David Cameron's Today programme interview

On Charles Clarke: David Cameron used his 8.10am interview on this morning's Today programme to explain the importance of Charles Clarke giving a full statement to Parliament (the interview can be downloaded from this 'listen again page').  Mr Cameron said that the public still needed more information on the whereabouts of the 1,000 released prisoners and the steps being taken to protect the public.  Mr Cameron said that the leaked fact that it took the Home Secretary three weeks to tell the Prime Minister and the police about the deportation scandal underlined why he was the wrong person to rectify the situation and to restore public confidence.  The Tory leader called on the Prime Minister to bring forward his reshuffle so that a new Cabinet minister for Homeland Security could be appointed.  Such a new position, he said, would lighten the load on an over-stretched Home Office and provide a valuable higher status to counter-terrorism efforts.

Incompetent Labour: The deportation fiasco - hot on the heels of the paedophiles in schools scandal, the incompetence over single farm payments and the mispayment of tax credits - illustrated the fundamental problem with this government's obsession with short-term headlines and its centralisation of decision-making.

"Dramatic" differences with Labour: Asked by John Humphrys for "dramatic" examples of differences between the Tories and Labour, Mr Cameron emphasised his opposition to regionalism and his belief that the proceeds of growth should be shared between the taxpayer and the public services - rather than gobbled up wholly by the fat state.

Living the green life: JH then repeatedly pressed Mr Cameron on why his Lexus car and government driver follow his bicycle to work.  Refusing to accept the Tory leader's suggestion that he had too much to carry, Mr Humphrys said that - via Google - he had found 36 litre panniers (eg here) which would allow him to transport his papers on his bike.  Mr Humphrys then said what was wrong with a Prius and passengers squeezing together a little bit?  Why did the Tory leader need a Lexus?  Why wasn't the Tory leader willing to make serious sacrifices for the environment?  Mr Cameron said that Mr Humphry's line of questioning was ludicrous and that it was possible to be green without making huge sacrifices.  On yesterday's Politics Show he emphasised how greener cars saved petrol costs and solar panels on the roof of a home can reduce heating bills.

Comments

[Suggestion]

Thanks Tim for another great diary post highlighting Cameron's work attacking NuLab. They are starting to lose control of crime and immigration and to lose ground to Cameron on green issues. We are now attacking them on all fronts. I am off canvassing today and tomorrow and working the phones Thursday. So thanks to DC for not letting up on Clarke and co, and here's hoping for a great result on Friday morning.

[fact]

I thought JH made Dave look a bit of a lightweight and slightly hypocritical.

The BBC shouldn't expose him to questions like this - it's unfair to him and undermines a good cause.

Can't Dave threaten to privatise the BBC if they don't continue to support him in the same way they did during conference - after all, whilst they prefer labour to conservative, he is the Tory leader they like most so they shouldn't undermine him ans risk Fox getting the job after the next election.

[kingbongo]

The problem for anyone trying to change their lifestyle in an attempt to reduce their carbon footprint is that everyone accuses them of hypocrisy. Humphrys sounded desperate to make this stick as it supports his own socialist worldview.

I thought DC did rather well by cosntantly pointing out that he wants everyone to make small changes and that it is not always easy to make the right decision. If he sticks at this realistic and optimistic view of environmentalism it will work.

The hair shirt brigade attract nobody except self-loathing types and doing nothing is not sustainable.

All in all a pretty good interview from DC and a typically poor line of attack from Humphreys; he who is the worst interviewer on Today apart from James Nauchtie, who I always remember saying before the last GE "if we win, I mean if the Labour Party win..."

As it's not mentioned elsewhere, time to start helping out Iain Dale and Guido who are compiling the Little Red Book of Labour Sleaze.

[Suggestion]

OH, JH is well known as a leftwing nutjob. Like Paxman, he uses rudeness to fluster his interviewees, especially Tory ones. Dave did well not to get annoyed and snap at the puppy nipping at his heels. The more reasonable he sounds, the better.

I love how he attacks Prescott's dreadful record 'pretty woeful'.

[Editor]

As mentioned on the frontpage comments I'm about to blog Iain and Guido's excellent initiative...

[Suggestion]

By the way, and it's not often I say this, Polly Toynbee is a must-read today:

"One cabinet minister put it graphically: "Our moral authority has collapsed. It's everything from Cherie's hair to cash for peerages, from Tessa's offshore mortgages to John Prescott's trousers. They think we abuse power and it's no good listing all we have delivered. It only makes them rage. They accuse us of arrogance and corruption and it leaves you silenced."

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/columnist/story/0,,1765392,00.html

[Suggestion]

Tim, hooray. The more you can help expose these guys for the sleazeballs they are the better.

The sense of 'losing a grip' is what's happening here.

[James Cleverly]

Those painers are made in Canada. The carbon emissions of flying them over would probably offset any benefit gained from not using the car.

[James Hellyer]

Where was the car made?

[Alastair Matlock]

Humphrys is such a boorish oaf that it simply beggars belief that anyone actually takes him seriously. If only we could all behave as badly as he does in our jobs! His refusal to bow to the Queen when she visited the BBC the other week was a case-in-point.

[John Hustings]

I wonder if David Cameron is now regretting some of the more gimmicky aspects of his environmental agenda. It really is inevitable that you will be pulled up on it and look foolish as a result (as we have seen).

Cameron seemed to deny that there was any connection between his cycling and his environmental agenda, but I think he's being very insincere here. Anyone who recalls his first speech as party leader will remember his (quite funny) joke about the fact that he was supposedly cycling to the hall to help the environment, but that this was offset by the BBC helicopters trailing him.

Having been exposed as a hypocrite, he's now pretending he cycles for "fresh air".

Will the gimmicks now stop? Probably not.

[sbjme19]

Interesting about the Humphreys interview. I thought the Politics Show on Sunday rather biased. When the real main story was Labour's problems there was a piece about Cameron being at odds with "traditionalists" in his own constituency (no evidence at all)and a feeble attack by the London interviewer on Wandsworth Council. It's perfectly OK for the BBC to report a story which might be embarrassing to the tories if it's a genuine story but this desperate dredging around for non-stories just at a time when labour is in trouble looks suspicious.

[kingbongo]

Where was the car made?

As it was a Lexus I'm guessing Japan. I am also thinking that it probably came over on a ship rather than by plane and that it was manufactured using energy generated from imported oil. As I said before, there are no easy choices but small steps are helpful.

I post this comment in the sure and certain knowledge that J Hellyer Esq will use it or some other piece of information to slag off DC.

I also do it in the knowledge that anyone who points out his incredibly prickly nature will be lambasted and he will then profess to be purely following an argument through to its logical conclusion despite the false syllogisms and 60 foot strawmen that are often used.

Yes James, this is ad hominem, a bit like the workover you gave Stewart Jackson; thanks for encouraging our MPs on to the site to debate policy with us.

I just hope that on Friday morning when we have gained hundreds of council seats you will feel able to celebrate a Conservative success.

[Chad]

Hi KB,

If the Tories are net gainers outside the M25 (ie excluding the M25 seats) as well as inside, then I will agree that it will be a good result and will be more than happy to say 'well done'.

My fear is that support for Cameron's agenda is strengthening inside the M25 but weakening outside, so I look forward to the results to see if the CamComs really are a London project or if they have an resonance outside the M25.

Do you accept the regional significance of the gains, and what would you consider a bad result?

[clear blue water]

Slightly OT, but the best Conservative interview today so far was David Davies, the Monmouth MP, on the Radio 2 Jeremy Vine show in the past hour.

What a wonderful relief to hear one of our MPs espousing clear, simple Conservative policies on law and order and the audience responded extremely positively.

Say it as it is David Cameron, don't mince your words.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

If an interviewer was that rude to Castro they'd be found floating in the sea off Florida with "Return to Sender" blowtorched on their face.

[Tom Greeves]

What a ghastly photo of Our Leader.

[Richard North]

"What a ghastly photo of Our Leader.

Posted by: Tom Greeves | May 02, 2006 at 13:37"

Speak for yourself, paleface.

[James Hellyer]

he will then profess to be purely following an argument through to its logical conclusion

When did I say this?

despite the false syllogisms and 60 foot strawmen that are often used

Your complaints about false syllogisms and straw men arguments would be more convincing if I used such techniques, and you weren't constructing a straw man argument yourself.

Yes James, this is ad hominem, a bit like the workover you gave Stewart Jackson; thanks for encouraging our MPs on to the site to debate policy with us.

Stewart Jackson was not interested in debating policy. His contribution appeared to consist of saying that people shouldn't debate policy and strategic direction. As my comments were a clear response to those points, and were not "about the person" making those comments, I fail to see how they could be taken as ad hominem attacks.

In short, kingbongo, your post is a nasty hatchet job. It boggles the mind that the person who wrote it can have the nerve to call anyone else "prickly".

[kingbongo]

Hi Chad

I agree, we need to gain outside the M25 but even within it there are areas we need to do well in if we are to succeed as a party of 'all Britons'. I have in mind the likes of Graeme Archer and co in Hackney or the guy in central Manchester (whose name I'm afraid I've forgotten). In London 200+ seats would be good and overall a vote share of 38% + would be good, anything below 34% has to be bad.

Anything less than 200 seats gained would be incredibly disappointing and for the media to see it as a big win for the tories it probably needs to be nearer 300 (ie 198 seats isn't going to impress the BBC).

Can't wait till Thursday!

[Chris D]

"My fear is that support for Cameron's agenda is strengthening inside the M25 but weakening outside, so I look forward to the results to see if the CamComs really are a London project or if they have an resonance outside the M25."
Chad, I think that your fear's about the success of conservatives in the local elections are quite clear when you use the terms like "Cameron's agenda" or "CamComs"
If you can predict the fortunes of the Conservative Party or the success of David Cameron's leadership at the next GE from the results of Thursday's local elections, then I want to borrow your crystal ball.

[kingbongo]

James H! I rest my case, I nearly posted the exact same response to myself to save you the trouble but you got in before me.

Cheer up a bit; the weather's going to improve, the Conservative Party is going to win a huge test of public support on Thursday and I am volunteering to act as your punchbag so you can vent as much as you want, and displace all that negative energy.

[Chad]

Thanks KB, I appreciate your response.

Having a few people brave enough to define a good or bad result before the vote is a much more effective basis for post-election analysis than each side using the same result to spin their own predetermined opinion.

[Chad]

Hi ChrisD,

You will note that KB agreed with me.

Just so there is no ambiguity, I would like the Tories to kick Labour's arse on Thursday.

We have a thoroughly unpleasant government and the sooner we are shot of them the better.

My only debate and difference with many here is about building a platform that really is built to last, not just to win the next election alone.

That is why I am trying to focus debate on what people consider what will define a good or bad result before the vote, so post-election analysis isn't entrenched in unmoveable opinion.

[James Hellyer]

James H! I rest my case

All your misrepresentations must have weighed it down.

[malcolm]

But James,Kingbongo is undoubtedly right.The weather is going to improve,I heard it today on the BBC so it must be true.

[Mark Fulford]

Having been exposed as a hypocrite, he's now pretending he cycles for "fresh air".

Why do you think that's a pretence? I cycle to work primarily for fitness and relaxation. The fact that it is environmentally beneficial gives me a cosy feeling but, were that to change, I'd still cycle.

[John Hustings]

"Why do you think that's a pretence? I cycle to work primarily for fitness and relaxation. The fact that it is environmentally beneficial gives me a cosy feeling but, were that to change, I'd still cycle."

Maybe he does cycle for fitness. The point I was making is that he's now denying that it was an environmental gesture, which contradicts his earlier line.

[kingbongo]

All your misrepresentations must have weighed it down. LOL

that's more like it; I see the promise of better weather is working already.

[Ted]

Perhaps Cameron should team up with the Daily Mirror to secretly film BBC Today interviwers and see how they get to work....

John Humphries has become the non-thinking persons Paxman. He develops a line of questioning that reveals more about Humphries than the subject of the interview. We are left no better off in terms of information but with the impression Humphries has proved his moral superiority.

[Chris D]

Chad, I hope the tories do well on Thursday but IMHO the results will not give us a clear indication of the fortunes of any of the major parties at the next election.
I voted for David Cameron in the leadership contest and his personal ratings in polls are better than I hoped for in his first 6 months.
I am not a Cameroonie but rather a pom pom waving supporter of a conservative party that represents more than one shade of blue and who believes in giving someone time to do the job asked.
Ask me two years from now if David Cameron has reached outside the M25, when he is facing Gordon Brown rather than Tony Blair with a range of firm policy commitments and a focus on Labour's record rather than internal torie bickering. I promise I will have an answer for you.

[Umbongo]

Back to the interview:

Another open goal missed: DC (again) refused to go for the jugular on, for instance, the economy: productivity falling through the floor, government borrowing through the roof, endless public sector (non)jobs massaging the unemployment figures, burgeoning red tape, any economic benefits due to Brown's continuation of Conservative policies, . . . . etc. No, we heard about "constructive opposition" (well done Mr Brown on independence for the Bank of England!) and most of the interview was Humphreys concentrating on DC's hostage to fortune, the NuGreen agenda. Or maybe I was listening to a different "Today" from everybody else.

[Chad]

No problem ChrisD! I'm sure everyone is keen to see the results.

are quite clear when you use the terms like "Cameron's agenda" or "CamComs"

One small point though, I only use "CamCons" as a short form of 'Cameron's Conservatives' which is the official branding adopted by Cameron on the official Tory site.

There is no implied insult on my part, it is simply an abbreviation of the term Cameron's has himself adopted.

I must say though, that I really do not like this term, as it implies a presidential rather than team approach, but it is the description that Cameron wants to use to describe his agenda.

[Jack Stone]

I am certain that on the friday morning after the next general election when DC is walking into number ten there will be idiots posting on this site saying that we could have done better.
The sun as started to shine , Labour are deep in trouble, the Tories are leading in the polls and we have a leader the first for about fifteen years who the public actually like. For gods sake get your chins off the ground and be proud to be a Conservative!

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Jack - you do remember that a Conservative leader won a General Election less than 15 years ago don't you?

[James Maskell]

Proud to be a Conservative??? I just left the Party in protest of its policies. Ive never been so ashamed to be a Conservative, something that Cameron is not.

[Ghastly]

"What a ghastly photo of Our Leader." or

What a photo of our ghastly Leader!

[matt wright]

I think the party is getting much tighter and effective now. All the bits of the strategy are coming together nicely in these last few days. We have added to the environment messages now with good stuff on crime and education and more of this should touch the right buttons of voters,

Matt

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Jack - you do remember that a Conservative leader won a General Election less than 15 years ago don't you?"

I thought it was the Sun wot won it?

[verulamgal]

Please may I be enlightened as to what Boy Wonder's 'good stuff' on education actually is?

[James Maskell]

I thought that Tory poliocy on education is that schools should have as much freedom as possible - as long as they choose not to be Grammar Schools...and that was announced some time ago.

As for crime, the furore about crime at the moment is not a policy setting time, this is the Conservatives calling for a resignation. What would the Conservatives do different? In fact, what is the policy on crime for the Conservatuves?

[Richard]

"In fact, what is the policy on crime for the Conservatuves?"

Attach criminals to wind turbines and hurl chocolate oranges at them? Or just exile them to Norway.