Thanks for all of yesterday's comments about ConservativeHome's Inaugural Conservative Movement Awards. Listed below are my revised suggestions for the Award categories:
'Local Hero Award' - I think we should stick with this category. Although it might be used to recognise a good Tory councillor - as first suggested by Richard Bailey - there should be room to nominate an excellent, non-partisan local campaigner or a more independent organisation.
'Blogger Award' - we'll keep this award, too, as the whole idea of insurgent blogging is close to ConservativeHome's heart!
'Use Of New Technology Award' - this could cover a clever viral email campaign or an innovative website. Thank you, Jules, for underlining the importance of this type of award.
'Best Writing Award' - this, as widely suggested by Andrew Woodman and others, merges my initial suggestion of separate awards for a columnist and author.
'Unlikely Ally Award' - I don't think the name of this is quite right but I like Peter Franklin's idea that we should reward people who are clearly outside of the big 'C' Conservative fold.
'Cultural Award' - the title of this one isn't quite right either but Stephen B's suggestion of a cultural focus is important. ConservativeHomers' interest in movies etc was illustrated in a recent thread on right-wing plays. This Award replaces the more bland idea of a 'broadcast category'.
'Lifetime Achievement Award' - Thank you, Geoff, for that one. This category, Carolyn, might provide the opportunity to reward those "unsung heroes" who have given much of their lives to causes like the Conservative Party. This will neatly balance the 'One To Watch Award'. This partly reflects Matthew Sinclair's observation that newstart blogs should, perhaps, be awarded separately from established blogs that might attract more votes. A 'One To Watch' category would cover more possibilities than blogs, however.
The 'Wooden Spoon' award has been dropped by popular demand! The international award will also go as we're in danger of too many awards and it would be perfectly possible for an international group or person to win under one of the general categories. I liked the idea of rewarding "Conversions", "Boomerangs", "Blue Sky Thinking", "Tax-Cutting" or "Courage Under Fire" but the awards ceremony can't go on all night! We'll keep my initial ideas of awards for 'Campaigner of the Year' and 'Parliamentarian of the Year' - which take the total number of awards to ten - unless you use this thread to persuade me otherwise...
Looks good to me. I think 10 is about the right number of categories. And I like teh fact that it isnt just the "big guys" who have a chance to be a winner.
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | April 13, 2006 at 10:03
Good selection.
Posted by: Matthew Sinclair | April 13, 2006 at 10:25
Its a nice choice to choose from. I can't see anything else needing to be changed though there wasn't really anything that wrong with the original list either.
Posted by: Voice from the South West | April 13, 2006 at 10:46
The awards need to be more ideological. The tax cutting award was a good idea. You should also award someone who supports the transatlantic relationship. An award for fighting Brussels would be a good idea, too. Make the whole event a bit spicier. Go on... make my day!
Posted by: CCHQ Spy | April 13, 2006 at 11:21
I think thats a good balanced selection.
Posted by: Serf | April 13, 2006 at 11:35
I'm quite taken by CCHQ Spy's challenge to what we've been discussing.
Perhaps half of the ten categories should be general and half subject specific. Choosing to award lower taxation and patriotism might do more to signal what the conservative movement was all about.
In the spirit of the And Theory, however, two of the awards should probably be about compassionate and green conservatism.
What do others think?
Posted by: Editor | April 13, 2006 at 11:46
I think subject specific categories would be interesting. The issue would be that in some categories the winner would almost pick themselves and would it really be a contest. (I'm thinking of the award for lower taxation for exmaple).
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | April 13, 2006 at 12:05
Perhaps that just shows the strength the conservative movement has in certain policy areas though??
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | April 13, 2006 at 12:06
Yes I think it is a good group. I got to this stream? late last night, so didn't feel like contributing and anyway, I agreed with other people about rewarding 'small' people. So now I must go and get some more ready for the big family Easter visit!
Posted by: Patsy Sergeant | April 13, 2006 at 15:59
An award for fighting Brussels would be a REALLY good idea!
Posted by: Patsy Sergeant | April 13, 2006 at 16:01
To mark the return of Michael Heseltine to the conference stage, I suggest the "Wet of the Year" award.
Posted by: Selsdon Man | April 13, 2006 at 21:28
and for Mark Steyn in his comments on the late-Peter Simple an award for le mot juste
http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=70
Decades ago, Wharton invented a pliable media-friendly “moderate” Conservative of no fixed beliefs – Jeremy Cardhouse, leader of the Tories for Progress Group – only to see him at the very end of his long life triumphantly anointed as head of the apparently real British Conservative Party under the name “David Cameron”...................................Wharton chronicled British life as a satirical fantasia through the eyes of Dr Spacely-Trellis, “the go-ahead Bishop of Bevindon” and author of God The Humanist; the environmental consultant Keith Effluvium; Dr Heinz Kiosk, psychiatric advisor to the Ministry of Agriculture and many other eminent bodies, with his great cry of “We are all guilty!”; Mrs Dutt-Pauker, “the Hampstead thinker”, and prototype of what Americans would call “limousine liberals”, who champions the world’s most deserving causes from her North London mansion Marxmount; the hard-hitting Fleet Street columnist Jack Moron, “The Man Who Knows It All”, with his mostly unheeded clarion call, “Wake Up, Britain!”; Sir Herbert Trance, of the British Boring Board of Control, whose deliberations, reported by Wharton’s correspondent “Narcolept”, determined which modish transgressive cause was now sufficiently tedious to be admitted to the torpor of their hallowed if drowsy precincts.
Posted by: Rick | April 13, 2006 at 23:02