ConservativeHome's Platform

Donal Blaney: How to build on this momentous weekend

Donal Blaney, Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation and the author of Blaney's Blaney, offers ten lessons to be learnt if we are to keep our momentum.

Last Friday was Gordon Brown's 100th day as Prime Minister having spent 13 years licking his wounds after the Granita Pact with Tony Blair. It was the moment he had dreamt of for decades. Brown's spokesmen made a great deal of wanting to have a whirlwind first one hundred days. You wouldn't think so now, would you? It is a safe bet to say that with his decision not to call a general election, the climax to his first 100 days in office won't be forgotten soon.

Conservatives are rightly ecstatic that an election they feared last weekend they would lose, and which would probably had led to a fresh round of blood-letting, has been avoided. Such was the turnaround in the polls that the Tories have even swung into the lead. Much of the reason for the Tories' success in the past week rests on the fact that, at last, Team Cameron realised that the Party's strategy had been unbalanced. Tim Montgomerie has rightly and repeatedly called for the adoption of "the and theory" - rather than for a continued unbalanced strategy based on false choices.

Announcements that reconnected the Party's leadership with its grassroots - and with voters - on crime, immigration, education and tax are what have rescued the Tories from electoral disaster and fostered a new sense of unity and purpose. Having successfully shown Gordon Brown to have been partisan, inept, underhand and lacking courage, the Tories need to learn the lessons of the past 2 years, and in particular the past few months when panic set in. With that in mind, here are my suggestions as to how the Tories can best build on this weekend's momentous events.

Donal Blaney: Conservatives must oppose Labour's citizenship agenda

Donal Blaney is founder of the Young Britons Foundation and a director of 18DoughtyStreet.com.

Gordon Brown is a Scot. He represents a Scottish parliamentary seat. Devolution has not quelled Scottish separatism. It has fuelled it. In both England and Scotland there is a rising desire for the end of the Union (although I remain of the view that the Union will endure). Rather than answering the West Lothian Question, Gordon Brown exhorts us to promote “Britishness” – albeit that this ignores the fact that the Education Secretary in Westminster has no say over education policy in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

The latest attempt to redefine “Britishness” has come from a paper written by Sir Keith Ajegbo entitled “Diversity and Citizenship Curriculum Review”.

The DfES website announces – in phraseology that would do Mao proud:

“The key proposal is that the secondary curriculum for Citizenship Education should include a new element entitled 'Identity and Diversity: Living Together in the UK'. This will mean that all pupils, as part of compulsory secondary Citizenship Education, would be taught about shared values and life in the UK. This will be informed by an understanding of contemporary issues and relevant historical context which gave rise to them.

This approach should be supported by a range of measures to ensure that all curriculum subjects adequately reflect the diversity of modern Britain, and that schools are appropriately supported in delivery of this education for diversity.”

If conservatism remains an intellectually coherent creed, it must surely embrace localism rather than central planning. An overly prescriptive curriculum – particularly in such a politically sensitive area such as “diversity and citizenship” – runs contrary to the needs of education and of broader society.

In an era when even leftists such as Trevor Phillips realize that multiculturalism has encouraged ghettos and a form of social and cultural apartheid, why is it that a retired educationalist with a track-record second to many, joined by two other individuals from ethnic minorities – not much sign of diversity there -  is promoting a politically correct revision to the curriculum.

I am willing to bet that most conservative activists believed that the addition of citizenship to the curriculum in the last decade was simply that: the addition of citizenship classes that ensure that students learn about British history, our political system and truly shared values.

Instead, the DfES report makes it clear that the government’s focus is more interested in “diversity”. Rather than actively ensuring that citizenship is at the core of the curriculum, the report urges that citizenship is taught “discretely”.

Hidden away in the report are some statistics that should be highlighted, most notably:

• Ethnic minorities now number 7.9% of the population (as at 2001);
• Ethnic minority numbers in schools are closer to 1 in 8 (as at 2001);
• This proportion in schools is set to rise to 20% (1 in 5) by 2010;
• By 2017, 15% of the workforce in Britain will be muslim.

These figures are official government figures: the real figures are bound to be more shocking still.

What is of concern – and again, what has not been highlighted elsewhere – is the assertion that diversity requires, “in the first instance”, that students should explore “their own identities in relation to the local community”. So while we are told that citizenship education is to encourage an end to multiculturalism and the embrace of “Britishness” and integration, the converse is the case in this DfES report.

The report reads as the worst form of leftist self-congratulation. It is extols the virtues of the “anti-racist work in the 1980s” in what can only be seen as a snide jibe at Thatcherism. Why single out the 1980s? Was there no work against racism in the 1960s or 1970s? Did anti-racism work end in 1990?

Donal Blaney: Compassionate conservatism should focus on the elderly

Donal is Chief Executive of the Young Briton's Foundation and a Director at 18 Doughty Street.

In the politically correct and expedient rush to appease Guardianistas, environmental extremists, health fascists and equal opportunities zealots, Conservative Party strategists have forgotten the most important group in society who truly deserve - and would benefit most from - compassionate conservatism: the elderly.

The Daily Mail reports that Ivan Lewis, a health minister, has admitted that the elderly are being starved in care homes and hospitals. The inhumane treatment of the elderly in care homes, and by society at large, is one of the great scandals of recent years.

Despite a decade in power when taxes have risen to punitive levels and government spending has spiraled, Gordon Brown has conspicuously failed to make adequate provision for the elderly who are particularly hard hit by seemingly endless council tax and utility bill increases. And yet little is being said or done by the Conservative Party to focus on this crisis.

Donal Blaney: Work as if it all depends on you – pray as if it all depends on God

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, has explained one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. This is the last in that series, click here for the full archive.

It is said that every team is only as strong as its weakest member. This certainly worked to the advantage of the Conservative government during the 1980s as the Labour front bench was (until the arrival of Blair, Brown and their cohorts) a seriously unimpressive collection of people.

No matter what role you have in an organization, campaign or team, it is essential that you work as if the entire organization, campaign or team depends on you. There can be no thought of leaving it to someone else, assuming something will be done or not giving it your all.

One of the tragedies of the Conservative Party’s recent past is the way in which a generation of activists and politicians began to believe that the Party had a divine right to rule.

Donal Blaney: You cannot beat somebody with nobody

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

This week’s Law of the Public Policy Process focuses on a key fact that even the most skilled campaigner must recognize – you cannot beat somebody with nobody.

Gordon Brown is undoubtedly “somebody”. For all his faults, and this week’s Pre-Budget Report shows that he has many, he is undoubtedly a past master at arrogating power to himself and destroying anyone who dares to come into his path.

He has ruthlessly dispatched pretenders to his crown, chief amongst whom are numbered Alan Milburn, Stephen Byers, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke and (ultimately after a decade of internecine warfare) Tony Blair himself. Machiavelli would be proud. It remains to be seen whether John Reid will fall by the wayside as well.

On the Conservative side of the Commons, Brown has also effortlessly dispatched people as diverse as Ken Clarke, Peter Lilley, Michael Portillo, Francis Maude and, to some degree, even George Osborne.

The same concept of a seemingly unbeatable “somebody” is Ken Livingstone. A series of candidates have thus far tried to defeat him (both for the Labour nomination and for the mayoralty itself) but nobody was sufficiently “somebody” to be able to defeat him thus far – worthy though many of those putative opponents may have been.

There is undoubtedly something that cannot readily be identified that marks out a “somebody” in politics or any other walk of life. All too often it is defined as charisma or that ubiquitous “X-Factor”. It doesn’t simply come from being in power. Many people who have “it” (and are consequently a hard-to-beat “somebody”) are not in power at the outset of their journey up the greasy pole.

Some initially have power by association (such as Hillary Clinton or Winston Churchill) whereas others marked themselves out for greatness early on despite not previously having been close to power (Margaret Thatcher prime among them).

Donal Blaney: Promptly report your action to the one who requested it

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Given that politics is very much about the art of communicating ideas, it has often astonished me how bad politicians are at communicating with each other. Misunderstandings frequently arise and all too frequently result in mountains being made out of molehills.

While some disputes are based on matters of principle (such as over Europe during the Thatcher Years) or naked personal ambition (such as between Blair and Brown since 1994), all too often a minor issue will develop into a festering sore, thereby destroying relationships between erstwhile friends when this could all have been avoided if the lines of communication had run smoothly. Email has, of course, a lot to answer for in this regard given that emails meant as humourous by the sender can often come across as terse or inappropriate to the reader.

Donal Blaney: The test of moral ideas is moral results

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

“There is much to be said for trying to improve some disadvantaged people's lot. There is nothing to be said for trying to create heaven on earth. When all the objectives of government include the achievement of equality - other than equality before the law - that government poses a threat to liberty.”
- Statecraft, Margaret Thatcher

Maybe I drank too much rum when I was living abroad for the past two years?

Maybe in time I will wake up from this horrible dream, this nightmare, in which the political party that gave us Churchill and Thatcher – the political creed that gave us Reagan and is still adhered to by John Howard and Stephen Harper – have been discarded by David Cameron in what increasingly seems to me to be nothing more than a naked push for power at any price, without any regard for political principle or the true needs of the vast majority of voters.

Donal Blaney: Never miss a political meeting if you think there's the slightest chance you'll wish you'd been there

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

It’s often said that life is a series of regrets. For those who are truly interested in politics, one of the most frequent regrets is missing a meeting that others wax lyrical about for weeks (or even years) on end.

I was privileged to hear Enoch Powell speak on two occasions, neither of which was televised or recorded for posterity. Regardless of one’s views of Powell, it cannot be disputed that he was one of the most influential and important political figures of the past fifty years.

I also had the privilege of hearing then Labour leader, John Smith, when I was at university a few weeks before his death. Many of us discussed earnestly whether or not we should attend what was essentially a Labour Students event. We feared being a focal point of abuse and invective and also thought that by boycotting this speaker meeting, we would be making some kind of (still unclear even to this day) statement. Thankfully common sense prevailed, we attended, we entered into banter with John Smith during his remarks and I have a memory that will last a lifetime of attending a speech given by a principled, if misguided, statesman.

By contrast I was unable to attend the 2005 Conservative Party Conference as I was working in the Caribbean. I therefore missed out on seeing in person the leadership hustings that were pivotal in propelling David Cameron into the pole position. Despite seeing Cameron and Davis’ speeches on tape since then, I missed out not only on hearing the speeches given live at the time but also perhaps more importantly I missed out on seeing first hand the fascinating manoeuvring of the rival candidates’ lieutenants and supporters. 

Donal Blaney: Lessons for Britain from the American conservative movement

Taken from Donal's speech at the ConservativeHome Awards

Why is it that at the same time our conservative cousins have been so successful across the wider Anglosphere – most notably in the United States, Australia & Canada – the British Conservative Party has languished in the polls and lost three successive general elections. 

Even when the Republicans lose control of the House and Senate, the Democrats can only seize power by running conservative candidates who back gun ownership, oppose abortion and extol the virtues of lower taxes. 

Rather than focusing on the merits or otherwise of tax cuts, A-Lists, modernization and so on, I want to focus in these remarks on the lessons for British conservatives to learn particularly from the American Conservative Movement.

Donal Blaney: Actions and consequences

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

This week’s results from the US mid-term elections brings home the importance of recognizing that actions have consequences. 

Jim Talent’s opposition to stem-cell research, Rick Santorum’s unbending conservatism and unfortunate remarks about homosexuals, George Allen’s unguarded use of language, Conrad Burns’ association with a disgraced lobbyist, Lincoln Chafee’s perpetual flip-flopping, Mike DeWine’s failure to campaign with enough gusto – all of this had the consequence of the loss respectively of Senate seats in Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Montana, Rhode Island and Ohio. 

These consequences could have been avoided in some, if not all, of these states if different actions had been pursued by these incumbent Senators. This is particularly the case when one thinks of how George Allen, previously considered a likely presidential candidate in 2008, managed to lose Virginia. A series of own-goals seem to have put pay to a political career that had seen Allen secure a number of fine achievements from his time as Governor of Virginia (and which gubernatorial achievements, in turn, had seen him successfully elected to the Senate). 

Donal Blaney: Effort is admirable. Achievement is valuable.

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

This week’s Law of the Public Policy Process seems, at first glance, to be blindingly obvious. There is no point working to hard doing something (or even appearing to be doing something) if, at the end of it all, nothing is achieved. 

Effort is indeed admirable – and assuming that people in the political sphere will put in the requisite effort is a dangerous assumption to make. All too many association officers, candidates, parliamentarians and even ministers seem to confuse doing or saying a lot with the more important concept of achieving a lot. Achievement cannot, of course, be attained without effort but effort does not always result in adequate levels of achievement. 

Take as examples a host of organizations whose founders launch them in a blaze of publicity and whose leaders put in an undoubtedly high level of effort. Conservative Insight was launched in the late 1990s as a vehicle to energise conservative-inclined graduates but died within a year or two. Contrast this with the successes, decried though its aims may be, of Women to Win. 

Donal Blaney: Make the steal more expensive than it's worth

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Cross-dressing is very much in fashion. I am not referring to transvestites as such, although there do seem to be more and more budding Eddie Izzards out and about even in spa towns today. I am, in fact, referring to the preponderance of political cross-dressing.

Who would have thought, even a few months ago, that it would be Labour politicians – not Powellite Conservatives – who would be calling for Muslim women to be lectured not to wear the veil.

Likewise who would have anticipated that it would be the Liberal Democrats, not the Tories, who would campaign for lower taxes for ordinary working and middle class families.

Similarly who would have countenanced that it would be the Tories – and not Labour – who would be advocating levying green taxes, opposing the expansion of grammar schools and calling for more distance in Britain’s relationship with the United States.

We truly live in interesting times when political alliances are being redefined with reference to national security, environmental issues, Europe and the economy. Many conservatives have more in common with Tony Blair on the War on Terror than they do with the approach adopted by the current Conservative Party leadership. Eurosceptic Tories have more in common with Bennite socialists in their attitude to the EU than with One Nation Tories (or, so it seems, many of their own MEPs judging from this week’s vote by the EPP in favour of all nation states adopting the Euro).

Donal Blaney: All gains are incremental; not all increments are gains

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

It will come as no surprise to learn that I remain a proud supporter of Thatcherism. I am convinced that the underlying values espoused by Margaret Thatcher, Norman Tebbit, Nick Ridley and Cecil Parkinson – lower taxes, self reliance, national pride, freedom of choice – are the values of a far larger number of people than the militant modernising tendency of our Party would like to believe. 

The death this week of Lord Harris, the great stalwart of the Institute of Economic Affairs and builder of Britain’s fledgling free-market movement, is yet another reminder that the great figures of the past are leaving us with increasing regularity for the next world. 

With few figures from the last period when the Conservative Party underwent a radical policy review during the period from 1974-79 now still alive, it is important not to forget the lessons to be learned from that period and to apply them to today’s debates.

Donal Blaney: Governing is campaigning by different means

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Something happens to politicians when they stand for office. It’s not so much that they forget who put them where they are, although that seems to be an increasingly common factor. It’s not that they forget their principles, although certainly many seem to do this as well (assuming they had any to start with). It’s that their IQs fall a dozen or so points. They forget everything they ever learned from the days when they were mere mortals, or “activists” as they are more usually known. 

When politicians are seeking the approval of voters during an election campaign, they focus on campaigning so as to secure victory. Every leaflet, every public statement, every speech focuses on ensuring the success of the campaign. 

Yet all too often the tactics that were so successfully deployed in opposition or during an election campaign are ignored once victory has been secured. The Machiavellian arts of persuasion, message repetition and pre-emptive rebuttal fall by the wayside and are replaced by managerial and technocratic centred administration. 

Donal Blaney: Choose your enemies as carefully as you choose your friends

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Having attended public school at the tail-end of the era of fagging and when physical punishments were still permitted (and even encouraged) it was quickly impressed upon me that the key to my survival at Tonbridge was to choose my enemies as carefully as I chose my friends. Tempting though it might be to land a punch in a scrum on a larger opponent, common sense dictated that it was more sensible to keep such older colleagues onside rather than to alienate them.

It is an equally important lesson in politics not to make unnecessary enemies – and one that some in high office seem to have forgotten, not least those advising David Cameron. 

Tim Montgomerie, the esteemed editor of Conservative Home, is the leading proponent of “the And Theory” of conservatism. Tim espouses the virtue of combining tradtionalist messages on, say, firm immigration and asylum control with a modernizing message calling for a compassionate response to those truly in need and a commercial attitude towards skilled migrants. 

Having started out as a purist I must confess to having been won over by this argument during the past 12 months or so. I remain convinced that a campaign that focuses heavily on lowering taxes and encouraging personal responsibility would be particularly popular today when tax rates continue to rise inexorably. For such a campaign to be successful it would necessitate a sustained and vigorous extolling of the moral virtues and imperatives of a low tax economy. 

This week’s Conservative Party conference suggests that such an approach has again been neglected and that we will run the risk, for a fourth election running, of attempting to fatten the tax-cutting calf on market day (to use Lynton Crosby’s analogy) – assuming that we even advocate lower taxes at all.

The current strategy of the Cameroons has admittedly been clever insofar as it is has focused on the various groups that have been ignored in the past and that the Party has sought to befriend – environmentalists, civil libertarians, homosexuals, the liberal intelligentsia. The Cameron approach has been to make it no longer a social taboo to be a Conservative and to seek to placate those groups that had hitherto adopted a knee-jerk anti-Tory stance.

It is also clearly part of that strategy not only to distance the current leadership from the failures of the past (and, for some reason, the successes too) but also to deliberately pick fights with those whose views do not accord with the current fashion. As well as assailing those bete-noires of the BBC, Norman Tebbit and Simon Heffer, the Cameroons have sought to show that they are no longer bosom buddies with the likes of The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and even The Sun – all three of which newspapers have coincidentally adopted an increasingly hostile tone towards both Cameron and the Conservative Party in recent weeks. 

Showing that the Party has changed by slaying policy dragons and cultural taboos may be one thing. Provoking discontent and disunity among traditional supporters, volunteer activists, lifetime voters and newspaper columnists on whose support the Party depends is another matter altogether and it is surely not wise. 

At a time when the Party’s poll ratings are not exactly reaching the stratospheric levels of New Labour a year after Tony Blair assumed his party’s leadership, it would seem to be a very risky strategy indeed to assume that the current leadership’s position is as unassailable as some cheerleaders would have us believe. 

The traditional weapon of the Conservative Party has been loyalty – a double-edged sword that has been wielded aggressively against leaders who have overplayed their hands in the past (Heath deservedly, or who have been perceived to be electoral liabilities - IDS unfairly). Conservatives, often derided in the past as “the stupid Party,” historically exhibited an all-encompassing desire for power, often at the expense of all else, including principle. 

While the desire for power may be stronger after 9 years in the wilderness than a desire for governance on a philosophically sound basis, it must surely not be pursued at the expense of causing levels of division or discontent that see the traditional Tory base disintegrating. The “And Theory” of conservatism is the pragmatic and politically astute way forward and yet instead enemies are being made with gay abandon – and enemies in politics have long memories.

Previous entry in this series: The Conservative Party needs a conservative movement

Donal Blaney: The Conservative Party needs a conservative movement

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Despite repeated electoral successes throughout the 1980s, the Right failed to win the cultural battle that the Left began waging in the 1960s. A steady infiltration of schools and universities was followed by a concerted assault on the prison system, the judiciary and, recently, the police.

The Left has managed to sustain itself through the efforts of the ever-growing class of politically motivated employees of the state (self-styled public servants), trades unionists and other taxpayer-funded interest groups who can all rely on the instinctive support of their fellow travellers in the mainstream print and broadcast media and their spokesmen in Parliament.

In contrast, those who have traditionally been seen as being on the Right – campaigners for standards in education, Eurosceptics, Atlanticists, those favouring choice and less state control in health and education and so on – have failed to work together to secure their desired ends.

In their seminal book, The Right Nation, Adrian Wooldridge and John Micklethwait graphically illustrate the concerted building of a conservative movement from the 1970s onwards. If you read no other political book this year, please read this book.

It is the development of this true conservative movement – a coalition of groups which share some, but not by any means all, of their goals – that saw the victories of Reagan in 1980 and 1984, Bush 41 in 1988 and Bush 43 in 2000 and 2004, as well as the seizure of Congress in 1994. Groups such as the National Rifle Association, Americans for Tax Reform and the Christian Coalition worked alongside other libertarians, social conservatives, economic liberals, foreign policy hawks and everyday citizens to create a movement that will still prove difficult to defeat in November, despite the challenges of Iraq and Afghanistan.

So in Britain, a true conservative movement needs to be developed. Countryside campaigners, Eurosceptics, fiscal conservatives, royalists, environmentalists, family values activists, voluntary sector workers and so on all need to work together to achieve their goals.

This week in Bournemouth, maximum effort should be expended on the fringes of the main conference hall to continue building a true conservative movement in Britain. There will be many occasions when the goals of libertarians and social conservatives – on issues such as gay rights, abortion and so on – do not coincide. But the fact is that libertarians and social conservatives would both surely prefer a Conservative government – even one led by David Cameron – than yet another four years of fiscal irresponsibility, EU integration and political correctness.  The shields logo of ConservativeHome represents this movement in graphical form.

For such a movement to flourish, it must be recognized by the Party that its component parts may well on occasions disagree with the official Party line. Rather than seeing such disagreements as evidence of wanton disloyalty that needs to be stamped on (as some of the more hysteric posters on this site seem to argue should be the case), the Party should recognize that there are many things that the wider conservative movement can and should be saying that the Party cannot and should not.

The Taxpayers’ Alliance is leading the fight against ever more wasteful government expenditure and the seemingly unending growth of the state. The Centre for Social Justice works tirelessly with voluntary groups in tackling the tragedy of social decay that has only been exacerbated by the state.

For the conservative movement to grow as quickly as we might all wish, its leaders need to work yet more closely together for the common good. Members of the conservative movement need to help each other in times of difficulty. Victory can be ours at the next election and the leftward cultural shift that would have made Chairman Mao proud can be reversed. But this can only happen if we build a truly diverse conservative movement, led by visionaries who work together and who learn the lessons from the successes of the conservative movement in the United States, Canada and Australia.

The Conservative Party alone cannot win the next election, nor particularly can CCHQ (even if it is based in Millbank Tower). But a conservative movement working to further conservative values and a conservative agenda can help deliver victory.

***
Previous entry in this series: Sound doctrine is sound politics

Donal Blaney: Sound Doctrine is Sound Politics

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

As will have become pretty obvious to all but the most political illiterate, my views are broadly "Thatcherite" in outlook. I instinctively believe in an independent nation, free markets, a smaller state, lower taxes, traditional values and I stand alongside those who oppose political correctness, multiculturalism and a headlong rush into a European superstate, In the parlance of conservative activists of a certain generation, I am "sound" and "One of Us".

And yet this week's Law of the Public Policy Process does not apply only to Thatcherites. Indeed in today's political discourse, who is NOT a Thatcherite? Last weekend's Sunday Times carried a fascinating article arguing that Gordon Brown - far from being the socialist bogeyman many of us believe him to be - is actually more of a Thatcherite than Tony Blair.

This week's Law - that sound doctrine is sound politics - stresses the centrality in politics of principle. It does not ignore the fact that politics is the art of the possible - that would be naive. But it does stress that a coherent philosophy is essential as the starting point from which any subsequent derogations or deviations may then flow.

Donal Blaney: Expand the leadership

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

This week has seen yet another opinion poll showing that voters no longer trust politicians (although their views of their local MPs were more favourable). Much of this is, I am sure, down to the manipulation of the media pioneered by the New Labour machine. In an era of uncertainty, voters look to their leaders to lead rather than to follow the results of focus groups. Empty vessels who parrot inane platitudes and soundbites are rightly less trusted than those handful of politicians who say what they mean and mean what they say. And yet the perception is that the former are in the ascendancy.

Politics is ultimately about power. The Prime Minister this week reminded the TUC that doctrinal purity is no substitute for controlling the levers of powers and being able to enact at least some of the agenda that matters to the TUC and its members.

Politics is also about hubris. Too often throughout history, political leaders have remained in office way past their sell by dates after convincing themselves (and allowing their coterie of advisors to convince them) that they are indispensable. It happens to third rate leaders such as Blair and Prescott as well as to great statesmen such as Churchill and Thatcher. In a nation without formal term limits,
persuading political leaders to leave centre stage is very difficult indeed.

Donal Blaney: Winners aren't perfect: they just make fewer mistakes than their rivals

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

I expect that most conservatives have enjoyed this week more than any week in politics since April 1992. The sight of the Labour Party indulging in what Peter Mandelson has called "a moment of madness" has certainly cheered conservatives' spirits in the run-up to the annual conference season.

How long ago seem the difficult days of the 1990s - a period when "New Labour" was given the benefit of the doubt and journalists and voters alike nodded sagely when Tony Blair described himself as "a pretty straight kinda guy".

Everything that Blair touched seemed to turn to gold. The Grid was adhered to. Iron parliamentary discipline was the order of the day. Ministers pursued initiatives with vigour. And it seemed that nothing that the Conservative Party did or said made the slightest bit of difference.

That is not to say - as some Cameroon revisionists would like us to believe - that the period from May 1997 to December 2005 was wasted. William Hague kept the Party together when a split was a real possibility. His good-natured, confident demeanour kept us believing that maybe one day our time might come again. Iain Duncan Smith lanced the boil of the European debate and pioneered the "compassionate conservative" agenda that the current leadership are passing off as their own. Michael Howard instilled discipline among MPs and persuaded voters that the Party was a valid electoral force again.

Donal Blaney: Never give a bureaucrat a chance to say no

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

For much of its existence, the Conservative Party relied on the votes of electors who supported the Party because their families had always voted Conservative and, in an era of deference, it was best to let the patrician elites who were born to lead to get on with the business of running the country. This era of deference was shattered by the election of a series of outsiders to the leadership of the Party, beginning with Ted Heath, continuing through Margaret Thatcher, John Major, William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith, and ending with Michael Howard. With the election of David Cameron as leader last December, the Party seems to have moved away from being led by an outsider. With the era of deference only a distant memory, was this a wise approach to adopt?

It is my view that the Conservative Party is at its best when it stands for the individual, the family and communities against the might of the State. Lord Acton's oft-quoted maxim that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is certainly borne out by the behaviour of civil servants and bureaucrats since time immemorial.

I appreciate that those who wish to appease the BBC & Guardian will tell me that for the Party to adopt an approach of bashing and denigrating civil servants and those who work in the public sector is self-defeating and, indeed, electorally suicidal. I may even be accused of protesting too much when I say that I am well aware that many public service employees, civil servants and - yes, let's call them what many of them are - bureaucrats, do a good job and they work hard for little pay. But there is another way to look at my approach.

Donal Blaney: You can't beat a plan with no plan

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Churchill once remarked to a colleague that history would judge him kindly. His colleague asked Churchill how he could be so sure. "Simple", replied the great man. "I will write the history".

Revisionism is very much the order of the day. Even this week we have seen that there are attempts by naval historians to rewrite the accepted history of the Battle of Britain so that the Royal Navy gets a greater share of the credit for the efforts of "the Few".

There has also been an increasing amount of revisionism in the Conservative Party since the Party's 2005 election defeat. It seems as though the Party leadership - or rather its more militant and unforgiving cheerleaders - are doing their best to rewrite history at every opportunity so as to justify "the Project" and to show how it is succeeding on its own terms.

For example, David Cameron (in his exclusive article for ConservativeHome this week) repeated the assertion that those who voted for him in the leadership election knew exactly what they were voting for and therefore that he has a ringing mandate to change the Party from top to bottom. I know many people who voted for David Cameron in preference to David Davis on the back of Cameron's pledge to leave the EPP - a cast iron commitment in an otherwise vague manifesto. That pledge has of course been broken and the lack of an open revolt should not be seen as acquiescence by those who feel betrayed by Cameron's decision to remain in the EPP for a further three years. In contrast while there were general hints as to what Cameron's "modernising" agenda might mean for the Party, it was not clearly spelled out. The perceived subjugation of local associations, the introduction of quotas and affirmative action and the apparent denigration of long-serving activists (many of whom had been active in the Party long before David Cameron went to Eton) were not uppermost in the minds of those who voted overwhelmingly for Cameron in the leadership election. And yet revisionism justifies repeating the assertion that the leadership has a mandate to change the Party hook, line and sinker.

Another example of revisionism (akin to that which occurred in 1997 when Cool Britannia was being sold to the public as a concept) is the way in which it is asserted, wholly incorrectly, that the Party lost the 1997, 2001 and 2005 elections because it was too right wing and, therefore, anyone who opposes "the Project" is some kind of swivel-eyed lunatic who wants to fight those elections again on the same platforms adopted in 1997, 2001 and 2005. Ask any conservative who believes in lower taxes, a smaller state, repatriation of powers from Europe, strict immigration and aggressive law and order policies and they will respond to this straw man argument by proclaiming "if only"!

The Conservative Party did not campaign in the last three elections with any conviction whatsoever on the issues mentioned above, in particular in relation to lowering taxes. Following Lynton Crosby's maxim that "you cannot fatten a pig on market day", any genuine attempt to campaign on a radical tax-cutting agenda requires that that campaign occurs over a number of years, not a handful of weeks. 

Donal Blaney: Remember it's a long ball game

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

I have remarked before that politics and life mirror each other in a number of ways. There are times in life when it seems as though all of the troubles of the world are weighing you down and there is no hope for the future. Many of us find solace in our faith. Others turn to drink or drugs. In reality problems that seem unending at the time are, in reality, never as bad when viewed subsequently. The same is the case in politics.

John Howard was an unsuccessful leader of the Liberal Party in Australia who led his Party to defeat before subsequently returning from oblivion to lead his Party to victory. Jeb Bush failed in his first attempt to win the gubernatorial election in Florida before subsequently winning twice. Richard Nixon came back from defeats when running for President and, subsequently, governor of California. Bill Clinton was humiliated in 1988 before returning to win in 1992 and 1996. Closer to home, one need only consider the political rehabilitations of Neil Kinnock, Chris Patten and Peter Mandelson (all of whom took the same path to the European Commission).

Donal Blaney: Don't rely on being given anything you don't ask for

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

This week's Law of the Public Policy Process applies both to politicians when dealing with the electorate and with fundraisers.

Politicians and their advisors spend an inordinate amount of time becoming intoxicated in the intrigue and gossip of the Westminster Village. They often forget that the vast majority of voters do not follow the minutiae of twists and turns on issues that matter to the chattering classes of Westminster. Subtle nuances of policy are often lost on voters who more often remember telling phrases repeated ad nauseam ("Tough on Crime, Tough on the Causes of Crime"). Even if a party embarks on a substantive policy change (such as Labour's abandonments of Clause IV, unilateral nuclear disarmament and withdrawal from the EEC) those substantive policy shifts are not known or appreciated by voters.

Lynton Crosby memorably said, when talking about the perceived lack of success of the Conservatives' pledge in 2005 to cut taxes, that "you cannot fatten a calf on market day". For a tax cutting pledge to be believed by voters as being desirable (and not merely evidence of opportunism) it would need to be campaigned for well in advance of polling day. While pulling a policy rabbit out of a hat may work among a narrow parliamentary caucus, it does not work when dealing with the broader electorate. By not having campaigned consistently, and therefore convincingly sought a mandate, for tax cuts in 2005 it was little surprise that the electorate did not give the Conservatives the chance to enact tax cuts in government.

Donal Blaney: "Don't treat good guys like you treat bad guys"

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Politicians and the mainstream media often furrow their brows and earnestly opine about the lack of interest in politics. Their self-serving analysis is wrong. This supposed lack of interest is not in politics or political issues per se. It is in the party political and parliamentary system and is borne out of cynicism and the fact that elected politicians seem to fail to respond to the concerns of voters - either because they are unable to deal with those concerns (because they are blocked by civil servants or EU law precludes action in Westminster) or because they are unwilling to.

Party politics is a volunteer effort. With the exception of agents and those employed in CCHQ, the Party's army of campaigners are volunteers with busy lives and everyday concerns that weigh on their minds.   It seems that this is all too often forgotten by the powers that be and it is a problem that is getting worse, not better.

The problem seems to have been exacerbated by the reforms pioneered by arch-moderniser Archie Norman which saw the formal creation of the Conservative Party as a legal entity (until 1998 the Party was a loose federation of independent local associations). It is those reforms that saw greater centralisation of control and the removal of power from local associations. The rationale for this was financial and organisational. Associations were assured that by pooling their resources, their campaigns would be more efficiently run than ever before. The converse has been the case.

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, the most frightening words to a Conservative activist most surely are: "I'm from Central Office and I'm here to help".

Donal Blaney: Staff is policy

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

Much of the Conservative Party's difficulties over the past decade was blamed on the Party leadership's inability to present its message effectively to the media. This was in part due to the fair wind the mainstream media gave the Blair government for much of its first two terms. It was also due, however, to the inherent bias in the broadcast media that has still yet to be addressed (although the impending launch of an internet-based television channel involving ConservativeHome itself will help).

However was it right to place the blame at the doors of the media? Could it instead be seen as a cop-out to blame the bias of the BBC and the laziness of print journalists who allowed themselves to be bullied by Alastair Campbell for so long? After all it was Enoch Powell who commented some 30 years ago that a politician who complains about the media is the same as a mariner complaining about the sea.

An alternative explanation may lie in the content of the message itself and the calibre of those presenting it. This is less palatable for politicians to accept but it is worth considering further in the context of this week's Law of the Public Policy Process - that staff IS policy.

This Law essentially states that it is as important - if not more important - for the right people to be in place, rather than merely to focus on policy or message. Margaret Thatcher realised this when she ensured that the key economic and industrial portfolios in her governments were filled by "true believers" such as Howe, Lawson, Biffen, Joseph and Tebbit.

Blair similarly chose a tightly-knit group of loyalists as his coterie: Mandelson, Campbell, Byers, Blunkett and Milburn. In recent years - endeavouring to learn from Thatcher's failure to ensure her legacy was preserved after her demise - Blair has moved to ensure that the likes of Milliband, Blears and Jowell assume roles of greater importance.

Donal Blaney: In politics, nothing moves unless it is pushed

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

When Britain truly ruled the waves, the sun never set on the Empire and a quarter of the globe was coloured pink, the country was governed by a civil service the size of a District Council and by parliamentarians who saw their role as being part-time. As our global status and responsibilities declined, so the civil service has grown by a frightening degree and our parliamentarians are now expected to be full-time legislators. If home-grown laws devised by bureaucrats and poorly scrutinised by the new class of professional politicians are not enough, it is also necessary to factor in the fact that over three-quarters of our laws are drawn in Brussels by the unelected European Commission.

Rather than having time to consider great issues of state, most MPs today find themselves acting out the role of glorified social worker and in redirecting complaints to local authorities or the Citizens’ Advice Bureau, much to their chagrin given that many of them thought that becoming an MP would see them getting the chance to shape the future of the nation.

With so many competing demands on the time of parliamentarians, it is no surprise that it is difficult to get them to focus properly on issues that matter to their constituents. This is even more the case when those issues are not being promoted aggressively by the media and cultural elites who have seemingly unbridled power and influence under this government.

Donal Blaney: In politics, you have your word and your friends; go back on either and you're dead

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

"Read my lips: no new taxes". These are the six words that destroyed George H W Bush's presidency and helped ensure the election of Bill Clinton in 1992. Bush caused such disaffection among the conservatives who had elected Reagan in 1980 and 1984 - and who had ensured Bush's victory as a favour to "The Gipper" - that millions of those conservatives could not bring themselves to vote for Bush again in 1992. Indeed many voted for Ross Perot instead. Bush 41 had broken a crucial rule of the public policy process. Your word is your bond - if you break it, you are toast.

Likewise our own Party after the 1992 election. I recall attending a Conservative Students conference soon after that election when Michael Portillo was still Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Portillo was pressed as to whether it was a breach of the 1992 manifesto pledge 'not to increase taxes', for taxes to have been increased soon after John Major's re-election. The Chief Secretary replied that the pledge had in fact stated that the Party "had no plans to increase taxes" and that the pledge had not been broken. Economic circumstances had conspired to force an increase in taxes and it was therefore not the case that any plans to increase taxes had existed when the pledge had been made. Such sophistry did not persuade the student audience and, combined with Black Wednesday, the Party's tax increases helped contribute to the loss of the Party's record for economic competence.

The consequences of betraying your friends in politics can be fatal too. Tony Blair kept Peter Mandelson close to him even after he was twice forced to leave the Cabinet and he has likewise not alienated David Blunkett (who has also left the Cabinet twice in disgrace). Charles Clarke, on the other hand, seems to take the view that Blair has gone back on an agreement they entered into when Clarke became Home Secretary (namely that Clarke would be given time to sort out the mess in the Home Office created by Straw and Blunkett). When Blair capitulated to media pressure and sacked Clarke, Clarke took it very badly and he is clearly now a man on a mission looking to destroy Blair's premiership.

What lessons does this week's rule have for today, if any? David Cameron gave as clear a pledge as is seen in politics by saying that the Conservative MEPs would leave the EPP. William Hague made it clear that it would happen in months, not years. Yet this week we learn that Tory MEPs will not leave the EPP until 2009. More startling still is the threat to those principled MEPs who made it clear they would keep David Cameron's pledge for him - they have been told in no uncertain terms that they will have the whip withdrawn and they will not be permitted to stand as Conservative candidates in 2009 if they leave the EPP before 2009.

In an era where the electorate is increasingly disillusioned with politicians who fail to keep their promises and with the culture of spin and political lie machines, David Cameron set out his stall with clarity. We were told that a Cameron-led Conservative Party would be "a no spin zone" and that when David Cameron said something, he meant it. It was for this reason, for example, that the Party has eschewed over-promising on tax cuts lest the books are in a worse state than is feared if and when the Party takes power at the next election.

William Hague is perceived to have done himself little credit when he tried to argue on the Today programme that the EPP pledge has been met because the announcement of the impending departure was made within months and not years. The sorry truth is that the pledge made by David Cameron - which lured many Eurosceptics such as Douglas Carswell MP to his cause when his campaign was at a low ebb last summer - has been broken. The one concrete thing that Cameron could deliver as leader of his Party has not been delivered. It can be blamed on Merkel and Chirac. It can be blamed on Caroline Jackson and the leadership of the EPP. It can even be blamed on spineless Eurosceptics in other EU states. It matters not. The fact is that the Party and its MEPs remain members of an avowedly federalist grouping that I would wager would barely gain the support of 10% of the Party's membership if its views, achievements and aims were made known to activists.

The EPP pledge may be said by many to be irrelevant to most electors and that is probably true. But it has totemic status for the Party's volunteers. A pledge was given and it has been broken. These are now dangerous times because trust, once lost, is very hard (if not impossible) to regain. David Cameron cannot get away from the fact that a vast swathe of the Party's membership in the Commons, Brussels and in constituencies will feel badly let down by what has happened this week. It may even be the case that many on the Right who had kept their counsel until now on Project Cameron may no longer feel compelled to do so anymore.

Open dissent would be a pity as it is rarely ever a good decision to wash one's dirty linen in public. But behind the scenes it will undoubtedly be the case that pressure on the leadership to promote, campaign on and deliver conservative policies (even if they are beautifully wrapped and gently sold) is now an absolute must. Without such an approach, it may not be long until dissent comes out into the open. And if we have learnt anything from the last 16 years, it is that such internecine warfare is not what we need if we are to win power. That said: if you go back on your word in politics, you will all too often end up dead.

***
Previous entry in this series: Moral outrage is the most powerful motivating force in politics.

Donal Blaney: Moral outrage is the most powerful motivating force in politics

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

I have written previously in connection with a related Law of the Public Policy Process (Politics is of the heart as well as of the mind: people don't care how much you know until they know how much you care). One of the great mistakes that the Conservative Party has made in recent years is that the smug bien pensant elites who took over the Labour Party in the 1990s have been able to appeal in an uncontested manner to voters' hearts. Conservatives won the battle of ideas but left the battle for voters' hearts wide open for Labour.

It seems that while the Cameroon approach is to moderate the Party's policy platform so as to broaden the Party's appeal, the Party is now also exhibiting moral outrage as a campaigning or presentational device. This may be a cynical viewpoint. The moral outrage so apparent this week in connection with the John Prescott affair may not be as a result of feigned indignation. It may be genuine. And it may be particularly genuine as a consequence of Labour having been in office for nine years and the wholesale lack of achievement of the Labour government.

It is certainly quite an achievement to make John Major's troubled final term in office (1992-97) seem to be competent, successful and unsleazy but the scandals surrounding John Prescott, Tessa Jowell, Peter Mandelson (twice), David Blunkett (also twice) and Cherie Blair (I have lost count) are managing to do just that.

The passage of time has certainly helped. In its earliest days in power, Blair's government was engulfed in the Ecclestone donation scandal but the Zeitgeist was very much against the Conservatives and in favour of Our Dear Leader, Teflon Tony. Now, after 9 years of underachievement and a growing smell in the air, the scandals are beginning to stick and the Party's moral outrage is starting to work to its advantage.

Donal Blaney: In moments of crisis, the initiative passes to those who are best prepared

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.


Roy Castle used to finish every edition of Record Breakers with a rendition of the worthy anthem "Dedication". Those who were in the Cub Scouts as young boys will remember that the motto was "Be Prepared".  And business seminars remind us that "Proper Prior Preparation Prevents Piss-Poor Performance". Winging it and flying by the seat of our pants are discouraged and yet all too often, human nature being as it is, we prepare inadequately for the challenges facing us.

Preparation is fundamental in politics. While the swing of the national pendulum is an important factor in the success of otherwise of local campaigns, there are innumerable examples where a properly planned, well-run local campaign can buck national or regional trends - witness the successes of independent candidates in Wyre Forest and Blaenau Gwent or the large swings in the parliamentary seats of Romford in 2001 and Hammersmith & Fulham in 2005.

Preparation is particularly important in a moment of crisis. At such times the rule book is thrown out of the window. The determining factor as to who comes out on top during such a crisis is the level of preparation beforehand.

As unappealing as it may be to reflect on the Nazis' success in seizing power in Germany in the 1930s, it cannot be ignored that Hitler and Goebbels ruthlessly exploited the crisis of the Reichstag Fire to great effect such that a communist activist was blamed for the fire (even though historians now believe that the Nazis themselves may have started the fire deliberately), communism was portrayed in the media as a direct threat to Germans and Hitler then painted himself as the only man to protect Germany from the Soviet threat (such that his elevation to Fuehrer the following year was presented as both inevitable and desirable).

The Bolsheviks had similarly exploited the domestic and military crises of 1917 to great effect in what was then Tsarist Russia. They also had a plan for when they took power. Roosevelt too exploited the financial crisis of the early 1930s to great effect in the United States so as to lead to the massive expansion of the role of the state in America during the Great Depression. Churchill's accession to power in 1940 was also as a result of his exploitation of the crisis of the impending fall of France to brilliant effect.

Blair's accession to the Labour Party leadership in 1994 is a case study in the ruthless exploitation of a moment of crisis. Casting one's mind back to John Smith's time as Labour leader (1992-94) it must be remembered that Margaret Beckett and Gordon Brown were far more highly favoured by both Smith and, seemingly, the Labour machine. And yet thanks to the efforts of Peter "Bobby" Mandelson and other New Labour cohorts, and the pact at La Granita with Brown, Blair ensured a crushing victory in the leadership election. The rest, as they say, is history.

There are parallels with David Cameron's victory. While it may be fashionable to believe that Cameron's campaign was a low-key affair consisting of a handful of true believers in his modernisation agenda - a latter day Band of Brothers - and that everything turned on Cameron's performance at the Party Conference, this is not an accurate portrayal at all.

The supporters of "modernisation" (which, for these purposes, I shall define as being a belief that the next election can only be won by repositioning the Party in the centre, by toning down policies on crime, immigration, taxes and Europe and by embracing a socially liberal agenda) had spent a number of years working on their project. The initial standard bearer, Michael Portillo, was only defeated in 2001 by some tactical voting engineered by the 92 Group of MPs to ensure a run-off between Ken Clarke and IDS. The modernisers then spent the next 2 years working behind the scenes, often undermining IDS' leadership in the process, to prepare for the next battle.  Organisations such as C-Change and Policy Exchange were born.

Realising they were not ready - and understanding that the 2005 election was likely to be another defeat for the Party for which they did not want to take the blame - they helped ensure that Michael Howard took power. And once Howard had lost, they moved to ensure that key adjutants were put in place in readiness for the ensuing leadership campaign (most notably Francis Maude assuming the role of Party Chairman). The impressive level of preparation saw a well-funded, brilliantly organised campaign among MPs, in associations, on campuses and in the media which reached its zenith with Cameron's own crushing victory. As with Blair, rather than resting on their laurels, the Cameroons have moved at lightning pace to reposition and rebrand the Party politically and to reform it internally.

There are of course examples of individuals who fail to exploit a moment of crisis and whose lack of preparation condemns them to failure. Butler after Suez. Butler (again) in 1963 on Macmillan's resignation. The Wets at the time of the initial loss of the Falklands. Kinnock during Westland. Kerry in the last US Presidential election. Thatcher's campaign team in 1990 was woefully under-prepared for the crisis of Heseltine's leadership challenge.

Such is the nature of a crisis that it cannot be predicted. Nonetheless contingency planning is essential. The contrast in leadership exhibited by Rudy Giuliani after 9/11 and New Orleans Mayor Nagin after Hurricane Katrina was stark. The key to dealing with such a crisis is preparation. Without preparation it will be nearly impossible to exploit a crisis to best effect. With preparation you are much more likely to do so.

***
Previous entry in this series: Keep a secure home base

Donal Blaney: Keep a secure home base

Every week the Co-Founder and Chief Executive of the Young Britons' Foundation, Donal Blaney, explains one of Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process. Morton Blackwell is the Founder and President of the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia.

This week's law has two meanings - it stresses the importance of a stable domestic life as well as the political importance of keeping core supporters onside.

The first of these two meanings is, I would hope, uncontroversial. A politician whose home life is stable is better able to perform his public role.

Occasionally there have been politicians who have been able to compartmentalize their lives, such as Bill Clinton. While Clinton's domestic arrangements and behaviour with a variety of women may have left more than a bit to be desired, it cannot be disputed that it didn't seem to do his powers of concentration any harm - indeed he seemed to thrive on the situation. Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher both had strong and happy marriages that gave them strength through difficult times. Tony Blair likewise clearly benefits from a strong family. The careers and lives of both Gordon Brown and William Hague were greatly helped by their marriages.

The second meaning - namely that it is important that a politician or party keep his or its core supporters onside - is perhaps more controversial in the current political climate.

Project Cameron is often portrayed by some as an abandonment of the core vote strategy supposedly followed by Hague, IDS and Howard between 1999 and 2005. To accept this argument, however, requires that one accepts that a core vote strategy was indeed pursued.