Tory Chairman attacks "pathetic" briefing against David Cameron

''I think it really is barmy to be jetting off to do this in the middle of the local election campaign. There will be Conservatives all over the country knocking on doors, and where is he? He's off looking at glaciers in Norway. I'm afraid he's missing the target - it just has the feel of a gimmick..."

That was what "a senior member of Mr Cameron's shadow cabinet" told last Monday's Daily Telegraph about the Tory leader's visit to a Norwegian glacier (for which Mr Cameron left London this afternoon).

In an interview with The Parliamentary Monitor Francis Maude described the "unattributable briefing" as "pathetic":

"It is obviously very unhelpful if anyone in a senior position in the party makes disobliging remarks to the media. That is a habit we thought we had grown out of and we need to grow out of it... They should just shut up, get on with the job or perhaps even better leave. If they don't like what is being done then being a backbench Member of Parliament is a perfectly honourable thing to do."

Mr Maude, who recently acknowledged the electoral mountain that the Tories still had to climb, also used the interview to insist that David Cameron's honeymoon was not over:

"Ok we are not far enough ahead in the polls to win an election but we have significantly improved from where we were flatlining for 14 years. So are we in better shape? Yes we emphatically are... I think David still attracts an extraordinary amount of attention, he's still a very interesting figure for the media and the public and he does reflect and represent change. There'll be much more from him."

Editor's comment: "Francis Maude is absolutely right to insist that shadow cabinet ministers do not brief against the leader.  "Unattributable briefings" from the Blair and Brown camps are damaging Labour in the way they once damaged the Conservative Party.  We must not lose the discipline that was the key achievement of Michael Howard's time as leader.  Choosing to go public with his concerns was not necessarily such a wise move, however, by the Conservative Chairman unless he is trying to pre-empt further frontbench disloyalty."

Comments

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"In an interview with The Parliamentary Monitor Francis Maude described the "unattributable briefing" as "pathetic"..."

Ha! Pot and (carefully not overfilled) kettle time again!

[Kettle]

Is this the same Francis Maude who briefed against IDS and plotted against him?

Pot and over-filled kettle indeed!

[Mark Fulford]

Cabinet members secretly briefing against the leader is hypocritical and cowardly. I’m sure that Cameron will be able to identify the source and, once the local elections are over, I hope they get their comeuppance. If they're in a safe seat, they deserve to lose it to a less self-interested candidate.

[Donal Blaney]

There is, of course, no way of us ever knowing whether anyone actually said anything to the journalist at all. He could have simply made it up. When pressed to reveal his source, he would then simply hide (in true cowardly journalist fashion) behind journalistic privilege.

[Richard]

"Ok we are not far enough ahead in the polls to win an election but we have significantly improved from where we were flatlining for 14 years"

Everytime someone says this they should be pointed to the Yougov polls showing a similar rise in Tory support under IDS and Michael Howard.

[Jack Stone]

We all know who`s doing this. The same person who as briefed against every leader since Margaret Thatcher and who is always a picture of pure innocence everytime he is accused of doing it.
Once proved he should not only be sacked but de-selected as well. We need people working for the party not against it!

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"We all know who`s doing this. The same person who as briefed against every leader since Margaret Thatcher and who is always a picture of pure innocence everytime he is accused of doing it."

But Michael Portillo isn't an MP any more.

[Esbonio]

I think Maude's comments only highlight dissatisfaction with the current leadersip which on current form seems justified.

[Paul, Southampton]

Maude is trying to deflect attention from the fact that what was said is absolutely correct. Why is Cameron going to look at a glacier? Because he's a bloody idiot.

As for 'Vote Blue, Go Green', I prefer 'Vote UKIP, Ditch Europe'.

It really is essential that all true Conservatives vote UKIP in the forthcoming elections for three reasons:

1. The Tories need to do very badly. Everyone will then realise Cameron is a liability and we can get rid of him.

2. UKIP deserves some support following the disgraceful and outrageous slurs made by Cameron.

3. The Conservative Party is now so left-wing there's no point in voting for it and UKIP is the only party that is moderate and right-of-centre.

[Elena]

I don't want to see the Conservative Party going through another leadership election. It would cancel out any positive process, lose us a fourth general election for sure and reinforce people's negative perceptions.

[Tim Aker]

For a man who has briefed and done all he can to undermine Conservatism in the UK, a man who became Mr. Maastricht, and someone who barely laid a glove on the government when he was a front bencher, the party could do us all a favour and deselect him, not those trying to save the cause of conservatism by showing Cameron up for what he is, Blue Labour through and through!

[Will James]

Jack Stone, would you care to enlighten us as to the identity of this serial back-stabber, for those of us only just born during Mrs Thatcher's premiership? Do you mean the Shadow Home Secretary?

[Chad]

This is same man who in just the past six months or so has tried to remove party members' right to vote for leader and who pushed the 50-50 A-list?

What is the chance of Maude embracing this 'equality' drive and agreeing to compete against a female candidate for the right to stand in his seat at the next election?

I'm just surprised that his name wasn't at the top of the most unconservative proposal to date, the one to introduce state funding of political parties.

Undemocratic, positive discrimination? Is there any conservative in Maude?

[Esbonio]

Given in particular how long and feeble the Tories' opposition has been, I sometimes wonder whether it might have been better for all concerned (governed, party members and MPs) if there had been a complete split a long time ago. Say immediately after Maggie was ditched. They (one way or another) might then be back in power if not now at the next election.

[Chad]

Well, the split between the Party and conservatism seems to have already occurred esbonio.

[Andy Stidwill]

I'm surprised by Paul from Southampton's comments - it looks like the infighting which has cost us the last 3 elections is starting all over again.

[James Hellyer]

A few points:

Maude is right that members of the frontbench should not be briefing against the leader. If they object to the strategies and policies adopted by the leader they should resign, and make it absolutely clear as to why they made that decision.

As this is an ideal world, that won't happen, and this therefore shows the deep dissatisfaction felt with Cameron from some quarters.

[Ted]

It must be that time of night again when we welcome the Ukippers and other vistors to this site. Just to remind them - there are alternative parties and other blogs you might find more condusive to your bilious comments (or perhaps they are too lonely and unvisited)

I had hoped that after Michael Howard and then DCs overwhelming victory that we would have a more co-ordinated and loyal shadow cabinet. I hope that this comment is an abberation and that any members on the front bench who accepted a post reflect on what that entails. I would have preferred Francis to have side-stepped the question (particularly in view of his association with the Portillista tendency) and hope that Mr Stone is wrong about the identity of the quoted person.

It is vital that we present a united face on strategy and then policy while letting NuLab self destruct. This means that DC must involve his cabinet and utilise the strengths they have, but equally the front benchers must both in public and in discussions with the lobby present a common front.

[Richard]

"I'm surprised by Paul from Southampton's comments - it looks like the infighting which has cost us the last 3 elections is starting all over again."

I doubt one blog post equals civil war.

[eugene]

Was there infighting under Michael Howard?...I do not remember it...and I dare say, there is no infighting now...just a good lively debate where the right feels left out somewhat.

While on the point of Michael Howard, we are going to lose some wonderful people next election...Ann Widdecombe too (*aside* now, these two had a 'little' fight a way back and it did not cause any lasting problems- we are a mature party).

[James Hellyer]

(*aside* now, these two had a 'little' fight a way back and it did not cause any lasting problems- we are a mature party).

Or it made "something of the night" part of Howard and his party's image.

[Paul, Southampton]

I'm not a Ukipper, I'm a true Conservative and I want to see a Conservative government. I just think it would be better for the Conservative Party to have a leader who is also a Conservative. Cameron patently isn't.

I didn't think my comments were bilious and it's certainly fair to say that Cameron's comments about UKIP were disgraceful and outrageous.

[Oberon Houston]

I would be very surprised if those comments were made by a current member of the Shadow Cabinet. If true, it is eye-wateringly crass and bitchy.

Even for a backbencher it would be a little too candid for me... as for us lot... well we are here to debate all these things!

The timing of his visit is strange, and I would have thought a bit 'ooh laa' for most ordinary folks if he's looking for positive association, then keeping it more atuned to the 'local environment' miga poor version of a 'New Labour ht be better than Photoshoot'

[Oberon Houston]

...sorry, word garble at the end there...

The timing of his visit is strange, and I would have thought a bit 'ooh laa' for most ordinary folks, if he's looking for positive association, then keeping it more atuned to the 'local environment' might be better than a poor version of a 'New Labour Managed Photoshoot' in Noggie.

[James Maskell]

"It is obviously very unhelpful if anyone in a senior position in the party makes disobliging remarks to the media"

"It is a bit of a party that just...would like to return to a world where Britain is all-white and Europe didn't exist - well, that's not the real world,"

Practice what you preach, dear Maude. You arent fooling me.

[Dontmakemelaugh]

"I'm not a Ukipper, I'm a true Conservative and I want to see a Conservative government. I just think it would be better for the Conservative Party to have a leader who is also a Conservative. Cameron patently isn't.

I didn't think my comments were bilious and it's certainly fair to say that Cameron's comments about UKIP were disgraceful and outrageous".

I agree with the above comment. I believe in the predominance, the maintainance of the indigenous culture of Britain and in particular of England. I do not believe that British governments should defer to the cultures of others invited or allowed to live in England at the expense and demolition of our own heritage. I believe in equal opportunity and freedom under law for all. If that makes me a "closet racist" then so be it.
I believe that a sovereign British Parliament is and should be the final arbiter and executive in the governance of Britain and not the unaccountable, hegemony of EU unelected commissars in Brussels. I believe that the Conservative Party has lost its way.
If that makes me a "fruitcase and a looney"
then so be it. I shall just have to vote accordingly - and I will. The present Conservative Party is in denial.

[Jaz]

"I didn't think my comments were bilious and it's certainly fair to say that Cameron's comments about UKIP were disgraceful and outrageous."

However, there are many even IN Ukip who are saying he party is turning extremists fromt he extreme-right-wing. Cameron reserves the right to SAY what he wants, and good on him. I'm sorry I cannot accept a politician that does not speak the truth once in a while, Cameron is not speaking the truth to the public about other issues, but atleast he's taken a stand on this one.

[RodS]

I wish that those who claim to 'know' who has been briefing against DC had the guts to say who they think it is. Meanwhile it must be admitted ,swanning off to the North Pole to look at glaciers, is a bad idea.
I would be happier if I felt Cameron was making his own decisions and not being guided by the likes of Maude.

[James Hellyer]

Cameron is not speaking the truth to the public about other issues, but atleast he's taken a stand on this one.

By your reckoning, Cameron is a habitual liar. Why should he therefore be believed on this?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Francis Maude and David Cameron will deliver us victory - don't doubt that! The more we increase Tebbit's blood pressure, the better.

[James Maskell]

"Francis Maude and David Cameron will deliver us victory - don't doubt that!"

What would you sacrifice for power, Justin?

[Sean Fear]

Hmm, the words "pot" "kettle" and "grimy arse" come to mind.

It seems we may not be that many weeks away from the Shadow Cabinet declaring that David Cameron enjoys their "total confidence" as party leader.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Old codgers like Tebbit and Widdecombe!

[Sean Fear]

You mean people who actually hold Conservative views, Justin?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Labour couldn't win without ditching people like Hutton and co. Elections in this country are fought and won on the centre ground. Even Mrs Thatcher knew this fact.

[James Maskell]

Why would getting rid of Hutton do anything to help Labour? It wouldnt hurt them either. His name isnt recognisable with the average voter unless people are told hes the one screwing up pensions.

Getting rid of Widdecombe and Tebbit would be rather ridiculous. There needs to be balance in this party and they provide that other side. Also Widdecombe is a bit of hot totty for us on the right!

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

As usual, visitors could be forgiven for thinking that these threads are written by a mixture of UKIP and New Labour hacks. When MH was our leader we were on a maximum of 34% in the polls. Less than a year later, we're almost on 40%. I call that real progress!

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Old codgers like Tebbit and Widdecombe!"

Nice to see your reputed warm regard for the elderly making a comeback, Justin. Care to keep your comments on-topic rather than taking cheap shots at loyal servants of the party?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

And which Party did you back at the last GE?

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"And which Party did you back at the last GE?"

I've been a Conservative supporter for as long as I've been politically aware, but this thread isn't about me, Justin and it's not about making false claims about the Conservative poll ratings under Michael Howard's leadership either - why not address the topic at hand eh?

[Terry Keen]

"I'm not a Ukipper, I'm a true Conservative and I want to see a Conservative government. I just think it would be better for the Conservative Party to have a leader who is also a Conservative. Cameron patently isn't.

I didn't think my comments were bilious and it's certainly fair to say that Cameron's comments about UKIP were disgraceful and outrageous."

I have never been happier in my 5 years as a Conservative activist than under our current leader David Cameron. I did not complain under the leadership of IDS (although I very much wanted Ken to have won that contest). I got on with being a Conservative activist.

It is about time that some people who post here realise that the Conservative party has ALWAYS been a broad church and long may it continue to be so, but at the same time we have to focus all our energies in attacking OTHER parties and not our own!

[Sean Fear]

When MH was our leader we were on a maximum of 34% in the polls. Less than a year later, we're almost on 40%. I call that real progress! "

Which polls are you looking at Justin? Our current poll ratings (according to mainstream pollsters) are more or less identical to those in the first months of Howard's leadership, and to those in the last months of IDS's leadership, and to those in the weeks leading up to the General Election.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

DVA, at least Francis and I voted Conservative. On your own admission, you voted LibDem!!! What you have to say as a "supporter" falls on dear ears as far as I'm concerened.

[Editor]

Let's not turn this thread into something personal...

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"On your own admission, you voted LibDem!!!"

*sighs* Justin, as I have previously explained that was a tactical vote to remove the Labour MP and thereby reduce the government majority, so you can set your clearly overworked mind at ease in that regard.

You would have been better off citing my vote for UKIP in the 2004 Europeans, to be honest.

"What you have to say as a "supporter" falls on dear ears as far as I'm concerened."

Well, I'm a supporter that has never been expelled or suspended from the party, but that's a different matter for a different day, isn't it?

Any thoughts to offer on the actual subject of the thread, Justin?

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Sorry Editor, missed your comment as was busy responding!

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

OK. But I really do get fed up with Conservatives attacking our leader. We're in a much better state now than we have been for years. That's why morale is up. This is a PUBLIC site and staff at Labour's HQ must have a field day reading through these threads. Yes, we are a democratic Party where opens discussions should be encouraged. Plotting and sticking two fingers up at the leadership cost us three elections - let's not repeat these mistakes.

[Andy Stidwill]

I am starting to wonder whether David Cameron's main objective is to win votes from the Green Party.

But since they polled 1% at the last election, and most of their supporters would rather vote Loony than Conservative, I don't really understand what he's hoping to achieve.

[ulsterman]

You guys should have been watching Newsnight ...

[James Maskell]

What happened?

[Richard]

"The more we increase Tebbit's blood pressure, the better."

What a lovely we to treat the man who gave the Unions a well deserved kicking.

Of course we won't win by adopting Tebbitism but nor will we win by going in the other direction. We need compromise. Like it or not some right-wing policies are popular.

[Rick]

Less than a year later, we're almost on 40%

That multiplied by say a 41% turnout in local elections should give a grand 16%.

[Interested Observer]

The Conservative Party is a broad church, undoubtedly. This is a *good* thing. But that broad church needs to be led broadly from the centre right for it to be stable over time.

And can I echo those begging people not to overstate the "Cameron bounce" in the opinion polls. One look at the poll of polls demonstrates the true picture. Yes, we do still have a lot of work to do.

[Margaret]

Like Paul I believe that Cameron is moving the CP to the left wing, trying to ditch those who are "truly" conservative as past it, too old, or useless.

Well lad, when it comes to the General Election who will walk the streets stuffing election addresses through letter boxes? Who will sit in the Conservative Offices putting said election addresses into envelopes? Who will raise the much needed funds to pay off those debts? Not those newbies who Cameron is trying to woo, they won't do anything useful for the "Party".

He should take heed, many of the true "right wing" if you must Conservatives are very fed up with what he is doing. As one supporter said to me on Monday "We made a terrible mistake electing Cameron".

[Edward]

Sounds awkwardly like David Davis language...

[Richard ROBINSON]

To read some of the comments on this thread you would believe that we had won the last three elections.

To win the next will require discipline. It is intolerable for Shadow cabinet members to brief brief against the Party. But it is equally important for those of you on here who are Conservatives to get behind the leadership.

Of course we will disagree about policies, priorities and tactics, and criticism is constructive, but bitter factionalism is not going to win us anything.

[wasp]

i remain amazed by some people.

If Cameron isn't allowed to do what he believes is needed then the game is pretty much up on this party. The revival under MH was very modest and won't be maintained.

Stop yer whinging and get in the game.

[James Maskell]

So the Tory party is now a cult of the individual?

[True Blue]

It's like a room filled with clones of Corporal Jones in Dad's Army, here. Cameron is here at the very least until the next election. I assume people want the Conservatives to win? For goodness sake, back him. He's only been in power a few months, you don't know what his exact policies are and you are digging a grave for hime already! It's like the Labour party pre-Kinnock. Where is the famed Tory loyalty that made us the machine of government, regardles of the leader? Constructive criticism is fine, sniping from the sidelines whilst claiming to be Conservative isn't. The snake and others like him who made these comments needs a St Patrick to drive them out of the party.

The same social conservatives who want to tell people the correct family structures, the correct religion, who seem to know what the correct indigenous culture is, are exactly the same ones who scream like stuck pigs when Labour tells them what to eat, whether to smoke and where to send their kids to school. If Cameron is a social liberal with a few family-oriented exceptions, then like it or lump it. Leave people alone to live their lives, and spend their money how they want.

As an aside, if you want us to leave the EU, please, please join UKIP. It is not Conservative policy and never will be. You will never find a comfortable home in this party if you hold those views. The only way we will reverse the political drive towards federation is by pan-European action by Eurosceptics. Unilateral disengagement is about as sensible and electable as unilateral disarmament. This is our "don't talk about the war!"

[James Maskell]

We arent digging the grave. He is with his poorly thought out policies which pre-empt his own policy groups and are against conservative principles.

[Alexander Drake]

No, but modern politics is leader-orientated.

[Chad]

As an aside, if you want us to leave the EU, please, please join UKIP.
Well the discomfort is caused by the current non-delivery of the unequivocal pledge to withdraw from the EPP which was the only specific pledge on Cameron's leadership election platform.

Cameron could clear this up very quickly by providing at least a timetable.

Overall though, has anyone else noticed how often this "go and leave" message is being repeated from Maude downwards? The Tory Party is narrowing.

For me, a conservative could not:
a: support state funding of political parties because it is big government and undemocratic
b: support a central national id database as it is big government, and will be bloated and inefficient
c: remain with the EPP grouping as that is promoting the opposite approach to nation-state cooperation.

I can only only repeat the messages here that people are driven by issues and values not the colour of the rosette these days.

No, but modern politics is leader-orientated.
It needn't be though. You can't attack Blair for his presidential style then ape him.

Politics is only superficial and image driven because that is all the politicians are offering. No wonder people are deserting political parties.

[Richard]

"Unilateral disengagement is about as sensible and electable as unilateral disarmament. This is our "don't talk about the war!""

I take your point but what do you think would be the downside of us leaving and joining EFTA and the EEA?

[Jack Stone]

My message to any Conservative member who supports UKIP is go and join them. It will be your loss and the Conservative Party`s gain!

[Chad]

Although, if you are a sitting MP, perhaps due to retire next time so can act out of principle, and you oppose the EU and state funding of political parties, then clearly you should stand up for democracy and small government and defect to Imagine. :-)

[True Blue]

We arent digging the grave. He is with his poorly thought out policies which pre-empt his own policy groups and are against conservative principles.

Which non-conservative policies has he implemented?

[Sean Fear]

"The snake and others like him who made these comments needs a St Patrick to drive them out of the party."

LOL!

[Margaret]

The EU is the elephant in the room, and unless Cameron and co address this issue, they will always have problems. The EU is unreformable and unless and until they take this head on, they will never become the Government.

[Sean Fear]

Plainly it is preferable to work with European sceptics to reverse the trend towards political integration.

But it that should prove ultimately fruitless, I can't see why we should rule out leaving the EU.

[True Blue]

I take your point but what do you think would be the downside of us leaving and joining EFTA and the EEA?

I don't particularly want to enact the vast majority of EU law into domestic legislation without having any say at all over what that law might be in order to be able to export to the EU. A former Prime Minister of Norway referred to it as a "fax democracy" - the EU faxes through legislation and Norway enacts it. Norway pays more per head than any EU country for the privelege of being told what to do. Norway pays money to Brussels and gets zero back. I have no wish to be in that position.

We would lose our heavyweight clout in trade negotiations and become an isolated country dictated to by our neighbours. What would happen to fishing rights, to oil rights?

I do however propose the True Blue test for further EU legislation. Does assist free trade? If it does, support it, if not, vote it down or oppose it in council.

One other point worthy of mention is that the European Court of Human Rights is nothing to do with the EU - it was set up by Churchill after the War in his "United States of Europe" speech. Many of the changes in our law have resulted from ECHR judgements and not from the EU. I'm not sure Churchill intended that the right to restrospectively change your gender on your birth certifcate would be a subject for the court, but it has grown in scope considerably. It has activist judges. It ruled that foetuses can't sue their mothers, restricted corporal punishment in the UK, ruled against anti-sodomy laws, stopped gay people from being banned in the military, ruled that consenting S&M sex between adults was no business of the State and allowed Jehovah's witnesses to proslytize.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Is it just me or is the EU/UKIP becoming this blog's equivalent of Godwin?

[Richard]

"A former Prime Minister of Norway referred to it as a "fax democracy" - the EU faxes through legislation and Norway enacts it. Norway pays more per head than any EU country for the privelege of being told what to do."

I think Daniel Hannan wrote an article on this pointing out that most legislation Norway has to adopt is of a technical nature and fairly uncontoversial. Would be interesting to know if that included metrification though. Would we pay more than we do now bearing in mind we wouldn't have to fund the CAP? Anyway, I accept it's not realistically on the agenda at the moment. I agree with the True Blue test - if it's nothing to do with free trade, bin it.

[Jon Gale]

I made this post on another thread, but given some of the comments on this one I'll repeat it.

At the last election Tory policies were popularuntil people realised that it was a Tory policy. Michael Howard had perfectly reasonable and good policies in many areas (and some not too different from Labour) but no matter what he did they were automatically, unthinkingly dismissed as "extremist" and nasty because it was the Nasty Party (and "Dracula") saying it.

David Cameron is trying to change this nasty perception - thus he talks about the environment, inner cities, helping the worse off, and goes to visit glaciers, etc. So that people get a new image of the party, and then they will be prepared to accept Tory policies in other areas like health, crime, immigration, europe, etc.

People must believe that the Party cares about more than just "looking after rich bastards and f***ing the poor" or just immigration, or just europe.

NuLabour have been stealing Tory policies for 10 years, but can sell it better "because they care". Blair can announce a crack down on illegal immigrants and get applause (doesn't actually do it off course...). Howard gets called a racist. Blair can crack down on anti-social behaviour - Howard would be called fascist, etc.

Cameron has until the policy reviews come back to change public perception.

I dont like everything DC does (I'd rather see nuclear power than windmills on roofs for example) but i can see why he is doing it.

[Mark Fulford]

agree with the True Blue test - if it's nothing to do with free trade, bin it.

The problem is that free trade requires level playing fields, and therefore has huge scope.

[True Blue]

The problem is that free trade requires level playing fields, and therefore has huge scope.

I didn't say "fair" trade I said "free" trade. If you are stupid enough to hobble your own people with unworkable taxation and employment laws, you will suffer.

What's the alternative Fulford Test? If France supports it, vote against it?

[malcolm]

True Blue states that those who wish to leave the EU would not be comfortable in the Conservative party.Like with so much else he posts I disagree wholeheartedly.Amongst those Conservatives I meet there is spectacularly little affection for the EU now and even amongst those few who profess to be pro EU there is a marked reluctance to put forward any arguments at all for our continued membership.I would hope that when we are in government again we have a sober and rational debate about the pros and cons of continued membership.

[True Blue]

True Blue states that those who wish to leave the EU would not be comfortable in the Conservative party. Like with so much else he posts I disagree wholeheartedly

So, you are comfortable inside the Conservative party with its current European policy? I think it is quite clear from the rest of your statement that you are not.

It's never going to happen. We will not leave the EU. If you accept this as a fact, you may well be happier, and take your custom to UKIP. If you sit within the party hoping this will change, you will be sorely disappointed, and more than that, help reduce the chances of party ever getting elected. We may as well debate the state of British Empire, the reintroduction of corporal punishment in schools and the Corn Laws.

If we left the EU altogether, we would be utterly, utterly screwed. The other European powers would shaft us and we'd sink into an appalling recession. Seriously, what do you think Chirac would do?

That doesn't mean we can't push the anti-Brussels agenda with the direct support of much of the population of Europe. It doesn't mean we have to join the Euro. With all the new members joining, here is our chance to join with other nations to reform the EU to its original purpose.

[Chad]

If we left the EU altogether, we would be utterly, utterly screwed.
Complete rubbish.

Massive international reform is needed, and we are one of the few countries with balls who can make it happen. The UN and the EU are incapable of addressing the issues of the 21st century.

What are the UN or EU doing to help in Darfur? Self-interest rules again.

It was interesting to see Douglas Alexander dismissing withdrawal, citing the environment not stopping at our borders. 100% correct, but neither does it stop at the EU's borders, it is an international issue to be solved internationally

Now is the time, not for isolation but expansion into the international arena. The EU hinders internationalism as it is a regional power-base in a 21st century where the biggest issues we face are international ones.

Imagine supports EU withdrawal too as a step up to being a reforming country looking for international solutions.

It would be good to hear the Tory leadership actually make such a clear statement on the EU as True Blue has, it would certainly cut the arguments and splits, but obviously it would cut the number of votes and members too.

[Sean Fear]

I fail to see how we would be "utterly screwed" outside the EU. I can't imagine the EU mounting some sort of economic blockade against us, simply because it wouldn't be in their interest to do so.

Put it another way. If we weren't in the EU, who would seriously be suggesting we join it now?

[James Hellyer]

Seriously, what do you think Chirac would do?

Screw up their largest export market for Peugeots, Citroens, Renaults, etcetera? It hardly sounds a rational course of action.

[Sean Fear]

Quite so. If anything, I imagine that Chirac and the other arch federalists would be quite pleased to see us leave the organisation.

[True Blue]

If we left the EU altogether, we would be utterly, utterly screwed.
Complete rubbish.

Complete rubbish? Well, that tore my argument into shreds. Did your mother never tell you that the withdrawal method doesn't work?

I think the fact that you have formed your own party makes your opinions about staying in Europe irrelevant to the internal party debate, except to the extent that it demosnstrates those who support withdrawal are happier outside it.

[James Hellyer]

except to the extent that it demosnstrates those who support withdrawal are happier outside it.

Only if they're happy in a party with overtones of Lennonism.

[Chad]

It is funny how europhiles have nothing to offer against the internationalist argument but personal insults.

If there is nothing extra that can be gained from the same countries operating at the eu level as the international level, then clearly they should be operating at the international level.

The EU is simply a regional private members club profitting a small selection of relatively rich and predominantly white countries.

This is the 21st century. We need to think pro-Europe, pro-America, pro-Africa etc, and work in international nation-state organisations.

[True Blue]

Who said the following:

Britain plays a unique role in the world. We are the only nation that is one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, a net contributor to the European Union, a member of the G8, at the centre of the Commonwealth family of nations and a leading member of NATO. We are a global trading nation with interests in every continent. As the world’s fourth largest economy, we have the potential to be a powerful force for good.

These durable strengths allow Britain to defend our interests and promote our values across the globe.

...

We will also build on the success of enlargement, making Europe more diverse by working to bring in more nations, including Turkey

...

We value Britain’s membership of the European Union, but our horizons extend much further.

etc. Read the Europe page of the manifesto:

http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=manifesto.uk.britainandtheworld.page

This reflects my views pretty much down the line. The Eurosceptic line is likely to harden a little in the next manifesto as a result of the constitution referendums, but that's it. We aren't proposing to leave the EU, we aren't going to propose to leave the EU. If you want to leave the EU, start by leaving the Conservative party.

[Chad]

We value Britain’s membership of the European Union, but our horizons extend much further.

I agree too.

Now is the time to extend those horizons and step up to the international challenge and build nation-state international bodies that can actually address the issues we face and not turn a blind eye to suffering because it might damage their own economic gain.

As your manifesto quote clearly states, conservatives are now looking beyond the eu.

[Mark Fulford]

I didn't say "fair" trade I said "free" trade.

By “free” trade, do you mean that people can trade across borders without regulation? If not, what types of regulations apply? Where does your version of free trade end and regulated trade begin?

What's the alternative Fulford Test? If France supports it, vote against it?

The Fulford Test applies to all aspects of government, including the EU: do ministers need to involve themselves in this matter; what would happen if they kept their noses out?

I haven't noticed any particular problems trading with China, India, Taiwan, Japan, the USA, Canada, etc. Enthusiasts often overstate the importance of the EU trading block.

However, the Fulford Test doesn't mean that I'm anti-union. I greatly appreciate the freedom to cross borders easily. I'm glad that I am free to move to a less objectionable EU country if government involvement in my private life becomes any more intrusive. I am glad that the UK can provide credible political opposition to the USA. I am glad that we are stabilising a widening area by forming strong bonds between countries.

On an emotional level it wouldn't worry me to be part of the United States of Europe. That said, it's not something I'd seek and on a practical level it isn't possible to create a safe, workable pan-European government.

[True Blue]

It is funny how europhiles have nothing to offer against the internationalist argument but personal insults.

The light-hearted remark was to keep you entertained while I dug out Conservative policy on the issue.

I'm concerned that "not wanting to leave the EU" makes you a Europhile, now.

Your argument was a totally irrelevant to the point I was making. Read what the manifesto said - I think it addresses your points fairly thoroughly.

Your whole argument is a non-sequituur.

But Incidentally, our position on the world stage will not be improved by an isolationist strategy. Supranational bodies can best address supranational issues.

The EU does not affect our ability to work in the international arena anyway. It does not dictate our foreign policy. The last thing I want is the EU having any involement in Darfur, or any similar situation.

The EU should be a free market, and that's pretty much it.

[True Blue]

As your manifesto quote clearly states, conservatives are now looking beyond the eu.

Oh, behave! Looking beyond doesn't mean leaving.

[Chad]

The light-hearted remark was to keep you entertained while I dug out Conservative policy on the issue.
To be honest, I should have listened to mum's advice about withdrawal as I've got 5 kids now!

But Incidentally, our position on the world stage will not be improved by an isolationist strategy
100% agreed. We need an internationalist approach.

The EU does not affect our ability to work in the international arena anyway
Isn't the EU pushing for a single seat in the security council?

[John Hustings]

I'm of the belief that Britain leaving would start a domino effect and other countries would eventually want to follow suit (especially the Scandinavian countries).

We always seem to underestimate our own importance these days. We act as if we "need" the EU, as if we wouldn't survive without it.

Hasn't True Blue noticed that Europe isn't exactly in great shape? Take a look at their national debts and pension liabilities. When we joined the European Community, we were the "sick man of Europe". Now we're not. The arguments for being in Europe are 30 years old.

[Chad]

I 100% agree John. There will be lots of negative noises, but once we have had the guts to push for change, then others will jump (up) with us.

Britain can be both the catalyst and architect of international reform. We should do so asap.

[True Blue]

Put it another way. If we weren't in the EU, who would seriously be suggesting we join it now?

I'm not sure how useful this counterfactual is. It would depend on a huge number of factors you haven't specified. We have to work with the situation as it is, not as it might have been.

The only evidence we have for the attractiveness of the EU is the current eagerness for lots of countries to join .

So the real question is, we are in EU, do you want to leave it? If so - I recommend UKIP.

[True Blue]

I'm of the belief that Britain leaving would start a domino effect and other countries would eventually want to follow suit (especially the Scandinavian countries).

We always seem to underestimate our own importance these days. We act as if we "need" the EU, as if we wouldn't survive without it.

Mr Hustings, your argument is based on the view that there is a manifesto for change within Europe.

If you think there are a sufficient number of countries and people who oppose many of the changes that the EU has wrought, then surely the best way forward is to work with these people and change things, rather than undermine the free market with the potential of trade wars, in-fighting and nationalism?

There is enough impetus within the EU to make it what it should be rather than throwing our toys out of the pram.

[Margaret]

So True Blue is happy for over 70% of our laws to be made in Brussels and stamped through our own Parliament without discussion.

Whilst Blair was EU President, over 4000 new regulations were imposed on us. Did you hear anyone in the HoC complaining, or opposing these?

Norway is one of the richest countries in Europe, thanks mainly to its opting out of the EU. The country is richly endowed with natural resources - petroleum, hydropower, fish, forests, and minerals - and has obtained one of the highest standards of living in the world partly from petroleum production. Only Saudi Arabia and Russia export more oil than Norway, which is not a member of OPEC.

It's GDP per capita is 4th in the world, with the UK 20th and European Union as a whole 31st.

I wish we were in the happy position that Norway is in, still in charge of our fishing, which we handed over to the EU, still in charge of our farming, the EU has practically destroyed ours, and still in possession of oil, most of which was frittered away

[Margaret]

If you want to leave the EU, start by leaving the Conservative party.

You certainly know how to win friends and influence people.

The only evidence we have for the attractiveness of the EU is the current eagerness for lots of countries to join .

They have been duped into believing they are going to get money. Some of them are already waking up to the reality that they swapped one dictatorship for another.

[Rick]

I assume people want the Conservatives to win? For goodness sake, back him. He's only been in power a few months, you don't know what his exact policies are

That sentence is loopy..............you want a Party to win even though you don't know what its policies might be ????????? !!!!

Now that is fanatical devotion.

As for the ECHR the judges are not "Activist" they are not even what England would consider Judges. Many of them - go look at their biogs - are Civil Servants from Ministries of Justice who have not in fact acted in courtrooms.

The key issue is that England has Common Law and the ECHR states are in the main Civil Law states which makes for great differences.

Then again a Judge from Slovakia, Lithuania, Estonia, Romania, Malta, Hungary, Spain...........adjudging matters in Britain ?

[Margaret]

If you want to leave the EU, start by leaving the Conservative party.

You certainly know how to win friends and influence people.

The only evidence we have for the attractiveness of the EU is the current eagerness for lots of countries to join .

They have been duped into believing they are going to get money. Some of them are already waking up to the reality that they swapped one dictatorship for another.

[Rick]

The only evidence we have for the attractiveness of the EU is the current eagerness for lots of countries to join .

True - in each case their governments have promised them money will shower from heaven - no wonder the Turks are excited ! It is a project designed by an elite for an elite and benefits an elite - just as Jean Monnet intended.

As for tariff-free access - China has such access to both US and EU markets under MFN status which if the USA granted to Britain MFN status the EU is compelled by bilateral treaty to extend to Britain

[Ted]

If leaving the EU is your primary political objective then I'd agree with True Blue that UKIP is a better party to support, however I'd disagree that you can't be a conservative with those beliefs.

I remain pre-disposed to continued membership but very much for moivng the discourse on future direction onto our terms. But the EEC/EU question has always been more about geo-politics and Britains traditional interest in the balance of power in continental Europe.

One of our objectives in joining was to stop the creation of a franco-german centred superstate - it's been a struggle but we have on the whole succeeded in that and retained a trans-Atlantic presence. The EU has been a force for good in supporting democracy in Greece & Spain and in building democratic states in post-communist central & eastern Europe, with the UK in forefront of widening as against deepening the EU.