A summer of policy reports gets underway...

A Conservative source tells the Daily Mail's James Chapman that the Tories are planning "a genuine radical ideas blitz" over the summer months to prove that there is real substance to the Cameron project and to provide a contrast with Gordon Brown.

The Mail highlights the recommendations of Ken Clarke's democracy taskforce (highlighted in the graphic on the right) which promise to win back the public's faith in politics and restore the standing of parliament - reduced to "poodle status" under Tony Blair.

The Mail believes that David Cameron will embrace the former Chancellor's proposals.

It is not clear if Mr Clarke will make any recommendations on state funding of political parties.  Extra state funding of politics is very unpopular with grassroots Conservatives and many MPs.  Ken Clarke's 2005 campaign manager, Andrew Tyrie, was the architect of David Cameron's plans for state funding.

The next three months will see all of the major policy groups report.  Key tensions to look out for:

• Tensions between the quality of life and international development policy groups.  John Gummer's quality of life group want to reduce the environmental impact of food being flown around the world whilst Peter Lilley's international development group is more minded to open up our markets to third world farmers.
• Iain Duncan Smith's social justice policy group making recommendations on family and drugs that could potentially alarm the party's social liberals.
• An emphasis on the importance of lower taxation within John Redwood's economic competitiveness report.

Comments

[Traditional Tory]

the Tories are planning "a genuine radical ideas blitz"

Really? After two and a half years of inaction under Cameron the mountain brings forth...Ken Clarke.

I suppose this non-story is supposed to shut down Grammargate.

BTW, whatever did happen to 'Sir' Bob Geldof and whatever it was that he was supposed to be going to do to make the party look 'cool'?

[Henry Mayhew]

At least they are trying TT. Making the Office for National Statistics independent looks interesting.

[Alan S]

These are all sensible policy suggestions from Ken Clarke. Very welcome.

[CDM]

All those mesaures seem sensible. I only hope they bite the bullet and slash the number of MPs, to the extent that they can all fit on the green benches.

[TomTom]

At least they are trying TT. Making the Office for National Statistics independent looks interesting.

Posted by: Henry Mayhew | June 04, 2007 at 09:10

Does anyone still work there now it's off to Newport ?

[Edward]

Great stuff.

[Tory T]

They're all good suggestions, and especially the curtailment of the right of Scottish MPs to vote on English matters. But if we are to reduce the number of MPs, presumably each will then serve a wider area. I would be interested to see the proposals for dealing with casework if that happens - would the MP/constituency link be strained?

[Peter Hatchet]

Agree with all apart from cut in MPs.

Can see no reason for this other than Clarke feels the public don't like politicans and there should be less of them purely for that reason.

Becomes very hard to represent a constituency properly/campaign in it properly if it gets above 100,000 electors - besides, who will choose which areas lose representation? How will we maintain a diversity of talent in the HoC?

Not a good move.

[Peter Harrison]

two and a half years of inaction under Cameron

I don't agree that there has been inaction under Cameron. In any case, he has only been leader for 18 months.

As for Bob Geldof, he wasn't supposed to be doing anything to make the party look cool. He is part of the group led by Peter Lilley looking at international development.

[Curly]

All nice sensible suggestions, but hardly the stuff to fire the imaginations of those voters we need to pick up to make a majority.

It's radical initiatives and alternatives on health, education, defence, security, and taxation that we need to be bringing forward. I feel sure that the electorate (when the time comes) will not be looking for a "more of the same" rebranded extension to Blairism, and will expect the Conservative Party to be well armed with good policies and ready to form a government.

[malcolm]

At last something I can wholeheartedly agree with . The cut in MPs is a good thing in my opinion. We must do something to restore a modicum of pride in our political process.All the other points seem sensible.
Does state funding come under the area of responsibility of this policy group? If it does then I hope Clarke and his team will do the decent and sensible thing and reject it outright.
I usually can't be bothered to respond to your posts these days 'Traditional Tory' but if you could add you might realise that Cameron has led our party for a little over 18 months not two and a half years. 18 months we were still behind in the polls and now we lead consistently even after the miserable fortnight the party has endured.

[Peter Harrison]

On the proposals, I'm broadly in favour of these.

To some extent I share Peter Hatchet's concern on cutting MPs. However, if we are serious about localism, it seems an obvious consequence - the fewer decisions are made nationally, the fewer politicians you need to do it. As for choosing which areas "lose" representation, that would be down to the Boundaries Commission.

A legal right for the Cabinet to be consulted may not be easy to enforce in practise but it sends the right message.

A code of conduct to limit political spin sounds like a good idea but may be difficult to define. At what point do you draw the line between promoting government policy (legitimate) and political spin (not legitimate). There is often no agreement as to what constitutes "the facts". However, if a clear line is possible, this is a good move.

The rest all seem sensible, particularly making ONS independent.

[Ash Faulkner]

Could somebody explain how decreasing the number of representatives is good for democracy?

[David Belchamber]

Very promising. Who heads up the education policy group and when are its interim recommendations due?

[CDM]

What's so special about 100,000? India seems to get by reasonably enough, and some of their constituencies contain more than a million voters.

Larger constituences would also lessen the incentive for MPs to spend all their time obsessing over local issues, rather than debating national issues at Westminster.

[Andrew Woodman]

I can't see MP's backing a cut in their number. Turkeys voting for christmas and all that. That is unless of course, the cut comes from Scottish and inner city MP's, in which case we will benefit.

No mention of the EU I notice!

[Denis Cooper]

"Could somebody explain how decreasing the number of representatives is good for democracy?" Of course it isn't, but then Kenneth Clarke isn't a democrat.

"I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a Council Chamber in Europe".

Kenneth Clarke, from International Currency Review. Vol.23 Autumn 1996.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

Largely sensible, although I share the concerns already articulated on this thread about reducing the number of MPs.

[CDM]

Why the concern about cutting MPs? Most are nothing more than voting lobby fodder, whose constituents wouldn't know them from Adam (or Eve).

[Traditional Tory]

if you could add you might realise that Cameron has led our party for a little over 18 months not two and a half years

Quite right. It just seems like two and a half years.

now we lead consistently even after the miserable fortnight the party has endured.

Not for much longer I suspect.

I see 'Cllr' Lindley is back. Nice name that. Did the vicar stub his toe on the font when he baptised him.

Looks like the warm weather is bringing the 'Roon Brigade back in force

[richard]

I can't wait. How thrilling to have the latest pc rubbish, and modish garbage from Dave and his super-fit 'right-on' team. Pass the sick bag, Alice.

[Tory T]

" see 'Cllr' Lindley is back. Nice name that. Did the vicar stub his toe on the font when he baptised him"

Ed, do we really have to endure all these personal attacks from a ukip voter?

What does that add to the debate?

[TomTom]

Could somebody explain how decreasing the number of representatives is good for democracy?

Posted by: Ash Faulkner | June 04, 2007 at 09:56

Since 33% MPs are in the Government explain how it is serving their constituents to have them signed up to the Administration ?

Maybe capping the number of Junior Ministers might be an idea - lots of these jobs could be done better by Civil Servants in a less political manner

WE have too much government - too many ministers - too many MPs. Lots of things could be done by Local Government using bye-laws. Yesterday The Politics Show revealed that dogs cannot be controlled without Primary Legislation.......when a normal country would simply pass an Omnibus Bill delegating whole areas of such trivial legislation to Local Authorities for Byelaws and Referendum

[Traditional Tory]

modish garbage from Dave and his super-fit 'right-on' team

Yes. Arch-Eurofanatic Clark wheezing in a cloud of poisonous smoke with his beer belly overhanging his belt seems almost human in comparison.

The 'suggestions' listed above certainly won't set the Thames on fire. Back to Grammargate!

[Denis Cooper]

"Why the concern about cutting MPs? Most are nothing more than voting lobby fodder, whose constituents wouldn't know them from Adam (or Eve)."

Is it a good thing, or a bad thing, that most of their constituents don't know them from Adam (or Eve)?

If it's a bad thing, do we want to make that worse?

And why hasn't Clarke addressed the problem of the iniquitous whip system, which reduces MPs to lobby fodder?

I agree with TomTom that "WE have too much government - too many ministers" but not that we have too many MPs - we should have less government, needing fewer ministers, and those MPs who are not ministers should be holding the ministers to account on behalf of their constituents and the country as a whole.

If we keep expanding the number of government (and official opposition) posts, and also cut the total number of MPs, we'll end up with no backbenchers, and therefore no free spirits, in the Commons at all. Of course some people would welcome that, but it would hardly be good for democracy.

[Traditional Tory]

Ed, do we really have to endure all these personal attacks from a ukip voter?

I don't support UKIP Tory T, so I guess that counts as a personal insult. I am fortunate in having a Conservative MP who is anti-EU and (as far as I can make out) not particularly pro-Cameron.

The 'serious' point I am making is that I (and others) find the flaunting of petty titles such as 'councillor' extremely irritating.

If I ever post under my own name - I'll do that the day after Cameron resigns - I must remember to list my several qualifications in order to impress - nay gobsmack - the readership.

[malcolm]

Tory T. I don't like Traditional Torys posts anymore than you do. However you do yourself no favours by continually misrepresenting those who don't subscribe to your point of view. There are several people who write very negatively about the party but claim to support it.Traditional Tory is one of those. He has been equally insulting about UKIP.

[Editor]

I've had enough of Traditional Tory, too. One more nasty, personal comment and I'll delete all further posts that he makes.

[Ash Faulkner]

TomTom, 10:28:

"Since 33% MPs are in the Government explain how it is serving their constituents to have them signed up to the Administration ?"

Arguably it isn't, though that seems a case for a presidential system.

I agree the obvious answer is major decentralisation...though if that's happening, it needs to happen after we cut down MPs, not before.

[Henry Mayhew]

Please behave yourself Traditional Tory - don't get thrown out. I think you have been most amusing and clever in part today. I even liked the stubbed toe comment, which I thought was reasonable.

You are a decent, hard-working pirate who will need somewhere to take your parrot 'Chip' for a walk. It must be getting knackered going out 20 times a day though.

[Ash Faulkner]

*I mean before we cut down MPs, not after. Silly me :P

[Chris]

Cutting the number of MPs really isn't a good idea, as many have said above. It will put tremendous strain on the constituency link, and some constituencies are already far too big. We need a proper unbiased boundary review, which focuses on levelling out the population of constituencies, not "maintaining traditional links".

Curtailment of Scottish MP voting powers must be EVOEL, no more no less. I was shocked to read that some people think that just cutting the number of Scottish MPs is the answer... it isn't, it simply makes it less prominent, whilst disenfranchising Scottish voters on UK wide issues. No Scottish (or Welsh for that matter if we make the Assembly more powerful) MP should be ever be able to vote on a law which will not affect their constituents.

I share the editors concerns regarding more state funding for political parties, but the rest of the list sounds fine.

[Traditional Tory]

Thank you Henry.

I am about to take my parrot for a very long walk.

There's shopping to be done.

[Richard]

"John Gummer's quality of life group want to reduce the environmental impact of food being flown around the world"

How do they intend to do this without hitting consumers in the wallet?

[Edward Taylor]

Very promising proposals from Ken Clarke. Radical enough to be more than just window-dressing but not too radical that they fundamentally change our constitution. I know this issue won't win or lose elections, but it does help to allay the still-persistent image that the Conservative Party is old-fashioned and out-of-touch. Good work.

[ToMtom]

"John Gummer's quality of life group want to reduce the environmental impact of food being flown around the world"

Wot...no airsick Maine lobster ? I always enjoy those meals when BBC types put food on the table and a full wine list

[Denis Cooper]

Correct, Chris - as far as may be practicable, a British citizen in Scotland and a British citizen in England should have exactly the same level of representation in the British Parliament when it deals with matters reserved to that Parliament. It's only for matters which have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament for Scotland that the British citizen in Scotland shouldn't be allowed any say on the decisions which affect England. The cleanest way to achieve that would be to remove those England-only decisions from the British Parliament to an English Parliament with the same powers as the Scottish Parliament, preferably located outside London somewhere closer to the geographical centre of England. That would also put a stop to the continuing attempts by europhiles to persuade the English that they really want "Parliaments", plural, aka EU Regional Assemblies.

[Jake]

"I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a Council Chamber in Europe".
Kenneth Clarke, from International Currency Review. Vol.23 Autumn 1996.

Not only is Clarke anti British , he is also is deeply anti English .

No mention of the gigantic democratic deficit which the English have to endure in the British state ie no parliament , no specific representation , no executive , no first minister , no budget and no English Office while at the same time having the British system rigged agianst us via the Barnett Rules ( which he conspires with Labour to keep quiet about )

He tries the usual ruse - which works with some Tories - of blabbing on about preventing Scottish MP's voting on matters which affect their own constituencies . This is just fiddling around with the British parliament ( highly divisively by the way ) and anyway , because of the Barnett Rules ALL English legislation affects Scottish consytituencies .
He does not mention tha MP's for Wales and Ulster could still vote on English matters . Why not?

It goes without saying that the number of Scottish MP's in the British parliament should go back to 45 just as the Act of Union Article 22 .

If we do the obvious , democratic and logical thing there will be an English parliament for England along the same lines as that of Scotland . Not a part time British one . In the federal British state that will result the number of MP's in the British patish parliament could then be reduced - would be a popular measure in England .

[John Irvine]

The policies we really need and not from Ken Clarke , are on Europe and how we are going to get out of the EU.

Cameron made promises on this and let us all down. Now he's U-turned on Grammar Schools its time to put the pressure on. He's obviously too weak to withstand ant real pressure.

Dump Ken Clarke and the leftists. We need real Conservatives chairing committees on how to deal with the EU and immigration - the things really care about.

[Denis Cooper]

"Very promising proposals from Ken Clarke".

God help us. This is supposedly a "democracy" task force, yet of the proposals mooted so far the one which most directly impacts on the "demos" is to cut the number of their elected representatives. Still, this is only a leak, and maybe the full document will have other proposals, for example that the "demos" should be able to requisition referenda, or to recall their representatives, or perhaps that it should be a criminal offence for anybody to apply undue pressure on an elected representative in an attempt to change the way he will vote - with only his own constituents being largely (but not entirely) exempted from that law.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Good on Ken - proves he still has a massive contrubution to make the both the Conservative Party and to Politics generally.

[clive elliot]

If Councils are going to have proper powers, and do more without central supervision, that will be a good thing. Maybe people will start voting in local elections if they think it will make a difference.

When that happens we don't need so many MPs. MPs shouldn't be social workers anyway. Much of their 'constituency work' consists of trying to 'lean' on local authorities anyway; it should be the Councillors who are responsible.

If we're to have Conservative policies of localism, then we could do with about half the number of MPs.

[Henry Mayhew]

Yes it is strange that a Democracy Taskforce does not have anything to say about the involvement of the EU and courts of justice and human rights in our democracy. I thought 50% of legislation originates in Brussels. Perhaps it is not relevant.

[Jonathan]

I do not support cutting the number of MPs either as too large an electorate cuts the constituency link and makes PR easier to justify.

I am also concerned about the specific mention of Scottish MPs being unable to vote on English matters, EVfEL requires the same restrictions on Welsh and NI MPs too. I would prefer a federal parliament, as I have posted before, which is a cleaner solution and makes the transition less threatening to the Scots. At the least, Clarke is missing a trick in not arguing for a full parliament (rather than an Assembly) for the Welsh which should be worth a few extra votes in Wales.

[Jonathan]

@Henry Mayhew
It is not that EU law is not relevant it is that, left to the FCO and the current political elite, nothing can be done about it.

[Denis Cooper]

"If we're to have Conservative policies of localism, then we could do with about half the number of MPs."

And if a subsequent government reversed those Conservative policies of localism, would it also restore the number of MPs to compensate for that? I think not.

This has nothing to do with "localism", it's to do with having fewer people with their hands anywhere near the levers of power, who would be more disconnected from the common herd, and who could be more easily (and cheaply) kept in line.

In other words, it's mainly about strengthening oligarchy, not democracy.

[TomTOm]

And if a subsequent government reversed those Conservative policies of localism, would it also restore the number of MPs to compensate for that? I think not.

They did in Northern Ireland - Heath increased representation at Westminster after imposing Direct Rule and sidelining Stormont

[Henry Mayhew]

Jonathan, can't you say that the Leader's way: 'It's delusional to think debating the EU's involvement in our democracy is practical politics. We need to stop splashing around in the shallow end of the debate, trying to bring back about a mythical time when we were a sovereign democracy.' :)

[Richard]

I agree with those who don't like the idea of a reduction in MPs but that aside I think this is a decent list of proposals.

Regarding radicalism on health and education, just how much will the electorate let us get away with? The European health model has cash issues and the American system is demonised for being ruthlessly free-market (even though it's heavily subsidised and regulated). How viable is the far-eastern model? Or is there a workable model we could produce that hasn't been tried elsewhere?

[Denis Cooper]

As I recall, Heath also argued that the total number of MPs should be halved.