A close friend of mine has been feeling very sorry for himself this weekend.  He has been a devoted Conservative all his life and when Cameron asked for a fresh wave of Candidates recently he decided to apply.  This weekend he heard that the first Parliamentary Assessment Board, (PAB), was taking place.  He was not on it and has concluded the Party don’t want him…..much to his dismay.

When he talked to me about applying to be a Conservative Parliamentary Candidate I advised him against it.  I steered that given what Cameron was saying and the PR messages behind what candidates should look like, someone with a Party background and years of experience as a councillor would not fit the current mould and to wait until the next Parliament.  The Party need to, from a PR perspective, show a raft of new candidates with fresh backgrounds.  In a previous blog I have called the new candidates the ‘Saint Squad’.  The Party will want people with respectable backgrounds like former policemen, civil servants, charity workers, nurses, doctors, teachers etc.  Where would be the sense of going with candidates who are Party faithful and ex councillors?  That would not represent a break from the past which Cameron wants to portray.  We have had those candidates for years and that is the make up of the MP’s now in the House.

Hence Cameron needs to say to the Party, here are the fresh breed, untainted by politics…who want to make a difference.  That makes great PR and will attract positive headlines.  Where would be the sense of, ‘Here are our new candidates, they are all Party Faithful with years of experience on councils’.  Wow that would be a PR backfire!

My friend, understood this but was in ranting mood.  ‘I have toiled blood, sweat and tears for this bloody Party’, they did not even have the decency to send me a rejection letter.  I hear about the PAB’s through the Daily bloody Telegraph…well f*** them.  I could add so much more value to the Party.  Look at that Chloe Smith.  Lightweight.  No gravitas.  I am gutted’. 

I sympathised but again stressed it was not the message the Party needed to send out if Party Faithful get the nod.  Cameron is underlining his credentials and his break from the past.  He needs those headlines of new ‘unpolitical canidates’. 

My friends time will come, (as will other readers of this blog).  Interestingly Charles Moore said in his DT article yesterday: ‘The range of bright, public-spirited candidates is impressive. This weekend, the Parliamentary Assessment Board is testing the new crop who have answered Mr Cameron’s recent call. Plenty, I gather, have experience of “real life” – ex-army officers, policemen, top-grade civil servants and people who have run their own businesses. They will look good when presented to the public at the party conference in the autumn.  But one cannot help asking if so many coming in for the first time, without having risen through the hard school of party politics, will know what to do if they find themselves supporting a Tory government. At present, the huge power of public-sector Leftists – in quangos, pressure groups, unions, the judiciary, green organisations, local councils and the BBC – directs disappointed anger on to Labour. After a Tory victory, all that will change. Like enraged addicts undergoing cold turkey, without their huge doses of public spending, they will trash the public space. Will the Tories have the tough foot-soldiers needed to fight this culture war? Will they have enough officers leading from the front? If voters spot this weakness in advance, will they support them’?

There comes the challenge…..and the last thing we want is a Parliament of mediocrity.  These new candidates will generate great PR and media headlines for us in the coming weeks and months….advantage Cameron and our Party!

Fascinating tribute from Charles Moore, who is of course Margaret Thatcher’s Official Biographer, to David Cameron, stating that he is the greatest Tory Leader of the Opposition since Benjamin Disraeli.  Take a look at the article here:  http://tiny.cc/nnZig

Moore states that the Conservatives have two advantages going for it.  Gordon Brown and David Cameron.  Many would fail to disagree with this.  Most interestingly, I think most in Labour would agree but it is what they will do about it that affects the result of the next election.

Moore cites his admiration for the way Cameron dealt with the expenses scandal making sure firstly the shadow cabinet repaid back any thing that did not look right and then Cameron turned his attention on to Conservative MP’s.  Whilst some MP’s grumbled, this was the right thing to do as it deflected attention off the Conservatives onto the Government and this strategy bore its fruits in Norwich North as Conservatives thumped home a whacking 7,300+ majority, in the first by-election since the expenses scandal.

Moore states: ‘Being Leader of the Opposition is notoriously the most difficult job in British politics. David Cameron has done it for nearly four years with a parliamentary party 30 per cent smaller than that which Margaret Thatcher led from 1975 to 1979. Judging strictly in terms of political management, I would say that he has so far been more successful than she. In fact, he must be the most skillful Tory opposition leader since Disraeli’.  That is some tribute.  But Cameron is not without issues.

The biggest issue Moore contests for Cameron is that policy needs to be defined more.  ’Voters do not recognise the Tory “signature” on anything much. In 1978/9, they would have known that the Tories promised something different on taxes, inflation, trade unions, and the Cold War. What do they know now? Nothing terrible, but also, nothing much. The vagueness of these impressions might not matter politically if in fact the Tories did know what they wanted to do. But where are they on terror, “human rights”, our constitutional decay, health service reform, local government, energy, our relations with America, the undeclared war in Afghanistan’. 

This asks an interesting question.  And it is true of any Opposition Party.  If the saying is ‘Government’s lose elections, not Opposition’s win them’, then why should Cameron reveal more?   Traditionally few Opposition Parties have spelled out their policies root & branch pre an election.  The more detail provided, provides more grounds for scrutiny and the spotlight must firmly stay on the Government and its incompetence.  Surely the goal is to provide tantalising alternative policies but not mapping them in the public arena to fine detail.

Cameron is a man that has changed much about the Conservative Party.  He deserves a great deal of credit.  He has gained public confidence on issues previously unheard of by Conservatives.  This evolves around his embracing compassionate Conservatism and the public trusting Conservatives with the health service and public services.  This is a huge win for the Conservative Party in gaining mass acceptance.

But does that make him the best Tory Opposition Leader since Disraeli?  That can only be judged after the next election.  If the Conservatives win with a big majority the Cameron deserves a pedestal in history for his work in Opposition.  If the Tories lose / hung Parliament, (and this can only happen if Labour remove Gordon Brown and there is a honeymoon period), then questions will be asked about why Conservatives did not reveal more policy.  All will be revealed within 10 months.

The Daily Telegraph screamed this morning, ‘Cameron to bring back Tory old guard’.  (Read the article here: http://tiny.cc/qZTtJ).  The Telegraph claims that Cameron wants to ensure that the Conservative Party, if it wins the next election, has plenty of experience to help the new Government hit the ground running.  As part of this Cameron is allegedly offering an olive branch to the party’s old guard after the turmoil of the expenses scandal, (some of the old guard were deemed to have been treated harsher than some of the front bench / new MP’s).

Now we come to the interesting part.  Names so far touted include for a return to a Senior Government role include….Peter Lilley, Stephen Dorrell, James Arbuthnot and George Young.

Iain Dale in his review of the big beasts of the jungle returning, throws up the name of David Davis and asks whether he would get a role on the Front Bench.  http://tiny.cc/IIlnB

The one man that needs to be in the frame is that of John Redwood.  After the next election Conservatives will be facing one hell of an economic mess.  An obscene public deficit, hard decision to take on public spending, unemployment above 3 million, falling GDP … and so on.  Key to tackling this economic misery will be calm, clear and experienced heads.  Osborne has laid a clear path forward but he will need the support of wise thinkers who know the delaying tactics that the Civil Service employs in launching new policy initiatives and making changes.  John Redwood has been there, done that and signed the t-shirt.  Cutting spending and getting value will be critical in the next Parliament and Redwood demonstrated his skills in this area in 1995 when he returned £100,000,000 of Wales’ block grant to the UK treasury unspent following efficiency savings and cost-cutting measures.  Unheard of…and something a Labour Minister would never do.  We need that skill and leadership in seeking efficiencies urgently today. 

Redwood has that fine quality of being a respected thinker and someone who can be trusted to deliver, (he was Head of Margaret Thatcher’s Policy Unity in the early to mid 1980’s).  Whilst we talk of the experience of the names above, like Iain Dale, I thought Stephen Dorrell had stood down from Parliament.  Dorrell has added no value to the Party in the past Parliament and has spoken very rarely.  Redwood on the other hand is a ferocious contributor to Parliamentary life, be it speaking in the Chamber, Chairing the Conservative Party’s Policy Review Group on Economic Competitiveness and as we know sharing his views and new ideas via his daily diary. 

If we talk experience, Redwood has held Cabinet rank as a former Secretary of State for Wales, (1993 – 1995).  His Ministerial experience includes time as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs at the DTI in 1989, the following year he was promoted to Minister of State.  Redwood became Minister for Local Government and Inner Cities after the 1992 General Election where he successfully saw through the abolition of the then called ‘Poll Tax’ aka the Community Charge.  In Opposition he has been Shadow Secretary of State for Trade & Industry, Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport & the Regions and Spokesperson on Deregulation.  That experience is precious.

When we look the create the strongest team for the Conservatives, don’t ignore the man Redwood, the nation needs his experience & vision.

Interesting interview in today’s Daily Telegraph with Mr ‘unsackable’, Alastair Darling.  Take a look here: http://tiny.cc/7CBpf

Darling lifts the lid and provides more information around the recent reshuffle and period of Ministerial resignations.  Gordon Brown did indeed, a week before the reshuffle, offer Darling a choice of Foreign Secretary or Home Secretary…but Darling states that Brown did not ask him to move on from the Chancellorship at any stage.  Bizarre justification that from Darling.  If someone offers you new positions it normally means they want you to move on or preparing you mentally for a change in job.  Shows Gordon Brown is a very weak leader if he offers new roles, especially the Home Office, which is a demotion from the great office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, without stating he intended to move Darling to his face but was leaking it to the national media on a daily basis.  As we would expect, Peter Mandolsen called Darling but credit to Darling he dug in.

I am also sure that David Miliband will this morning be fascinated to read that his job was offered to Alastair Darling.  David must rue the day that his political courage was sucked from his body and must pray that like the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz he can find courage in his soul one day to stand!  So now we know that we have two Cabinet ministers in place that ideally Gordon Brown wanted to move.  How humiliating for both Darling and Miliband to know they are Brown’s second or third choices!  This also shows that by offering Darling the role of Foreign Secretary, he was desperate for Ed Balls to be Chancellor.  (More on this subject in my next blog).

Darling, giving his ‘unsackable’ position is finally growing some balls, (and not Ed Balls!).  Darling has looked uneasy on the front benches as Brown has trotted out some dreadful lies about public spending figures.  Interestingly the Telegraph asserts in its article that:  ‘Mr Darling is clearly not signed up to the “Labour investment v Tory cuts” mantra being spouted by his boss. At all times, he says, the Government must be honest with people about what lies ahead. There is still pain to come — unemployment will rise into next year — and the Government will have to take some difficult decisions about spending’.   The Telegraph assert that : ’Mr Darling is willing to say what Mr Brown will not: that there will be less cash to go around after the next election. He wants, he says, to be honest with the voters. “Both political parties will have to set out their stalls.” The next government will have to take difficult decisions and “you have to have a mandate for that”.  The friction over policy and strategy is obviously rife at the heart of Government.  Credit to Darling for being more attuned to the public and realistic than Gordon Brown.

Darling goes on to admit, which is a departure from Brown again, that he wants to reverse recent tax increases….and this includes the planned rise in the top rate of tax to 50p in the £ above £150,000.  He told the Telegraph:  “Looking into the future I would like to be able to reduce tax. Raising the top rate is something I didn’t want to do.”  Does that imply that the policy was a Brown dictat?  Or just a temporary decision he needed to do for economic reasons….but as TBB has demonstrated, cutting taxes increases tax receipts, raising income tax, decreases tax receipts…as Darling is now seeing for himself!

Darling is starting to move closer to the Tories views on spending.  He agrees that public spending has radically increased in the past 10 years, in fact it hasdoubled in 10 years, hence there is  – there is scope for reductions.  Darling notes that the country is wealthier and the public sector is well padded and therefore some cuts can be made.  Have you heard Brown say this?  This is Darling acting more in line with analyst opinion like the World bank, IMF, IFS, IOD, CBI etc…and his friend Mervyn King at the BOE.

With calls for a complete Spending review pre the election, Darling states that he and the Treasury are carrying out a review of departmental spending covering 50% of Government spending.  Darling states that colleagues cant assume ‘they are getting another penny from me’.  Finally, tougher language from the Chancellor and HM Treasury.  But this is at odds with what his boss has been saying.  It will be fascinating to see if Brown alters his tact next week at PMQ’s!

Well Darling seems liberated.  Knowing he cant be sacked as the spotlight will be back on his boss, he seems more free to act, speak his mind.  I am sure these are character traits that Brown does not like….but then what can he do….he cant sack Darling.  Alastair finally comes of age….and grows balls!

The days of patronising and back patting are coming to an end for Darling from bully Brown!

7 front pages that changed the face of Politics

A week is a long time in Politics.  That has never been truer than the past week.  The Daily Telegraph seized the political agenda and itself dominated the headlines of all major media networks, be it tv or national press, all week.  Never has 1 newspaper dominated the news in one week as much as the DT this week….and it’s still going strong!!!

So, some things are beautiful about what the Daily Telegraph has done and some are questionably beastly.

Let’s start with the beauty.  Hooray for the Freedom of Information and that Speaker Martin could not get these stories stopped.  A free press is at the very centre of a true democracy and free society.  Free to investigate wrongdoing and hold the Executive, (and legislature), to account.  For this, we should celebrate what the Daily Telegraph has achieved.  Magnificent journalism.

But the week does pose some interesting questions for the DT…….

-  A once natural Conservative newspaper does not feel as Conservative as it once did.  Do they feel more inclined towards the UKIP in Euro elections?….. and Brown and No.10′s influence appears strong at the Telegraph.

-  Why has the DT timed release of this information to now?  They have had it for some time.  Why not release before now?  Why not after the elections? What is the motive?  Who is benefiting?  Smaller parties are certainly doing well eg UKIP. 

-  Who is the check on the DT?  Nadine Dorries said yesterday on her blog she felt the DT were embellishing some facts for better reading.  Eg when is a chandelier a chandelier!!!….or a paper lamp shade with beads hanging down on it….

-  Clare Short, (not my favourite person), stated that the DT are dredging up old issues of expenses that have already been repaid to continue their reporting.

-   By drip feeding stories over the past week, and continuing to do so, are the Daily Telegraph now more focused on commercial matters ie they must be selling shed loads of papers and their circulation on fire with new readers.  Their papers are dominating content in other papers and of course, what great publicity for the DT with the major TV & Radio networks focused on their stories this week.  And of course, the DT build the next issue the night before keeping the likes of Sky News in a frenzy.  Release one name at 9pm on the website—bang headlines.  Release another name at 9.30….bang more headlines.  And so on.  By releasing details of 4 people on average a day…..is this story now being dragged on and receiving overkill for commercial reasons?

-  How much did the DT pay?  Will we ever get to know who the whistle blower was who sold the info for personal gain?

Lots of questions remain.  Let’s celebrate the DT for what it has brought to light but also rightfully, ask our own questions.