lab govt of which Gordon Brown was a key part.
Now David Cameron suggests this again to Tony Blair under Privy Council terms, and Gordon Brown announces this *Tory* policy as his own.
Do you think the Observer - a Labour, left-leaning paper - would be calling it a “Tory terror initiative” if it were not?
Or further, do you think that your leader Tony Blair would have apologised for the theft otherwise?
Or how about this:
“An irritated John Reid, who has been holding cross-party talks with Davis and Nick Clegg, of the Liberal Democrats, confirmed that the telephone tap idea had come from the Tories.”
That seems absolutely crystal clear to me. Both PC terms and the idea proper came from us and were announced by Gordon Brown. I do not hold the Labour govt responsible, as both Reid and Blair are standing up for the truth here. Just Gordon Brown.
57. Not minor for them at all ******* major. Even a mildly Eurosceptic KC would not only be Leader but well into his tenure at Downing street by now.
60 Punter. Shagger stands no chance. Not because of his extra-curricula rumpy pumpy but because of his somewhat “on the make” activities.
Frankly nobody stands a prayer against Red Ken presently, which explains the dirth of suitable candidates who rightly realize they’d get tonked at the polls !!
57. What about Hannan, Helmer and Heaton Harris - the famous eurosceptic Conservative H Block in the Euro parliament? Helmer’s a bit older (sorry Roger) but Hannan and Heaton Harris are typical young confident eurosceptic British conservatives. Unfortunately the older lot still control the party - William Hague, Ken Clarke backed up by the old H’s you listed. Hague’s a full on europhile posing as a eurosceptic and getting away with it. When will he come out of the closet?
The media are right behind Blair. Murdoch controls Labour’s EU Policy according to Lance Price in his Spin Doctor’s Diary. The BBC are europhile, it is pretty obvious. Any politician that tries to stop the slide into EU totalitarianism gets assassinated. IDS tried. maybe Cameron will have a dabble, but I don’t see enough vigour yet which will stop the EU programme overwhelming the puny political resistance that Britain finds itself able to put up.
63. Did not say he’d win, only that he’d do better than 2004 which was highly creditable given national Tory fortunes
62. Totally disagree. The Tories couldn’t have won from 97-2005, even if they’d had the gold-covered offspring of Abraham Lincoln and Alfred the Great as their leader. Blair was unbeatable. The Tory brand was toxic.
Back on topic, much as I would love to think this phonetap story is BIG and shows a MASSIVE DIVIDE in Labour, I don’t buy it. Yet. It contributes to a general sense of tiredness and fractiousness within Labour, but it’s more cock-up than catastrophe - like the grammar school row with the Tories.
Much bigger, potentially, is this story:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article1909775.ece
English taxes to fund free Scottish Universities? When you put it like that, the West Lothian Question is fairly stark, and very explosive. As Alex Salmond will not cease from reminding us.
This is an open goal for the Tories, and could damage Labour/Brown bigtime. But how do they play it without destroying the Union?
62. But in a way Clarke must have known that it was Europe that held him back. He may have been foolish, but he stood by what he thought was right as a matter of principle - probably why he could never get to Downing St (well no. 10).
3 - About time that someone took on the tabloids, the labour government have been a bunch of cowards, sucking up to them at every opportunity. I’d have preferreed it to be Rebekah ‘traitor’ Wade but Maguire will do for a start.
Lib dems are hated by The Sun, they could get great publicity by taking them on, there aren’t many votes there and it would give a good USP among Guardianistas etc.
66. 1997-2001 Ver certainly. But I think KC would have taken them above the 200 seat barrier in 2001. And well if he’d survived the probably putsch for opposing Iraq, in 2005 who knows. At the very least we can agree there would be a significantly larger Tory parliamentary Party
63 - So why is Brown so bothered about being a Scottish MP if it isn’t an issue? Going on about how he loved Gazza’s goal against us and how ‘we’ won the world cup certainly suggests he thinks being an MP for a Scottish constituency is a problem.
67. Yes, but that’s my point. A rational person would have realised by, say, 2003 that not only was the euro fairly unlikely for Britain on a political level - very hard to win a euro referendum - it was also not a sensible move economically. To put it mildly.
By 2003 it was screamingly obvious that the euro was not helping European economies, that one-size-fits-all interest rates were - as some of us gently suggested beforehand - something of a shackle - and that the ECB was obsessed with inflation at the expense of growth, etc etc etc.
Yet despite all this Clarke continued to profess his surreal pro-Europeanism, and refused to publicly renounce his faith in the euro - even when he must have known that it was costing him the 2003 Tory leadership.
Bizare. For me this smacks of faith rather than principle. Devotion rather than politics. For people like Clarke, and Heseltine and Hurd and all the other loonies, Europe is the Blessed Virgin Mary in the sky over Fatima.
64 It is excellent that Chris Heaton Harris has the safe seat of Daventry and will be an MP after the next election. Perhaps we need Dan and Roger in Brussels. No parliamentarian of any stripe has Daniel Hannan’s towering intellect.
Given Brown’s tough on terror line those lib dem waverers are going to come streaming back over the next few mnonths. So desperate to best Cameron, like most labour posters on here, he seems to have forgotten that he has two fronts to fight.
70 Max. It’s our Gawd’s attempt at the big tent !! …. more small sleeping bag than marquee IMO.
I think Cameron should definately take on the Mirror as long as he seems firm, strong and and justified. Think about it; swing voters aren’t going to be impressed by the Mirror’s line and Cameron looks good if he seems to be standing up to the Tabloids. It’s all another bit of Steve Hilton presentation i suspect.
71. Agree with 69
“Why does Tony feel he has to apologise to Cameron?”
He saw him through a window which he mistook for a mirror?
Surely there is nothing in this Identity Card/evidence issue which requires the secrecy of Privy Council? I can even remember Charle kennedy between drams expounding them all. Changing policy through the Privy Council would just be a face-saving exercise.
stjohn
If it’s so unusual to discuss things with the Opposition on important matters like this, the Blair-Cameron meeting wouldn’t have happened. The fact Brown couldn’t resist the temptation to wait until he had had a similar meeting reflects badly on him.
After all Cameron could have done the same thing BEFORE Brown, but he deferred to discuss things with the Prime Minister. Brown just looks like he’s desperate to be in the headlines, which is rather pathetic and sad.
Interestingly different newspaper spin on the EU Constitution negotiations.
The Sunday Telegraph claims Blair is gonna sign up to a deal, renege on the referendum pledge, and basically sell us all out - and Brown will thereby be screwed (though the paper says Gordo is “concerned”). This would be a gift for the Tories, of course, enabling them to unite and fight Brown on the most serious matter - with the Murdoch and Dacre papers passionately behind them, plus widespread public support.
The Sunday Times, by contrast, says Brown is refusing to be bound on any Blair Constitution deal, and will insist on opt-outs in all contentious areas.
There are so many ways of interpreting this issue - which will surely be the defining moment of Brown’s early premiership. Blair could actually be helping Brown to screw Cameron - if Blair appears to give in to Europe, Brown could them come along and be all gruff and stern, and say No no no. Not without a referendum. Result: Big kudos for Brown, support from Murdoch and Dacre for Labour, half the Tory party secretly loving Gordo.
Alternatively, it is possible that Blair really does hate Brown and really does want to sign up to a Constitution, and really doesn’t care about the referendum pledge, and is genuinely keen to polish his “legacy” by selling us all out to Brussels.
A third possibility is that everyone is trying to second guess the other and we’re all in the dark.
My head hurts.
56 Stjohn - this is the Honest Gordon Brown who had no idea about the letter being circulated by his acolytes last autumn despite one of them visting him when it was all over the press? Gordon Brown who will be moving into no10 in 2 and a half weeks knows nothing about discussions going on between the current PM, Home Sectretary and the the two opposition parties?
He or his staff presumably do take some interest in current affairs and were aware the Home Secretary was to announce in HoC later the same week that Gordon “I don’t spin, not me never” Brown’s staff brief the Sundays? Even if Gordon “we won’t make announcements first in the press, we’ll tell the HoC” Brown doesn’t speak to Reid or Tony a call from his team to Tony’s might be thought courtesy, even perhaps a requirement, in terms of collective responsibility.
73. Very true. The longer those 2005 switchers stay Lib Dem, the more like tactical voters they will stop being tactical or temporary and start to actually form proper Lib Dem core vote. It also means more likely that the Lib dems will find Tory votes easier to squeeze in Labour Seats.
“My head hurts”
water and alka-selzer before going to sleep, mate
41 - I thought the Tories won the regional list vote in Montgomeryshire. That could be a sign, though I agree it’s highly unlikely that the Lib Dems would lose the seat.
83. They did indeed win it. BUt you are quite right, Lembit would have to go into complete and utter self destruct mode for that to happen, even with a high quality Tory PPC in Glyn Davies.
83 - IIRC they won that seat and Brecon on the list vote.
In saying that the SNP won Caithness & Sutherland, Ross Skye & Inverness West and West Aberdeenshire on the list but I think it’s unlikely they will threaten the Lib Dems in the succesor constituencies in a general election.
85. Of the two Brecon would be the better bet for the Tories, it at least was Tory recently as 92, Mont only flipped blue once in the aftermath of Rinka the dog.
Interesting story, which I typed up at 1 AM this morning but have only just stuck on my blog!
I have to wonder why Tony is apologising and how the story got out!
News of the world claims Straw Home Sec, Darling Chancellor. My money on it being vice versa.
83 In the 2003 Montgomery Regional List Vote the LibDems only polled 800 more votes than the Conservatives in the GE in 2005 it was over 7,000 . I am confident enough to put money where my mouth is but Conservative supporters are not .
80. Ted. I agree Brown must have known, at least in broad terms, about that letter.
82. “My head hurts.” Test and Sean T. I’ll tell you what’s very good for a hangover. Too much to drink the night before. Works every time for me.
John Hemmings has published details on his blog of 8 election petitions that have been lodged following last month’s local election results see http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2007/06/election-petitions-2007.html
91. Great man. How are things looking for you in Hall Green. With Yardley safe as Houses, you must now be able to throw the Kitchen sink at that. You must see off Respect though
You know what, considering Blair did this. I think it is a warning to Brown from Blair and Reid, a shot across the bows. Back off buddy, we are still in charge. He had better rein it in, or they will damage him.
59 “54 Stewart J. The only polling evidence on the WLQ shows that it has as much resonance with voters in importance as yak dipping regualtions in Ulan Bator !!”
I didn’t know that 61% in England and 51% in Scotland were as concerned about Yaks waste products as they are about the WLQ.
Evidence rather than spin is here :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/01_january/16/union.shtml
And if you want to know why then the story that SeanT flags up above is now just one of a long line of getting second best compared to the other countries in the union that have devolved powers: tuition fees, latest cancer treatments, free old people’s care, no prescription fees …….. the list is getting longer every week it seems.
Being taken for granted (or taken as a nation of mugs) for ten years is bound to have it effect. And to the credit of the Scots that a majority of them think its time that England had a devolved government of its own.
59 “54 Stewart J. The only polling evidence on the WLQ shows that it has as much resonance with voters in importance as yak dipping regualtions in Ulan Bator !!”
I didn’t know that 61% in England and 51% in Scotland were as concerned about Yaks waste products as they are about the WLQ.
Evidence rather than spin is here :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/01_january/16/union.shtml
And if you want to know why then the story that SeanT flags up above is now just one of a long line of getting second best compared to the other countries in the union that have devolved powers: tuition fees, latest cancer treatments, free old people’s care, no prescription fees …….. the list is getting longer every week it seems.
Being taken for granted (or taken as a nation of mugs) for ten years is bound to have it effect. And to the credit of the Scots that a majority of them think its time that England had a devolved government of its own.
On Swedish Politics.
Ladbrokes are laying 6/1 Allians-regeringen spricker innan 30.6.2007.
I don’t have a clue what this means but I’m tempted by the odds! Might have a double with the NY Alliance to be in Folketinget after the next Danish election.
93
Agree
And the idea that phone tap evidence use in court is a “unique” idea belonging to David Cameron is just plain silly. We’ve been debating it for years. The Conservatives have always supported the idea with Labour only starting to show signs of supporting it in the last year or so.
The intelligence community have usually been against the idea.
Using phone tap evidence in court in terrorism cases is just one of the logical conclusions anyone would have included when drawing up proposals.
This a very silly article with Blair trying to cause unnecessary mischief.
96 stjohn - Welcome to the obscure world of Nordic politics :-;
It means that the current coalition government resigns before 30.06.07, and there is absolutely no chance that this will happen.
If you want to bet in Swedish politics, I recommend the 2.20 that Nordicbet offers for a leftwing government in 2010. Fair value IMO more like 1.50, but you need to wait three years, and the limit is small.
In Denmark, Ny Alliance is doing well in the first opinion polls since the party was established, and I’ve made several bets on their election results myself, but next election is probably not due until 2009, and the party might fall to internal strife long before that.
Local elections in Norway in September, but there is no reason this should interest anybody outside my country (and not that many inside the country :-).
“Reid’s comments and Blair’s apology will raise questions about the state of communications between the Prime Minister and Chancellor just weeks before Brown takes over in No 10. Brown’s anti-terrorism initiative, which he has been working on for months, was virtually identical to the plan outlined by Reid in the Commons. This suggests that the Home Office and Downing Street incorporated Brown’s ideas on phone taps without telling the him they had been suggested by Cameron.
Brown is understood to believe that the Tories may be playing fast and loose. He has been examining the idea of holding a privy council inquiry on telephone tap evidence for some time and has been consulting outside the government. There are fears that some of Brown’s thoughts may have been passed to the Tories during this consultation.”
there is no way to know who thought about the idea first, maybe it was cameron, maybe it was brown, maybe none of them, but we can’t be sure….
95 The monthly Mori polls which ask which issues voters consider important to Britain today show just 1% consider Devolution and Constitutional Reform an important issue . People may give a view if polled on something like an English Parliament but they continue to think it of no relevance compared with the issues they do consider important Immigration , NHS , Crime , Education , Housing , Environment and the Economy .
Nothing particularly remarkable about the Observer story - except for the fact that the Observer seems to have far more hard-hitting anti-government stories than today’s Tory papers. The Telegraph for example seems content to fill its pages with sycophantic articles about the House of Saud.
Every party becoms Eurosceptic when in opposition, The Tories took us in, hinting at a referendum before the actual signature. Heath then renaged on that, by saying that in the 1970 election everyone knew that in the manifesto it was Conservative policy to enter, therefore the election was in itself a referendum. The only referendum, we have had was forced on the Labour Party by the Bennite left, strongly opposed by the Tories. That referendum produced nearly a 70% vote for staying in. The yes vote was backed by the Labour government, the opposition, the press and just about every one you can mention. It was opposed by the left and a few Tories, who saw their political careers go down the pan.
Once in government the Tories will once again become, ‘The party of Europe’ and Ted Heath will be elevated to, ‘Saint Edward of Broadstairs’ for taking us in.
57. I would agree on the tragey of not having Ken Clarke as leader.
If he had been the tories leader they would have opposed the war in Iraq. Instead they had that turkey IDS. My intermitant membership of the party meant i had a vote in the 2001 election. I went to an event in Manchester and saw Clarke their. I was puzzled why so many young people wanted IDS for leader. He read a speech where as Clarke covered all areas honing his delivery for the audence touching on areas such as student loans etc. This was the weekend before september 11.
Obviously i voted for Ken Clarke but alas a lot of Tories did not.
It is such a shame that Clarke will not serve in a shadow cabinet as he would be very effective in the run up to a closly contested election. I think Clarke has missed his chance to lead the party as he is getting on now.
The great bastion of British Communism - the General Teaching Council says all testing prior to 16 should be abolished. Its great to know what the nutters think, so we can do the opposite. Of course, trust the BBC to report the GTC as a ‘watchdog’ when it is nothing of the sort. The GTC, and its fellow travellors in the teaching unions, have been responsible for the collapse in school standards over the last 40 years. It is simply a pressure group for ensuring teachers have to do as little work as possible, while being paid as much as possible!
Well done Alan Johnson for slapping down the GTC. Now he knows who needs to be sacked in it, as they have ‘outed’ themselves. Could we also look to a ban on unionisation in the teaching profession? Long overdue. We don’t want anymore Marxists in our schools.
And I notice we are seeing unprecedented amounts of pro-Brown bias from the Telegraph. No doubt it would like to surrender 95% of its readers to the Times. Can we organise a mass-boycott of the Telegraph? Come on, folks. Lets do it.
Furthermore, why does the GTC think tests that ensure children learn how to read, write, do maths, etc at ‘distracting’. I’m sure most parents in the country are more than a little angry by this hard-left non-story being given so much coverage today. No doubt its been put out by the Brownites. Perhaps its the GTC that needs to be abolished rather than testing!
If the Conservatives actually want an issue on which to gain popularity the anti-Communist agenda for education is it. How many parents are upset about the non-teaching going on in many of the countries comps? All of it encouraged by Communist bastions such at the General Teaching Council. Waging war against these nutters is a sure-fire way to win a General Election. Put these nutters on the dole queue where they belong. Either we get rid of them, or they ruin the lives of our children.
I have always bought the times. Think it is a better paper although their are a couple of Commentators i don’t like reading Tim Hames and Peter Riddell have some funny ideas!
I also prefer the paper.
Surprisingly i don’t mind the Guardian but of course some of it’s commentry and issues are not to my taste.
Re: 98 - Thanks for the update, Jan. I was unaware of the creation of Ny Alliance. It’s early prospectus reads quite similar to the Lib Dems and it’s interesting to see it’s drawn support from BOTH Government and Opposition.
I suppose the 64-million kroner question is whether they will flare and die like the CDs or whether they may take a permanent place in the Danish political spectrum as perhaps a more centrist version of Radikale Venstre.
Although the VKO Coalition now has a majority of two, I think it will probably serve out most of its term. Can Ny Alliance maintain the momentum up to the next election ? I think the tricky question for them is whether they would support a VK Government or seek to support a Social Democrat administration ? It’s basically the same dilemma as the LDs have here.
The history and failure of the Centrum Demokraterne doesn’t bode well for the survival of a new centrist party in what is already a very crowded space. To be fair, Rasmussen seems to be taking Venstre further to the Right and that might be the Ny Alliance’s opportunity. We’ll see.
98. Thanks Jan. I thought you might be able to explain it. I think I will sit this one out.
Re: 104 -106: Hmm, sunday lunch seems to be sitting a little awkwardly today, Will ?
I find it laughable when you (and other Tories) witter on about media bias. I wasn’t aware that it was the job of the broadcast media to only reflect the guidelines from Conservative HQ. You are incredibly lucky to have a favourable press overall. Cameron’s protestations to the editor of the Mirror are ridiculous given the sustained vitriolic and persoanal attacks endured by Neil Kinnock in the 1980s and early 1990s and Cherie Blair in more recent times.
Cameron is a politician - if he can’t take some heat, he shouldn’t be in the job. IF he is genuinely interested in creating a new media tone for political debate, then let’s see him criticise the Mail and Express for the way they have treated Labour and Lib Dem politicians.
It emphasises for me the fact that Cameron is brittle and isn’t up to the job. He may well become Prime Minister - it’s not a prospect I’m looking forward to.
110. Would you think someone going through your bins was justified. If that’s what it means to be a politician, then I think Nick has his answer as to why people do not queue up to be MPs. BTW refer you to 81 for opinion.
103. KC has only himself to look at. Blair suckered him on that platform as he’d suckered Ashdown, Jenkins and Brown before him. He then could have recognised reality and said Ok if Blair can’t get Britain into Euro I sure as hell can’t but I can do other things. He didn’t. Typical KC, admirable but foolish, engaging but stubborn.
I would be astonished if any Conservative MPs EVER speak to Kevin Maguire or any Mirror journalist. I never do nor would I ever speak to a Mirror reporter in the future.
They are clearly overtly partisan and muck raking when it comes to anything to do with the Conservative Party and their agenda is well known.
Also, given that hardly anyone other than viscerally hostile anti-Tory Labour core voters read the Mirror, who cares what they say or print.
The golves are off? When were they ever on?
Re: 111 - I certainly don’t accept that going through someone’s bins is justifiable but Cameron is crying “wolf” here. In comparison with the merciless hounding of Kinnock, Charles Kennedy and even IDS, Cameron has got off astonishingly easy given such gaffes as the “cycling with car” episode.
Re: 81 - I don’t know is the simple answer. There are those on the Tory side who claim that the anti-Tory tv era is over. Well, perhaps. I do think that the “squeeze” argument is far too simplistic. In a Tory seat with an LD close second, the Labour vote will still be squeezable. Likewise, are we to see Tory voters voting tactically to oust Labour MPs if LD candidates are in with a chance ? Again, I don’t know.
“The golves are off? When were they ever on?”
Exactly, Stewart!
112. God, it’s just like hearing Labour MPs talking about the Sun in the eighties.
Gosh, the Mirror is partisan, doesn’t like you and says nasty things about you so the solution is to say nasty things about them and to refuse to talk to them?
That worked well for us. Not.
Just bear in mind that this story is from Mirror sources and its editor is a former Labour ’spin doctor’, doubtless a graduate magna cum grubbi from the Campbell school of veracity. I think that’s probably ’nuff said’ about its credibility.
Talking about journalistic partisanship look what i saw in the online Independent today. Apparently the BBC had to apologise for abbusive and hostile interviewing:
http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article2640422.ece
I might be wrong in thinking this but does Kirsty Wark not have some Labour connection. I think she went on holiday with a minister, her husband and the ministers other half.
The answer to your question is in the page you referred us to, Martin.
I do think that there must be a line to which press intrusion should not go. I think looking in someones bins is one of those things. If you think that going through Cameron’s bins then it would be as legitamate to hold a fishing net over a sewage outlet to see whether the health minister for “healthy eating” practices what they preach. This of course would be completly unacceptable but as with all Labour supporters if you are a Tory then it is acceptable.
118. Sorry did not read it properly!
112 Stewart , the last poll I can recall on newspaper readership and party support had something like 15-20% of Mirror readers supporting the Conservatives and a similar number LibDems so you are not correct that the readership only consists of hostile anti-Tory core Labour voters .
79. The Sunday Times, by contrast, says Brown is refusing to be bound on any Blair Constitution deal, and will insist on opt-outs in all contentious areas.
Brown will try to do a John Major who signed the Maastricht Treaty negotiating temporary opt-outs, then claiming there is no need for a referendum.
It’s all a game designed to stop people from rising up in revolt over powers being delivered to Brussels. Murdoch won’t do anything to help. He only cares that he keeps his monopolistic privileges which the EU Competition Commissioner has the power to remove. Murdoch’s just another player like Brown acting eurosceptic, but ensuring Britain puts up no real fight.
112/114 Stewart/Test “The golves are off?”
Golves ???? ….. perhaps a cross between a black dolly and a wolf ??
OT. Prezza has left hospital ….. not too sure he’s looking much better, but we wish him well :
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/849/prescottmonster1pk.jpg
Golves ???? ….. perhaps a cross between a black dolly and a wolf ??
I thought he was a leading Tory MP, Jack.
re 112 and 121. Mark’s right. The last Ipsos-Mori survey on this subject had 54% of Mirror readers saying they would turn out and their voting preference split was CON 13%: LAB 66%: LD 15%
The paper with the smallest proportion of Tory supporters was the Guardian with 7%.
see http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2005/voting-by-readership-q1.shtml
Re 124 Jack W, is the larger picture Prescott in good health and inset him looking “under the whether”?
The Mirror described Cameron as ‘Born with a silver dinner service in his mouth’!
It made me laugh…….
127 Benedict. “under the whether”?
Back to grammar school for you !
125 Tressage.
113. In many seats it has already been squeezed hard with little or none left viz Romsey. There a few like Eatleigh where there is mileage, but they don’t constitute the majority. In contrast there are many new Lib/Lab seats where this has never been exploited before. Hence i think the later far more likely than the former.
126 I’m amazed how can sdomeone buy the Mirror and vote Tory. Only if you only read the Sports pages I suppose and even then….
122. Sorry mate, I don’t buy this grassy knoll, David Icke-ish, Rupert Murdoch-is-a-europhile-lizard business. I work and have worked for lots of Rupert Murdoch publications - including the Times. I know lots of other News International journalists - from the Sun to the Sunday Times.
Murdoch’s euroscepticism is heartfelt, I think. He is a libertarian pro-American capitalist and sees the EU as a genuine if benign threat to Anglo-Saxon liberty and British sovereignty. Sure he wants to make a buck, but I think he has ideals too. So do a lot of his hacks - (and newspaper hacks tend to be eurosceptic in my experience).
He certainly employs some fiercely eurosceptic journalists - a secretly Europhile mogul would not have the ferociously anti-EU Trevor Kavanagh as his most important political writer for more than a decade.
The same, only more so, can be said of Dacre and Associated Newspapers. Again the euroscepticism is heartfelt. Dacre is a big fan of Brown but if Brown tries to sign us up to a Constitution, without a referendum, he will turn on El Gordo.
Whether that matters to Brown or not is a different matter. Possibly not. But recall how Blair folded under pressure last time. Having the Mail, the Times, the Sun, the Sunday Times, the News of the World, the Daily Telegraph, the Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Telegraph all after your a$$ isn’t fun - and that’s what’ll happen over Europe if Brown reneges.
Should be interesting.