David Cameron: We must fast forward to the new Conservative Party

Key sections of speech:

HUMOUR: "Well it’s been a busy few months.  Charles Kennedy’s retired. Tony Blair’s about to retire.  He’s certainly taking his time over it… Soon I will be the longest serving leader of a major political party in the country.  But don’t worry, Gordon; don’t worry Ming…  I won’t be attacking my opponents for their youth and inexperience."  Reagan would have been proud of that line!

A HEALTHY PARTY: "We’ve signed up 20,000 new members – at a time when other parties are losing support."  Francis Maude said it was 25,000 yesterday!

HOUSING: "In 1997 the average deposit for a house or flat was around £5,000.  Today it’s approaching £25,000.  Put simply, we’re pricing our young people out of aspiration.  There is a new housing apartheid in Britain between those who already own their own homes… and those young people who look at their salaries, then look at house prices, and fear that they will never achieve that dream.  We need starter homes.  We need shared ownership.  We need more houses that are beautiful, environmentally sensitive, and above all, affordable.  We helped millions to buy their council houses in the 1980s.  And we must become the Party of aspiration once again."  The only major section on social justice within the speech.

GREEN TORIES: "Our planet is rapidly getting warmer.  The polar ice caps are melting.  Sea levels are rising.  Hosepipe bans in April.  What more evidence do we need?  We simply cannot afford to ignore it.  This Government hasn’t taken the environment nearly seriously enough.  We need to be the party that doesn’t tiptoe around the issue.  Instead of just far-off targets that we will never meet, we need binding targets for carbon emissions every year.  We can take a lead.  We can make a difference.  Imagine if twenty years ago I’d have told you that all our cars would be running on unleaded petrol…that we’d be recycling our waste on a daily basis… that houses in England would have solar panels on their roofs.  You’d have thought I was mad.  Well today I want this Party to lead a new green revolution.  Daring to imagine possibilities that seem a distant dream today.  Unleashing innovation, imagination, inspiration.  Setting a clear framework that brings forward the best technology, the brightest thinking, the boldest plans.  And setting a clear challenge for individuals, for households, for business and for government… a clear challenge that says: this is our planet, our future, our responsibility.  We’re all in this together, and together we can lead the way."  This section won loud applause.

PENSIONS: "The advance of science, medicine, prosperity means that we are living longer.  Forty years in work followed by forty years in retirement.  That could soon become everybody’s expectation.  It must surely be our mission to help each individual live each precious stage of their life to the full.  Filling in forms to get means-tested benefits?  What a way to treat the elderly, those who by any moral code most deserve our respect and support.  So let us set a clear direction.  Raising state pensions to reduce means testing.  And raising the retirement age to help pay for it.  We must lead the debate on pensions."  Nothing on Labour's £200 General Election year tax bribe.

NO TO ID CARDS: "Under my leadership, we’ll always strive to do the right thing.  That means saving our energy to oppose the government when it’s wrong.  Like on ID cards.  Labour can’t decide what it’s for.  They can’t control what it costs.  They can’t explain why they’re making it compulsory.  Labour’s plastic poll tax has no place in modern Britain.  It’s an ugly monument to the waste, chaos and vanity of intrusive, over-mighty government.  I promise you this….in office, we will pull it down."  The audience liked this commitment.

CHANGE WILL ONLY GET FASTER: "There’s so much we need to change in our country - we can’t afford to waste time going slow on changing our Party.  So now is not the time to put our foot on the brake.  Now is the time to press on the accelerator.  We must fast forward to the new Conservative Party.  I know some of you think we’ve had quite enough change for the time being.  I read the letters… Asking me to slow down… Telling me to take it easy… Sometimes reminding me to wear a tie… Well I say this.  Britain cannot wait while we take it easy.  We have a massive mountain to climb if we’re to win the next election.  If we falter on the way, then Labour will win again."

Missing topics: Iraq, Iran, Darfur, Tax, Immigration, Crime, UKIP, And Theory Of Conservatism.

Editor's overall verdict: Nothing new in this speech but a reaffirmation of David Cameron's leadership message of 'change'.  If David Cameron is to convince voters that this message is more than spin he will have to start taking difficult decisions soon on issues like green taxation, energy and pensions. 

Download full text of David_Cameron_speech.pdf

Comments

[Richard]

"What is this "European Model" ? The one the Germans are trying to ditch you mean ?"

Fair point. But I can't see much support for moving to the American system (which is actually far from being a genuine free market). We somehow need to find a middle position between the system we have now and a completely private system, as much as I believe such a system would be superior. Probably a topic for another thread though.

[Selsdon Man]

"A HEALTHY PARTY: "We’ve signed up 20,000 new members – at a time when other parties are losing support."

My local association has lost about 10% of its members. More are leaving or dying than joining.

[AlexW]

Reading the posts of Geoffrey Brooking and Annabel Herriot, I was interested in the presumption that "younger voters" are more likely to plump for a Cameron-style Conservatism. I'm not sure that this is necessarily true.

Instead, I have this hypothesis: Cameron Conversatism is particularly popular in the 35-44 demographic - middle-aged voters who were members of Generation X and were students in the days of High Thatcherism and recoiled at some of its excesses or perceived excesses ("get on your bike", "only failures ride buses", "no such things as society" etc.) This demographic is beginning to reach senior positions, particularly in the media, and it is notable that media support for Cameron tends to be strongest from columnists and commentators from this age range. Cameron himself is part of this age group. Whilst this group defines itself as young in relation to the baby boomers, it is better described as the "new Establishment" - between the "old Establishment" of baby boomers but older than the current generation of students and graduates who are only starting their careers and therefore have limited impact.

I would suggest that people aged below 35, and particularly below in the 18-25 demographic, are more sceptical of Cameron. Our political coming-of-age was under Blair, and instead of recoiling from the perceived harsh rhetoric of Thatcherism we have been disillusioned by the superficial and hollow posturing of Blair and his ilk. I believe (though I have no evidence beyond the anecdotal) that students and graduates are therefore less receptive to Cameron than those aged 35-44. Certainly most of the Conservatives I know are fairly hostile to Cameron; although this could simply be because student Tories are of a certain (right-wing) political disposition, or more ideological.

[Rick]

AlexW - a perceptive analysis - I am persuaded.

[Margaret]

He's missing the point of why the Tories lost the last 3 elections. Nu Labour pinched all their clothes, that is why they won.

Now, 8 years later, Cameron is trying to get his clothes back. That won't win him the next election. Blair has had his time and the public are fed up with him.

Touchy feely won't win the next election, people want tough talking, not "I feel your pain" rubbish.

[Richard Carey]

My local association has lost about 10% of its members. More are leaving or dying than joining.

Selsdon,

You link this to the overall message about a "healthy party" in Cameron's speech, but I'm interested to clarify a couple of points, not knowing your situation.

I'm interested to know what the Association that you refer to has tried to correct this for itself? If we've gained 20-25k members nationally, are there specific local factors that contribute to your issues? The Party locally in many areas does need some assistance, frequently, in identifying and marketing itself to potential members in different ways as we have done with key swing voters previously.

I know it is often difficult for Associations in this position to turn things round, especially identifying and gaining approval for seed funding for these kind of campaigning projects, but I strongly feel it is worthwhile.

Not all responsibility for change resides with the leadership. I have spoken to Assciation managements in the past who expected their new members to simply trot in off the street and hand over their subs!

[Rob Largan]

I have to agree with AlexW. The biggest thing I noticed was that the biggest supporters of Cameron seemed to be the older women, while the younger lot which I spoke to, mostly voted for Davis.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I would suggest that people aged below 35, and particularly below in the 18-25 demographic, are more sceptical of Cameron. Our political coming-of-age was under Blair, and instead of recoiling from the perceived harsh rhetoric of Thatcherism we have been disillusioned by the superficial and hollow posturing of Blair and his ilk."

You've hit the nail on the head there. Although for some reason, my contemporaries are far too receptive of the Liberal Democrats, who are the quintessential proponents of posture politics.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

I run into quite a few Harry Enfield-esque tory boys and girls. Conceited is one word which comes to mind. They tend to forget that there is more to politics than ideology. Still, the Lib Dems remain far and away the most popular political party amongst people of my age range, not just because of the war, mind. In Durham certainly, most of the Lib Dem votes came from students. Still, Labour remain the best at ensuring their members worm their way into students unions and NUS.

[Hannah]

I also, think David Cameron is on the right track to changing the Conservative party for the better.

[Rick]

most of the Lib Dem votes came from students.

Well it is an ideal "parked vote" - they are unlikely to form a government and they appeal to emotion rather than reason, and their is no consequence flowing from voting for them since you can vote for "manna from heaven" with Lib Dems and blame the electoral system for not delivering it.

The trouble is that the more the Conservatives retreat from the facts into breezy rhetoric the more they become remote from the idea of power.

The other day on German TV a Professor of Criminology said Germany had added 10.000 more cells in the past 5 years - I doubt Britain can say the same which is why early-release is economic not judicial or judicious

30 years ago Roger Bacon & Walter Eltis wrote a book "Britain's Economic Problem: Too Few Producers" - if the situation was bad then, it is dire now as the B of P deficit will show as oil and gas imports increase over coming years and living standards are depressed to fund it. The next Government will have the return to the kind of economic crises that North Sea Oil pushed aside for the past 30 years.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Maybe if we'd spent some of the money on renewables....

[Rick]

on renewables....

Really ?

http://www.energybulletin.net/8422.html

Digital TV increases electricity consumption;

Internet increases electricity consumption

But gas is essential for heating, so using it to generate electricity was a sure-fire way to deplete North Sea reserves and make Britain dependent upon imported LNG for heat and light

[matt wright]

There is a danger that the reactionary sections of our party live in their own little world set in the past. We do need to change - this is obvious if we are to win back swing voters. However it is right that we have to think about how we make these changes. I think Cameron has been right to try and change the perception of the party so that people will start listening to our message. However he needs to be careful and should avoid being blown off track by either those who want to go back to the comfort zone of the core vote or those that want to invent clause-4 moments of conflict. Members voted overwhelmingly for change but ironically there is an argument to say we are not yet getting any logical, practical idea of this change. People want to know what we stand for - what is modern conservatism in the 21st century? What activities are we to engage in to illustrate this change. Community projects would be logical. I feel Cameron has a natural grasp of this but needs to focus on this and a bit less on an inner circle of spin artists that always end up forcing leaders into a bunker,

Matt

[Rick]

the reactionary sections of our party live in their own little world set in the past.

Is that what they call tautology ? Or simply an "Aunt Sally".

It conveys no real information therefore it must be a slogan. If we adapt it to read the opposite does it make sense ?

the progressive sections of our party live in their own little world set in the future.

Not really, it is still just meaningless.

Maybe the obession with Party is the problem. We live in a country with One Man One Vote so maybe it is Voters that should be the focus not Party; and it is hard to believe that what the Conservative Party thinks it is doing is anything but confusing to voters....................we shall see.