Ten reasons for supporting Project Cameron

David Cameron's change agenda has entered its most testing period.  The opinion polls have not budged as much as his modernising followers had hoped.  Andrew Rawnsley described the problem in yesterday's Observer:

"David Cameron is a pilot who can't get his undercarriage up. His leadership of the Tory party left the runway with impressive speed, considerable élan and a strong following wind from a friendly media. But now he is struggling to gain any altitude."

David Cameron's great problem is that he is struggling to substantiate his change message.  He talks about his passion for the environment but, with the reports of the policy groups still more than twelve months away, he cannot offer any bold policy changes that substantiate his commitment.  There is no great environmentally-friendly tax reform or a big push towards a new, cleaner way of meeting Britain's energy needs.  On social justice there is no equivalent of Mrs Thatcher's sale of council homes.  On international development there is policy silence.

In order to bridge the gap between now and policy announcements we are presented with gesture politics.  There's Mr Cameron's forthcoming factfinding trip to Norway and there was Saturday's well-meant but cringe-making 'be the change' leaflet.  Mr Rawnsley thinks that Mr Cameron is vulnerable to a right-wing storming of the pilot's cabin.  Given the Tory parliamentary party's Messiah Complex you can never rule out an attempted putsch but Mr Cameron faces no credible threat to his leadership.  There are many good reasons for Tory activists to keep faith with the leader who won such an overwhelming mandate only four months ago.

I am disappointed with David Cameron's failure to consistently combine core Tory beliefs with his new priorities (through the 'politics of and') but listed below are ten reasons why the Tory leader continues to enjoy the confidence of ConservativeHome.com:

1. Police reform: The police remain one of the Britain's most unreformed public services.  There is a 'Nixon in China' element to why the Tories are best placed to shake up the police in the same way that Labour are best placed to undertake welfare reform.  David Cameron's appointment of Nick Herbert MP to the shadow police reform post suggests a seriousness of intent in this policy area.
2. Prisons: As noted only yesterday, on prisons Mr Cameron is following the 'politics of and'.  He is combining Michael Howard's 'prison works' policy - which was so successful in reducing crime in the 1990s - with a compassionate and prudent investment in offender rehabilitation.
3. Social justice: Anyone who was in Manchester and witnessed Friday's panel on social entrepreneurs would have been impressed with Mr Cameron's personal commitment to this subject.  The most encouraging aspect of the commitment is that it is authentically conservative.  Under IDS the social justice policy group is not looking to further fatten the dependency-inducing welfare state but to emphasise economic independence, stronger families and a freer, more innovative voluntary sector.
4. Support for marriage: As part of 'getting nasty' with the Tory Party, Michael Portillo wants David Cameron to drop his pro-marriage commitment but you can't deliver social justice if you don't strengthen the family.  The family provides more welfare in more holistic ways than the state could ever hope to. ConservativeHomers enjoyed a good discussion of marriage a couple of weeks ago and gravitated towards some practical ways of supporting society's most important institution of liberty.
5. No to ID cards: Saturday's Manchester speech made it clear that David Cameron is determined to abolish Labour's "plastic poll tax".  Many Conservatives who have no principled objections to ID cards have been converted to opposition by doubts over the cards' likely cost and efficacy.
6. Standing up to big business: Conservatives should be on the side of competitive markets - not a corporate state where big businesses collude with the government to create barriers to entry through regulations.  Eurosceptic Conservatives should remember that before the transformational work of Business for Sterling, FTSE-100 companies led the charge towards eurozone membership.  Small firms - and big firms with devolved internal structures - are the engine of the economy.
7. Tax cuts for enterprise: Last week George Osborne noted that business deserved tax relief if Britain plc is to stay competitive in the world economy.
8. EPP exit: A swifter exit would have prevented the Clarke-Jackson-Beazleyites digging into the pro-EPP trenches but this leadership contest pledge is a pointer towards Mr Cameron's Euroscepticism.
9. An open primary election for London Mayor: Done properly (not rushed) this open primary election could revitalise interest in the London party and be a model for a party that regularly invites the British people to help shape the Conservative agenda.  A medium-term aim of Francis Maude should be to harness the internet revolution and deliver a scale of public participation in the Conservative Party that will make it become the true political arm of the British people.
10. National security: This certainly won't please the more multilateral ConservativeHome readers but in William Hague and Liam Fox, David Cameron has appointed hawks to the vital international portfolios.  Liam Fox has rightly said that the military option must be kept open with regard to Iran.  William Hague's faith in a UN solution to the problems of Darfur is worrying but we must hope that this faith will quickly pass with a more sobre analysis of the ties that bind certain Security Council members to Khartoum's odious regime.

Comments

[James Maskell]

2 sounds like a half thought out fudge that could send signals to the public that we are still on the side of criminals.

4- Single mothers,unmarried couples and single people are going to find themselves disadvantaged.

5-Its not exactly like that is it? We allowed the Bill through. We accepted a compromise and thats all that matters. We can say we'll get rid of them if elected but the fact remains, we voted for this.

6-My concern is how exactly we plan on going about this...big business already has what it wants (a stranglehold on the market). The Conservatuves need to propose some extremely radical policies on this issue and I doubt very strongly Cameron has the cahones to drive the hard change through.

7-I half agree with this. Business cuts are required to free business but I would much better prefer a cut in personal taxes before it.

8-Im in a minority on this issue but I think we should stay in the EPP. I expect a hail of questions...

9-As many will know here, I dont like the idea of Open primaries due to the possibility of the system being manipulated by non Conservatives. Im not going to go back over that argument but Im very sure of my position here.

10- Part of it I disagree with. Im no hawk and opposed the War in Iraq on the grounds of false case for war. I think we should pull out as its getting clearly out of hand and the risk to our soldiers grows each day if the news reports are right. I think the policies on Darfur and Iran are OK but a tightening on Sudan would be welcome, short of sending troops in. Our armed forces are too stretched and being cut down from the inside (thanks Labour).

[Selsdon Man]

You have over-filled your kettle!

[michael]

I don't like the 'politics and' idea - it's a recipie for mixed messages and Cameron would be charged with being inconsistent.

I think the gap between between now and policy should be filled with a narrative.

Cameron should paint a picture of the type of society he wants to create - John Major did this very well in his early days when he talked of a society at ease with itself.

[James Maskell]

Ill donate some blood to balance it or maybe Ill pick up two pieces of litter to make up for it, Selsdon!

[Christina]

One problem for the And Theory is that understanding approaches tend to be soft approaches in most cases.

Consider recruit training in the Army, Navy and RAF.

These Armed Forces have an understanding approach in transforming civilian volunteers into soldiers, sailors and airmen/women. It isn't soft though, it is quite hard. I'm former RAF.

I'd like to see the same kind of thing for young offenders in particular. An understanding but challenging approach which aims to transform character.

Also, many young offenders have not had good role models in life, something like recruit training would provide them in the form of specialist prison officers who are more like drill instructors and outward bound instructors.

The ideal personnel would be former Armed Forces personnel, so it would be good for the Forces too.

I think that many young offenders are weak, rather than strong. That is what lack of discipline does. They are too weak to resist peers who challenge them to break the law.

[passing leftie]

Cameron's leadership makes me laugh. You lot really didn't know what you were letting yourselves in for here. And you can't even keep it together for six months. Where is the legendary steel and loyalty of the Tories, uniting behind their leader?

1 He's bang on here. Perhaps he could start with prosecuting police officers who let people die in custody, or beat the crap out of people for no reason. The funniest thing last year was to see countryside alliance people expressing suprise that the police would whack them them for no good reason - something other protesters have experienced for years.

2 Isn't this "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"? No change their then. Crime is a product of complex social factors, and it is the fear of being caught which is the strongest deterrent.

The British Crime Survey, generally recognised as the most accurate source of crime data suggests crime has been faliing since 1995.

3 Yes, we need social assistance with a side order of moralistic religious junk to make it palletable. We really need to subsidize evangelical time-share salesmen and Islamic fundamentalists.

4 Yes, marriage is superior to all other family stucture. If you are a single mother, or living in sin, screw you. We'll disadvantge your children too. Because after all those people already married need the most help, not those other sinful groups.

5 Get rid of ID cards... try not voting for them in the first place. But he has promised to get rid of them, I'll give him that.

6 Stand up to big business...

7 ...by giving them tax cuts. Nice one. The wealth gap is growing year on year, and you want to subsidize these scumbags. If you are going to cut taxes, how about some cash for people earning a pittance?

8 Leave the center right to do what? Sulk in a corner. If you hate the EU so much why bother sending MEPs to snout in the trough? If it's such a gravy train, let's see those MEPs not claiming their full allowances.

9 They will charge people to vote. That'll stop people from other parties from being bothered with this - as if they would give a monkey's anyway. Unless Ken is undemocratically deposed, he will win against anyone you can put up.

10 A great alternative to labour. Yet another bunch of lapdogs clinging on to American coat tails. At the very least, I would hope that a nationalistic party should show some pride.

[TimC]

"with the reports of the policy groups still more than twelve months away, he cannot offer any bold policy changes that substantiate his commitment"

One problem that we face is that if we come up with a truly innovative approach, nuLab will have no problem implementing it as their own policy, even if it is something that they would never have been able to think of themselves.

This leaves a dilemna between appearing light on detailed policy and timing announcements so that they don't get stolen.

[James Maskell]

Interesting point about the Policy Groups. Because of their creation the Conservative Policy Forum has been knocked down the policy creation priority list. Does the CPF have any prominence in Conservative policy creation anymore? Anyone here involved with the CPF have any views on this?

[James Cleverly]

It was very kind of Passing Leftie to remind us why we have to work so hard to get wooley thinkers like him/her out of government.

[Sean Fear]

Good to see Dave Spart contributing towards this message board. It's always helpful to be reminded why one needs to work to return a Conservative government.

Those are good points Editor. While I've been critical of quite a lot of what the Party leadership has done, it's important to remember that they have got several important things right, as well.

[Chad]

Hi TimC,

I agree, but isn't this dilemma more a flaw of the strategy?

If all you are doing is proposing a mixed-bag of policies then Labour can pinch the ones it likes.

However, if you instead create a small set of core and clearly definable values and ensure your policy announcements comply with these, then the public will begin to learn what you stand for.

With a clear set of definable values, the public will not just be able to understand why you have proposed a policy but it will also be able to judge for itself how future policies comply or don't comply with your core values.

These core values should not be a vague mess like B2L that it would be difficult for anyone from any party to object to. They need to be distinctive otherwise why would the public listen to you in the first place? They don't need me-too clones of other parties.

When you are driven by a core set of values and the public understand this, then they will also be able to judge for themselves when the opposition seeks to half-inch your bright ideas.

[James Maskell]

Indeed James. By the way, hows the campaign going?

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Having read these boards quite a lot I was under the impression that Cameron had no policies. I knew I must have been mistaken.

[Chris Palmer]

Surely those Conservatives who don't necessarily agree with everything that David Cameron says or does would acknowledge that a Conservative Government would be far more favourable than any Labour Government.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Not if there's a monster raving UKipper they can vote for.

[Chad]

Indeed Chris. But first we need a conservative opposition.

No-one is going to swap new labour for blue labour.

[passing leftie]

It was very kind of Passing Leftie to remind us why we have to work so hard to get wooley thinkers like him/her out of government.

My pleasure, but I am insulted that you think the New Labour apparatchiks have genuine left wing principles. I despise this authoritarian regime.

But the Tory leadership appears to be turning into the same amorphous creature as the New Labour clique. I'm suprised you can put up with it. At least you knew where you stood with Thatcher.

[James Cleverly]

James M,

The campaign is going well, new young members coming out of the woodwork and we have the hardest working set of council candidates that I have ever met.

Bringing this post back on topic, I feel that we should be selling our core beliefs at this point and then adding the policy detail later. “Policy lite” is OK as long as people can see where we are going and why.

If we push "Smaller, local and accountable" it will help people to understand why we stand up to big business, support small and start up businesses, oppose police mergers, oppose regional qangos etc.

If we push “Responsibility and Duty” rather than just thinking about rights, people will understand or support for social entrepreneurs, support for the family, reduction in the size of the state.

[Richard Bailey]

This "failure to gain altitude" rubbish is purely the creation of an ephemeral media with the attention span of a 3 year old.
They have nothing to write about, so they write about the fact that they have nothing to write about and come up with all sorts of ludicrous conclusions.

How sad is it that in 2006, after 200 years of moving with the times, we as a Party have become so fat and arrogant that we resist the changes necessary to rejoin the nation.

It should be perfectly obvious to all that the Party and the previous policies are unelectable and we have to do something about it. Cameron is right to tackle the image of the Party first.

The duty of those to the right of the Party is to get behind the agenda for change so that the Party gets back to power. Then they can make their case for tax cuts etc.

[Damian]

far more favourable

To whom?

As for the "policies" above, scarcely any amounts to anything like a policy. At most these are vague me-tooist (same as that Tony bloke) aspirations.

And as for the notion of "social justice" - well, as Hayek (whom we seem to be genuflecting to at No. 6) said:

As a weasel is alleged to be able to empty an egg without leaving a visible sign, so can these words deprive of content any term to which they are prefixed while seemingly leaving them untouched. [...] But while the rule of law and the market are, at the start, fairly clear concepts, the attribute "social" empties them of any clear meaning

In fact, this bit is better, because more specific:

Only human actions can be just or unjust; the task of government cannot be to create just conditions, but only to prevent unujust actions. To describe as just or unjust a state of affairs that men have not and could not have created, and to which most of them owe their existence, is giving expression to fantasies in socialist baby language.

I don't suppose the Boy-King's use of the term reflects any specifically socialist belief. I doubt he has any particular beliefs at all - beyond a belief that he, a man totally unfitted for the position, should be prime minister. But "baby language" is about right.

Baby-talk from the Boy-King.

[Chad]

With Cameron so passionate about the environment, do you think the Tories would do better with Davis at the helm and Cameron as the environment minister, and generally media-friendly senior minister?

That way you could have a leader who is protecting your core vote, and cleary a conservative (small c) with a young buck who is reaching out to the libcons.

Davis is the core, and Cameron is the 'and' to quote the Editor's preferred approach.

I voted for Cameron,and he is needed in the party, but I now regret choosing him for the leadership role over Davis.

When I saw the big word "CHANGE" behind Cameron at the conference it did indeed make me think of change, but maybe not the change he would like.

Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

[Sean Fear]

"we as a Party have become so fat and arrogant that we resist the changes necessary to rejoin the nation"

As far as I'm concerned, I'm part of the nation.

The problem with the "change agenda" (as Conservative modernisers describe it) is that it is intended to appeal to an incredibly narrow section of the population (broadly speaking, people living in N1, NW1, SW1 and W8 and their equivalents in some large provincial cities). This is a much smaller social group than either core Conservatives, or the average floating voter.

[Chad]

It would be interesting to have an almost "sliding doors" look back on what could have been different since December.

Davis in charge, Cameron pushing his passion for the environment (perhaps duoty leader and environment minister) and Fox at the FO, delivering his EPP pledge.

Would that be a better foundation for the future?

[True Blue]

Here are the actual policy commitments I can find. If anyone knows of any others, please add them. It would be great if our esteemed editor kept a record of these for reference.

Abolish ID cards, fix carbon emissions, raise the pensionable age, share the net proceeds of GDP between the public and private sector, abolish the current early release scheme, reduce business taxation, leave the EPP, change party funding.

[Editor]

This talk is unhelpful, Chad, and, frankly, given your own Imagine Party, you do not have the best interests of the Conservative Party at heart.

David Cameron is the Tory leader and there is no serious appetite in the Conservative Party for that to change. If we changed another leader we'd look absolutely incredible to the public.

What we need to focus on - and that's what this thread is about - is the party's policy agenda and priorities.

[Chris Palmer]

In case anyone was actually interested, here is a link to Chad's Imagine Party website : http://www.imagineparty.org/

[Chris Palmer]

This is a favourite of mine, Chad. I quote from the top of your website: "British political party promoting less politics and more love." Added to that, the interesting sunflower graphics on the website - is this a return to the 60's hippy flowerpower movement?!

[Chad]

:-) I don't think anyone could accuse me of not being transparent Chris. I use my real name etc.

Have you noticed though how many times other conservatives have come out and agreed with me? It's because we are discussing issues to make Britain better, not promoting blind tribalism.

Try to keep on subject please. I am open about who I am and what I believe.

Back to subject:
Do you think the Conservaitve Party would be in a better position with Davis at the helm, deputy Cameron as environment minister and Fox at the FO?

[Chad]

Tim,

Why is it unhelpful? I am not asking anyone to come and join me, I am open about what I believe.

I think the party has made a mistake. I voted for Cameron and accept my share of the blame.

It seems more than fair to ask what would have been different if Davis has been elected, surely?

The thread is about supporting team cameron, so it seems particularly relevant to compare it to the alternative.

[James Maskell]

True Blue...no more grammar schools.

[Derek]

John Lennon has written the party anthem. It sounds a bit too idealistic to me.

[Christina]

"EPP exit: A swifter exit would have prevented the Clarke-Jackson-Beazleyites digging into the pro-EPP trenches but this leadership contest pledge is a pointer towards Mr Cameron's Euroscepticism."

If we had withdrawn earlier, we would not have withdrawn into a new group, we would have had Conservative MEPs who were acting as independents in the EU Parliament.

It is better for the country that time is taken to build a new group first.

If Cameron were replaced as leader, we would be a laughing stock.

I suggest those who prefer Davis or Fox to Cameron, seek to emulate those 2 gentlemen who are not seeking to bring him down, but are working with him to make the Party the next Government.

If you don't have any faith in Cameron, why not have some faith in Davis and Fox? ie they know what they are doing.

[Christina]

PS

Reagan's 11th Commandment, something the progressive conservatives in the USA are keen on.

"Never speak ill of a fellow conservative."

[Paul Kennedy]

"If we changed another leader we'd look absolutely incredible to the public.

What we need to focus on - and that's what this thread is about - is the party's policy agenda and priorities". Editor

Totally agree, except I would suggest changing the word "incredible" to "stupid".

As a new activist and candidate (formerly a Right of Centre Independent) I am desperate for the leadership to come forward with some really meaningful policies and priorities for the country and in so doing, in my opinion, the Conservatives will start to look and sound like a party capable of Government. I am worried that if we are going to have to wait for 18 months or so, our credibility will suffer, and interestingly I think it was Oliver Letwin who has said that if there was a snap election in the meantime, policies would be forthcoming, which to me says a lot.

[Chad]

My point was intended to be constructive. Look at the LibDems, they picked the old hand for the helm, and placed the rising start Huhne into environment.

I just wondered whether a similar approach, with core-vote Davis at the helm with deputy Cameron bringing change and pushing the environment would be more effective.

Better to be a laughing stock now (though I disagree) than to lose the election later and go through all the pain again with lost years and an election behind you.

[True Blue]

Thanks, James.

No more grammar schools goes on the list.

A policy statement, true, but not much of a commitment. Margaret Thatcher approved the closure of more grammar schools than any minister before or since. No one has seriously suggested opening new grammar schools.

[Annabel Herriott]

Chad! You are really the individual versus the collective arnt you!! We have been plagued by it since 1867. It would be so nice to find another way. Try and find an old Daily T column of Bill Deedes. He listed every Tory leader and fate since Disraeli. Mostly dumped, and much good it did us. We will NOT get back into power until we have cleaned out our own furred up tubes. We have started the process. It is a truism that when an organism is being required to change, when that change is not that organism's choice, then it will fight to the death NOT to so change. That is what DC is up against right now. The beauty of it is, that most of the whinging can be done on site, and not on the high street, where it would put off any potential converts.Now just SHUT UP, go and busy yourself with your imaginary party, and leave us modern Tories to get on with the real work. I am reminded of that Mark twain quote if only I could remember it, Of the young man who thought his father knew nothing, but when that young men grew up, he was amazed at how much his father had learnt. I think you are that young man, Chad, and the Tory party the father. A bit vague, open to my being knocked down pronto by you young lads, but tough on me!

[True Blue]

Everyone - give the guy a year or so before trying to tear a strip off him. Show some loyalty, and offer constructive criticism. It's pointless wishing that the leadership contest had gone differently.

The last few leaders have been bad, bad, bad. The populist wing of the party have had their chance and it hasn't worked. For us to win the election, we need polcies that don't frighten the horses, but are clearly different; unity; some horrible error by Labour; a crap economy and a plausible, electable leader.

[Chad]

Chad! You are really the individual versus the collective arnt you!!

:-) Sorry, can't help it Annabel.

I was a meddlesome poor kid who was given the chance to escape my hand-of-cards and better myself and challenge my mind with of a grammar school education.

How many ex-grammar kids from poor backgrounds oppose more grammar schools?

Surely we should be promoting all excellence whether sporting, artistic or academic to help poor kids with a particular skill from excelling.

Of course all kids deserve an excellent education, but we should also think in terms of our nation as a whole and actively allow the best to reach a potential that goes beyond the levels an average kids could achieve even with the best schooling?

These people will be our scientists and doctors of the future who could make discoveries to advance mankind.

[Oberon Houston]

Cameron has made critical errors since being elected and will pay a heavy price for them. He says we need to change, but nothing tangible he has done is consistent with this.

Lets look at his team:

Hague: Well, he may get cheers at conference, but to many of the electorate he is still the guy they would rather jeer. Message: we haven’t changed.

Davis: Campaigned on an agenda that we didn’t need to change and yet now is still there supporting Cameron on his ‘Change Agenda'. People find this completely baffling.

Fox: Another right winger, who promptly jets off to the USA with IDS and Hague et al to confer with Republicans just as their foreign policy adventures take a popularity nose dive into the Iraqi desert. Message: we might even be worse than before.

Then there are the policy makers, now despite the merits of some individuals, they are commonly figures of Thatcherism and the past, and people like IDS who are seen to be active in senior positions on the ‘Change Agenda’ despite all the confusing connotations this conjures up with the electorate ( “mmm, not that type of change” they say) . Message: if we have changed, when you find out what it is you might want to run a mile.

Finally there is our performance in opposition, something the whole party needs to think about, but especially the Westminster MPs. We consistently fail to form an effective and convincing argument and opposition to counter bad Government legislation. This reflects very poorly on us across the board. How can we hope to convince people to elect us into power if we cannot form an effective opposition?

The simple fact is this; our popularity took a jump when people felt that all this had been left behind, but now they are realising that the right are still at the tiller, holding it stronger than ever and presto…we are back to 33%. Do not pass GO, do not get elected.

Gordon Brown may have his worries just now, but we are certainly not one of them.

I (as you may be able to guess) am completely pissed off. What a waste of a golden opportunity.

[Annabel Herriott]

I forgot to mention, I heard Andrew Rawnsley Giving DC the once over at a fringe meeting last October. At the time, I thought he was really out to get him. DC stood up to him, and didnt fall for any of his little traps, so I guess he will be pretty much out to even the score. Wouldnt you, if you were a lefty Journo??

[Paul Kennedy]

"My point was intended to be constructive. Look at the LibDems, they picked the old hand for the helm, and placed the rising start Huhne into environment". Chad

That is true, it was in effect a case of "Young Cardinals choosing an Old Pope", but for that to have been the case in the Conservative elections, the "Old Pope" would have had to have been Ken Clarke, now there is a thought!

[Chad]

Not a pleasant one though Paul....

[Jon Gale]

It would be interesting to have an almost "sliding doors" look back on what could have been different since December.

4 months of Headlines like:

"Did the Tories choose the right one?"
"Tories lurch to the right"
"Another lacklustre speech from Davis"
"Davis seen as 'more boring than Brown' says Poll"
"SAS man fails to escape 33% in poll"

etc.

Only half of which might be true, but the media put DD into the box marked "Hard Right Children Flogger" and he would've spent the next 4 years trying to get his real message out, just as Howard was never able to leave the "something of the night" image behind.

Personally I liked Davis, but what i was seeing (as someone intereted in politics) was so different from what the media reported about him that i realised he was never going to given a chance.

[Annabel Herriott]

Chad!! What has grammar schools, and your deprived background got to do with your Imaginary party and undermining our leader with a year of his election with a considerable grass roots mandate??? I was a battered kid and a battered wife, but I dont whinge about it. I use to experience to be constructive!!

[Paul Kennedy]

"leave us modern Tories to get on with the real work". Annabel

Which is?

[Julian H]

Questioning Cameron's election as Leader is extremely damaging and is merely providing our Passing Leftie friends with ammunition.

We elected Cameron and are doing far better for it. If you're strongly opposed to the Party's position then find a new party. If you're not then get behind the leader and let's start working together to get Tony and Gordon out of power.

[Annabel Herriott]

Paul. The real work is campaigning and all that goes with it. Fundraising, leafleting,etc.etc.
Chad. What has Grammar schools and your deprived upbringing got to do with your Imaginary Party, and undermining our leader of less than a year, elected with a considerable grass roots mandate?? I was a battered kid, and a battered wife, but I dont whinge about it, but use the experience constructively.

[Chad]

Well that is what I have done Annabel. I joined the party to help change, but some of the changes break my own core values, so I had to move away.

but I dont whinge about it. I use to experience to be constructive!!
My mum was too, she ran off to a women's refuge to escape the usual violent alcy father.

You are right Annabel, we get on with it. We don't take sh1t and aren't afraid to fight for what we believe in.

The problem is, those values that were clearly defined on the 'beliefs' page of the Conservative Site before Cameron were elected no longer seem to apply.

I can't be party of any party that supports state funding of political parties. The whole idea is abhorrent to me.

[Chad]

My point on grammar schools though was relevant to my background.

It is so easy for a rich kid who went to a top public school to preach that 'selection' is bad.

Selection is not bad. It enables the best to reach their potential and is a great social mobiliser.

That is what conservatism means to me.