The conservativehome.com blog

The Germans are right on cloning - and Britain is wrong

Last week this blog discussed the institutional bias of the BBC. The Beeb’s coverage of last week’s cloning ‘breakthroughs’, in Korea and Newcastle, illustrated that bias. The ‘Ten’o’clock News’ referred to – but did not spell out - undefined ethical issues associated with cloning and then very specifically focused on the medical advances that embryonic stem cell research might bring. ‘We will all benefit’ was how Fergus Walsh, BBC Science Correspondent, ended his one-sided report.

Another organ of the mainstream media monopoly has come to the uninformed public’s rescue, however. The Guardian gave a platform for Nigel Cameron to highlight some of the ethical elephant traps associated with embryonic stem cell research.

Viewers have to pay a £126.50pa poll tax for the BBC’s ‘public service broadcasting’ but you had to read Dr Cameron’s column for a real ‘public service message’:

George Galloway, friend of Saddam

Saddam Hussein’s favourite MP has become a media darling. He was hardly off our screens last week. Many news broadcasters decided to put his Senate testimony at the top of their news bulletins last Tuesday – relegating the Queen’s Speech to item two. [Tony Blair’s programme for government was relegated to item three on the increasingly tabloid ITV news – behind Galloway and Kylie Minogue].

The reasons for Galloway’s celebrity status are many. First and foremost Mr Galloway undoubtedly provides good telly. He’s charismatic. He’s always got something to say. And, unlike much of the grey political establishment, he doesn’t mince his words. His anti-war stance also appeals to Britain’s old media and their obsessive determination to undermine British participation in the war on terror.

Michael Moore Conservatives, warped by their hatred for Tony Blair have even started to like George Galloway.

In America’s Weekly Standard, Christopher Hitchens provides some welcome reminders as to why no conservative could honestly sympathise with Mr Galloway. Putting aside all of the suggestions of dodgy financial deals, here are five killer facts about the socialist with a fancy villa in Portugal:

The Tory Europhiles have a problem with democracy

The British people have never been trusted with the truth about the European project. We were promised that we were joining a purely economic project by Ted Heath. Twenty years later we know that the plan is for Britain to belong to a country called Europe with its own president, parliament, army and foreign policy.

Fortunately the British people have been granted the opportunities to stop this ambition of the European elites. Tory eurosceptics have forced Labour to hold referenda before we join the euro or have to sign up to the centralising EU Constitutional Treaty.

Marriage is good. Marriage is good. Marriage is good.

Driving fast or under the influence of alcohol is dangerous, often deadly. A whole system of highway laws, traffic policing and driver education has been devised to reduce the social costs of bad driving. Professor Bob Rowthorne of Cambridge University wonders why, when it comes to marriage, politicians adopt a completely contrary and laissez-faire approach. So much evidence points to the benefits of marriage for children and married couples themselves. Jill Kirby’s ’Broken Hearts’ research offers a landmark account of these benefits.

In the last few days three journalists - Fraser Nelson in Scotland on Sunday, Kay Hymovitz in the Wall Street Journal and Ferdinand Mount in The Daily Telegraph - have turned their attention to the benefits of marriage.

Fraser Nelson posed the questions that have stumped the left-wing poverty industry:

Charles Moore's Conservatism

Last night Charles Moore, former editor of The Daily Telegraph, spoke at the Policy Exchange think tank. Charles Moore has replaced Michael Gove (Surrey Heath’s new MP) as Policy Exchange’s Chairman.

It first struck me as a slightly surprising appointment. Policy Exchange and C-Change are associated with the more liberal wing of the Conservative Party whilst Mr Moore, a devout Roman Catholic and supporter of the marriage-centred family, is more of a traditionalist.

Can Robin Aitken 'Goldberg' bias at the BBC?

Bernard Goldberg’s ‘Bias’ book caused a sensation when it was released in the USA. Bernard Goldberg was a CBS insider and he exposed the institutional left-liberal biases at America’s top broadcaster. Goldberg started an avalanche of exposes that has seen trust in America’s old media plummet.

My big hope is that Robin Aitken’s forthcoming book - Taking Sides: Bias At The BBC - will do the same.

Aitken, a veteran reporter for the BBC, encouraged Corporation executives and the Board of Governors to address its “unconscious, institutionalised Leftism” but was met with polite indifference. Now having left the Beeb Aitken is taking his message to the licence fee payer. In a Damian Thompson interview in Saturday’s Telegraph (not available online) Aitken catalogued some of the BBC’s biases:

Would the Tories have won 27 more seats if they'd campaigned more on Europe?

John O'Sullivan writes an interesting article in this morning's Sunday Telegraph.

It contains three main observations:

(1) Working class voters are drifting Rightwards and should be aggressively targeted by the Tories. O'Sullivan's prescription is based on the fact that more prosperous voters - once the core of the Tory vote - are drifting towards New Labour and the Liberal Democrats. George W Bush and John Howard made big inroads into the working class vote in their recent elections. O'Sullivan's advice is directly the opposite of the conclusion drawn by Daniel Finkelstein in Wednesday's Times. Although Bush and J Howard showed that a winning coalition was easier to create by winning striving lower income voters than stopping the drift of professionals to the liberal-left parties, Finkelstein wrote:

Attracting defectors from Labour and the LibDems

The Conservative Party is looking for a leader that will win us the next election. That, of course, is how it should be. But let us not dismiss the possibility of making a major parliamentary advance before 2009. How could this happen? Labour’s majority is enough to last it a full term and, these days, by-elections are few and far between. That just leaves the intriguing possibility of defections from both Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

Let’s take Labour first. The recent election has left a large number of slender, if not wafer thin, Labour majorities. No one’s suggesting that Labour MPs will cross the floor just to save their jobs, but let’s just say good Conservative poll ratings will concentrate minds wonderfully. There is also the small matter of the Labour succession. A Brown leadership combined with a resurgent Labour left will make life unpleasant for true Blairite believers. They may conclude that the only real prospect of genuine public sector reform lies with the Conservative Party. Now, this may apply to no more than a handful of MPs, but even two or three defections would be of great symbolic importance – anything more than that would count as a political earthquake.

Message to Francis Maude - don't over do the focus groups

Francis Maude, the new Tory Chairman, was on Newsnight last night. Jeremy Paxman was grilling him about the Tories' alleged 'nasty party' image. In that context, was it helpful, Paxo asked, for Michael Howard to accuse Tony Blair of being a liar.

An uncomfortable Francis Maude replied:

"I don't know whether it was helpful or not. We'll do some research and find out whether it was helpful or not".

Oh dear. Politicians shouldn't need focus groups or polls to know that playground abuse is not only unhelpful but unattractive. Francis Maude is not the kind of politician to use such ill-mannered language. He was probably using the language of 'doing some research' to avoid having to answer the question. But let's also hope that market research will be used to help us sell our beliefs - not to decide what they should be. I love this quotation from George W Bush's 2000 GOP Convention address:

"I believe great decisions are made with care, made with conviction, not made with polls. I do not need to take your pulse before I know my own mind. I do not reinvent myself at every turn. I am not running in borrowed clothes. When I act, you will know my reasons... When I speak, you will know my heart."

'Manifesto for a 44% Conservative Party' is launched

The conservativehome.com manifesto argues that the Conservative Party remains in a weak electoral position despite last Thursday's increased number of MPs.

It identifies five major objectives for the Conservative Party:

> The election of a leader who can appeal to floating voters.  The manifesto argues that this will best be done by holding a US-style primary election that looks beyond the 'parliamentary village' and heeds the views of 'target voters'.

> The adoption of a heartfelt commitment to govern for every member of society.  In order to get from 33% to 44% the Conservative Party must demonstrate to 'values voters' that it is not a selfish party but one that is concerned for the welfare of all Britons, particularly the most vulnerable.

> The identification of grown-up policies that address Britain's fundamental problems.  For example, the Conservative Party cannot fight another election without a much stronger economic policy and without a serious interest in issues like the environment and global justice.

> The need to rebuild links with society's major professions and voluntary groups.   The Conservative Party only has shallow relations with huge sections of society.  These relationships will not mature without determined investment.  The Party must commit the same level of resources that it has traditionally given to media relations.

> The Tory Party's two modernising factions need to find common ground with the more traditionalist grouping.  There will only be infighting and no progress if one group seeks to defeat the others.  Particularly important is the need for the 'Soho modernisers' - seeking a more tolerant party - to secure a settlement with the 'Easterhouse modernisers' - who want to rebuild social justice and the social fabric.