David Cameron: We must fast forward to the new Conservative Party

Key sections of speech:

HUMOUR: "Well it’s been a busy few months.  Charles Kennedy’s retired. Tony Blair’s about to retire.  He’s certainly taking his time over it… Soon I will be the longest serving leader of a major political party in the country.  But don’t worry, Gordon; don’t worry Ming…  I won’t be attacking my opponents for their youth and inexperience."  Reagan would have been proud of that line!

A HEALTHY PARTY: "We’ve signed up 20,000 new members – at a time when other parties are losing support."  Francis Maude said it was 25,000 yesterday!

HOUSING: "In 1997 the average deposit for a house or flat was around £5,000.  Today it’s approaching £25,000.  Put simply, we’re pricing our young people out of aspiration.  There is a new housing apartheid in Britain between those who already own their own homes… and those young people who look at their salaries, then look at house prices, and fear that they will never achieve that dream.  We need starter homes.  We need shared ownership.  We need more houses that are beautiful, environmentally sensitive, and above all, affordable.  We helped millions to buy their council houses in the 1980s.  And we must become the Party of aspiration once again."  The only major section on social justice within the speech.

GREEN TORIES: "Our planet is rapidly getting warmer.  The polar ice caps are melting.  Sea levels are rising.  Hosepipe bans in April.  What more evidence do we need?  We simply cannot afford to ignore it.  This Government hasn’t taken the environment nearly seriously enough.  We need to be the party that doesn’t tiptoe around the issue.  Instead of just far-off targets that we will never meet, we need binding targets for carbon emissions every year.  We can take a lead.  We can make a difference.  Imagine if twenty years ago I’d have told you that all our cars would be running on unleaded petrol…that we’d be recycling our waste on a daily basis… that houses in England would have solar panels on their roofs.  You’d have thought I was mad.  Well today I want this Party to lead a new green revolution.  Daring to imagine possibilities that seem a distant dream today.  Unleashing innovation, imagination, inspiration.  Setting a clear framework that brings forward the best technology, the brightest thinking, the boldest plans.  And setting a clear challenge for individuals, for households, for business and for government… a clear challenge that says: this is our planet, our future, our responsibility.  We’re all in this together, and together we can lead the way."  This section won loud applause.

PENSIONS: "The advance of science, medicine, prosperity means that we are living longer.  Forty years in work followed by forty years in retirement.  That could soon become everybody’s expectation.  It must surely be our mission to help each individual live each precious stage of their life to the full.  Filling in forms to get means-tested benefits?  What a way to treat the elderly, those who by any moral code most deserve our respect and support.  So let us set a clear direction.  Raising state pensions to reduce means testing.  And raising the retirement age to help pay for it.  We must lead the debate on pensions."  Nothing on Labour's £200 General Election year tax bribe.

NO TO ID CARDS: "Under my leadership, we’ll always strive to do the right thing.  That means saving our energy to oppose the government when it’s wrong.  Like on ID cards.  Labour can’t decide what it’s for.  They can’t control what it costs.  They can’t explain why they’re making it compulsory.  Labour’s plastic poll tax has no place in modern Britain.  It’s an ugly monument to the waste, chaos and vanity of intrusive, over-mighty government.  I promise you this….in office, we will pull it down."  The audience liked this commitment.

CHANGE WILL ONLY GET FASTER: "There’s so much we need to change in our country - we can’t afford to waste time going slow on changing our Party.  So now is not the time to put our foot on the brake.  Now is the time to press on the accelerator.  We must fast forward to the new Conservative Party.  I know some of you think we’ve had quite enough change for the time being.  I read the letters… Asking me to slow down… Telling me to take it easy… Sometimes reminding me to wear a tie… Well I say this.  Britain cannot wait while we take it easy.  We have a massive mountain to climb if we’re to win the next election.  If we falter on the way, then Labour will win again."

Missing topics: Iraq, Iran, Darfur, Tax, Immigration, Crime, UKIP, And Theory Of Conservatism.

Editor's overall verdict: Nothing new in this speech but a reaffirmation of David Cameron's leadership message of 'change'.  If David Cameron is to convince voters that this message is more than spin he will have to start taking difficult decisions soon on issues like green taxation, energy and pensions. 

Download full text of David_Cameron_speech.pdf

Comments

[John Hustings]

"Now is the time to press on the accelerator. We must fast forward to the new Conservative Party. "

What exactly does this *mean*?

[Geoffrey G Brooking]

I think Cameron is definitely on the right course. My hope is that he sticks to it and doesn't let the blue rinse toffs get him down.

The party needs to change its outlook to win over more younger voters, more female voters, and win over people in the cities.

[John Hustings]

"The party needs to change its outlook to win over more younger voters, more female voters, and win over people in the cities."

I don't think anyone denies this. The question is whether David Cameron is doing it (or doing it right).

And what does he mean by "accelerating change"?

[wasp]

Sounds like a pretty good speech. Keep up the good work. Would be nice to know exactly what this change is though.

[Guido Fawkes]

Isn't the commitment to abolish ID cards new?

This will therefore be a clear choice at the general election. The ID cards "compromise" was a clever trap and all credit to David Davis if he devised it. Postponing compulsory ID cards until after the election date means that there will be a clear principle at stake on election day.

Individual Liberty versus State Control. A good battleground for the Conservatives to be fighting on.

[a-tracy]

It's alright accelerating away on a clear road, in a safe fashion, as long as he remembers we all want to go to Plymouth and not Portsmouth (so to speak).

Plus as you get a little older and wiser you start repeating things your parents used to say, you know; you'll only end up stopped at the next set of traffic lights anyway - it won't get you there any faster and could result in a crash.

[John Hustings]

"Individual Liberty versus State Control. A good battleground for the Conservatives to be fighting on."

Which side is Cameron on?

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

Anyone with a bit more technical knowledge want to create a "John Hustings comment generator" along the same lines as the Daily Mail headline generator?

I didn't have a Conference pass but I have been along to a couple of the fringe events, and the mood has been extremely positive. Manchester has been an excellent choice to host the Conference and several people commented to me that there is a younger and more enthusiastic crowd than in previous gatherings in Brighton and Harrogate...

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

Erm, why all the bold?

[Ed R]

Because Guido forgot to close his bold tag.

[Chris]

Thats an end to the bold. If using HTML remember its content

I think the ID cards section was pretty inspiring, and I reckon that abolishing the id cards scheme would make a brilliant general election platform.

[John Hustings]

"Anyone with a bit more technical knowledge want to create a "John Hustings comment generator" along the same lines as the Daily Mail headline generator?"

I still haven't had an answer to my question as to what "accelerating the change" means.

I can only presume you don't know either.

i.e. it's gibberish.

[michael mcgough]

Fast Forward-----------Blue Labour
Forward not Back-------New Labour
Faster Wider Deeper----Blue Movie? meaning?

Where is the 'bankable promise' to leave the EPP ? This man can't deliver!

This CLASS A politician needs some lines of performance enhancing policies -----see missing topics above.

[James Maskell]

Cameron pulls off a wonderful speech, full of inspirational messages and an incredible vision. His tactical prowess in the political arena. Hes gonna make one hell of a Prime Minister, driving Britain forward to a better tomorrow. Every member who disagrees with Camerons vision should quit the party now and join the fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists in UKIP.

Praise the Lord, Halleluyah! we have a saviour and his name is David Cameron!

[Samuel Bowman]

Will there be an audio or video of this speech avaliable online today?

[Andrew Woodman]

I've just watched in on the Sky News active if that's any help Samuel.

Nice to see Cameron mention Northern grit. We have a lot that that up here.

[Rick]

These "younger" voters are what age ? The average age in the country is over 40.

I am sure that 18 year olds are fascinated by Conservative volte-face since May 2005 - opposed to tuition fees in 2005 but supporting them at £3000 in 2006................no doubt by 2007 policy will be to uncap them and charge VAT.

[Andrew Woodman]

I agree with the about turn in tuition fees even though I was initially opposed to them, for the simple reason that in 4 years, we would have had them for 10 years. Imagine the resentment by people are are paying off a tuition fees loans if they were scrapped now. It would be very unfair.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

The speech is on the BBC website now:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4890894.stm

(click "watch the speech")

[James Hellyer]

Nothing new in this speech but a reaffirmation of David Cameron's leadership message of 'change'.

But change to what?

[John Hustings]

It seems people are less concerned with what we change to than the fact that we've changed.

Have you ever seen such self-flagellation from a major political party?

Why does anyone think it makes them more electable?

(I don't think we're really changing anyway; what we're seeing is one faction of the Tory Party attempting to purge the Party of another faction.)

[Paul Kennedy]

Given that historically, not all change or reform has been good or for the better, maybe a word such as "improve" should be substituted into speeches.

[michael mcgough]

With Cameron and his masters purging one section of the party then state funding of politics could enable the long overdue split of the party.All the modernisers,wets,
liberals and socialists can stay with the Blue Labour party ,servicing the historic on and offshore debts(at commercial rates) whilst the conservatives in the Conservatives can start afresh,with a new debt free and state financed True Blue Party.Fast forward to political clarity and sincerity.

[Andrew Woodman]

'Fast forward to political clarity and sincerity.'

And a permenant Labour government. Politics is about compromise. Shame a few more people don't realise that.

[michael mcgough]

'Politics is about compromise'
That has become very clear as all three main parties have been well and truly compromised over loans-----especially the offshore ones.
'Permanent Labour Government'
If Cameron keeps supporting Tony and Gordon yes.

[Editor]

I've now turned the bold off. Guido should know better!

[Chad]

Individual Liberty versus State Control

Increased State Control
1::Cameron is proposing turning independent political parties into state vehicles by switching to taxpayer-funded state funding.
Under Cameron's proposals, opposition parties will be dependent on the government for their survival and this will erode any effective opposition, as the old saying notes, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"

2::Cameron makes no pledge to pull down the heart of the ID card scheme, the monster state-controlled database scheme.

The cards themselves are fairly meaningless, we all carry one form of ID or another. The argument is a misdirection, because the increased state control comes in the form of the central database.

3::The CamCons are proposing more tax breaks (PC's) not less, making people even more dependent on the state.

If 'conservative' still means small government, then Cameron cannot be a conservative based on his actions and pledges. Much as I disagree with UKIP on much, their 'blue labour' description is very accurate and worrying for opposition in this country.

[Annabel Herriott]

Pressing accelerators and fast forwarding----well, he was mixing his metaphors a bit, but we knew what he meant. Stop mucking about, stop whinging, and get behind me to get this show on the road! Is that plainer? The point being that we do need a total shake up, and we do need acceptance among the general public, not just our comfort zone. I agree with Geoffrey Brooking --- those of us that are 60+ going on 160, must give way, stop contemplating their navels, and forget about the Boer war! I was entranced by the sheer number of young folk at manchester forum. Long may it continue. I have trendy kids and grandkids, so I can keep up. They prevent calcification of the brain cells setting in. I had a text message this morning, Hi Mum, just seen you on telly, thought you looked grear! I only hope what I SAID.. about NHS quangos wrecking local services registered as well. There is a feeling, not just my funny little hobby, but from the likes of Jim Lumb from Treasurers....Blair announces retirement after Nulab party conference sept 2007. Goes early 2008. Gordon has to seek a mandate, so may get that snap election sometime 2008. Sounds plausible, so we have NO TIME for sniping, disloyalty, any individuals working on the collective, or any of that crap! Lets get on with it. Tim has given out a load of CH leaflets , and I had a small pile too. I made sure I picked a pretty diverse bunch to hand mine to. All sexes, all colours, so hopefully, we will get many more people posting. So move over any political anoraks, and let the real world have the odd two pennorth. I feel it will be interesting, just hope the site doesnt crash.
One final chuckle. Saw a bright spark with a fruit cake in his hand which he was about to cross the road with, and hand to the UKIP delegation. Blue with cold they looked too! You are the fruit cakes he said.

[Rob G]

Chad: You keep mentioning the monster state-controlled database scheme. We already have monster state-controlled databases run by HMRC, DWP, NHS etc; and there is a certain amount of data matching between them. What exactly is it that you don't like about the current proposals? Can you point me at some authoritative explanation of what is proposed?

[Chad]

Yes, Rob we have lots of databases, but the danger comes in centralising too much information.

I complain as an experienced geek, a database developer who understands the relative ease of hacking into databases.

When this occurs, you actually expose people to more risk, as hackers, once inside (whether by brute force or inside help) they will have access to enough information to easily assume your identity.

In short, greater centralisation leads to greater identity risks.

Most experienced database geeks understand the enornmous risk this poses, which is why Microsoft's national technology officer, Jerry Fishenden warned that:

"current plans for a centralised database with large amounts of information on each person are a mistake, and could lead to "massive identity fraud"

Link here

Centralisation of too much personal data is the biggest threat to identity protection we face.

[Rob Largan]

On the way back on the met, listening to the radio, the headline was simply, Cameron tells Tories they need to change if they want to win. I cant help but feel, the constant reference to 'change' however well intentioned it may be, is in fact overshadowing the good points made on ID cards, local government etc.

I was impressed by the Conservativehome flyer thrusted at me this morning, very classy.

For those who were there, I was the one looking lost, in the scruffiest clothes there, sat on the backrow.

[Chad]

Can you point me at some authoritative explanation of what is proposed?

Sure. Here is the response from the British Computer Society to the House of Commons Home Affairs enquiry into Indentity Cards

[Rick]

Chad, I assume that the actual maintenance and keypunching of the databases will be done in India or China for cost. In time no doubt Indian call-centres will call you from NHS Direct to remind you to visit the doctor, Chinese girls will be updating your banking details, student loans, and mailing passports from Hong Kong.

This will be managed by GovCorp based in the Cayman Islands and operated as a Non-UK-Profit Making Enterprise by Berlusconi-Blair International, Inc.

[Chad]

For the non-geeks - ie those of you who can talk to members of the opposite sex, ;-):

Probably the easiest way to explain the risk from the government's plans it is that lots of different databases contain pieces of the jigsaw of your identity with certain clues to the overall picture (as you note in terms of limited linking), but the government's plans are akin to completing the jigsaw and storing the whole thing intact in the box.

Rick,
You are right, it will be a ticking timebomb. It is not a question of if data will get out but when. It could be from hacking, inside job, incompetent security or more likely a mixture of all of those things.

And there waiting for the criminal will be the completed jigsaw puzzle of your identity.

Once someone opens that box, they have all the need.

[Editor]

CCHQ will be pleased with the Saturday evening news bulletins: DC's speech led the bulletins on BBC1 and ITV1.

ITN reported that a poll in one of tmrw's Sundays gives a 1% Tory lead. I'll post on that properly tmrw when the details are in...

[Paul Kennedy]

Leeding the bulletins is very good, as it certainly raises the party's profile and that is important in the run up to May 4th.

However, in my opinion, and for what it is worth, I didn't think it was a particularly good speech as to me it lacked real substance and was obsessed with the word "change".

As a person who has undergone massive changes in my personal and professional life during my 50 years, and indeed I am a person who enjoys and can cope with change and variety, I am still left wondering what more change do I have to undertake.

In my experience I have found those who most advocate change in others are actually the most resistant to change themselves.

It is also worth remembering not all change is good or for the better.

[Richard]

Some good statements but I'm still not 100% sure what Cameron stands for apart from "change". Do we believe in reducing state interference and encouraging individual responsibility? Cameron made some promising noises about voluntary associations a while ago, I would like to see this elaborated on.

Do we believe in defending our traditional civil liberties? The ID cards promise points towards this but what about other issues such as the HRA undermining our common law liberties?

Do we believe that a state-run NHS is no longer viable especially with opinion poll evidence pointing to public sympathy for a European system?

Do we accept that anything can be done about crime rates that are at a 50 year high? I know these figures are disputed but the supposedly reliable British Crime Survey misses out many crimes and only goes back to 1980. The alternative measure - crimes reported to the police, is even accepted by the Leftist Jonathan Freedland as evidence of a disturbingly higher level of crime than decades ago.

In general there have been promising signs but Cameron needs to develop the directions he's hinted at. Furthermore, he should realise that important though the environment is, it tends to come low in voters' priorities. Don't bang on about crime and immigration but don't forget them either!

[Richard Carey]

Tim has given out a load of CH leaflets , and I had a small pile too.

Hi, Annabel - I wondered who Tim's other "little helpers" were!

One final chuckle. Saw a bright spark with a fruit cake in his hand which he was about to cross the road with, and hand to the UKIP delegation. Blue with cold they looked too! You are the fruit cakes he said.

I wished afterwards that I'd been quicker off the mark thinking of this one. After all, as modern, compassionate Conservatives, I wished afterwards we'd arranged some hot tea and sliced fruitcake for these poor souls out in the cold. Would have been a good stunt - if Labour can give George Galloway a mass delivery of Whiskas...

Oh, and the first and last communications tip that I will ever give UKIP: if you're looking to rebut the charge of being swivel-eyed xenophobic nutters, trying to bring a tank into the centre of Manchester probably isn't a very sensible place to start!

On topic, a very good speech from David Cameron, pushed some different but very important buttons; environment, climate change, pensions, carers - not always topics in traditional Conference speeches, and all the better for it.

As for the need for the Party (that's us...,well most of us!) to accelerate change, it was a point well made. What proportion of us can honestly say that in our own constituency associations the process of change and modernisation has been equally as rapid as it has at the centre? As noted on this blog, the next GE might not be four years away - let's get stuck in to the things that we can immediately change for the better on the ground.

[John Hustings]

"not always topics in traditional Conference speeches, and all the better for it."

Yes but he's certainly got good mileage from those topics in recent months.

Will he *ever* have the guts to address the more central issues?

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Richard, Cameron isn't going to say that rapists only need a slap on the wrist or that the borders should be flung open.

The environment is a big issue because it shows the party being socially responsible by using tax and regulation sensibly to bring about a real change. Something Labour have convinced the electorate we don't know how to do. Social justice, economic stability, environmental responsibility. All supposedly Labour selling points.

The ID cards debate should be part of a wider attack on Labour. Currently the government takes 38% of GDP in tax. They tax and regulate small businesses out of existence. They regard Parliament as an inconvenience. They have stalled on Lords reform and packed the chamber with yes men who may or may not have paid for the honour. Ministers abuse the powers they do have and seek further powers for themselves at every opportunity. Their commitment to choice in education and healthcare is a lie and the modest reforms which have been carried out were done so in the teeth of huge resistance from the Labours socialist instincts. Rather than tax less, they make people submit to means testing. Oh, and if Charles Clark had his way you'd have to produce an identity card whenever you were asked for it by any government employee, ensuring easy access to a huge volume of private information on you. For more I suggest people read "The Road to Serfdom" by Hayek.

People love doctors, nurses and teachers. They hate civil servants.

[John Coles]

Well I've just read the full text of Mr Cameron's speech and he comes over as Blair-lite. Staccato sentences, maudlin language and no policy substance whatsoever, just interminable references to "change".
Paul Kennedy (above) put it succinctly:
""In my experience I have found those who most advocate change in others are actually the most resistant to change themselves.
It is also worth remembering not all change is good or for the better.""
He cannot continue in this vein fatuously invoking the need for "Change" - he has to specify policy at some stage.

[Richard]

For more I suggest people read "The Road to Serfdom" by Hayek.

I read it a couple of years ago. I believe the Tories distributed abridged copies of it during the 1945 General Election.

A good book but, speaking as an economic ultralibertarian, I think we unfortunately have to realise that free market economics have only limited appeal. Of course we should call for tax cuts and deregulation but there is only so much the electorate will permit us to do.

[John Hustings]

I'm thinking this whole "change" agenda provides a convenient excuse for whenever Cameron's poll ratings are low.

He can say, "Well, I'm doing fine, all this shows is that you lot need to keep up with me". And if, well into the future, his poll ratings are still low, he can say, "the party is being resistant to change; this only shows we need to change some more" etc.
The media will of course go along with this line (and not expect any explanation as to what this "change" actually means).

This stategy is a way of fobbing off the responsibility. You can blame the party members and activists for your own dismal performance. How convenient.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

"Earlier, Mr Cameron threw his weight behind Francis Maude, the party chairman, who claimed that it was not "defeatist" to say that the Tories might lose the next election".
Hopefully, Maude was being optimistic. Wheel on the next "leader".

[Richard]

How about some things we can agree on?

Firstly, we have to accept that going on about crime and immigration won't win us an election. However, our traditional "right-wing" approach to these issues is popular and should therefore be maintained. We should simply emphasise these issues less.

Secondly, although the environment doesn't come high up on voters' priorities in opinion polls, showing an interest in the area helps improve the Conservative Party's image. The environment looks like becoming an increasingly important issue, especially amongst the young. The Tories should lead the way in offering practical solutions to declining resources and global warming without going off on a statist regulation binge.

Thirdly, Cameron did the right thing over Blair's Education Act. We should call for even more autonomy for schools. Ideally we should aim for schools free of state control, perhaps funded by a voucher system, but only if this is electorally popular.

Fourthly, there is growing support for a move away from socialist healthcare to a more European model. We should latch onto this before Labour do and lead the way towards a better healthcare system

Fifthly, we should call for the removal of EU social legislation and the reverse of compulsory metrification. I know these are issues usually seen as being an obsession of the Right but the former is hugely important to British business and the latter is just ridiculous - going to prison for selling in pounds and ounces. This may be a major issue in 2009 when it finally comes into force. We should also call for an end to the common external tariff so that Member States can make trade agreements with other countries. Those that wish to push ahead with integration should be allowed to do so. Those of us who just want trade should be allowed to do so.

Sixthly, we have to sort out the mess that is Lords Reform. Personally I favour going back to the pre-1997 system but I doubt this
is a realistic option. How about peers who are experts in various fields being appointed by an independent commission?

[Sean Fear]

"What proportion of us can honestly say that in our own constituency associations the process of change and modernisation has been equally as rapid as it has at the centre"

A very small proportion, I trust.

[Rick]

Fourthly, there is growing support for a move away from socialist healthcare to a more European model.

What is this "European Model" ? The one the Germans are trying to ditch you mean ? The exhorbitant cost for companies which is now a crippling payroll tax and which Merkel proposes to replace with Kopfpauschal and move to a system more like Britain.

Or do you mean the 33% doctors' practices likely to go bankrupt ? Or the fact that German medics are on strike for a 30% pay increase ?

Or the hospitals that are bankrupt in Germany ?

Or do you mean the enormously bankrupt French healthcare system ?

If you want to bankrupt British employers copy the French and Germans..........add another 40% to labour costs.

[Rick]

Sixthly, we have to sort out the mess that is Lords Reform. Personally I favour going back to the pre-1997 system but I doubt this
is a realistic option. How about peers who are experts in various fields being appointed by an independent commission?

Why not read the Preamble to the 1911 Parliament Act and see what Lord Grey of Fallodon proposed...................?

[Rick]

"Earlier, Mr Cameron threw his weight behind Francis Maude, the party chairman, who claimed that it was not "defeatist" to say that the Tories might lose the next election".

You won't get rich punting on those odds

[Richard]

"What is this "European Model" ? The one the Germans are trying to ditch you mean ?"

Fair point. But I can't see much support for moving to the American system (which is actually far from being a genuine free market). We somehow need to find a middle position between the system we have now and a completely private system, as much as I believe such a system would be superior. Probably a topic for another thread though.

[Selsdon Man]

"A HEALTHY PARTY: "We’ve signed up 20,000 new members – at a time when other parties are losing support."

My local association has lost about 10% of its members. More are leaving or dying than joining.

[AlexW]

Reading the posts of Geoffrey Brooking and Annabel Herriot, I was interested in the presumption that "younger voters" are more likely to plump for a Cameron-style Conservatism. I'm not sure that this is necessarily true.

Instead, I have this hypothesis: Cameron Conversatism is particularly popular in the 35-44 demographic - middle-aged voters who were members of Generation X and were students in the days of High Thatcherism and recoiled at some of its excesses or perceived excesses ("get on your bike", "only failures ride buses", "no such things as society" etc.) This demographic is beginning to reach senior positions, particularly in the media, and it is notable that media support for Cameron tends to be strongest from columnists and commentators from this age range. Cameron himself is part of this age group. Whilst this group defines itself as young in relation to the baby boomers, it is better described as the "new Establishment" - between the "old Establishment" of baby boomers but older than the current generation of students and graduates who are only starting their careers and therefore have limited impact.

I would suggest that people aged below 35, and particularly below in the 18-25 demographic, are more sceptical of Cameron. Our political coming-of-age was under Blair, and instead of recoiling from the perceived harsh rhetoric of Thatcherism we have been disillusioned by the superficial and hollow posturing of Blair and his ilk. I believe (though I have no evidence beyond the anecdotal) that students and graduates are therefore less receptive to Cameron than those aged 35-44. Certainly most of the Conservatives I know are fairly hostile to Cameron; although this could simply be because student Tories are of a certain (right-wing) political disposition, or more ideological.

[Rick]

AlexW - a perceptive analysis - I am persuaded.

[Margaret]

He's missing the point of why the Tories lost the last 3 elections. Nu Labour pinched all their clothes, that is why they won.

Now, 8 years later, Cameron is trying to get his clothes back. That won't win him the next election. Blair has had his time and the public are fed up with him.

Touchy feely won't win the next election, people want tough talking, not "I feel your pain" rubbish.

[Richard Carey]

My local association has lost about 10% of its members. More are leaving or dying than joining.

Selsdon,

You link this to the overall message about a "healthy party" in Cameron's speech, but I'm interested to clarify a couple of points, not knowing your situation.

I'm interested to know what the Association that you refer to has tried to correct this for itself? If we've gained 20-25k members nationally, are there specific local factors that contribute to your issues? The Party locally in many areas does need some assistance, frequently, in identifying and marketing itself to potential members in different ways as we have done with key swing voters previously.

I know it is often difficult for Associations in this position to turn things round, especially identifying and gaining approval for seed funding for these kind of campaigning projects, but I strongly feel it is worthwhile.

Not all responsibility for change resides with the leadership. I have spoken to Assciation managements in the past who expected their new members to simply trot in off the street and hand over their subs!

[Rob Largan]

I have to agree with AlexW. The biggest thing I noticed was that the biggest supporters of Cameron seemed to be the older women, while the younger lot which I spoke to, mostly voted for Davis.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I would suggest that people aged below 35, and particularly below in the 18-25 demographic, are more sceptical of Cameron. Our political coming-of-age was under Blair, and instead of recoiling from the perceived harsh rhetoric of Thatcherism we have been disillusioned by the superficial and hollow posturing of Blair and his ilk."

You've hit the nail on the head there. Although for some reason, my contemporaries are far too receptive of the Liberal Democrats, who are the quintessential proponents of posture politics.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

I run into quite a few Harry Enfield-esque tory boys and girls. Conceited is one word which comes to mind. They tend to forget that there is more to politics than ideology. Still, the Lib Dems remain far and away the most popular political party amongst people of my age range, not just because of the war, mind. In Durham certainly, most of the Lib Dem votes came from students. Still, Labour remain the best at ensuring their members worm their way into students unions and NUS.

[Hannah]

I also, think David Cameron is on the right track to changing the Conservative party for the better.

[Rick]

most of the Lib Dem votes came from students.

Well it is an ideal "parked vote" - they are unlikely to form a government and they appeal to emotion rather than reason, and their is no consequence flowing from voting for them since you can vote for "manna from heaven" with Lib Dems and blame the electoral system for not delivering it.

The trouble is that the more the Conservatives retreat from the facts into breezy rhetoric the more they become remote from the idea of power.

The other day on German TV a Professor of Criminology said Germany had added 10.000 more cells in the past 5 years - I doubt Britain can say the same which is why early-release is economic not judicial or judicious

30 years ago Roger Bacon & Walter Eltis wrote a book "Britain's Economic Problem: Too Few Producers" - if the situation was bad then, it is dire now as the B of P deficit will show as oil and gas imports increase over coming years and living standards are depressed to fund it. The next Government will have the return to the kind of economic crises that North Sea Oil pushed aside for the past 30 years.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

Maybe if we'd spent some of the money on renewables....

[Rick]

on renewables....

Really ?

http://www.energybulletin.net/8422.html

Digital TV increases electricity consumption;

Internet increases electricity consumption

But gas is essential for heating, so using it to generate electricity was a sure-fire way to deplete North Sea reserves and make Britain dependent upon imported LNG for heat and light

[matt wright]

There is a danger that the reactionary sections of our party live in their own little world set in the past. We do need to change - this is obvious if we are to win back swing voters. However it is right that we have to think about how we make these changes. I think Cameron has been right to try and change the perception of the party so that people will start listening to our message. However he needs to be careful and should avoid being blown off track by either those who want to go back to the comfort zone of the core vote or those that want to invent clause-4 moments of conflict. Members voted overwhelmingly for change but ironically there is an argument to say we are not yet getting any logical, practical idea of this change. People want to know what we stand for - what is modern conservatism in the 21st century? What activities are we to engage in to illustrate this change. Community projects would be logical. I feel Cameron has a natural grasp of this but needs to focus on this and a bit less on an inner circle of spin artists that always end up forcing leaders into a bunker,

Matt

[Rick]

the reactionary sections of our party live in their own little world set in the past.

Is that what they call tautology ? Or simply an "Aunt Sally".

It conveys no real information therefore it must be a slogan. If we adapt it to read the opposite does it make sense ?

the progressive sections of our party live in their own little world set in the future.

Not really, it is still just meaningless.

Maybe the obession with Party is the problem. We live in a country with One Man One Vote so maybe it is Voters that should be the focus not Party; and it is hard to believe that what the Conservative Party thinks it is doing is anything but confusing to voters....................we shall see.