Labour 3% ahead in Times poll

A Populus poll for today's Times suggests that David Cameron has improved the Tory standing but that he has yet to transform it.

Peter Riddell writes:

"The poll underlines the favourable impact of David Cameron’s election as Tory leader on the Conservative Party’s prospects. Tory support since his election has been in the 36 to 38 per cent range, compared with a maximum of about 32 per cent since the mid-1990s.  Mr Cameron’s leader rating is now much higher than that of his predecessors. On a scale of 0 to 10 his rating is 5.28. That compares with 4.58 for Michael Howard a year ago, and 4.2 to 4.3 for Iain Duncan Smith in the summer of 2003, before he was forced out."

The slightly disappointing message from the Populus survey is, however, that the last month's favourable blizzard of publicity has not produced a stronger Tory showing.  Given the electoral system's bias against the Tories the survey underlines the considerable uphill struggle that still awaits David Cameron.  Up until now he has made the easier PR announcements.  He has not made tough decisions on such issues as nuclear power, Iran, family values and how he intends to 'share the proceeds of growth' between tax cuts and spending increases.

Populus' headline finding relates to the LibDems.  Echoing Sunday's BPIX poll Britain's third party have sunk to 16% - their lowest standing for four years.

Mark Oaten (profiled here in The Independent) appears certain to stand for the LibDem leadership according to the BBC.  Mr Oaten hopes to be Charles Kennedy's successor when the ballot of the party's 70,000+ members is declared on 2nd March.  The LibDems' leadership sprint will take about seven weeks - a marked contrast to our seven month marathon.

Comments

[Coffee Monster]

The Populus polls in The Times always overestimate Labour at the expense of the Conservatives

e.g.
----------------------------------------------- Con Lab Lib
Populus Poll-------- 4th May 2005 - 27 41 23 Lab lead=14
General Election - 5th May 2005 - 33 36 23 Lab Lead=3

The Times has become a vehicle for New Labour and I would ignore their Populus polls. I think when you look at Mori, BPIX, YouGov and ICM, all of which have better track records, then you can conclude that the most likely situation is the Tories probably lead about 38-36.

[Frank Young]

re-assuring words.

I think the Times poll should act as a reminder of how much hard work we need to put in between now and the election.

[Chris]

Hmmmm I thought Populus were reducing the weighting that drastically increased Labour's share, obviously this hasn't happened.

I must admit though I still favour the other polling services. Their coverage of the general election and the leadership contest was completely rubbish. The figures I go byt these days are yougov and MORI who normally have at most 1% errors.

[James Hellyer]

Populus have changed their weightings. Under the old system, Labour's poll lead would have grown by two points.

I also think the poll Coffee Monster is complaining about is from their tracker poll, and this suffered from distortions of its own due to the "tracker" methodology.

[Sean Fear]

Yes, the Populus tracker poll was terrible.

Their eve of poll was Con 32%, Labour 38%, which was a respectable performance.

[Goldie]

Perhaps the public isn't so impressed with Dave's attempts to imitate New Labour.

I can't seem to shake the distinct impression the original Blair isn't that popular after 8 years of spin and no substance. Pray, why might they not like the copy?

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Populus' headline finding relates to the LibDems. Echoing Sunday's BPIX poll Britain's third party have sunk to 16% - their lowest standing for four years."

That will soon change once the formidable political operator John Hemming is installed in his rightful position as Liberal Democrat leader.

After all, this is the man who, while standing as a Mercian Nationalist candidate, was beaten by a dog (no, not Jenny Tonge) in an election. I kid ye not.

[liberal democrat]

"In 1980 there was an alliance between some Liberal Democrats and some Labour people to defeat the Conservatives."

John Hemming was clearly far-sighted then, even at university, considering the Liberal Democrats didn't come into being for another eight years!

[Alcibiades]

Nothing like "Tory modernisers" whistling to keep their spirits up, eh? 3% Labour lead already. Who would have thought it?

I voted for Davis (and would have voted for Fox) and like an increasing number of other Tories I regard the election of "Labour-Lite" Cameron as a total disaster.

Well not quite.

Now that the wheels are beginning to come off the bandwagon we can begin to look forward to a post-Cameron party run by a TORY.

[Ted]

Goldie
If you look at the deatail of the Populus poll TB is still surprisingly popular...

[Alcibiades]

I can't stand Blair but at least he's a "grown up"

The party was off its trolley voting for this guy. With all Davis's experience he was the obvious candidate after Fox was sadly knocked out.

Any Davis supporters dissatisfied with Cameron's activities are welcome to email me privately. There must be lots of us all over the country.

[Wat Tyler]

Populus looks like disappointing news for Cameron's Conservatives. As others have said, seems the bandwagon has got stuck.

Except of course- and I'm no polling expert- weren't Populus the ones who came up with that freak "DD ahead of DC" result that turned out to be the result of just asking young Aitken's mum what she thought?

[James Hellyer]

Wat,

like Coffee Monster you aren;t comparing like with like. That poll was actually the Times extrapolating something from the data tables of a main poll - without noting the effect on the margin of error the smaller sample would have. This poll is a standard Populus poll, of which the reliability is much greater.

[Richard]

I wanted Cameron to win but voted for Davis in the hope that if Cameron only won by a small margin he might not listen to some of the more insane ideas proposed by the modernisers. He has more charisma than Davis but needs to pay more attention to opinion polls that show many "right-wing" Tory policies are still popular (crime and immigration for example).

[Alcibiades]

Hey you guys this has been my first postings but Im really encouraged to read so many Tories who agree that things are going wrong under Cameron.

We've gotta work at it. We've got to get back to trad Tory principles like Education Vouchers, Patients Passport and new ideas like a flat rate tax.

If Cameron's not with us we'v got to work to ease him out, just like they got rid of IDS when he didnt come up to scratch.

[James Maskell]

I am not the most positive Tory at the moment. In fact on this forum Ive been thrown together with James Hellyer as overly critical of the Party. I dont have any ideological attachments and before the end of this election I felt I was a moderniser. A right winger when it came to bread and butter issues like Europe and Crime as well as being pro death penalty and in favour of euthanasia (of course with the right safeguards) but left on other issues like adoption, gay rights and welfare. Im finding that as more announcements are made by Cameron, Im further to the right then I thought.

I dont think Cameron has been a disaster. Hes done well to get the Conservative name out. The problem is that I prefer substance to style. When it comes to May 2007 I want policies I can believe in and support in Thanet. I can do the style part myself perfectly fine. Im better at providing policies and explaining them to the public, thats what I do best. The bounce factor isnt gone yet. He hasnt made enough policy announcements yet to move from the bounce to proper political swing. Wait till his announcements on welfare, pensions and tax come up. Thats where the votes are won. Thr idea he was proposing during the campaign is just that and needs more explanation before we can expect any effect on the polls.

[James Hellyer]

"In fact on this forum Ive been thrown together with James Hellyer as overly critical of the Party."

You don't have to say that as if it's a bad thing!

[Rob]

We could do with more people like James and James, I agree, right now it is very hard to feel positive towards Cameron's Conservatives, the education announcements are a step too far.

[James Maskell]

Im actually quite proud of that. But then if Cameron wasnt pre-empting his own policy Groups and coming up with these bad policies then I wouldnt be so critical.

I want to be supportive of this Party, I rally do...in fact I really should be by beliefs. But to be perfectly straight, Im not sure I can be under this leadership. This isnt just me wanting to cause trouble but looking at his policies, they are just bad policies that I cant sell. How can I sell the view that discrimination is the right way to go with candidates? I asked someone who couldnt care less about politics in general and she was appalled at the idea of reverse discrimination. I cant sell these policies if I cant believe in them myself.

[Sean Fear]

Very well put, James.

It's important for people to realise that unhappiness with what David Cameron is doing is not just confined to either the social Conservative Right, or the libertarian Right, of the Party, but actually is starting to spread across the whole spectrum of Conservative opinion.

[James Maskell]

rally = really. Im watching Blair's speech on respect and alcohol seems to be the best way of understanding how kicking people out of their homes helps promote respect...

[BW]

I see there are still plenty of suicide jockeys in the Conservative Party or claiming to 'support' it, wanting to plot to ensure a continued Labour dominance.

Alcibiades and others...

Complete Nutters....Out of touch with political reality.

[Sean Fear]

BW - on the contrary, we reject Labour dominance, which is why we don't want Labour dominance to continue if people wearing blue rosettes get elected.

James - I think ideas such as on-the-spot fines or evicting people from their own homes are disgusting.

[Elena]

Alcibiades, if you really think the way to go is to force Cameron out of his position, then I feel sorry for you. We would be consigned to the electoral dustbin.

OK, Cameron may have done some unpopular things, but we've not got to squander this - we're at our highest points in the opinion polls for ages.

If you compare our standing with the last Populus Poll you can see that the gap between us and Labour is the same in both polls, so there's not really been much change in, what will be, I'm sure, a two-party battle in the next election. We've drawn level with Labour on BPIX (+1 pt) and remember that Mori, ICM and YouGov followed the last Populus poll with Tory leads. We're doing well - we could be doing better - but we have a long way to go yet and I think we should wait for the YouGov, ICM and Mori polls before we start wailing.

[James Hellyer]

Thinking that the Conservative Party should try to improve on the status quo hardly makes people a "suicide jockey".

To suggest that it's not improving its chances by abandoning policies that were popular is also not "out of touch with reality".

[RobC]

Oh dear - one poor poll and the doom-and-gloom merchants appear.

When's the general election guys?

[malcolm]

Except Sean it's not.The polls even including todays are better than we've had for a long time and 16,000 new members in a month I would suggest is news that Camerons approach is leading us to popularity again.
It's still very early days let's give the guy a chance.

[James Hellyer]

"we're at our highest points in the opinion polls for ages."

Since Howard was in the lead last March and April you mean?

[James Maskell]

"suicide jockey"? I am a paid up member of the Conservative Party. Last night, I attended a CF event in Canterbury and had a great debate with other students there about the costs and benefits of being within the EU. I will return next week and whenever they would like me to return. I support any Conservatives who I think has this country's future at the forefront of its mind. I campaigned for my local Conservative MP and helped him get re-elected with a greater majority in May. I risked a lot in doing that. In fact Ive made some enemies in the Labour Party in doing so (Ive met them since then and they werent happy to see me at all). People who I will probably regret annoying in the next couple of years. I campaigned with a local Councillor in March 2003 on my first proper day with the Conservative Party for his re-election (we won) as well as delivering thousands of leafets on foot for County Councillors (one got in, the other got narrowly beaten). I have risked my own political ambitions for this Party so that others can stand up for us.

This is the cost I pay to fight for the future I want. I was given a second chance at life under Major. I owe what I am today to the Conservative Party.

I am extremely determined to get Steve Ladyman out of office in 2009 and replaced with a proper constituency MP who wont slag off the schools to which hes supposed to represent. I will fight as hard as I can so that both halves of Thanet are Conservative. If I have to I would risk it all because I want a united Conservative Thanet standing up for the residents and giving them the future they want. I want the Conservatives back in Government. But I dont like the way this Conservative Party is going. It just doesnt feel right.

[James Maskell]

And since you name Achibiades, why not name us all properly instead of throwing us altogether as "others"? Achiades isnt a regular critical Conservative though his comments are definitely welcome here. Im James Maskell, Im a Conservative and Im very much a regular critical.

[Jaz]

I for one think there's far too much complaining at the minute, Cameron has a given right to do what he wants, and as party members we should trust his judgement.

I would normally be critical for such policies...but frankly..another IDS would kill the party, another loss at the general election will be a disaster as we have no "plan B" - (no fox simply is NOT an option imo).

The power is in Camerons hands to get us elected, I am confident he will do this, and I am confident that well into the second term in office he will come up with more conservativebased policies.

[James Hellyer]

"Cameron has a given right to do what he wants, and as party members we should trust his judgement."

When did he get a mandate to make sweeping policy declarations? He was notably policy lite in the leadership election and can therefore claim *no* electoral mandate there.

But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised that you see the Party as being some form of elective dictatorship...

[howard stevenson]

Would he have got elected in the leadership contest if he had made the comments on schools and the NHS during the contest?

I have said it before on here, but 18 months for some concrete policies seems a long time.

[howard stevenson]

http://www.yougov.com/interactive/blogIntro.asp?jID=3&sID=4&kID=http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php

Interesting analysis of the Populus poll and the fact they have not changed the weighting much.

[John Hustings]

The only people who are not upset by Cameron are those who either

a) think Cameron is a trojan horse, who is "pretending" to be left-wing to get elected.

But these people have nothing but a quasi-religious faith to support their position.

or b) don't have any particular belief in, or commitment towards, conservative policies whether they be to do with crime, immigration, public services or such totemic issues as oppposition to reverse discrimination. There is no reason why such people would not be quite at home in the Labour Party, and indeed, should be fairly happy with the way that the country is being governed as it is.

David Cameron has done his best to depress just about anyone who has any conservative sympathies at all.

[Goldie]

Mr. Stevenson makes the right comment. I was an enthusiastic backer of Cameron before he even announced for leader.

But Mr. Stevenson asks: "Would he have got elected in the leadership contest if he had made the comments on schools and the NHS during the contest?"

I suggest the answer is NO. I, for one, would never have voted for him, and I feel, quite frankly, deceived. This issue must be addressed and it must be addressed squarely. Deception is no basis for the leadership of the Party or the country.

The worst thing of all is that Cameron is unilaterally surrending to the left-liberal media. He is acting in the way *they* want him to act, so that they will write positively about him.

I think he's making a most serious mistake. It seems to me that he would be ideally suited to apply the 'And Theory of Conservatism' and he would, I think, be able to win an election on that very basis.

Instead, he is thoughlessly dumping conservatism and turned the Party into Newest Labour.

It ain't gonna work.

[James Maskell]

Quite, howard stevenson. In fact it knocks out not just this years local elections but next years elections too! The European elections are next year as well if I am not mistaken. No Policy Group reporting till after then.

Does it really take 18 months to do an Inquiry into the countries economic competitiveness? I could have sworn I heard a speech from Cameron saying that he would have an independent body to oversee the golden rule. Did that take 18 months to come up with?

[Jaz]

"The only people who are not upset by Cameron are those who either

a) think Cameron is a trojan horse, who is "pretending" to be left-wing to get elected.

But these people have nothing but a quasi-religious faith to support their position.

or b) don't have any particular belief in, or commitment towards, conservative policies whether they be to do with crime, immigration, public services or such totemic issues as oppposition to reverse discrimination. There is no reason why such people would not be quite at home in the Labour Party, and indeed, should be fairly happy with the way that the country is being governed as it is.

David Cameron has done his best to depress just about anyone who has any conservative sympathies at all."

A wonderful assesment, and its probably true, I think Cameron is probably a trojan horse, as I dont think theres such a things as a "fake tory", especially one from a aristocratic background of wealth and power, taught is private schooling and influencial parents/in-laws.

"There is no reason why such people would not be quite at home in the Labour Party, and indeed, should be fairly happy with the way that the country is being governed as it is."

We are thankful we don't have you as our leader, as anyone who doesn't share the exact extremities of your view wouldn't be in the party.

The truth is, opinion polls have showed that people like what Cameron is saying, and as the party of opposition, which is right of labour...We have a duty to give people what they want, not to give the conservatives what they want.

You do know that we have to move left to get the center ground, it was obvious that the center ground wasnt going to come to us.

Its called the battle for the middle-people that we will win now... Either we shift to the right again..and let labour win its 4th election.. Or labour moved left. I know who I would prefer...

[James Maskell]

I think I am mistaken. the European elections will be next held in 2008. At least the Policy Groups will have responded by then...

[James Hellyer]

"I dont think theres such a things as a "fake tory", especially one from a aristocratic background of wealth and power, taught is private schooling and influencial parents/in-laws."

Tony Benn was a hereditary peer you know. John Thurso is a hereditary peer. I don't see that being titled and having influential connections makes you Conservative.

Conservatism is a matter of belief or outlook. In that regard our leader is wanting.

"We are thankful we don't have you as our leader, as anyone who doesn't share the exact extremities of your view wouldn't be in the party."

So believing people should keep more of what they earn is extreme? A belief in improving public services is extreme?

"You do know that we have to move left to get the center ground, it was obvious that the center ground wasnt going to come to us."

Firstly the "centre ground" has been moving to the right year on year. Secondly you really out to look up what Keith Joseph - and David Cameron - had to say on the "Centre ground" versus the "common ground".

It appears even David Cameron thinks David Cameron is wrong.

[Sean Fear]

"We have a duty to give people what they want, not to give the conservatives what they want"

Conservative are people (many millions of the population in fact). Why not give both Conservatives and "people" (whatever you mean by that) what they want.

[Ed R]

I think Cameron is doing a marvellous job despite the fact that I don't agree with everything he's saying. Sure, I wouldn't be put out by him tacking to the right more than he is, especially on education, but there's a bigger picture. There were plenty of things Major, Hague, IDS and Howard did or said that I was uncomfortable with as well. Parties are broad churches and recently the Conservative Party has felt more like a narrow chapel.

I like that a eurosceptic Conservative is making arguments on the environment, globalisation and global poverty -- ideas traditionally only argued through the prism of socialist structures. I like that the party is looking seriously at social action: ideas like the school leavers' program and the social action zones seem like they have merit. I like the fact that on any number of issues, Cameron's views appear to be close to my own: marriage, fox hunting, gay rights, etc. I like that the party is actually doing some serious research into issues -- sure, there's some territory that's been fenced off, but there's a lot still to be decided (it also allows for the party to really talk to people and to test ideas without being damaged by them -- quite a rare opportunity). I like that he is trying new ways to communicate the party's message to the young, and that he has a smart and effective media strategy which -- like it or not -- we need in the 21st century. He's getting himself out there.

I am perfectly comfortable with Cameron's direction -- he has surpassed my considerable expectations, and I will be fighting to help him form the next government in 2009/10. I want a eurosceptic government, a government that has genuine experience of business, a government that supports civil liberties, streaming in schools, environmental awareness, the need to keep the state in check rather than growing year-by-year and many more things. I won't agree with everything he says, but I will agree with a lot of it. He is doing a fine job and I hope the whole party will support him.

[Rob]

"I dont think theres such a things as a "fake tory", especially one from a aristocratic background of wealth and power, taught is private schooling and influencial parents/in-laws."

Seriously you have to be joking making a statement like that. There is a long history of as my dad used to call them 'pink socialists' in the Conservavtive party. People who were born into wealth and have certain aristocratic characteristics, who see themselves as the noble elite that knows best and must 'look after' those unfortunate souls not as lucky as themselves. I call them idiots myself. If anyone thinks that because of your background will cause you to be a 'true' tory then you are seriously misguided. Its where you are going, not where you come from that matters.

"Oh dear - one poor poll and the doom-and-gloom merchants appear.

When's the general election guys?"

Its nothing to do with any poll that people have been raising concerns, in fact it is usually those who support Cameron who are more concerned with opinion polls. The truth of the matter is that Cameron is failing to deliver on the factors that made him appealing in the leadership contest. While the issues members such as myself feared are indeed materialising.

In the contest we feared that Cameron was all style and little substance, that has been largely been proven to be correct. However that is no major concern. The issues which Cameron appeared to be appealing on have been vast disappointments.

His promise to withdraw immidiately from the EPP has not happened, indeed, a few rebellious voices from MEPs 'gone native' have ensured he has not mentioned the subject all together.

His suggestion of 'campaigning for capitalism' has transformed since becoming leader to 'standing up to big business'.

His sensible decision to have a serious think over policies with policy groups has been completely undermined by the off the cuff policy announcements he has made in the last 2 weeks which have rendered many of these policy reviews useless. And ruled out many possible strong policies.

And worst of all in my opinion, when he appeared to be very sound on education, indeed one of his cheerleaders Alice Thompson hinted in the contest that he would have a policy of bringing back a selective education system. I for one hoped that for once the Conservatives could take a dynamic new direction in education policy that could give the chance of many disadvantaged children to better themselves and solve a whole series of social problems. However after a half hearted jibe by Blair at PMQs and the winging of a few 11 plus failures and Cameron has immidiately ruled out the policy.

It is reasons like this, that make me feel negative about the party and more importantly the country's prospects. Cameron had better sort things out, now.

[a-tracy]

Rob if I remember it was David Davis supporting selective education and grammar schools not Cameron.

[Jaz]

"Does it really take 18 months to do an Inquiry into the countries economic competitiveness? I could have sworn I heard a speech from Cameron saying that he would have an independent body to oversee the golden rule. Did that take 18 months to come up with?"

Ofcourse not, but its all politics, he has to "appear" to be changing, and has to appear moderate and well-thought out. The policy groups have given him alot of press-attention, alot of media publicity, mostly good publicity.. And infact is partially a political calculation.

He's calculated that the Tory party wouldnt be stupid enough to backstab another leader, especially as the party has no backup plan. His polling is good, his effectiveness against brown seems to be better in the polls, and he's got positive media coverage with exception to the telegraph which people are intent on leaving anyway (yes I used ot read it..but its frankly the same 'tune' everytime i read it)

"So believing people should keep more of what they earn is extreme? A belief in improving public services is extreme?"

Precisely, Cameron hasnt said that what you earn shouldnt be your's. He has a belief in public services, so do I, I want the NHS to improve, do does he, I think immigration might be useful for our nation so does. He... I don't think theyre should be any taxcuts except business rate and perhaps in the lower brackets.

Things that cameron hasnt talked about that I think is conservatism.
-Security and policing
-Less meddling in the family, (getting rid of that smacking law)
-Less meddling and deregulation of leisure markets...
-Getting inactives back into the workforce.
-Find out why Baladeshi and Pakistani women refuse to work.
-Reducing benefits for people over 4 children without any decent household income.

I don't think its wise to have wide-scoping tax cuts as many want. It gives the wrong image..and is difficult to sell.
Its unwise to promote private schools strongly, because people think its promoting only better education for the well-off.
I also don't think its right to devalue the NHS to any insurance scheme at all.. I like the NHS, I admit that futher choices between private and government should be increased. But I think it provides something closer to a utopia.

I'm one of those people who think we should avoid potentially unpopular policies..the conservative brand is extremely damaged, we need to lift ourselves out of the crater of the Major government.

"Seriously you have to be joking making a statement like that. There is a long history of as my dad used to call them 'pink socialists' in the Conservavtive party. People who were born into wealth and have certain aristocratic characteristics, who see themselves as the noble elite that knows best and must 'look after' those unfortunate souls not as lucky as themselves. I call them idiots myself. If anyone thinks that because of your background will cause you to be a 'true' tory then you are seriously misguided. Its where you are going, not where you come from that matters."

But your family is your most strongest influence...Which is why I strongly, strongly doubt that Cameron is anywhere near socialist.

"His promise to withdraw immidiately from the EPP has not happened, indeed, a few rebellious voices from MEPs 'gone native' have ensured he has not mentioned the subject all together."

The problem is extremely complicated, his the MEPs are rebelling, and Merkel..now frankly the leader of probably the most powerful country in Europe doesn't like the idea. Hague is responsible for this I believe...

[James Maskell]

But this Conservative party doesnt believe in streaming. It believes in setting, Ed R. He also wants to control business more from the sounds of its criticism of confectioners. Not to mention the fact he said he wanted to be tougher on big business.

And as for fencing, the Policy Groups wont publish its results for another 17 months so Im sure well have more territory fenced off before then, look at todays announcements...thats "Social Justice" policy group cut down a little bit more by the announcements relating to the "Respect" agenda.

[howard stevenson]

We have moved the right way in the polls. We have broken out of the 30-35% range. Cameron is trying hard to change the image of us all as nasty right wing nutters. This would explain some of the bounce in the polls the "Tories are not so bad after all."

But we have to be anchored in something. We need a reference point around which move. Our core beliefs. If you asked what TBs core beliefs are could you name them? Likewise I could not name Camerons. I hope Camerons succeeds as I do not want a fourth Labour term. But question becomes what price are we will to pay for that electoral success? How far is DC going to takes us?

[howard stevenson]

I have just reread my last post, sorry for the poor English. Thats a comprehensive education for you!

[James Hellyer]

Precisely

As you think basic tenets of Conservatism are extreme, why are you a Conservative?

Cameron hasnt said that what you earn shouldnt be your's

Yes he has. His "sharing the procedes of growth" formulation assumes that any extra money generated by the economy is his to decide what to do with. He is not starting from the basis that I should have as much of my earnings as possible.

"He has a belief in public services, so do I, I want the NHS to improve, do does he"

He believes in a socialist system, but is willing to subcontract. I'm not sure that can be taken as definitive Conservatism.

"Its unwise to promote private schools strongly, because people think its promoting only better education for the well-off."

Thank you for confusing your inability to sell a policy with the party being unable to do so.

"I also don't think its right to devalue the NHS to any insurance scheme at all"

As social insurance models deliver markedly better results, I can only assume you favour thousands of needless deaths a year.

[John Hustings]

"As social insurance models deliver markedly better results, I can only assume you favour thousands of needless deaths a year."

Absolutely, we should turn this argument around:

James Bartholomew says that we have a *minimum* of 15,000 deaths every year because we have the NHS and not an average health service. Do you want to be responsible for the death of all those people because of Cameron's craven opportunism?

[Richard]

I think David Cameron ought to read James Bartholomew's excellent book. Mind the Gap by Ferdinand Mount also contains some interesting ideas.

[john Skinner]

Doooh! Hellyer and Co are doin' my head in. For sheer mind-numbing negativity, they take the biscuit. They remind me of Ben Elton in the eighties with his Thatcher rants. Why do they think we must have instant savage rebuttals of any positive comment on Cameron?
I've worried about Mr H for some time. And then I happened upon his website. Yes, the same old diatribes, but more interestingly, the responses. "0 comments, 0 comments, 0 comments".
Sad, isn't it? Nobody's interested in his views, but if he posts on this site, he gets the audience he craves.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Actually I'm interested in James Hellyer's views, John Skinner, despite the fact that they are often divergent to my own, and several others are as well, otherwise his blog would not have been linked to this one by the editor.

It's interesting to note you don't have a blog of your own, and that all you have to offer are ad hominem attacks on James instead.

[Simon C]

Agreed Daniel.

John that was pretty unnecessary. I hope you reconsider & regret it in the morning.

[Frank Young]

"I'm interested in James Hellyer's views...despite the fact that they are often divergent to my own"

I second that.

[Chris Palmer]

Some people don't have blogs Daniel, because they don't have the time to spend writing and updating one. I thought about starting my own blog, but decided against it - not because I didn't have many ideas, but because who actually bothers reading them?

As I see it, David Cameron is saying some things I agree with, some I disagree with. However, he has only been in the job 4-5 weeks and therefore I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. The opinion polls are up, even Tony Blair has been forced to admit that the Conservative party are a threat. In the end, he's the Conservative Party leader. I will be supportive even if others will not, as I think that is where the party has failed in the past. Look at the Lib Dems now for evidence of just what can happen to a political party that doesn't support its leader.

On a completely different theme, I have just seen Blair on Newsnight and before that, John and Dan Snow presenting Who Owns Britain. Any thoughts from others on these programs?

[Richard]

Unless I am mistaken, the landowners in London were compelled to sell property they were renting out by Conservative legislation. I find it outrageous that the Tories extended right-to-buy legislation to those occupying PRIVATE leaseholds. Giving people the right to buy state-owned council houses is giving the people their property back. Allowing them the right to buy private land even if the owner does not wish to sell is theft.

That said I think an increase in small organic farmers at the expense of agribusiness would be socially and economically beneficial for the country. Cutting off the subsidies that make agribusiness viable (as well as opening markets to cheaper foreign food) would be a step towards this.

[James Maskell]

Give him the benfit of the doubt? He knew what he was signing up for when he said he would stand. He's Leader of the Opposition now. Why should he be given the benefit of the doubt? We are supposed to support our leader because we are a Conservative Party member? What a ridiculous assertion. That idea means we have to follow like a sheep just because we are part of that organisation.

David Cameron proposes things of his own volition. We criticise it as we should do. If we dont criticise it then he would think his views are justified and he would push ahead assuming we would be in favour. Im not going to lie to the Party to make itself feel better about itself.

[John Hustings]

"We are supposed to support our leader because we are a Conservative Party member? What a ridiculous assertion."

It's the only defence that Cameron supporters are left with. Few of them can bring themselves to defend what he actually *says*.

[Alexander Drake]

Surely if we are serious about getting this guy in to No. 10, then we all have to be ambassadors for him. Critical commentary on his policies is one thing, but support for him as the alternative PM is completely different. The moment internal factional/philosophical differences get in the way of that, the Party's toast.

In the end, surely what unites members of the Conservative Party is greater than what divides them.

PS John, I don't have a problem with defending what Cameron's been saying. He has been pursuing the only strategy available to make the Conservatives a serious, competitive, professionally-based campaigning outfit, and I think it has the potential to pay significant electoral dividends. The alternative is to make Labour the natural party of government.

[libertorian]

It seems to me that James Hellyer is one of the most intelligent and interesting posters on this site, and I very much hope the Conservative Party has more of his type than that of the likes of John Skinner.

He's an articulate champion of Conservative beliefs (Remember them, Mr Cameron?), and even when I (rarely) disagree with him, his posts are always worth reading.

[James Maskell]

Yes, Alexander, we do have to be ambassadors for the Conservative Party and I dont shirk from that role. However Im not going to lie on this blog and be supportive when in my heart of hearts dont support it.

[Sean Fear]

Or to put it another way, James, the Conservative Party is bigger than David Cameron.

[Sean Fear]

So long as one does not resort to personal abuse of David Cameron and other senior figures, I think contributors to this blog are entitled to criticise anything they come up with.

[Guardsman]

Having visited this web for the first time on a recommendation I am in despair at the attacks on David Cameron.

Through family connections I have known David since he was a child and I can tell you that he comes from one of the finest and best-connected families in his county. David is a traditionalist, not a socialist as some seem to believe. In former days he would almost certainly have been a supporter of a patriotic group like the Monday Club but times have changed and these days it is illegal to express our true views about Homosexuals, ethnic minorities and other facts of life. We Tories therefore have to box clever.

I urge my colleagues to remember that we can achieve nothing UNTIL WE ARE IN GOVERNMENT. It is therefore essential to trim until we have grasped the levers of power. Then we can begin to put into effect all the policies we really believe in

Those who recall Prince Hals’s contemptuous dismissal of Falstaff and his friends in Shakespeare’s Henry IV will know exactly what I mean. Hal could not dump his friends until he was king and in exactly the same way David cannot cast aside the temporary policies which seem to be upsetting so many people until he is Prime Minister.

Take the homosexuals for instance. As an old soldier I have my own views and I have no doubt that David shares my opinion of these people, but as I have said WE MUST BOX CLEVER. Once we have taken power something will happen. Maybe some child will be assaulted and murdered. Then and only then can we act in the decisive way we want with the full support of the public.

It’s the same with Europe. For a while I supported UKIP but I realised that the Conservative Party is the best option for an early withdrawal and rejoined the Conservatives under Howard. I liked Michael Howard. He had many good points, but unfortunately his essential “foreignness” repelled many voters. In David we have a fine young Englishman, without a trace of alien blood, who will achieve great things for this nation and for the Conservative Party.

Believe me, my friends if we pull together and support Cameron he will achieve all the things we desire. Just give him a chance!

[James Maskell]

I dont really care which family he comes from. His background I cant sell. His policies are the only things I can sell on the streets. The policies hes provided arent ones I can sell though.

Are you implying that his policies that he is giving now is just a cover? Therefore isnt Cameron deceiving the British public as well as his own Party? If Cameron proposes something then I take it as done that that is what he will do in Government. If this is truly a cover just to get the Tories into power then I will leave this Party and never return.

I know you mean well and party unity is important if the Party is to be successful. But the fact remains that the policies thus proposed arent ones I can sell.

[Frank Young]

I equally dispair at many of the commments made about David Cameron and the changing party. But I remind myself, quite rightly, that this is an open and candid forum where people express views free from the constraints of representing the party.

I know that come election times, most, if not all of the contributors on here who are members of the party will be working hard to elect Conservative MPs.

[Sean Fear]

Are you suggesting, Guardsman, that David Cameron's opinions on the "facts of life" are in reality, very hardline ones?

[James Hellyer]

"Take the homosexuals for instance. As an old soldier I have my own views and I have no doubt that David shares my opinion of these people, but as I have said WE MUST BOX CLEVER. Once we have taken power something will happen. Maybe some child will be assaulted and murdered..."

For all David Cameron's faults, I sincerely doubt he's secretly planning some pogrom against Britain's homosexual population, never mind pinning his hopes of justifying one on child murder. I'm rather worried that anyone would think that, never mind want that...

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

I think we may have a troll in our midst. It's unfortunate that the Editor is in the US as there are some highly distasteful sentiments expressed above, worthy only of deletion in my view.

[John Hustings]

I get the feeling that guardsman is a bit of a wind-up.

But getting back to the bigger point:

I don't see what mandate Cameron has to change the party's principles, and I don't see why the party should go along with it.

Those who say, "we must do it to get elected", have to face the question over whether a) traditional conservative principles (especially apropos of public service reform) have really been tested and b) whether David Cameron's tactic is really working. Do people really *want* what he is offering? I don't see any evidence for it.

Also, in the most general sense, there are 3 types of conservative:

1) economic liberal, social liberal (libertarian)

2) economic conservative, social conservative

3) economic liberal, social conservative (like myself)

David Cameron, on the other hand, is demonstrating himself to be an economic conservative and a social liberal. In other words, he pleases no-one. Nothing he says can be construed as conservative in any of those three senses.

What is the point of the tactic David Cameron is pursuing? He seems to be attempting to appeal to the likes of Polly Toynbee. But she would *never* vote conservative, even on pain of death. Neither would most guardianistas. All the people who *could* vote conservative David Cameron is pitching far far to the left of.

This doesn't seem like a smart tactic. It seems stupid.

Oh by the way, it appears we have elected Michael Portillo as our leader by stealth. I don't see any difference between Cameron and Portillo, except that we know Cameron a bit less, so he will take a bit longer for people to work out.

[James Maskell]

DVA, I wouldnt say its trolling. Guardsmans comments imply Cameron has some unkind views on certain issues but its not that bad. I think the majority of us are above that.

[Sir Buffy de Vere Spoofington, Bt]

I once danced with a gel who was David Cameron's third cousin twice removed, and I can therefore say with complete conviction and authority that he is a perfectly splendid chap and will make a sound prime minister.

No one of that calibre could possibly believe the stuff he's sayin' now, and so it must be a ruse to flush the birds out of their cover and toward the guns. Mark my words, sir, every one at the club is expectin' him within four hours of enterin' Downin' Street to tar and feather all Liberal Democrats, round up all the socialist oiks and shoot 'em, scrap votes for women and re-annex India. Damn clever if you ask me. Imagine the look on the faces of all the scruffs as they're headin' off to sing-sing, what?

So you young chaps just keep your powder dry for when we'll need it, and let's not have a nasty miff in the mess.

[Mike Christie]

Sir Buffy, I thought a chap of your pedigree would know to warn chaps who might be drinking tea before making such comments. I'm sure you'll do the decent thing and unbelt for a new keyboard and some screen wipes.

Thanks awfully!

[Chris Palmer]

I was thinking of constructively replying to this thread. However, it's obvious that the content and tone has rapidly deteriorated - and therefore it’s not worth my effort even bothering.

[Sir Buffy de Vere Spoofington, Bt]

Palmer? What the hell you playin' at messin' about with computers? Get downstairs and polish my polo trophies this instant.

[James Hellyer]

John Hustings:

"Also, in the most general sense, there are 3 types of conservative:

1) economic liberal, social liberal (libertarian)

2) economic conservative, social conservative

3) economic liberal, social conservative (like myself)"

While I'd reverse the definitions of economic liberal and economic conservative, I'd broadly agree with this.

However, I think there's a fourth class - people who are socially Conservatives. By this I mean they either vote that way out of habit (true of many of the older members who joined when it was the done thing), or because they just want a change of government and for whatever reason think our lot will manage it better.

[Graeme Archer]

I'm sorry, I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed Sir Buffy's p*sstake of Guardsman. Have we a new Peter Simple in our midst?! Bravo, sir.

[Ted]

Graeme - hear, hear!
Buffy's is best way to deal with Guardsman's comments - which I was struggling to match my usually liberterian views against wish Editor was around to censor. Was trying to decide if it was just a distatesful spoof or deliberate provacation - humour is the best medicine if the latter....

[Oberon Houston]

John, you raise a very interesting point, regarding what 'type' of conservative various people regard themselves as.

I guess I would consider myself a Traditional Conservative, of which one of the biggest influences on me are 'scepticism of change' and 'what works'. This does not mean that I dislike change, infact change in order to preserve is one of the founding principles of the Party, however any change requires a heavy burden of 'proof', or a measured approach before a 'Traditional' Tory like myself will accept it.

This is one of the main differences between many Traditional Tories like myself and those of the 'New Right' advocating economic liberalism, or NeoCons, who prefer traditional values of the past, but crucially, values that would need a big change from the current status-quo, so...oh oh , conflict with the scepticism of change rule.

This is why I instinctively as well as politically prefer Cameron's more measured approach. Instinctively, because the language he uses is measured and limited, therefore that sits well with me. Politically, because the vast majority of the electorate also feel these instincts, therefore the approach satisfies my 'what works' preference. Those that advocate rapid change, or a radical agenda may well have the best solution, however Conservatives like myself will need a very good case before we will plumb for it, which of course often puts us at odds with the 'Ideological Right'.

[malcolm]

Yes I think I would support what you say Oberon.Too many on the ideological right feel that don't have to sell their more radical ideas very hard,we (the public) should just buy them.If we don't we are either stupid or crypto socialists.Hence the reaction to amongst other things the 'patients passport' or 'education vouchers'.Both of which were 'sold ' very ineptly by their advocates.Or more accurately weren't sold at all.

[Richard]

I take my brand of Conservatism from the reactionary Toryism of Lord Salisbury. He wedded the Tories to economic liberalism over a century before Margaret Thatcher did while doing all he could to halt the march of socialism.

Although not a Randian I was also influenced very strongly by Ayn Rand. I found her book Atlas Shrugged to be very uplifting. If only we could have a strike of the talented and powerful to bring down socialism in this counry today!

[malcolm]

I hardly think Socialism in this country really exists anymore Richard.I'm not sure Lord Salisbury is the best role model either,the issues facing us in 2006 are very different than those facing us in the 1890's!

[Richard]

I suppose it depends how you define socialism. A state-run health and education system combined with the government hoovering up 40% of the nation's wealth looks suspiciously like socialism to me. Not to mention all the regulations enforced on British industry both by Blair and Brussels.

I agree that the problems of the 1890s are quite different from the problems we face today. Back then the Tories were trying to prevent the rise of the overmighty state. Now they have to reverse it. I was merely explaining where I got my philosophy of reactionary anti-statist Conservatism from.

[James Hellyer]

"Too many on the ideological right feel that don't have to sell their more radical ideas very hard"

I'd say the opposite. I think we realise the need to sell our policies. That's precisely why it's so galling to see the the very people who were too incompetent to even try and sell them, give them up on spurious pretexts.

[wasp]

But James you can't sidle onto the centre ground you have to drive a train into it. Cameron has arrogantly stormed onto Labour's ground without leaving any flanks open for attack.

His willingness to be the centre of British politics means that he is the only leader since major that could get there.

[James Hellyer]

Sir Keith Joseph made a distinction between the Centre Ground and the Common ground. The former is an exercise is positioning and just splits the differences between parties. The latter represents the values of the electorate.

His point was that while it was essential for the Conservatives to appeal to the Common ground and show that their policies relflected the values of the people, if they simply occupied the Centre ground, all that would happen is a perpetual leftwards drift.

Nothing proves this point better than immigration. Moving to the centrem involves taking a more relaxed stance on this issue, even though that's the opposite of what the electorate want.

[Sean Fear]

Socialism doesn't exist as a viable option, anymore. Social Democracy is alive and kicking, and the Conservative Party has no real plan to deal with that, so far as I can see.

[Ted]

James
A good defense of Cameron's NHS policy in the Times today from D Finkelstein.

I think too often we get caught up in the means rather than the ends. I believe in a health service free at point of delivery but also in one that is more locally managed, offers high levels of clinical expertise, is cost effective, is demand rather than supply managed (some of these are not necessarily compatible - demand managed may mean less cost effective?).

I think that DC is right to throw out rejected policies and start afresh - he can always say later that he now recognises x is a good idea after all but priority has to be to get the Party recognised as one that appeals across the electorate free of the taint of failure.

[James Hellyer]

It's an awful defence of Cameron's health policy. Finkelstein claims that the NHS is good at cost control. He clearly hasn't noticed that it increasingly controls costs by cancelling operations and allowing buildings to degrade to dangerous states.

The point he misses is that although other systems are more expensive, they actually deliver far better value for money - as any examination of international survival rates tends to show.

The rest of his argument seems to consist of him setting up a series of Aunt Sallies that he then obligingly knocks down. The arguments put forward for social insurance aren't based on cost or sourcing drugs at a lower rate, they are based on the structural reform delivering better patient focussed service that raises survival rates.

The argument he puts forward can really be summed up as "bad health care on the cheap". Some policy.

[malcolm]

I'm struggling to think of anyone in Britain from the 'ideological right' who has sold their ideas effectively for about 20 years.Can anyone help me?

[James Hellyer]

"I'm struggling to think of anyone in Britain from the 'ideological right' who has sold their ideas effectively for about 20 years."

Is this the traditional dismiss the ideas because we had "the misfortune of Portillo, Letwin, et al on our sales force" argument?

[Selsdon Man]

The Adam Smith Institute sold its ideas effectively when we had a Conservative government, Malcolm.

UKIP's 2004 European Election campaign was highly effective too.

[Rob]

"I'm struggling to think of anyone in Britain from the 'ideological right' who has sold their ideas effectively for about 20 years.Can anyone help me?"

Perhaps in the last 10 years I cant think of any, but in the last 20 there have been a few.

I would say my views go back to Robert Peel in the 1830/40s. Economically, I am the most Liberal man you will probably ever meet, on the social side liberal but not excessively.

I see Cameron as an traditionalist, paternalist almost neo-conservative.

[Graeme Archer]

Setting aside the "slag the leadership" fing, this "what sort of Conservative are you?" is quite a good parlour game isn't it. I was listening to PM on R4 this evening, getting ready to shout at Peter Tatchell on Sacrabanie (sp?), when, not for the first time, I found myself agreeing with nearly everything he said. Is Peter Tatchell a Tory after all? On my blog I wrote about Tatchell and Hughes, the "social" liberal ... no-one seems to talk about that campaign anymore.

Anyway I must be a social conservative (yes, really, though I think it important to extend the reach of the traditional institutions) and an economic liberal ... but are there many people (Guardsman aside) who wouldn't describe themselves thus?

[Sean Fear]

Malcolm, it's easier to sell one's ideas if one actually believes in them.

Eurosceptic organisations have generally sold their ideas well, as has Migrationwatch.

[malcolm]

Nope can't remember a thing about UKIPs campaign in 2004 except that old charlatan Kilroy Silk getting a lot of publicity.
While I like what Migration watch are doing I doubt if 1 in a 100 of the electorate have even heard of them.
I think we need to face it chaps there has been no effective selling of radical rightwing ideas for many years.Perhaps it would be worth reflecting on that before criticising Cameron in his attempt to make the Conservative Party electable.
On a different subject,I'm in the audience for Question Time tomorrow.Will any fellow bloggers be there?

[John Hustings]

"Is Peter Tatchell a Tory after all?"

No Graeme :) LOL

Peter Tatchell is not a Tory.

You have an obsession with trying to identify with people from other ends of the political spectrum.

Peter Tatchell is a little more consistent in his moonbattery than others on the left, but that is only because the main cause that motivates him is homosexuality and he puts that above all other things. So whereas some leftwingers side with Muslim extremists -- even if those extremists hate gays -- (such as Ken Livingstone) Peter Tatchell is not willing to make such alliances.

But if you listen to Peter Tatchell on another topic like, say, Israel, the politically correct thought processes emerge again, and he retreats into inconsistency and illiberalism.

[Sean Fear]

So Malcolm, do you conclude that right wingers should stop promoting their ideas, or try promoting them better?

[James Hellyer]

"Nope can't remember a thing about UKIPs campaign in 2004 except that old charlatan Kilroy Silk getting a lot of publicity."

I delivered an exceptionally strong result, with them even topping the ballot in some constituencies.

" While I like what Migration watch are doing I doubt if 1 in a 100 of the electorate have even heard of them."

They don't need to have heard of them. However if they have seen a news item on immigration, then there is a good chance that they have heard them, and their arguments have been winning the debate.

" I think we need to face it chaps there has been no effective selling of radical rightwing ideas for many years."

So we're back to "David Cameron's supporters were too incompetent to sell these ideas, therefore we should trust their support of David Cameron."

Not convinced!