By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
In my Times column (£) I offer eight pieces of New Year advice to David Cameron:
Continue reading "Eight pieces of New Year advice for David Cameron" »
By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
We've already had new year messages from Nick Clegg and from Ed Miliband. Today it's David Cameron's turn. It couldn't be more different from early Cameron when in a different economic climate he was quoting Gandhi and was encouraging all of us to “be the change we want to see in the world.”
Today - more than half-way through a fixed-term parliament scheduled to last for five years - his message is sober and focused. He ignores the internal party controversies of Europe, immigration or gay marriage. There's no mention of early modernising themes like climate change or even of the Big Society. He makes no mention of the Liberal Democrats or Labour. It's sensibly focused on the challenges facing Britain and his Government's response to those challenges.
He mentions key achievements...
We've cut the deficit by a quarter, he says...
500,000 more people have jobs....
There are 1,000 more academies...
24 million workers are paying less income tax....
The state pension has gone up more than it's ever gone up.
By Paul Goodman
Follow Paul on Twitter.
Not so long ago, people were both more free and more orderly. For example, there were no race relations laws: you could say what you liked about ethnic minorities (as they usually weren't called then). The English always drank: "He gives your Hollander a vomit ere
the next pottle can be filled". But - again by way of example - fewer illegal drugs were available, so the policing and health and social costs of substance abuse were far lower. And since there was no internet, it followed that there was no online porn. Although the churches were emptying, Christianity was woven deep into the nation's culture, like the threads on the Bayeaux Tapestry.
Today, people are less free but more disorderly, or at least more diverse. You must watch what you say about ethnic minorities or gay people. But illegal drugs, once consumed only by the elites, are available to the masses. And you can say pretty much what you like about Christians, or at least people with socially conservative views. (Though Nick Clegg thought it prudent to claim that he doesn't believe that those who oppose same-sex marriage are "bigots). Where once the presence of the Church of England floated like some universal fog, today there lumbers health and safety...or the European Union.
Continue reading "Cameron risks the revenge of "the elderly of the earth"" »
By Paul Goodman
Follow Paul on Twitter
Tim Montgomerie yesterday offered congratulations to George Osborne, and commiserations to Policy Exchange, on respectively gaining and losing Neil O'Brien. Seconded. As Tim wrote, "Team Cameron is succeeding in recruiting the calibre of people that it needs to maximise its effectiveness".
Continue reading "A twitch of a tentacle from Octopus Osborne puts Neil O’Brien in post" »
By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
Throughout this week we'll be previewing next week's Autumn Statement. Pete Hoskin will wonder if George Osborne should abandon his fiscal targets. Paul Goodman will return to the need for a long-term examination of what the British state should spend. Tom Frostick will urge the Chancellor to target wealth but John Redwood will urge Mr Osborne to keep a lid on the tax burden. Andrew Lilico will look at the global risks to the Chancellor's economic objectives.
Today I want to briefly note that after some early mixed signals the Chancellor does seem to have developed a pretty clear narrative on economic policy. Some of this was set out in his recent article for The Times (£). But these are three top messages we are hearing regularly from his lips and from those of his lieutenants...
Continue reading "George Osborne's economic narrative is taking shape" »
By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
Matthew d'Ancona interprets the speech as Cameron's challenge to the nation, to choose revival or decline: "The purpose of this speech was to remind party and public alike that the Tories represent the whole nation — just as that nation faces a moment of historic decision in the great “global race”. Does it modernise its education, welfare and health systems to make itself fit for the task of planetary competition, or settle for heritage status as a once-great country, a busking midget singing songs for pennies about its glory days as a giant?" (Evening Standard).
Nick Robinson focused on Cameron's attempt to tackle "the party of the rich" label: "The man who's heard himself branded as posh and out of touch and his party as that of the rich and the privileged fought back. The Tories were, he said, not the party of the better off but the party of the "want to be better off". He was a man who didn't defend privilege but wanted to spread it." (BBC). Andrew Lilico (ConHome) applauds the repositioning; "He said that Conservatism is the means to serve the needs of the poor. He said we would use Conservative methods to meet progressive ends. He said not cutting the deficit would harm the poor."
Ben Brogan calls the speech "defining" and proof that there's still fight in him. (Telegraph).
James Forsyth is struck by the clarity of Cameron's new message... but asks if he will stick with it... "Cameron has tried to portray himself simply as a competent steward of national affairs, shying away from ideological definition. But this speech was different. It had a central argument, about the need for Britain to become more competitive. His answer was right-wing: boost enterprise, improve schools and deal with an unaffordable welfare system. Downing Street’s challenge now is to have the discipline to stick with this message. It must resist the temptation to start flirting with other arguments or to fall back into the complacency that has too often characterised Cameron’s leadership." (Spectator). Ian Birrell thought the speech has the potential to unite the Tory Left and Right (Guardian).
I cannot deny that my grasp of public affairs is not as sure as it might be since, for reasons that readers of this publication will understand, I am presently incapable of taking my seat in the House of Lords. I must also confess that my mastery of the means of communication on which this modern age depends is, alas, incomplete (the mysteries of the telegraph remain a wonder to me). None the less, Mary Anne, being returned yesterday afternoon to Hughenden from her duties, has read to me a transcript of the speech of the Labour Party leader to his conference, and I am dictating this article to her by way of response.
I wish to make it clear at the outset that I am by no means ill-disposed to Edward Miliband. As I say, my grasp of present events is a little tentative, but I understand from Mary Anne that my party is now in coalition with Mr Gladstone. Readers will comprehend that I find this deeply disturbing, and I see from the opinion polls that my view is widely shared: as I once said, England does not love coalitions. So I am prepared to give Mr Miliband a fair hearing. As I once told the Commons, the cause of labour is the cause of England. This is why the Conservative Party is - or should be - the party of labour, as well as the party of capital.
Continue reading "Benjamin Disraeli: Miliband leads the No Nation party, not the One Nation party" »
By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
i've been working the phones tonight to try and establish genuine Tory reaction to Ed Miliband's speech. There was first surprise, even anxious amazement. As the evening has worn on there's less worry.
The reaction can be summarised under two headings: (1) He's now safe as Labour leader and (2) He's as beatable as he was yesterday.
On (1) the view is that Ed Miliband was very unlikely to be replaced as Labour leader before he spoke without notes. Now it's certain he won't be replaced. In other words, said one of my sources, there'll be no Darling, no woman leader or no leader from the new generation. That suits Conservatives, they said.
On (2) my sources reiterated the attack plan I disclosed last Monday. Labour will be attacked for planning a tax bombshell because they won't control debt. Labour will be attacked for being on the wrong side of the immigration, welfare and crime questions. Third, Labour will be attacked for being unable to take tough decisions. Are any of those three attacks less potent than they were yesterday? No, no, not really.
***
By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
After Andrew Mitchell overshadowed the Lib Dem conference rumours that Conservative strategists were going to ask William Hague to head butt a nurse in order to upstage Ed Miliband's big speech have proven to be unfounded!
The best I can offer is the slogan for next week's Tory Conference...
Drum roll please....
It's "Britain can deliver".
Party sources tell me that the slogan aims to capture the sense that Britain under the Coalition government is making real progress. Not just in terms of reducing the deficit by a quarter but also making long-term reforms that will serve the country's future competitiveness. Key achievements that will be spotlighted include the progressive lowering of corporation tax and pensions reform as well as the flagship changes to welfare and schools made by IDS and Michael Gove.
There'll be an Olympics sub-text to the Conference. The PM and ministers will argue that London 2012 was concrete proof that Britain can still do great things and even greater things lie ahead.
Labour will be presented as yesterday's party tied to yesterday's solutions - still wedded to an outdated and now impossible belief that higher taxes and higher spending can solve every problem.
> Boris Johnson, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Gove are some of the stars in ConHome's fringe programme.
By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter
John Major was the main guest on this morning's Andrew Marr show and his interview was notable for five main things...
First, he suggested that economic recovery was probably underway. Twenty years ago Norman Lamont said that the green shoots of recovery were emerging and he was shot down for saying so. But, said Sir John, he was right. Today, he suggested, it was also probably true: "Recovery begins from the darkest moment. I am not sure but I think we have passed the darkest moment." The former PM pointed to employment and manufacturing data that suggested Britain had turned the corner, as did stock market sentiment. The recovery would be slow, he continued, but it was underway. This was Lord Bates' argument this time, last week, on ConHome.Downing street thinks the same but won't say so until there's a lot more data in. What they can't work out is whether economic recovery will lead to political recovery. Will the return of a modest feel good factor overwhelm the pain of difficult cuts?
Second, Major urged the Conservative Party to unite behind David Cameron. There is, he said, an "inevitability" about division and leadership speculation in politics. For the last thirty years the Conservative Party has been divided in different ways - first between economic wets and dries and then, in the 1990s, over Europe. “If the Conservative Party has learnt anything," Sir John told Andrew Marr, "it’s that regicide is not a good idea.” The man who benefitted from Lady Thatcher's "regicide" and went on to win the 1992 election as a result, praised the Mayor of London as an "attractive, able" politician who is "doing a supremely good job". Boris Johnson is not in parliament, however, and keeps saying he has no intention of challenging David Cameron. People talking of a leadership challenge were filling newspapers but weren't living "in the real world". The party, Sir John said, needed to remember that "disunity costs votes".