« Andrew Lilico: Two economic policies | Main | Louise Bagshawe: Educashun, educashun, educashun – Labour’s slumping standards »


Henry Mayhew - ukipper / delusional conservative

If anyone can work out what this is all about would they let us know? I don't think Ukippers are any more honest than freedom-lovers who believe the best way to achieve what we all want is to stay in the Tory Party. If the writer is as open-minded as he pretends he will go to a speech by Nigel Farage or Philip Davies MP to find politicians who combine free-market commitment and presentational skills. Graham Brady was looking good until he slightly overdid it a couple of weeks ago. Mark Field is ace.

If some of us happen to believe (however wrongly) in a sovereign, small-government country, how can we support DC and his schoolchums/fags? What is the point of going in the wrong direction? Tax breaks for marriage are an excellent first step in the right direction. Back that up with handing the distribution of Welfare to mutual societies. Chuck in another ten sensible policies (school vouchers, Chilean pensions, closure of quangos) and I will be right behind this writer in his affection for the leadership.


And your meaning is?


I live in a country where The Church of England is besotted with personal and staffing issues like a stagnant bureaucracy rather than an evangelising Church........the Conservative Party seems similarly self-absorbed with articles of this nature.

It really has become a golf club concerned about were the cakes are ordered and who drives what car. There is a country disintegrating such that large swathes of the population have given up on London and are disconnecting from the institutional structures.

Noone is particularly happy with Labour but dissatisfaction is stronger with voters than it is with Conservative politicians who are more concerned with themselves and using the media to score points over each other viz Peter Franklin above.

I don't care about the 1980s - they have caused the economic problems that will crush us - deindustrialisation coupled with debt-fuelled consumerism - just as the 1960s and 1970s produced the social problems that are destroying the welfare state.

Our major industries are foreign-owned, our infrastructure is increasingly foreign-owned, and loaded with debt from British banks which increases risk here and returns abroad.

The sale and leaseback of Whitehall buildings makes HSBC and RBS rich but saddles the taxpayer with leasing payments in perpetuity just as with schools, hospitals, GP surgeries, crematoria, swimming pools, etc.

The only things public money builds from taxpayer extractions are National Assemblies in Scotland and Wales, the GLA in London; the Olympic White Elephant.........

But all the Conservative Party can come up with is whether "The Right" or "The Left" is the cause of losing the next general election.


Sticking your head in the sand, Mr. Franklin, and singing "tra-la-la-la"?


Excellent article - there are some headbangers who would rather stick their head in the sand and bleat rather than knuckling down and fighting for the team.

Tax Cuts Please

"Reform and the Taxpayers Alliance, but despite their good work these are tiny operations, dwarfed by their American counterparts."

The TaxPayers' Alliance is quickly becoming a mass-movement grassroots organisation, developing local branches and it has over 17,000 members, hardly anything 'tiny'.

Henry Mayhew - ukipper / delusional conservative

If you don't understand my politics, Bill, how can you understand Dave's or this writer's?

At Point 2 he says: "better an honest ’kipper than the sort of Tory who spills his guts to the media."

At 10 he opines: "The Right, if it wants to survive in any meaningful form, now needs to articulate a lucid, comprehensive and electable alternative to the policies of Gordon Brown."

Eh? How do you do that without spilling your guts to the media or developing policy for UKIP?

My meaning, Bill: Let's get debating ideas without Dave or the writer calling innovators 'delusional' 'cripplingly self-indulgent or 'useful idiots'. Then they might learn something.



It wasn't referring to you but Mr Franklin.

I still don't "get" his piece. That may be because I am not sure what is meant by him and others by the term "Right". After all aren't we often told that terms like "Left" and Right" are so last century, and that we must look at people's views from many dimensions? I like to consider myself not only a strong believer in our ancient liberties but also quite a libertarian. Does that mean I am right wing?. I also believe in a small state. Is that right wing? Maybe it is if the centrists and the left (forgive the labels) believe in a grand state which redistributes wealth and controls our lives.
I also believe in the rule of law and democracy: which means the people elect their representatives to represent them and pass law on their behalf and which are then properly by a judiciary which respects parliament and the will of the people. I could go but if my views are right wing and therefore by definition to be deprecated:tough.

Simon Newman

"Tax cuts and voucher schemes may be great, but the message isn’t getting through, is it?"

I remember the 2005 election, when the supposedly right-wing Michael Howard refused to argue for tax cuts and deselected Howard Flight when he did. I ended up so disgusted I voted independent.

It's been many years since the Conservatives argued for tax cuts, and they've never argued for voucher schemes. If they had argued for tax cuts in 2005 they might well have won, but the party is so intimidated by the BBC's hostility they treat it as off-limits. That goes for most core Conservative values & policies.


The kids are not alright
Politicians, not teachers, are to blame for Britain’s decline in education, says kenneth minogue

Why, in Britain's broken society, do bad things not only happen but tend to get worse? The reason is likely to be that we have become locked in a cycle, in which the consequences of one policy cause the next degeneration. Let me illustrate.

Few people doubt that the quality of education in Britain's schools has degenerated and that it has done so in almost exact proportion to the involvement of the Department of Education in telling teachers what they must do. The more directives, the more bureaucracy endured, the worse the results.

Many comprehensive schools have become engines for providing increasingly worse education for pupils, a decline no longer concealed by inflated exam results. History becomes propaganda about the evils of British life, geography the current affairs of climate change, social studies indoctrination in how to be multicultural.

A capacity to spell and write grammatically is no longer something teachers even try to teach their pupils. And a stream of directives comes from the DfES about teaching parenthood, better diet, equality issues, not smoking, how to deal with the increase in bullying and similar subjects. Employers despair at the quality of those applying for jobs.

Why does it happen? Let's ask the old Roman question: Cui bono? Who benefits? At first, one might think it would be the teachers, because teaching real subjects to pupils is harder than being a child minder.

But, no. The real beneficiaries are the politicians. Most politicians today have never had a real job. The only skill they have ever exercised is to talk vacuously and get out the vote. And so one reason for this dumbing down suggests itself.

Who would vote for these incompetents – except a generation of young people never seriously challenged by the demands of real education?




The Tories are in an utter mess. I look forward to a similar thread entitled "Home truths for the Modernisers, Cameroons, Centrists, the Left et al".

At least I know what a "groupuscule" is now though. I bet that goes down well on the doorsteps.

Miss Tooty

I may have a ham salad today, I'll keep you informed.


Great article Peter - I really hope the whingers on this site will read it and take note, but I'm guessing not...

"excuses along the lines of “it’s-not-me-that’s-changed-it’s-the-Conservative-Party.”

Sums it up perfectly - describes about 90% of ConHome posters. Having only been a wee lad during the 1980s, I didn't really know what it was like. given the obsession that people on this site have with fighting its battles, it must have been great - i guess it was bananarama which made it stand out...

William Norton

What an excellent article. Might I also refer people to my Platform piece from February 2006:


Deary me, is it fall on our own sword time already?

As we all know, Cameron is flirting with the centre in order to appeal to the marginal floaters based upon the false assumption that the electorate is essentially progressive as expressed in Franklin's 'Prevailing cultural conditions are unfavourable'.

The prevailing cultural conditions are not those perceived in the Westminster village filtered through the mediaocracy and shaped by rules of political engagement that deny the reality of inconvenient truth.

This false perception of the real political battlefield comes across as a patrician condescension toward the politically unsophisticated masses where even the discussion of issues that genuinely worry, disturb and actually motivate is dismissed.

Cameron's forte is PR where appearing to do the right thing in the right order with the correct soundtrack is enough. But what is the right thing? In marketing it is identifying, knowing, reaching and satisfying the customer and we are, simply, not doing that because of this false perception of the prevailing cultural conditions.

We are failing to satisfy the wrong customer.

Andrew Ian Dodge

So the solution is to have a party under David Cameron which is virtually indistinquishable from Labour or the Liberals? Surely that is denying Britons choice at the polls?

The attacks on UKIP are just pathetic and tired. At least you didn't call them racists as is the wont of some in the shadow cabinet.


Today I had a chat with my Muslim taxi driver and we both agreed that no matter how hard you worked houses were always that much more out of reach......so which do the Conservatives propose to do - to let wage inflation rip to make houses affordable - or to have a housing crash to wipe out the Wealth Effect which makes it impossible to convert income into capital but easy to convert capital into income ?

Matt Wright

Good article that touches on the opportunity to have a positive agenda that unites different wings of the party. The tiny minority who want to create imgainary battles between either/or positions in the party are the real danger. The vast majority just want Cameron to succeed and desire a clear focused agenda about what Conservatives stand for in the 21st Century. This is not rocket science, we can get ahead of Brown,



It's only in the media that Gordon's doing well. The reality is that he hasn't got a clue. The media are terrified of him. I don't think Conservatives should be paying quite so many compliments.

Obviously the corrupt big cheque and big ego suporters will all flock across to get a bit of media. Let them go over. The quality of what we have is improving by the day, and the quantity of support, if you look at the details of the polling.

Brown's only making headway with previous non-voters, who are unlikely to atually vote. Cameron is doing well, keeping remarkably sane and level-headed through it all.

He shouldn't start any Brown-praising as is suggested on PB today. What is there to praise? The reality is dreadful in nearly every respect.


Such a patronising, ignorant, arrogant and insulting attack on my politics and values from a party official demonstrates that it is CCHQ that is causing factionalism and splitting the party.

I was planning to go canvassing with my PPC tonight but I will go to dinner at my club instead. It is clear that the Party does not want the support of the tradional conservatives anymore.

Satisfied Franklin?

Tory T

Hear hear Mr. Franklin.

ukip have no principles, they actually stood a candidate against John Redwood and don't seem to care that their MEPs buy cars on Euro Parliament expenses. Talk about snouts in the Eurotrough.

In getting Labour MPs elected, they are the europhile left's best friend.

I liked the quote I read on another blog yesterday "So once again the Conservative Party faces off against its traditional arch-nemesis, the Conservative Party"

Tim's Tory Diaries this week are a welcome blast of sanity

Henry Mayhew - Ukipper / Delusional

Sorry Bill, egomania.


Hmmm "It is clear that the Party does not want the support of the tradional conservatives anymore"

What would be your definition of a traditional conservative, out of interest...?


" The Right, if it wants to survive in any meaningful form, now needs to articulate a lucid, comprehensive and electable alternative to the policies of Gordon Brown".

So that is the job of the Right is it? So what is the job of Cameron's Modernisers?

Dear Mr Franklin we are forever being told that the Conservative Party is a "broad church", (but only as long as it agrees with Cameron and you apparently).
The Tories do not have a God given right to govern. First of all you will have to persuade the majority that the Tories espouse their aspirations and undersatnd their fears and hopes; are relevant (and in that respect the actions of Cameron are more important than words or PR); it is worth their while that the English get off their backsides and vote for you.

Outline your so called centralist policies - persuade me to vote Conservative - I am all ears.


Team Conservative should remember it is just that....a team. The electorate punishes political parties that indulge in too much internal bickering and they don't care which side of the debate gets hurt (as Europhiles and Eurosceptics found out in 1997).

We do need to find as a party a more convincing user-friendly way of communicating our views to the public. I listened to some old speeches made by Mrs T the other day (yes, I am sad) and what struck me was that she used very clear, direct language speaking directly (often) to "the housewife" (a term you could use more freely in 1979 I guess!).

That contrasts with polticians today from all sides these days who too often lapse into "think tank speak" or ignore direct questions. We shouldn't be afraid of communicating the clear case for lower taxes, law and order, maintaining our sovereignty, tackling global warming, addressing family breakdown and improving standards in education and healthcare in plain English.

The comments to this entry are closed.

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker