Edward Leigh's latest attack on Project Cameron will test unity of Cornerstone

FreeDictionary.com defines Don Quixote as "An impractical idealist bent on righting incorrigible wrongs."   Edward Leigh MP, quickly emerging as Mr Cameron's most outspoken critic from the Tory benches, has compared Project Cameron to Don Quixote's escapades.

Writing for the House Magazine, Mr Leigh lists the ways in which Mr Cameron has offended traditional Tory sensibilities:

"This is the year that Conservative spokesmen have:

• Adopted Aneurin Bevan as a role model (he who vowed to destroy us and described us as 'vermin';
• Praised left-wing Polly Toynbee's view of society;
• Snubbed the CBI;
• Pleaded understanding for marauding hoodies;
• Announced that we, not Labour, were the real defenders of an unreformed NHS, the last Soviet-style, centrally-controlled health service in any large country;
• Rejected tax cuts, despite the biggest tax hike in peacetime history;
• Criticised grammar schools;
• Turned down the volume on Euroscepticism to the inaudible."

While praising Mr Cameron's personal qualities the Chairman of the powerful Public Accounts Committee warns that the party is in danger of "taking our core vote for granted and in the process effectively disenfranchising millions of decent people who feel that none of the mainstream parties speak for them."  He continues:

"Our Euroscepticism is deliberately confused with crude nationalism, when in fact we want to help the Third World by breaking down trade barriers.  And why did the leader's speech at the party conference not mention immigration at all, when in the last few years we have undergone the greatest-ever wave of increasing immigration into our country?"

Part of the reason Edward Leigh is listened to is because of his leadership of the forty-strong Cornerstone group of Tory MPs.  The Cornerstone group is not necessarily united in its concerns about Project Cameron, however.  One member of the group resigned last week and Cornerstone's co-founder - John Hayes MP -  is known to be much more favourable to the party's direction.

Comments

[yogring]

Richard Carey asks Alex to calm down!! Richard, have you seen the party website? NH yes? Labour cuts? Campaigns about Labour cuts in spending belong on the SWP website, and you ask Alex to take a deep breath? I can see the future: Conservatives.com(sponsered by unison). Alex is as disgusted as me at what our party has become.

[Thatcherite]

CDM is a fool. We lost by a landslide because the distastrous "H" block (Hurd, Hezza, Howe etc) led the EMS entry chorus under Thatcher. The result was Major's Black Wednesday (with Dave as Lamont's Special Adviser) and the public never forgave us.

I suspect that Gordon Brown is sitting on Dave's policy papers from that time. One broadsheet reported that Cameron wrote a paper that advocated that Britain join the Euro. If he did, he is toast.

[HF]

What was the point of Leigh writing this? He even quotes things provided by Labour's spin doctors as the truth!

Did he expect to improve our political fortunes? Surely not as he just provides bullets for our opposition.

The point of this piece was feeding the ego of Edward Leigh at the expense of David Cameron.

What a twerp.

[matt wright]

I agree with CDM, Alex needs to get out more. People from all backgrounds of the Party work very hard for it and very loyally and will continue to do so. At the moment we are working our socks off for the May elections. Feedback is excellent, genuinely so, but he seems to be more interested in deliberately causing damage. I wonder why?

Matt

[Thatcherite]

Matt Wright wrote "I am also anti-EU but share Redwood's view that there are those so obsessed with the issue that they are helping Labour and the EU rather than enabling us to tackle this."

Which John Redwood are we talking about - the author of Eurosceptic books or the one who sold out his principles to Ken Clarke during the 1997 leadership election in exchange for the promise of the Shadow Chencellorship?

It seems that the latter has re-emerged in recent months, presumably in the vain hope of a Shadow Cabinet position. Sad!!

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Sean, what planet are you on? I called for the Party to unite and turn its fire on our enemies (Lab and the Lib Dems) and you respond with a personal attack on me.

For someone with political ambitions in London, I would have thought you would be trying to get people on board rather than alienating them…

[Og]

"Og, UKIP are not a threat to the party and never have been." Scotty.

I didn't say that UKIP threatened the Conservative Party, I said that Tory candidates in marginals were threatened. This is not surmise, but fact. Study the results of the 2005 election and see how many seats had a majority over the second-placed Tory which was less than the number of votes UKIP received.

You go on: "This claim about being at 42% in the polls had we followed your strategy is laughable." I put forward no strategy; my post suggested that Cameron, for all his interpersonal skills, had appeared not to charm the Right.

An 'E' for your English Comprehension.

[Jon Gale]

"Edward speaks for Britain and he speaks for at least 80% of the Conservative Party."

And when Edward Leigh falls in water he doesn't get wet, the water gets Edward Leigh!

Seriously, Og raises an important point about "The Right" causing problems if we have a small majority, it would be wise for Cameron to try and keep Cornerstone and similar at least vaguely on board, if only by sitting down and talking with them.

But it would also be wise for those of The Right to actually read/listen to what Cameron in fact says, instead of what Labour or the front page of the Daily Mail tells them Cameron has said!

A Tory MP repeating Tony McNulty's "Hug a Hoodie" stupid soundbite is unforgivable.

[malcolm]

Malcolm the magnificent! Has a certain ring to it I think. But no 'Alex Forsyth' I am exactly who I say I am as the Editor of this blog and others who post here well know. You on the other hand have a variety of aliases haven't you? Tory Loyalist was obviously a misnomer but why did you have to stop being Mark McCartney?
Sad but predictable that this thread has gone the way of so many others recently.ie s shouting match between those who broadly support the leadership and those who appear to dislike it far more than they dislike other parties. I'm not sure if there is anything you can do Tim but it is starting to make the Diary the least interesting part of this site which is a trewmendous shame.

[Richard Carey]

Richard, have you seen the party website? NH yes? Labour cuts?... Alex is as disgusted as me at what our party has become.

Yes, good, isn't it? People care about these services. Yes, of course we need to look at providing them more efficiently and effectively, but think about the following. (I realise I might be going a little off-topic here, but this is worth taking on.)

Do you think it is right that when Trusts have overspent in an effort to meet misguided New Labour targets, Brown should demand his money back from them in the following year, leaving them in deficits, without a forward plan? I don't.

Have you had a close family member be told that they would have to wait in pain for over 20 weeks even for diagnostic tests because the unit they need to go to is about to be "reconfigured" out of existence to save money? I have.

Do you know people who work within the health service who care deeply about the health of the people they serve, bursting with ideas to improve the service they provide, only to be stymied by the structures they work in? I do.

"yogring", please don't you and your like dare to lecture me about some of the issues on which we should take on this Government.

[Scotty]

When Edward Leigh pens an article which contains factually incorrect accusations and sets out to be deliberately damaging, is he any better than some of the trolls on this site?
"Snubbed the CBI" He conveniently forgot to point out that David Cameron chose to go to visit our troops instead, at the only window of opportunity given to him and his team by the MOD.
I still find it odd that the only window of opportunity given coincided with the CBI conference, and it smacks of Gordon Brown's interference. But thanks Mr Leigh for furthering this myth and no doubt there will be chuckles in the government corridors over it.

[Thacherite]

"But it would also be wise for those of The Right to actually read/listen to what Cameron in fact says".

We do read Dave's articles and speeches and they are not Conservative - more green liberal.

[Scotty]

"But because Cameron is contemptuous of the Right"
Og, I think that my comprehension is fine, and in light of the article above I would say that it is David Leigh who is contemptuous of David Cameron.

[Alex Forsyth]

I haven't a clue who you are Malcolm, not that I could give a damn.

Tory Loyalist I've never heard of. From what I've seen of his posts Mark McCartney appears to be a sound Thatcherite but I daresay he can speak for himself. I've just checked that he hasn't posted on this thread or - surprisingly - the Cameron Drugs thread - so your blatant accusation that I am using multiple IDs to boost the Thatcherite cause falls flat on its face.

Funny how you Camerloons comfort yourself by fondly imagining that the increasing number of Conservatives who are challenging the Cameron agenda are either "UKIP trolls" or sockpuppets of some malignant mastermind.

I'm afraid you've got an unpleasant awakening in store.

[Will]

Scotty - who is David Leigh ?

[Scotty]

Malcolm, "sockpuppets" is a familiar term much loved by both Tory Loyalist and Mark McCartney.

[Cllr Francis Lankester]

Is there huge waste in public services at national level or not? That is the key question. If there is waste to be cut out, this should be done irrespective of whether we promise tax cuts.

One big problem of our times is dependence-not just low income earners but all those receiving tax credits. Why is being dependent on the state more "moral2 than being independent. I remember Keith Joseph come to Hull Univ. and routing the Left on the theme of the moral and ethical case for capitalis. You won't catch any of our lot doing that now

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Presumably you don't vote for you MP, Mr. Forsyth? For he's a Cameroonie!

[Scotty]

Will, he is a result of my typing too fast then not proofing properly.

[Jon Gale]

Thatcherite,

Edward Leigh obviously doesn't read them if he thinks Cameron was pleading for understanding of misunderstood hoodies, or praised Polly Toynbee, or rejected tax cuts ("sharing proceeds of growth between public services and lower taxes"), or snubbed the CBI, etc.

[Alex Forsyth]

Malcolm, "sockpuppets" is a familiar term much loved by both Tory Loyalist and Mark McCartney.

Is that so Scotty? Oh well that's conclusive then. I'm using three separate IDs to troll the forum and gave it all away with one slip of the tongue. Oh dear. Woe is me. Smack bottom.

Have you got a better word to describe a - er - sockpuppet then? Yes of course I'm sure you must have. You could well be one yourself.

After all, who the hell is "Scotty" when he's at home?

A dog?

[Alex Forsyth]

Presumably you don't vote for you MP, Mr. Forsyth? For he's a Cameroonie!

Really Justin? I'm not aware I mentioned the name of my MP but please impress us with your psychic powers and tell us all who he is.

[IRJMilne]

When has Cameron criticised Grammar schools? I think he said they didn't plan to build more of them - which is, unfortunately, something we're stuck with because we can't afford to create more grammar schools.

Mr Leigh makes a good Chairman of the Public Accounts committee. Speaking on these issues, he allows right wing Tories to feel they still have a voice and a place in the party. If Leigh says nothing, too much of the right wing will defect to UKIP.

He only performs a real disservice to the party in repeating soundbites like "hug a hoodie". I don't understand why he's doing that.

[Thatcherite]

Jon Gale - the proceeds of growth belong to those who created it, not the government.

Whenever I read or hear a politician use the word "share", I substitute "steal".

Cameron is proposing to increase tax revenue in real terms - that is a tax increase not a tax cut.

[Jon Gale]

Thatcherite,

As the economy grows more money goes into the Treasury, Cameron is proposing spending some of that money on public services, and some on funding tax cuts - How is that a tax increase? The extra money is coming from the growing GDP, not extra taxes. The longer a Cameron government stays in power the more taxes can be reduced. Over time the proportion of state spending will decrease. Its not as dramatic as some might wish but its a lot better than Gordon Brown.

The spending on public services may reduce the amount of tax cut, but it stops the public worrying we will slash hospitals and schools and thus means they might actually dare vote for us for a bloody change!

[Thatcherite]

Tac cuts stimulate economic growth. Dave assumes that you can must have economic growth to fund tax cuts. In a global economy, there is tax competition. Dave and Boy George are economically illiterate.

A tax increase results in increased revenues being confiscated from taxpayers. The % of GDP measure is a politician's means of deceiving the public into thinking they are paying less taxes.

Real taxation reduces when tax revenues decrease. When the economy grows, and taxation revenues decrease, tax as a per centage of GDP decreases faster.

Private school fees are often cheaper than the per capita cost of educating children in state schools. If we introduced a voucher scheme, there would be even more money for tax cuts.

[Valedictoryan]

When has Cameron criticised Grammar schools?

I'm afraid that this will be one of those unanswered questions. It seems that people frequently criticise Cameron for what they imagine he said, rather than for what he actually said.

I consider myself a Thatcherite and a Cameroon. However, it seems that some wear rose tints wrt the blessed Margaret. For example, the truth is that she approved the closure of more grammar schools than anyone before or after.

[Nikki C]

In the short time I have been on this forum I've noted a very nasty tendency at bitching (even though it's almost all male) and name-calling. It's not all one sided but most of it is coming from the Cameron support group.

Earlier today another lady asked why there were so few women on here and somebody else said she would soon find out why. He was right. This is just a madhouse of bitching and personal spite. The utterly nasty post above attacking Edward Leigh is a big example.

Im not surprised all the women have been driven away. If this is an example of what the party under Cameron has come to Im disgusted.

Another woman poster

[Thatcherite]

Cameron and Willetts have ruled out more grammar schools in several articles and interviews. They have done nothing to fight Peter Hain's closure of the remaining grammar schools in Ulster.

Thatcher closed the grammar schools when a member of Ted Heath's cabinet. She was wrong to do so but I suspect that there was a direction from Number 10.

[Prentiz]

"CDM is a fool. We lost by a landslide because the disastrous "H" block (Hurd, Hezza, Howe etc) led the EMS entry chorus under Thatcher."

Like hell we did. Most people who voted the Conservative party out of office couldn't name most of those people, and couldn't tell you what ERM stood for. The reason that the Conservative party lost office, and indeed the reason why, for the timebeing, I support Cameron wholeheartedly, is nothing to do with the policy, and everything to do with the brand. At this point I expect an anonymong chorus, whining about how even mentioning brand is to accept the Nu Labour fallacy - but that rather proves how ludicrously out of touch some people are. The reason Cameron has a chance of winning is that he has the chance to do what Edward Leigh cannot understand - to reach beyond politics and into the real world and make our party something other than party of privilege and poll tax in the minds of many voters. There are so many places in Britain where, if you are a Conservative it doesn't matter what you say or who you stand for, the party you stand for will ensure you won't get a hearing. That's what Cameron will change. Sadly, I suspect that these are places very alien to Mr Leigh and a lot of his advocates...

There's plenty of stuff I'm not overjoyed with about the new era. The cronyism of the A list, the delayed promises on Europe and the failure to see revitalising the party as extending beyond Westminster, all need to be addressed, to name but a few, and that's one of the things that really irks me about these silly comments. They do nothing to address the real issues in our party, and they make those who would like to raise them, constructively and without hurting our chances of government, look like idiots. Leigh is failing in his, self appointed, role of representing the real grass roots, in fact his ham-fisted attempts to hold the leadership to scrutiny will only make it harder, not easier, to raise the issues that need raising, and harder, not easier, for Cameron to do the job he was elected to do. If Cornerstones want to be of any positive influence, this is not the way to approach it.

[matt wright]

Nikki, I am genuinely puzzled by your post, if you had been visiting the site for a long peirod of time you would know that the anti-Cameron posts have plumbed the depths of nasty bile and some of us have tried repeatedly to have rational debates just to be faced with even more bile. Some of the people who post appear to be the same people who post as supporters of other parties that are attacking the Conservatives. Perhaps you didn't know this. Also until recently I was only vaguely aware that some people like to create a number of aliases but having checked on this it appears that this is widespread and that there are people who blog as an obsessive hobby and take all thgis to bizzare lengths as part of some lobbying technique. It is quite possible, unbeleivably so, that many of the people who post on this site are actaully the same eprson playing what we used to call at school "silly buggers". Indeed I beleive that some people who run blog sites actually create imaginary people to make posts to pereptuate their sites in some form of marketing exercsie. If you don't believe me have a look round the internet and ask. Its quite an eye opener!

Matt

[Jon Gale]

Thatcherite,

"A tax increase results in increased revenues being confiscated from taxpayers. The % of GDP measure is a politician's means of deceiving the public into thinking they are paying less taxes."

There is no tax increase!

If a company (or individual) makes a profit of $1,000,000 (I have no pound sign) in Year One, and pays 40% tax the treasury gets $400,000.

If business is good (economy is growing) they make $1,300,000 proft in Year Two, the Treasury gets $520,000 at 40% tax. Taxes have not gone up but tax revenue has.

If Osborne then cut the tax rate to 31% and at a company profit of $1,300,000 the Treasury still gets $403,000 - about the same as Year one.

If we "share" some of that extra money on public services instead of all on tax cuts, Osborne could cut the taxes to only 37% instead, then the Treasury gets $481,000 - The company still gets a 3% tax cut, AND public services have $81,000 more than in Year One.

And of course the lower taxes improves business, makes the economy grow, repeat the process. Eventualy it breaks down, but at our present level of tax that is some time away.

If the economy is not growing to start with you could cut a business tax to stimulate business that doesn't give the treasury much anyway - say a tax on share trading....

[Cllr. Robert-j M. Tasker]

LeighforUKIP @ 20.08 says -

''Extreme right wing dogma such as that which comes from Edward Leigh''

Are you being serious? do you honestly believe that what Edward Leigh has said is ''extreme right-wing dogma?''

If so, I think its you who is in the wrong party.

Editor(s) could we have the name of the MP who resigned from Cornerstone recently?

[matt wright]

Also this would take time to work through the system but just making big tax cuts immediatley, as some on here propose, is really going to mean sacking people now.

Matt

[Tam Large]

Malcolm 21.13 - "Not sure why people like Tam Large and Michael Mcgough contribute to threads like this."

We do because we are conservatives - even though we are no longer Conservatives thanks to Dave. I was a member for 34 years... more than you I might guess.

Unlike many, and yourself Malcolm, we use our own full names and do not hide behind pseudonyms or shortenings. Mature and open debate should be encouraged from all those involved. I left because of the malaise Edward Leigh is describing - so have been affected directly, along with increasing numbers of members.

[Tandy]

Edward Leigh is a nutter. He is in a safe seat and has no chance of ever having a Cabinet Job, so this is the only way he can ever get any attention. He is a shameless publcity seeker, has nothing to offer and should be de-selected.

[matt wright]

Although I don't agree with Tams views on DC I do share his view that posts should be from people who give their full names and identities. I think unless there is some control over this site it will further deteriorate,

Matt

[Scotty]

"It's not all one sided but most of it is coming from the Cameron support group." Nicci C, if you have come to that conclusion then you either have not spent enough time on this site, or you are an astro turfer/troll judging by your other comments regarding Edward Leigh and David Cameron. As for women posters, you have not been reading the comments posted here in any great detail, there are a few and they are easy to spot.
Tam, I was a LOYAL conservative voter then member of the party under Mrs T, Major, Hague, IDS and Howard before David Cameron so I will take no lectures from you on being a real conservative!
"Unlike many, and yourself Malcolm, we use our own full names and do not hide behind pseudonyms or shortenings. Mature and open debate should be encouraged from all those involved." I defend my right to use a pseudonym on this site when I see some of the personal attacks which take place here, I also will not post my real email address until there is a privacy policy in place.

I would like to echo the comments of Richard Carey, Malcolm, Matt Wright and Prentiz who I think reflect the vast majority of the party who keep giving David Cameron such a high personal rating despite the constant whinging on this site.

[FreeSpeaker]

So yet another toff has his nose put out of joint by the cameron camp. These people should get real, get lives and get on with the job of running the country. Self-serving tosser.

[FreeSpeaker]

another thing.... why does this site and all the blogs associated to 18 tory street all look and feel the same? is it because tim montgomerie is behind them all and 18 tory street too? trying to set up a little blogosphere all on your own eh? got no real friends to play with? i would be worried about the future of the left, but your record of delivery is just rubbish. look at this shite for example... total unfocussed rubbish, same with 18 tory street and all those crap blogs that don't even work any way. how pretentious are you? i bet you're so pretentious that this comment will somehow get deleted...... you claim to be a traditional conservativ but you wouldnt dare let people criticise you, you call tim ireland a nutter but its you thats the nutter with all your crappy little projects and attempt to create your own little movement. they'll fail and labour and the left wil remain strong. the tories wont win the next gen election because the country still wont trust you and its people like you that make people truly believe that.

[ToMTom]

because we can't afford to create more grammar schools.

but Non-Selective Academies can be built with a billion or two of public money.....

[Plekhanov]

"Richard Carey, Malcolm, Matt Wright and Prentiz who I think reflect the vast majority of the party"

All four of them? Sounds about right - NOT!

Leigh speaks for the majority of Tories, the silent majority which the proto-Cameroons were insulting as The Nasty Party.
Judging by some posts above they havent stopped.

[jorgen]

matt wright: anti-Cameron posts have plumbed the depths of nasty bile

Yes, I can see that:

Two Camerloons argued: Edward Leigh is a baffoon, just look at him, he sums up everything the public think is wrong about the Tory party, he's greasy, slimey, snotty nosed and comes across as arrogant and uncaring

[Alex Forsyth]

Is a "baffoon" a classic definition of a Camerloon?

In reply to Nikki, reading through the above thread, I find endless hysterical personal abuse emanating from the Cameron Mafia and absolutely nothing that could be so described coming from Thatcherites and Traditional Tories.

Game set and match to the Thatcherites and to that courageous Christian Tory Edward Leigh.

We need more like him!

[Graeme Archer]

When you've all finished shouting at each other, maybe someone would like to point out that the worst thing this stupid Tory MP has done is to repeat a shedload of Labour guff about us. I think only one of his assertions - about grammar schools - is even vaguely factually correct, and even then only in a tortuous manner. If Cornerstone can't find anything more constructive to do with their undoubted abilities, I suggest they spend more time looking after their constituents' interests, and less time demonstrating the limits of their political outlook.

Compare Leigh's outputs with those from IDS' CSJ. There you have a strand of Conservatism which is distinct to some of those represented by our leadership. But IDS/CSJ haven't wasted their time repeating Labour rubbish about Cameron. They have influenced the views of many Conservatives by showing how community leadership can have a dramatic impact on quality of life. They have therefore mainstreamed the "social justice" agenda - which can easily come across as anathema to non-authoritarian types - into one of the cores of our party's thinking (social responsibility). When those people speak on a subject from a perspective which is not naturally my own, I listen, from respect and genuine interest. When someone like Leigh shows off in this way, I do not.

[Giles McNeill]

I live in Edward Leigh's Gainsborough Constituency.

I'm a member of the local association.

I've voted for the man twice (I'm 25).

I'm even helping out with the local elections in May.

I don't remember when I cast my vote for Edward back in the general election that I was supporting a candidate who was going to attack his own party's leadership.

I almost didn't vote for him based on his response to my question to him about his position on Lords Reform - but that is another issue.

Labour know that united parties win election; after all they learnt it the hard way. I know this. Does Edward?

[John Irvine]

"the worst thing this stupid Tory MP has done is to repeat a shedload of Labour guff about us"

"Us" being you the Cameroon, or perhaps I should say Camerloon minority clique of socialist saboteurs within our party.

I would put money on it that Giles McNeill doesn't live in EL's constituency, assuming he exists at all, which I doubt.

Otherwise who put him up to suddenly appearing here for the very first time just on the day EL happens to be discussed?

I think I may write to Leigh to ask whether this person exists.

In the meantime we True Conservatives need to give our full support to Cornerstone. Is it possible for ordinary members (I am now just a ward Chairman) to join this group?

[MH]

This is disgraceful. I thought Dave had purged the Party of all traditional Conservatives. He should arrange Leigh's deselection immediately.

[jorgen]

Labour know that united parties win election; after all they learnt it the hard way. I know this. Does Edward?

Does Cameron?

[Gospel of Enoch]

"CDM is a fool. We lost by a landslide because the disastrous "H" block (Hurd, Hezza, Howe etc) led the EMS entry chorus under Thatcher. Like hell we did."

Sure you did. People don't like interest rates hitting 15%, or the subsequent recession... the may not know the names, but they sure remembered the effect of what they did...