Fiona Melville: Activists and CCHQ need to do more to embody the modernising and optimistic message of Project Cameron

Fiona Melville is a political consultant at Apex Communications.  She worked for the Conservative Party for four years, in the Political Unit for the 2005 General Election, on David Cameron's leadership campaign and as Head of External Relations. She is part of the team behind Platform 10.

If he hasn’t yet, David Cameron and his team should read Alistair Campbell's Diaries. They (and we) should take note especially of the iron focus on victory. Then he should take a deep breath, remember what happened to previous Conservative leaders who abandoned their original modernising instincts, and resolve to continue the programme of change.

CCHQ needs to politicise and beef up its approach – sending a press release out and expecting coverage isn’t enough.  Everyone in that building needs to relentlessly promote the value of Conservative ideas.

David cannot give in to the temptation to personalise the attack on Brown. It’s his record, not his personality, that counts.  The critique needs to be in terms that voters understand, and the solutions need to be personalised.  Now that the policy groups are reporting, it’s time to articulate the vision of how to make Britain a better country.

Remaining in the mainstream of British politics is what counts.  Focusing on what affects people’s daily lives is what gave the party its poll lead for 19 of the last 20 months.

The Party needs to make sure that a consistent Conservative message is sustained and coherent.  The leadership needs to repeat the same thing over and over again, and make sure that the same message is carried by every single activist, councillor and member.

Now the Policy Groups have reported, David has the opportunity to prove that he can make the tough choices for the good of the country. He mustn’t take the easy, grass-roots pleasing route, but the right one for Britain.

Finally – but perhaps most urgently - David needs to remind us of why we picked him. That sense of optimism and success is what will make him and the Party winners at the general election.

A longer version of Fiona's piece can be read on Platform 10.

NEXT IN THIS 'WHAT DAVID CAMERON SHOULD DO NEXT' SERIES: JAMES FORSYTH AT NOON

Comments

[CCHQ Spy]

As well as CCHQ doing more we need the part-time shadow cabinet to become full-time. Are you reading this Mr Hague?

[Mr Angry]

Some good points, some total bollocks. But then I suspect that the same will probably be the case with most of today's submissions. Looking forward to reading them all.

[Iain]

"The Party needs to make sure that a consistent Conservative message is sustained and coherent. The leadership needs to repeat the same thing over and over again, and make sure that the same message is carried by every single activist, councillor and member."

If you Fiona can see it as a professional in the political world, and some of us who have no professional political qualifications have been posting the same for months and months, why have we got so many clueless political donkeys at CCHQ who can't see it?

[Lucy]

So if I won't parrot the 'message' of Project Cameron, should the Party refuse my membership?

[Change CCHQ To Win]

It is the use of language such as modernisation and Project Cameron that alienates party members.

We are not the dinosaurs that CCHQ, and former officials like Fiona, think we are. As councillors and campaigners, we focus on what affects people's daily lives - crime, graffiti etc. Rwanda was mentioned but only because voters thought that Cameron should put Britain and his constituents, under several feet of water, first.

Members are leaving the party in droves, partly. They think that they are not wanted by Team Cameron and the arrogant twenty-something "Know-it-alls" in CCHQ. In fact it in the inexperienced "know nothings" who are the problem.

It is Team Cameron and CCHQ, rather than the loyal and compassionate members who dedicate their lives to local public service, who must change to win.

[malcolm]

I would agree with you Fiona. Your second paragraph is key.I don't envy Andy Coulson his job at all but we must do better with the media.
To the poster above who says 'people are leaving the party in droves'. How do you know?

[MH]

Some of the above really get the point. Dave's supposed modernisation is completely alienating many of those of us who supported through even darker days than at present. The grassroots associations are collapsing even in safe seats.

[James]

I'm curious about those who keep saying that 'grassroots associations are collapsing'. Where? That's not the evidence I see.

There are some who are uneasy about the current leadership, but I see no evidence of a collapse here in the West Midlands. Quite the contrary - people who have never voted Conservative in their lives are saying that they now consider us to be an alternative they can vote for. Conservatives (under DC) trounced both Labour and the Lib Dems only three months ago in the local elections.

Frankly, after three catastrophic GE defeats, those who seem to believe that all we need to do is keep saying the same thing over and over again until the electorate come around are utterly deluded.

[HF]

CCHQ spy is right. Part time shadow cabinet people who are ineffective in the media are harming our chances.

Locally the party has become stronger. It is the Regional and Central folk that are holding the party back.

[Ken Stevens]

"He mustn’t take the easy, grass-roots pleasing route, but the right one for Britain."

..But he has to be sufficiently pragmatic to have some popular/populist [-delete as applicable, according to your standpoint] measures in order to obtain enough extra votes to gain office, before doing the right thing for Britain.

[Marcus Wood]

There is a totally unjustified sense of 'crisis' in some of the posting (and, to be fair, quite a lot of the media) about project Cameron at the moment.

Sure, we have lost our poll lead (the one we have only had for 12 months out of the last 200 or so!) but what did we expect?

I think the idea that we should react or change our plans in any way to this will play into Gordon Browns hands.

Labours only hope remains that our party lapses into the small-minded reactionary politics that has kept him safely in No 11 for the last decade and which (he hopes) would keep him in No 10 for the next one.

Given our recent past history of internal fighting and dispatching our leaders with bewildering frequency you can perhaps understand why Labour will be sticking to their proven formula and hoping we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory again.

The good news is that team Brown have no plan B. If this time we remain sure on the centre-ground, unified behind the leadership, hungry for power and fit for Government he is toast at the next election.

[Umbrella man]

C'mon Marcus. There is a crisis. Have you seen the numbers below the headline YouGov/ICM figures? I think of who would make best PM etc.

[Chris Palmer]

Sorry, Fiona, but nobody should waste any money or time on Mr Campbell's book of Downing Street lies - especially not David Cameron!

Personally, I think that the extreme unpopularity of Blair had as much to do with the Conservatives' opinion polling advantage as Cameron focusing on the 'mainstream of politics' (whatever that is).

About 40% of people in this country didn't vote at the last General Election. Even less at the recent locals. The Conservatives need to be putting forward a new vision for Britain and its people, not recycling the same old stuff over and over. There is an enormous pool of non-voters to be tapped if we can offer them something really substantially different to the current 'norm'.

[TaxCutter]

Is Cameron rebranding himself "David" now?

[TomTOm]

How much more brand-management does politics in this country need ?

The populace is completely turned off institutionalised politics by the kind of Fairy Snow approach of advertising which is simply propaganda from well-heeled people sitting in rented offices blowing bubbles.

It is far removed from the seething anger that every visitor to this country notices with surly and aggressive behaviour from people feeling resentful and angered at the patronising attitude from The Establishment as they shaft the ordinary voter yet again.

It reads Fiona like a GCSE script

[bluepatriot]

Fiona:

(1) Do you think ConsHome is too critical of the Tory leadership?

(2) Do you see Platform 10 as a rival to ConsHome?

Thanks for answering my question.

[Marcus Wood]

Umbrella Man; I couldn't care less what an August poll says in *any* year; much less eight weeks after a new prime minister has taken over. July and August isn't called the 'silly season' for nothing.

I'd rather consider what is happening in real elections and at a local level where membership is up, and here in Torbay we continue to enjoy truly encouraging canvass returns.

[Ali T]

Well said James. As one of those longstanding loyal members who joined the Party in the early 1990s, I do not recognise the picture painted by Change CCHQ To Win. Far from loosing members my experience on the doorstep has been quite different. In my ward we have gained members.

The biggest problem that we face is the perception that we are divided. Our problem is not caused by DC, Project Cameron, or dare I even say CCHQ, but one or two of our high profile members/MPs taking every opportunity to snipe from the sidelines. This more than anything else is affecting our support.

I look at the Labour Party and ask myself why has Brown enjoyed such a strong bounce when they were so far behind in the polls, is it because of his charisma, great speaking or even announcing something really new? The answer is no, but because he seems to have united the Labour Party round him. How long this will last I don’t know, but

If we are to win the next GE we need to rediscover that hunger for government that we had in the 1980s, stop sniping at each other and focus our attention on the Labour Partyu and their record of failure.

[The Wilted Rose]

You mean they should repeat a 'mantra', not a 'message'.

It mustn't be like the 5 Points + 1 , but something more meaningful.

[Umbrella man]

You only fool yourself Marcus with that talk. We were told before 01 and 05 to ignore the opinion polls and look to local election results etc. I prefer to believe the opinion polls. If we don't change strategy we will certainly suffer our fourth successive defeat.

[michael m]

I keep saying and I will continue to say, we are all being let down by the complete absence of any front bencher/Conservative MP who just do not come out fighting. I again challenge any of them to come on to this platform and tell us, the loyal hardworking member/supporter of the party and David Cameron that they are serious about winning and how they intend to achieve it. The impression is that the majority care only about their other jobs and that as they have safe seats anyway, why bother?

[MH]

James

Look at the membership levels of associations in Kent for a start. Start with Sevenoaks and see what has happened since Dave became leader.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

The key message here is loyalty; those, like myself, who were less than enthusiastic about recent leaders managed to remain loyal(and there were those who didn't and I think less of them for it), those who now feel as I did should do the same (or leave, if they really have to).

A general has to know that there is nobody fomenting rebellion, a divided fighting force is one that will lose.

[Marcus Wood]

Umbrella Man you have a selective memory. In 2001 and 2005 the party offered a reactionary and myopic campaign focussed entirely on issues that mattered to core Conservatives while ignoring a wide range of other issues that mattered much more to the man in the street.

That is why we lost those elections, we failed to motivate more than our core vote and indeed 40% of voters remained unmoved to support anyone.

If you look at the detailed polling (and you say you do) you will know that polls are showing a much higher level of retention amongst Tories than for the others, a greater determination/likelihood that Tory voters will actually vote than Labour and a much higher percentage of those they didn't vote last time but will vote next time coming to us than Labour.

This suggests that our win when it comes will be because the '97, 01 and '05 stay at homes come out in support of a change of Government.

[Andrew Lilico]

Indeed, Fiona. But saying we need a narrative is one thing. Saying what it is is another. Do you have any suggestions?

[Iain]

Marcus Wood yes the campaign was myopic, but not for the reasons you may suggest. It was short sighted because the Conservative campaign didn't make their agendas inclusive to other groups. Eg immigration, the issue should not have been defined as immigration, but over population, by defining it as such it becomes inclusive of the chattering classes and other groups, whilst also showing the confusion in labour's position of talking green yet pursuing mass immigration.

[Marcus Wood]

Iain I purposely didn't get into the reasons why the campaign was short-sighted; just that it was.

Unfortunately a common problem with opposition campaigns is that they become a carping whinge about the Government - enough to please the already converted but rarely enough to win power.

People want to vote for a Government with vision and ideas for their future - Mrs Thatchers famous 'property owning democracy' was a good example - and they want an optimistic future that they think will be better for lots of people, not just themselves.

Cameron is on strong ground with a lot of what he is saying; if he can draw all the various strands of policy together into a coherent vision for a better future he will win.

[malcolm]

So what are the membership levels in Kent MH? Exact numbers will do.

[Guido Fawkes]

Am not convinced about restraining from personalising the fight.

Gordon Brown is a deeply flawed person, that needs to be communicated to voters. People by and large don't vote on policy detail, they vote emotionally. Something examined in convincing detail in Drew Weston's The Political Brain: How People Vote and How to Change Their Minds: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.

His personal flaws inform his policy flaws and are a legitimate issue. His personal control-freakery and tendency to micro-manage is naturally extended into public sector policy.

Labour will be launching an all out assault on Cameron's personality and background. If you haven't got the stomach for the fight that is fine.

Maybe it isn't a job to be done by Cameron, but it is a job that needs to be done.

Oh and one small factual correction, the Tory poll lead in the porevious 19 out of 20 months was due to the fact that voters preferred Dave to Blair or then then unknown prospect of Brown. Not policy.

[Luke]

"Indeed, Fiona. But saying we need a narrative is one thing. Saying what it is is another. Do you have any suggestions?"

Yes thats the core problem. this article is almost a mini parody of Project Cameron. it knows what is should be saying but doesn't possess any substance. Motherhood and apple pie.

If the Cameroon's can't propose a substantive, vigorous agenda then they ought to vacate the building. DC is clearly the best leader the Party could have but it looks like there is nothing behind him!

[Scotty]

"His personal flaws inform his policy flaws and are a legitimate issue. His personal control-freakery and tendency to micro-manage is naturally extended into public sector policy."

Guido, totally agree! Cameron needs to hold him accountable on policy because no one else will, certainly not anyone in his own party. Would give the job of unmasking his flaws to a tough operator in the Shadow cabinet though.
You only need look at his last budget to see just he allows his personal flaws to corrupt our economy and our relationship with the State. Mrs Thatcher never enjoyed that level of complete power within her own government, yet Blair never reined in Brown allowing him a totally unhealthy control over other departments and domestic policy. The political graveyard is littered with Ministers and civil servants who tried to stand up to him, question his decisions or the outcomes of his policies. Had any of those groups of people been supported by Blair we might not be in the mess we are today.
When I saw the subservient way that Labour MP's allowed him his coronation without a debate, I realised that we have now got the most illiberal government without even the most basic cabinet level safety valves, not healthy and rather worrying!!

[Fiona]

Thank you to everyone for your comments today!

I just wanted to reply to some of them, but not all because others have done so, and to make a few more general points.

I’m a bit disappointed that two of the eight posts today have come back to that perennial EU question. David Cameron is very clear on the EU. 1) Conservative MEPs will not be part of the EPP after the 2009 European elections, 2) A new group will be formed which campaigns for the EU to act where it can do the most good – the environment, global poverty and economic globalisation. Look at the Movement for European Reform’s website for more.

Members are not leaving in droves. I don’t have figures, but for example, my local association has increased substantially in the past 18 months (admittedly from a relatively small base).

The whole point of the modern, liberal Conservative agenda is to be in tune with the mainstream of British opinion. There is no mileage in sitting out on the wings, expecting to be returned to government when it’s our turn. No-one has a God-given right to be in government – we have to work to earn people’s respect and trust.

Leading on from that, gaining one voter from the centre actually means we gain two votes – one because Labour or the Lib Dems have lost one and one because we’ve gained one. Only appealing to a core vote does not win elections, and not winning elections means that we cannot put our values and principles into effect.

Change CCHQ to win at 11.27 – please read this post on Platform 10 from the only Conservative councillor in Glasgow and then tell me that that isn’t the way to demonstrate our values in today’s world.

Ken Stevens at 12.06 – I don’t think it’s inconsistent to have both popular and ‘good for Britain’ policies. I posted on here recently how, for example, fixing our broken society can be seen in ‘good for Britain’ terms AND in ‘good for me’ terms. There are tough choices to be made on policy, especially when it comes to spending, and we should make sure that we are aware of the longer term outcomes of our decisions. We can’t be seen to be dog-whistling or acting solely in our own political interests – people have had enough of that in the past.

Andrew Lilico at 13.46 – keep reading Platform 10 and Tim has also asked us to write a Your Platform on this (it’s too long for this already very long comment).

Guido at 15.54 – DAVID should not personalise the fight. Others can, but we do need to all be aware that while we may enjoy PMQs and Punch & Judy, it’s deeply off-putting to people who don’t follow politics obsessively… And – I would somewhat disagree with you on why we led the polls. Of course it wasn’t because of detailed policy, but it was based on a feeling that David understood the concerns of voters and would act in their best interests.

Hope this has all been useful.

Sorry, Tim, but one final plug! Platform10.org is there to continue the discussion.

[Think about it]

"2) A new group will be formed which campaigns for the EU to act where it can do the most good – the environment, global poverty and economic globalisation. Look at the Movement for European Reform’s website for more."

LoL. Yes Fiona, Cameron has just two partners in the MER making his grouping only a third the size of even UKIP's and the combined GDP of his partner countries is less than 10% of UKIP's!

How exactly is Cameron going to achieve any kind of reform with such an embarassingly small and powerless group?

[Matt Wright]

What Fiona says is also right. If you break it down its not actually that different to what Janet Daley is saying! Basically be coherent and forward-looking. What we have to do is drop the imaginary battles of either/or and left/right. Most people want the party and DC to suceed and just find such battles distracting. To be fair I'm not quite sure what "modernise" means and perhaps that is one of the problems modernisesrs have had, although I sense we have to be more upto date in a common sense way. What I do think we have to do is focus on practical things and coherence. This Fiona seems to be saying,

Matt

[sped]

I'm not sure what she is saying. She seems to be conversing in cliches and platitudes. Pontificating for pontificating's sake. i'd find it difficult to disagree with anything she has written (on either occasion) but equally I'd find it hard to point to one incisive political strategic point of substance she is making either.

I hoped Coulson was going to put all this pyscho babble to one side and finally start communicating a message. I still feel DC is the man but was surrounded by the wrong people. Most Tory leaders have operated in two year phases. I hope we are now into the "cut the crap" phase two and we can start to hear the real choice the British people are offered on education, health, taxation, law and order and foreign policy.

Please n more talk of "middle ground" "reaching out", "core voters" "the brand" "punch and judy politics"
lets havea real policy strategy and a defined position.

[Stuart Barr]

Imagine a little green (wo)man from outer space looking at this chain, and thinking "What on earth are they all going on about? Let me recall the facts:

"- DC was elected leader on a landslide;
- he's made the party electable again by reaching out to include the middle ground;
- he's had a convincing lead in the polls for 95% of the time since he was elected;
- he's set out a long-term strategy of mammoth policy commissions that have set out suggestions that encompass all wings of the party;
– and is about to begin the great debate at conference and stand-up speak-up that has the potential to unite everyone from the centre to the right;
- yet, just when it's all coming to fruition, (and the new PM gets the long-expected polling bounce), the self-defeating naval-gazers return to their 20-year long gloom, doom and despair with the irrationality of manic depression."

Those same green folk might just scratch their heads and think this party was heading for electoral defeat - but only purely because its activist literatti was losing self-confidence at a critical moment!

They might even profer two bits of advice (assuming "vote blue, go green" is just the thing for those little green folk...)
1) DC: Don't lose heart now. Do not deviate from the grand plan you started out with. That is the only way you will win the next election. Lead boldly, listen carefully to your party and country and they will follow.
2) Party: Don't lose faith with the most successful leader of your party for over 20 years. Stick with it - and remember, ruthlessly focus on victory - nothing else. Naval gazing will only lead to defeat again.

[ToMTom]

Naval gazing will only lead to defeat again.

Our great naval hero Lord Nelson put his telescope to his blind eye so as not to read the signal...but he never gazed at his navel.

[Think about it]

Stuart,

Perhaps those little green men will conclude that he shouldn't have started insulting party members ('delusional' etc) who disagreed with him, and shouldn't have started sacking non-Old Etonians who went off message (Compare Graham Brady being sacked for going off-message with Boris actually praised by Cameron at conference for, um, going off-message).

Then those little green men might look at the promises Cameron made to achieve his election victory, and might conclude that his failure to deliver the clear pledge on the EPP that was so important to that section of the party to which it was made, was a huge misjudgement.

They might then also conclude that Cameron's poll lead was nothing more than anti-Blair sentiment that has now been wiped away, returning Labour to its pre-Iraq war popularity.

Finally, looking at the poll deficit, they might conclude that someone so willing to insult his own party members, sack those who go off message and fail to deliver key pledges is a shifty, dishonest Blair-clone who will blame everyone for himself for his failures whilst crediting no-one but himself for past glories.

There is a simple rule; if the failures are not yoursh then neither are the successes. They are the two sides of the same coin.

[Yogi]

Think about it is spot on. The problem with the CCHQ is simple; it has been infiltrated by the fifth column of LibLab activists who have been bent on destroying the Conservative Party. Cameron and Gideon have been foolish to have allowed this to happen.
Modernisation to satisfy the Radio 4 and Guardian Readers has ripped the soul out of the Party and worse alienated the core supporters.

When the election is lost, will Cameron have the grace to fall on his sword and appologise to the Part members? No, he'll just shift the blame.

For the sake of the country and the future of your Children, Please GO NOW.

[Praguetory]

I prefer "win the argument" rather than the vacuous and meaningless "change to win". When change to win moves from a slogan or branding move - to an attempt to poison the well or hector long-serving Conservatives - without actually making a sound argument for any of the specific proposed changes, it has gone too far.
PS - Don't buy the Campbell Diaries. You can get pirated copies if you must, but it's still not worth it.