This sixth category in ConservativeHome's inaugural awards programme is for an 'Unlikely Ally'.
Through this award we are looking to recognise someone or some organisation who is not associated with the conservative movement (and may not want to be!) but has made a positive contribution to the idea of the family, smaller government, the nation state or some other principle dear to conservatives.
Charles Clarke, Patricia Hewitt and John Prescott have, of course, given generously to the cause of Conservatism in recent days but we are not thinking of awarding them. We are looking to make a positive award...
A Nowegian glacier?
Posted by: Richard North | April 29, 2006 at 01:13
David Cameron ? - " we are looking to recognise someone or some organisation who is not associated with the conservative movement (and may not want to be!) "
Posted by: Will | April 29, 2006 at 04:48
Dr Evan Harris, Lib Dem MP for Oxford West for his unstinting opposition to the animal "rights" nutters.
Posted by: Burkean | April 29, 2006 at 06:14
Well the LibDems are the only big party standing up for small government and opposing the big government central national Id database, so perhaps Ming as the leader of the party?
Posted by: Chad | April 29, 2006 at 07:56
Tony Blair?
We need to word it carefully, but his instincts for need to reform health and education are perfectly in tune with Conservative philosophy. He admitted he always wishes he'd gone further.
Let's face it, he's not a Socialist.
Posted by: Nadim | April 29, 2006 at 08:48
Sky News. For giving us news a little less slanted to the left than Auntie's offering.
And without giving us a poll tax of a licence fee for the privilege.
Posted by: Mark Clarke | April 29, 2006 at 09:57
"Let's face it, he's not a Socialist."
Nor is he in any sense a conservative.
Posted by: John Hustings | April 29, 2006 at 10:23
I would nominate Rod Liddle, who, despite being on the left, has written very well against political correctness and identity politics (it almost makes up for his demented opposition to faith schools).
Posted by: John Hustings | April 29, 2006 at 10:25
Unlikely ally?
The Labour Party.....they must just carry on running the country like they do- it will make us big and strong! If it was not so sad for the UK, it would be funny.
Ummm- no scrap that- we will have to fix up all this mess when we get in.
Posted by: eugene | April 29, 2006 at 10:51
Rod Liddle is an excellent suggestion, John, and in the same vein I would add Claire Fox, a Marxist but with a remarkably clear and honest view of what is happening. Claire Fox opposes dumbing down in education, for example, because it damages prospects for poor kids etc.
The importance of these 'unlikely allies' is that they improve the debate by breaking up the Polly Toynbee hegemony.
Posted by: buxtehude | April 29, 2006 at 11:05
"Nor is he in any sense a conservative"
A bit too black and white. His instincts on education are Conservative. It was only his party that stopped him effectively re-introducing Grant Maintained schools, liberating them from LEA control.
Posted by: TT | April 29, 2006 at 11:32
We've been in agreemnt with Shami Chakrabarti quite a bit recently. That's an unlikely partnership.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | April 29, 2006 at 11:37
I personally find Shami Chakrabarti has been very over-rated from her populist performances on QT.
How about people who have been on our side when opposing Government Bills, e.g. Rowan Atkinson with the Religious Hatred Bill?
Posted by: Deputy Editor | April 29, 2006 at 12:54
"I personally find Shami Chakrabarti has been very over-rated from her populist performances on QT"
She's someone who only defends the rights of terrorists and criminals. She is the embodiment of "human rights" culture. I absolutely despise her, and can't stand her sanctimony. Her body language and the way she regularly screws up her face say it all; she doesn't even pay respect to those with whom she's arguing.
Loathsome. Certainly not an ally of conservativism in any sense.
Posted by: John Hustings | April 29, 2006 at 13:04
I agree with John. A loathsome woman and individual.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | April 29, 2006 at 13:22
>>>>I personally find Shami Chakrabarti has been very over-rated from her populist performances on QT<<<<
Well meaning, intelligent, but misguided woman.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | April 29, 2006 at 13:56
Frank Field and Kate Hoey.
The former for realising the problems in the pensions system and how to re-engage the working class in politics [ironically, with conservative proposals]. Kate Hoey for her conservatism, on northern ireland, on hunting, on europe. They're both conservatives, sadly in labour, who show more principle than Maude or, dare i say, Cameron.
Posted by: Tim Aker | April 29, 2006 at 14:01
I agree with all the comments on Shami Chakrabarti. I am sure SHE thinks she is well-meaning, but she comes across as an opportunist, getting onto a populist band wagon and becoming 'faymous'. There have been other women similar, that have achieved this sort of fame and have faded away again.
Posted by: Patsy Sergeant | April 29, 2006 at 16:05
Norman Tebbit for aiding the Cameron modenisations, cheers norman
Posted by: Charles Pemberton-Leigh | April 29, 2006 at 16:14
Private Eye
Posted by: Donal Blaney | April 29, 2006 at 16:43
I'll second Rod Liddle and Claire Fox. I saw Fox on Question Time a while back and was impressed by her performance. I was surprised by how much I agreed with what she said!
I also second those who are opposed to Chakrabati. The Libertarian Alliance (a far more consistent organisation) pointed out that organisations like Liberty and Amnesty International will avoid upholding the human rights of those who are right-wing and unfashionable eg the clown David Irving.
Posted by: Richard | April 29, 2006 at 17:56
I would second Field and Kate Hoey.I hope that strong efforts are being made to encourage them to defect.
Posted by: malcolm | April 29, 2006 at 18:17
>>>>Frank Field and Kate Hoey<<<<
They are Labour Party people, Frank Field didn't join the SDP when it was formed in 1981 despite all the abuse he got from his own side which was far worse than anything before or since, Kate Hoey was even trying to get Labour to organise in Ulster whereas any sensible Unionist would have been telling people in Ulster to vote DUP or Ulster Unionist Party, she also opposed Rob McCartney (Leader of the United Kingdom Unionist Party) when he rejected the Good Friday Agreement totally.
Frank Field is greatly over-rated, means testing has caused many iniquities and introduced perverse incentives but the schemes he proposed in the place of current benefits would have bankrupted the Treasury and pushed Welfare spending up to record levels, the only way to reduce means testing through Universality is to cut benefit rates to ensure that Welfare spending does not rise relative to the size of the economy, this also means tightening eligibility rules of many benefits, Frank Field favours raising Jobseekers Allowance and Incapacity Benefit to be in line with it's value relative to earnings in 1979, the fact is that this is impossible as is increasing the State Pension in line with average earnings - the focus has to shift away from reducing relative poverty or even seeking to raise definitions of absolute poverty and rather to one of minimising destitution without warping the system.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | April 29, 2006 at 19:17
Unlikely allies..... Zac Goldsmith, James Reuben, Bob Geldof.... oops sorry, my mistake. They are unlikely allies of Dave, not necessarily allies of the conservative movement. Silly me.
Posted by: Andrew Kennedy | April 29, 2006 at 19:18
Surely the people most likely to defect from Labour to the Conservative Party are former supporters of Tony Blair who either don't see a future for New Labour in the Labour Party but think that there might be a chance of a Conservative version, or opportunists who want a fast track into government and think that Labour's power may be waning and that while in Labour they are having to compete with those who alright have substantial time in government whereas they maybe are less likely to be seen as wet behind the ears on the Conservative side.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | April 29, 2006 at 19:22
Iqbal Sacranie (mcb) on homosexuality . .
Posted by: bob | April 29, 2006 at 21:38
"Iqbal Sacranie (mcb) on homosexuality . ."
No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
Whatever his views on moral issues, he is NOT an ally of this party, and NOT a true representative of Islam.
Posted by: Nadim | April 29, 2006 at 22:25
It's a shame people don't seem to like Shami Chakrabarti very much.
Posted by: Andy Stidwill | April 29, 2006 at 22:55
"Through this award we are looking to recognise someone or some organisation who is not associated with the conservative movement (and may not want to be!) but has made a positive contribution to the idea of the family, smaller government, the nation state or some other principle dear to conservatives."
The Socialist National Party, sorry Scottish National Party, have pledged to cut taxes in their policy platform for next year's Follyrood elections.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | April 30, 2006 at 14:09
"It's a shame people don't seem to like Shami Chakrabarti very much."
Did Liberty stand up for Abu Hamza and Nick Griffin? No, they didn't. The reason is that Liberty will only stand up for fashionable or popular causes. A group generally dedicated to defending our liberties would not be afraid of standing up for the unfashionable or unpleasant. Peter Tatchell is an honourable example of someone who is prepared to stand up for the rights of those he strongly disagrees with.
Posted by: Richard | April 30, 2006 at 15:49
Sure Shami picks populist causes, but if you can't provide evidence to demonstrate she was against Irving's right to free speech - then there is no case against her.
Irving, Griffin or Hamza never requested support of Liberty. I don't think Griffin wanted our Shami to make a statement outside court . .
Peter Tatchell is embodiment of "human rights" culture.
Evan Harris is member of secular societies, Humanist Societies, Atheist soc's . He's anti-religion, anti-family, anti-conservative.
Rowan Atkinson Is a conservative supporter.
Posted by: VT Dasgupta | April 30, 2006 at 16:38
What about Christopher Lee who when asked frequently cites the permissive society notably the abandonment of Family and Faith Based values and the welfare state as the reason for the breakdown of society.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | April 30, 2006 at 16:45
"Sure Shami picks populist causes, but if you can't provide evidence to demonstrate she was against Irving's right to free speech - then there is no case against her."
One would have at least expected a press release. Organisations like Liberty don't wait to be asked what their opinion is. My case isn't that she was opposed to Irving's right, merely that she remained quiet. Besides, that was a charge levelled primarily against Amnesty International.
I never claimed Tatchell was perfect, merely that he is at least consistent.
Posted by: Richard | April 30, 2006 at 16:57
"Peter Tatchell is an honourable example of someone who is prepared to stand up for the rights of those he strongly disagrees with."
He's somebody I thoroughly dislike but the forgiveness he extended to Simon 'Straight Choice' Hughes is something to grudgingly admire I suppose.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | April 30, 2006 at 17:00
Tracey (kiss and Tell) Templeton? She could do for us what another 'woman-scorned' (who was old enough to also know better -Sarah Keys) did for the Labour Party.
Lets hope that she shows the same dogged determination as Sarah - turning up at EVERY opportunity to rubbish the man she once 'loved' - despite knowing that he was married!
Posted by: Jon White | April 30, 2006 at 22:29
>>>>Tracey (kiss and Tell) Templeton? She could do for us what another 'woman-scorned' (who was old enough to also know better -Sarah Keys) did for the Labour Party.<<<<
Not sure it actually did the Labour Party any good at all, in fact I'm not sure it actually did the Conservative government any harm either. Mostly the people who harped on about it were radical Feminists in the Labour Party who would have voted Labour anyway and most people just ignored the issue.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | April 30, 2006 at 22:44
Maybe, but the Socialist press (Namely the Mirror, Guardian, and the BBC) gave her the chance to remind the public about 'how badly she had been treated' at every opportunity - allowing voters to be reminded.
Lets hope Tracey gets the same chance.
Posted by: Jon White | April 30, 2006 at 23:07
Did Liberty stand up for Abu Hamza and Nick Griffin?
Would you, or any other right-minded person? I can't think where the BNP leader's rights were infringed, in being tried in a court of law for a specific offence. Besides, he had enough of his own loonies standing up for him.
(Sorry, Ed, for the OT post - I shall have to think of a nomination now...)
Posted by: Richard Carey | April 30, 2006 at 23:14
On the Peter Tatchell note, how about Ben Cohen/PinkNews?
It endorsed Cameron's leaderhship bid, was encouraging when he won, and recently had a positive interview with Francis Maude
Posted by: Paul Church | May 01, 2006 at 09:44
The French and Dutch electorate for 'Non' and 'Nee'. Specifically Laurent Fabius of all people.
Posted by: Shaun | May 01, 2006 at 23:58
More in the spirit of what the Editor intended, I would nominate someone hardly anyone has heard of: Cllr Dave Barnes. Defected to us earlier in the year, giving the Conservatives our first councillor in Islington in a zillion years.
link
Posted by: William Norton | May 02, 2006 at 10:26
I second the previous mentions of Shami Chakrabarti. Liberty is by no means signed up to the Tory Party's overall agenda, but in the last year it - and Shami particularly - has fought the case for freedom and for the individual against the ever bulkier state with valour.
Posted by: Edward Lennox | May 02, 2006 at 11:19
I second the previous mentions of Shami Chakrabarti. Liberty is by no means signed up to the Tory Party's overall agenda, but in the last year it - and Shami particularly - has fought the case for freedom and for the individual against the ever bulkier state with valour.
Posted by: Edward Lennox | May 02, 2006 at 11:19
I second the previous mentions of Shami Chakrabarti. Liberty is by no means signed up to the Tory Party's overall agenda, but in the last year it - and Shami particularly - has fought the case for freedom and for the individual against the ever bulkier state with valour.
Posted by: Edward Lennox | May 02, 2006 at 11:20
Edward Lennox how delightful to have you on here, esteemed company!
Posted by: Henry Edward-Bancroft | May 06, 2006 at 13:58
On second thoughts (seeing that Cllr Barnes got knocked out on May 4th) how about a nomination for Alan Milburn, for his insightful contribution to the Budget Debate along the lines of 'Gordon is an idiot for putting up taxes too much'.
Posted by: William Norton | May 08, 2006 at 11:52
If conservatives are going to start counting idiot Shami as one of your allies there is definitely no hope for you. You would do well to understand her and her lefty cohorts opposition to anti-terrorist legislation isn’t based on any particular principle, except the principle of throwing their hand in with anyone who hates Britain. She is despicable and wrong 99.9% of the time.
Posted by: Nick Marsh | October 17, 2006 at 10:11
I saw Shami at a Liberty fringe meeting at conference. Whilst I am sure the Conservative party and Liberty will never be in complete agreement on everything, she articulated a desire to make Liberty a genuinely cross-party campaign group.
OK, so it was a blatant pitch for members, but the option is there.
Posted by: Mike Christie | October 17, 2006 at 11:45