Heffer: Cameron will live to regret insulting right

David Cameron and Simon Heffer do not get on.  Today's Heffer column in The Daily Telegraph is only the latest round of the Heffer Vs Cameron series.

Simon Heffer believes that the Tories should now be 16% ahead given "Labour's meltdown" and the weakness of the Liberal Democrats under the "utterly inept" Ming Campbell.   He thinks that Labour will recover somewhat under Gordon Brown and that the LibDems will ruthlessly ditch Ming.  Where will this leave the Tories, he asks?

Mr Heffer argues that the Tories need to do more to positively address Britain's failures under Labour.  He highlights illegal immigration, the pensions disaster, Labour's economic mismanagement and the 'Sovietisation' of parts of Britain in terms of dependence on the state:

"Perhaps Mr Cameron's most harmful assumption is this: that, in the end, the Tory public, and the supposedly Tory press, will have nowhere else to go, so he can muddle along in the middle and end up in Downing Street. If the Conservative Party were any longer Tory, he might have a point - but it isn't. I am alarmed by the number of readers who write to me to say they have voted, or will vote, BNP. The entirely respectable UKIP now stands at four per cent in the polls, and almost all its support is precious votes taken from the Conservatives. Above all, the abstention party goes from strength to strength. Mr Cameron wilfully does nothing to counter these forces, except occasionally to insult them. However unlikely it may now seem, he and his party will live to regret that."

Mr Heffer's style of attack is probably what Max Hastings was thinking about when, in yesterday's Guardian, he wrote:

"Every time a neanderthal columnist attacks the Tory leader in a rightwing newspaper, I find myself wondering how much the Cameron camp paid for the privilege."

Mr Hastings appears to think that Mr Cameron's greatest strength is that he is prepared to ignore people like Mr Heffer:

"His greatest strength stems from a recognition that the British people have changed immeasurably, that the past has no message for them. If the Tories are to hold power again, the endorsement of bankers and retired colonels will never suffice. Just as Blair triumphed in 1997 because he knew old Labour was finished, that the unions had become an embarrassment, so if Cameron gets to Downing Street it will be because he takes no heed of Conservative geriatrics, and woos new Britain. It is the big tent all over again: "We're a party for everyone - young and old, sick and healthy, rich and poor. Margaret Thatcher's great achievement was to convince the British people that this country's best days were not in the past. We've got to do the same - to give the message that our best days are still ahead.""

Comments

[arthur]

Thank God for Simon Heffer!

[Hmmmm]

Hey Heff!! ...doncha think we should perhaps.. err...try to learn something from failure?

[Ted]

Oh gosh a choice between the Huffalump and Hastings..plague on them both is my usual response.

There is a bit of truth in both comments - in being a big tent we must keep the bankers & retired colonels inside (actualy retired colonels always seem pretty moderate, it's the ex-majors surely who are most extreme) but we should be a party that everyone can find some identification with.

Heffers advice would turn us into "entirely respectable" UKIP mark II, Hastings's would like to see IMHO a competent version of NuLab. Steering between these two, taking on board a few bits of reasonable advice, seems to be our current and sensible course.

On the 16% ahead bit - over on Politicalbetting there is a thread about us having a 15% lead from women versus a 2% deficit from men. Question is how we attract more male support without losing the gains we have made amongst women - if we can crack that perhaps 15-16% lead might be possible.

[Zhukov]

Heffer is a moron.

Conservative Party percieved as right wing and home of anti-immigration lunatics et al.

Cameron insults/ignores lunatic right.

Perception of Conservative Party changes.

More normal people vote Conservative, Conservative Party wins.

[Esbonio]

I tend towards Ted's point of view whilst instinctively sympathising with Heffer's world view not Hastings's.

[Larry]

For a man with a face like a slapped arse, Mr Heffer certainly has a lot to say for himself. If I looked like that I'd be afraid to leave the house.

[Martin Curtis]

Ted, my Dad is a retired Major!!!! (and you are right).

My tuppence worth is that if we lose 1% of our support on the far right and gain 10% in the centre ground it will be worth it. Not least because those 1% often do the party more harm than good, with somewhat extremist views which, when expressed, people associate with Conservatives in general.

[Mark Fulford]

There is a wonderful quote on the Ligali web site:

Simon Heffer describes himself as Irrepressible, irascible, irreverent…. But he is also iniquitous, ignominious, impenitent but ultimately... irrelevant.

[SimonNewman]

I think Cameron wins by keeping it positive, that's what people want. Cameron can easily weather attacks from people who don't like his fluffy-bunny clouds & flowers environmentalism. But he should always avoid negativity - calling UKIP 'closet racists' insults all Eurosceptic Conservatives and risks driving them away for no good reason.

[Chad]

Zhukov,
Your response is only partially correct, and thus misses the point of the criticism.

The scales were tipped to the right-wing, and the tory Party was unpopular.

Cameron quite rightly starting focussing on more 'left' issues and so balance and thus popularity increased. Great.

However, having restored the party to a perception of balance, Cameron kept taking the little weights off the right and placing them on the left until the scales were imbalanced again.

You need an equal amount of left and right (whether 'extreme' or otherwise) to create balance as that would mean you are presenting a balanced party.

Once you start throwing out the 'lunatic' right without any similar concerns for the 'lunatic' left, then you have no chance of forming a government.

[Peter M.]

Exactly, Simon! You are right. You are 100% right.

[Chris D]

Simon Heffer states that "Perhaps Mr Cameron's most harmful assumption is this: that, in the end, the Tory public, and the supposedly Tory press, will have nowhere else to go"
I am still laughing at that statement, Its because voters deserted the tory party in favour of Labour and the libdems over the last 10 years that we now have less than 200 MP's.
Judging by David Cameron's campaign to widen the appeal of the conservative party and attract back these voter's , its probable fair to assume that he wants to form a government with a working majority!
I gave up reading the Telegraph a few months ago partly because I would not pay to read the weekly Hefferant at DC every week.
The tories have had some of their best poll ratings in years recently , how much has the telegraph readership increased recently?

[AlexW]

Hastings is right. Attacks from Heffer serve to demonstrate to the wider public that the Conservative Party is moving towards the centre, just as Blair was able to peddle a myth of "triangulation" by contrasting himself with the Old Left. If the public see us as nowhere near the "entirely respectable" UKIP*, this can only improve our image.

* Put "Godfrey Bloom" into Google for some interesting commentary on women in the workplace...

[David Belchamber]

Heffer does go OTT but... all of us, not just right wing tories, want to hear something about control of immigration (one of Howard's big points), lower taxation, a crackdown on crime etc.
On the other hand, we do not really want to hear minority parties insulted; if our policies are good enough all round, we should pick up votes at the GE from one issue parties.
Let us work together to produce a really good all-round, conservative manifesto that coheres.

[South East Blogger]

We are still in the 'changing or perception' stage. This is recreating our image to get those who deserted us and those who previously supported other Parties to listen to us again. It means that instead of fighting from our bunkers getting out and tackling the enemy on their own ground.

Those who are having fits and panick attacks should pause and take a deep breath. What will count in the end will be the firmed up policies - wait and see.

Heffer (who's political stance I normally agree with) should carry on whinging as it is helpful to Cameron for him to do so. The rest of us should take what is said by him with a pinch of salt and keep and eye on the big picture.

[Don Gilders]

I’d like to hear our leaders’ analysis of the issues and outcomes that affect us every day folk.

Maybe we have to wait for policy specifics for some tactical reasons, but I’d really like the confidence that comes from knowing they are on the case and that I can agree with their concerns and conclusions at least, and perhaps even anticipate some healthy proposals later. Right now, I’m willing Mr Cameron the best, but I’m not sure how he really views the issues that concern me.

I think Simon Heffer is making the same point, and has the talent to express this position and potential outcome more robustly.

[Annabel Herriott]

Its the age 80 and over contingent that the Hefferlump appeals to.Uber right wing, homophobic, bring back the birch, hang 'em, shoot 'em flog 'em brigade. Retired Air Commodores have a bit of the Herr Heffer about them as well as Majors. Crusty old buffers is another Heffer fan club. My dear partner I'm afraid, is a Heffer lite, but I try to keep him indoors, or down on the allotment so he doesnt frighten the horses! He has always voted Tory, does not see it as his duty to lift a leaflet, let alone stuff an envelope, b ut he is supportive of my efforts, loves to get his "black tie" out and duly pays for the tickets, or at least his own. Its a funny old world, my kids have always kept me young in outlook, I only hope I wont get like that in another 9 years, when I too will be 80!!! No, Heffer is a dreadful little man.

[Andrew Kennedy]

Sorry Annabel..... i am 39, openly gay, live in greater London and work in media - and I agree with 90% of what Simon Heffer says !

Having said that - my partner also tries to keep me indoors out of harms way! ;)

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

I know Daniel Vince-Archer likes to refer to Simon Heffer as the Heffersaurus, perhaps Heffersaurus Wrecks is more appropriate?

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

Today's Heffer column in The Daily Telegraph is only the latest round of the Heffer Vs Cameron series

...so why is this newsworthy? Heffer is repeating the same column and will continue to do so ad nauseum until he scares enough readers away from the Telegraph that they fire him. Miserable bastard.

[wasp]

Heffer still doesn't seem to realise that the votes we need to win come from Labour and the Liberals, not UKIP & BNP.

UKIP & BNP do not have 4 million voters for us to nab.

[Graeme Archer]

Strewth! I was all set to try very hard and not be unpleasantly personal in my reaction to Simon Heffer, but I needn't have bothered! Conservative Home posters - in particularly Larry and Annabel - you have made my day & made me laugh out loud - Thanks!

I think we should adopt the Telegraph policy of always adding an epithet whenever Heffer is mentioned. DVA's and Iain's are good but Annabel's is a classic: "No, Heffer is a dreadful little man".

Time for a rethink at Telegraph towers? I'm not quite at Chris D's stage of giving it up for good but every Heffer article takes me one step closer. It's 65 of your earth pence, which is quite a lot to have your lifestyle routinely sneered at by some red-faced burp who wouldn't last 3 minutes in Bethnal Green. If I wanted to read the Daily Mail, I'd buy it.

Where did you go after the Telegraph Chris D? I have a good Tory friend who swears by the Independent of all things. I picked up one of the million free issues that fly around LIverpool St, it was unspeakably awful. Why would I care what Janet Street Portah finks abaht anyfink?

Creeping up the list of silly columnists the world would be better off not reading is Lord Sir William Rees of Mogg. Consistently wrong about everything (see Eyes passim & I think my most treasured article was his late 1996 one where he confidently predicted that John Major had turned the corner and could look forward to another good majority) he has taken to belly-aching about the Tory leadership because his children have somehow failed to be selected as A-listers, despite having delivered leaflets and being related to one of Fleet Street's top columnists! Shurely shome mishtake? Who do these little people think they are?

[David Belchamber]

Don Gilders @ 09.58 said: "Right now, I’m willing Mr Cameron the best, but I’m not sure how he really views the issues that concern me."
Hear! hear! Whilst we applaud the amount DC has achieved in such a short time, I see no reason for alienating traditional conservative supporters or, indeed, people tempted to vote UKIP and BNP.
As Heffer points out, the Opposition has a number of open goals to aim at and we should score as many as possible.
At the same time, the occasional reminder that policy review groups are working on the "meatier" issues would not come amiss. Or simple reminders like "the tories traditionally reduce taxation, while Labour always does what Gordon Brown has down - put them up".

[torylady]

all of us, not just right wing tories, want to hear something about control of immigration (one of Howard's big points), lower taxation, a crackdown on crime etc

Comments like David Belchamber's above are extremely annoying and poorly thought through.

Anyone who reads Hansard or pays attention to what's going on in parliament will know that Shadow MPs are talking about these issues. How many times have we heard Damian Green talk about control of immigration?
Cameron is not a one-man-band. He will not do everything on his own, and in any case, We ARE talking about those issues. We just aren't repeating them ad infinitum.

MPs are in the commons opposing poor government policy everyday and making suggestions for exactly what to do to crackdown on crime. We are an opposition party, not in government. We are also going through an intense policy review stage, there is only so much we can do without compromising ourselves.

Cameron & Co have already made the point that cutting taxes is not an all-purpose panacea for economic growth although we would like to cut them.

David Davis dug a hole for himself when he was promisng tax cuts in his leadership campagin, and as Jeremy Paxman rightly pointed out we don't know what the economic situation in 2009 is going to be, so how can we just promise tax-cuts rashly?

David Davis did focus on tax, immmigration, crime, etc etc during his campaign.
He couldn't even win the leadership of the party, you must be dreaming if you think harping on indefinitely about those issues will win us the leadership of the country.

[Graeme Archer]

@torylady: hear hear! brava!

[EdR]

Heffer's idiocy no longer surprises me, but the depths of his vanity and arrogance still do. There's a whiff of Spode about his horrifying blend of irascibility and smug self-importance.

The Telegraph is a joke as long as Heffer is on board. Britain deserves a centre-right newspaper which offers coherent, intelligent criticism of Cameron from the right -- not mud-slinging and Monday-morning quarterbacking. To see how a newspaper that really represents mainstream centre-right opinion in this country puts its views across in a concise but punchy fashion, check out the leader pages of The Sun. Heffer's airheaded verbiage would be shown up pretty quickly over there. He must be replaced now.

Personally, I can think of one independent-minded individual with a cool head and a finger on the pulse of conservative opinion in the nation. His name is Tim Montgomerie.

[johnC]

Does this mean that the celebrated Labour voter Max Hastings has switched parties again ? Can anyone take him seriously ?

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

John, more seriously than I can take Heffer, that's for sure!

[Graham D'Amiral]

Given our performance in polls for the last 14 years I'm not going to get too depressed at only being 6 points ahead.

What I don't understand is what Heffer thinks is so different today than just a year ago, where we fought an election on the kind of issues Heffer thinks would give the party a 16 point lead, and our vote share flatlined.

[Chris D]

Chad, you state that "You need an equal amount of left and right (whether 'extreme' or otherwise) to create balance as that would mean you are presenting a balanced party."
So you achieve this "consensual" balance within the party and then everyone will be happy because we have achieved the centre ground in the the tory party. We then just wait for the rest of the voting public to move away from the centre ground of British politics in a big lurch to the right and we will win a GE!
We have had 4 leaders since 97 who have been expected to perform that miracle and at last with DC we seem to be finally breaking the cycle and he might actually achieve the job he was elected to do, which is to win a GE and form a government. But that will only happen by moving the party towards the voters who decide who governs the UK.
Maybe we should have a discussion on CH about "How we judge the success of the tory leader". William Hague and Michael Howard failed because they lost GE's by focusing on dog whistle issues like Europe and immigration. But IDS was ousted because I believe he tried to move the party more to the centre ground. So is being a successful leader of a "balanced" party the target or is it being a successful PM to the wider voting public?

[Yawn]

Anyone who reads Hansard or pays attention to what's going on in parliament will know that Shadow MPs are talking about these issues.

So what you're saying is that 99.99% of the population has no idea that these issues are being discussed, or are even on the current Conservative agenda.

We ARE talking about those issues.

Just not where the public will hear.

Cameron & Co have already made the point that cutting taxes is not an all-purpose panacea for economic growth

Though they remain strangely silent on the issue of whether they have a moral right to take and spend increasing amounts of other people's money - presumably because they think they do.

you must be dreaming if you think harping on indefinitely about those issues will win us the leadership of the country.

As nobody has suggested "harping on indefintely about these issues", may I suggest you learn to read?

[Londontory06]

Poor old Simon Heffer. He is so offensive that he actually harms those whose views he claims to represent. What self respecting right wing Conservative would want to associate with this kind of ignorant and self serving rant? Presumably he believes that if only Michael Howard had run a louder, even more right wing campaign at the last election, the Party would have won more seats. Putting it politely, I don't think there is any polling evidence that supports such a proposition.

I wonder why the Telegraph took him on when the Mail shipped him out?

[christina speight]

Wasp. I am one of those who deserted the party in despair AND I did not vote Labour or LibDem. Michael Howard brought me and many [not enough, but many] back. Heffer is right.

This leader makes me squirm with embarrassment - he's so cuddly, so (ignorantly) green, so given to spin wsith not a hard cutting edge anywhere. Blair's lot are floundering but not once does Cameron suggest that he might have noticed, or suggest that things would be better under the Tories. A spineless leader for a spineless era I suppose.

He can't even get his "spin" right - the glacier fiasco, the non-existent wind-turbine, the car following the bicycle!

And where is his promise to get the Tory MEPs out of the Federalist EPP grouping. Has he forgotten it, because for many of us it is a litmus test.

I cut my teeth fighting to get rid of Attlee and his government and to replace him with someone with fire in his belly and fought to bring freedom back to Britons- Churchill.

Two prominent political authors of best selling books dismiss Cameron as a lightweight. One added yesterday- - -
=====
"Surely someone at the top of the Conservative Party should take note that many activists and loyal Conservative voters will almost certainly not vote for Cameron and may not vote at all thus joining the 5m or 6m former Conservatives who already stay at home.

I suppose it is possible for Cameron to win but on a low turnout where the majority dont vote. Not sure what sort of win that would be - dangerous springs to mind.

So he and others have to do something about the millions who longer vote at all in general elections but used to vote Conservative - I'm joining them.
===

A six percent lead with all that's happening is a death warrant for the Tories under Cameron

[Chad]

"So is being a successful leader of a "balanced" party the target or is it being a successful PM to the wider voting public? "

I don't think you'll achieve the latter without becoming the former first.

Hi Chris,
I think politicos get too wrapped up in defining one thing or another but for the sake of argument, it is as vital to equally discuss immigration as the environment.

It is as vital to discuss lower taxes as redistribution or commitment to public services.

This is what real people want to hear. This is what I mean by balance of 'left' and 'right'.

For all the 'vote blue go green' (which I agree was excellent and effective), I bet most activists on the doorsteps at the local election were primarily banging on about lower council tax. That is balance and it was effective.

This current trend of branding those who want to hear about tax and immigration as much as the environment etcas lunatic right-wingers is incorrect and insulting.

I agree with your explanation for previous failure, all I am saying is that it was not because the party was simply "too right wing" but that it was not balanced. Too-left is as imbalanced as too-right.

So the 'leftie' stuff is good but it has to be balanced with the 'rightie' stuff too because those are the issues that are concerning people.

[Mark Fulford]

So the 'leftie' stuff is good but it has to be balanced with the 'rightie' stuff too because those are the issues that are concerning people.

I broadly agree, but you also have to consider the minefield of button issues. I'm guessing that some of Christina's 'rightie' stuff would see me off the plot.

[johnC]

One thing that Heffer is certainly right about is that the opposition has been pretty feeble at its primary task, which is opposition. The government has been allowed to get away with far too much. On BBC's Question Time the strongest critics of the government are usually the independent panellists and the audience rather than the Tory spokesmen. During 1975-79 the Tory opposition under Thatcher was merciless to the hopeless Callaghan government. We need the same killer instinct.

[malcolm]

I would hope that those who slag off Conservativehome on other blogs as being populated exclusively by 'anti Cameron right wing nutters' read this thread!
Poor Simon Heffer,he is becoming a rather lonely voice (even on the Telegraph Ed)who has becoming so unbalanced in his continual attacks on Cameron that he is in danger of becoming a caricature of an out of touch 1950's kind of 'Tory Boy'.I really do wonder what influence he now has in the wider world,any?
Hastings is more interesting,he has clearly fallen out of love with Nulabour but will never be an uncritical friend of the Conservative party.It's the fact that he can be unpredictable that make his articles required reading for me.

[Mike Christie]

I think some of the people commenting here, and the Hefferlump, seem to be caught up in some Rip van Winkle story where they have been asleep for the last 10 years and missed our three resounding defeats that came off the back of campaigns focused on things like Europe, immigration and crime.

[Esbonio]

I am not being precious but I do think some of the language used find language used by some people on thgis thread does very little to support their views.

[Mike Christie]

or perhaps they have been reading a toddler's guide to political campaigning. If people aren't listening to you, JUST SHOUT LOUDER AND STAMP YOUR FEET!

[torylady]

I see someone has resurrected the ghost of James Hellyer in the form of "Yawn".

Very few people manage to give the appearance of forensically analysing someone's comments while doing nothing of the sort.

Talk about wide of the mark - you missed my point even though it was a mile wide and had huge barn doors wide open in the middle saying
This Way Please >>>>>>>>

[Esbonio]

If you do not do like Heffer's views, argue the case.

In the same vein, crass stereotypes of ex-servicemen and the like is ignorant and offensive to some. Do you want to give the impression that so called Conservative supporters have little or no empathy with those who have served the nation and been prepared to make the final sacrifice?

[Chris D]

Graeme Archer @ 10:36
I am still looking but I must admit to having started buying the Times because I like columnist's like Matthew Parris.
Chad, you state that "I agree with your explanation for previous failure, all I am saying is that it was not because the party was simply "too right wing" but that it was not balanced. Too-left is as imbalanced as too-right." I am sorry but you are contradicting yourself, if you agree with me about the previous failures then you are saying that the party has been "too right wing" As for a the assertion that being "too left" is imbalanced , that might be the case in the other political parties but moving to the left for a tory party that has been very right wing leads you to the centre ground of British politics. You seem to be looking for a balanced party that is tailored made to your requirements and I wish you luck. I am looking for a conservative government which I hope will be a reflection of many different voter's aspirations.

[Mike Christie]

"crass stereotypes of ex-servicemen and the like is ignorant and offensive to some"

Do lighten up, the stereotype of the crusty retired Major or slightly eccentric retired Colonel is an old one. It isn't meant disrespectfully. It has been used in the press, media and arts for many years.

[Richard]

"UKIP & BNP do not have 4 million voters for us to nab."

Although their combined support in the opinion polls comes to 7%. Assuming arbitarily that just over half of these are ex-Tory voters that's a potential extra 5% we could gain the polls. Let us hope they realise that they are wasting their time with the minor parties.

[Jack Stone]

I do not understand why the Conservative Party should be interested in gaining votes from those tempted to vote for the BNP.
The BNP is a racist organisation. Those who vote for it are racist. Do we really want such people on our side!

[Graeme Archer]

I will try the Times next week Mike!

I'm going to risk making a comment to Chad. Chad - balance is a silly driver. I can have a completely symmetrical distribution centred on any spot on the real line, call it m. All symmetry guarantees you is that Prob (M > m) = Prob (M < m) = 50% where M is a random observation from the distribution.

In other words, you would be happy with balance even if it includes an extreme right-wing nutter *and* an extreme left-wing nutter.

In other words, we should have frothing UKIP type nutters (they are, they so are) as well as squeaky-keen LibDem types.

This is balance but it's a bit pointless. Statisticians have long pointed out the need to consider not only location (m) but scale ie how wide a tent are you willing to erect? (Fnarr)

As for me I can't see any reason why symmetry is of even vague interest. Plenty of good-natured distributions are not symmetrical. An exponential distribution probably best describes us: centred in a big blob around the decent views of the moderate majority (Christina: this does not include you) with the odd skew point to the right on matters that make us distinct (robust eurosceptic, tougher on outcomes than the causes of outcomes etc).

[Ted]

On the meat in Heffers story I think he misunderstands what effective parliamentary opposition is - he looks back at the opposition to Callaghan.

The difference between Callaghan's govt and Blairs is called a working majority. Punch & Judy opportunistic opposition works when every vote is a knife edge and getting Gerry Fitt to abstain brings down the government.

With a government that is not likely to fall - does anyone seriously imaging Blair losing a vote of confidence - opposition is about stirring the pot so the governments manifest failures are exposed and the impression is built of a failed and tired government. We've done that - less than a year after an election victory NuLab talks of renewal from top to bottom, it's Home Sectretary talks of "not fit for purpose", the DPM is a joke etc. We did duck the chance to beat Blair on Education - deciding that it presented us as a constructive opposition and kept a weakened, stumbling PM in place so the narrative continued (why let Brown come in with his renewal message early in a parliament?)

That's what Labour did to Major - they built up from 1994 a story of incomptence, of sleaze, of PM weakness that overshadowed by 1997 the fact the economy had recovered. They were helped by anti-Maastricht rebels as we are by the Capaign group & the anti-education Bill rebels. I wonder what 1997 would have looked like if someone other than Redwood had taken Major's invitation and actually won the leadership early enough?

[Graeme Archer]

Chris D! Not Mike! Sorry!

[Richard]

"I do not understand why the Conservative Party should be interested in gaining votes from those tempted to vote for the BNP."

Because if they're voting for us they're voting for a non-racist party whose policy they won't have any influence over. Effectively we neutralise them.

[Mike Christie]

"Those who vote for it are racist"

Not necessarily true, the BNP tries hard to deny that it is racist and I would hazard that a substantial number of its voters are feeling disenfranchised and alienated. They are voting for a party that claims it will champion their cause. I know a few people who either voted or were strongly tempted to vote BNP. They have fallen for the BNP propaganda which takes a genuine problem (lack of affordable housing or unemployment) in an area then twists it and presents it as the fault of immigrants and a anti-working class white conspiracy on behalf of the main parties.

[torylady]

Exactly, Mike Christie. You've hit the nail right on the head.

I'm tired of people like that "William" fellow who keep stating that the BNP and UKIP are viable alternatives to us, because they are not.

[Mike Christie]

UKIP and the BNP are both single-issue parties. UKIP claim they will fix everything with the money they will save by leaving the EU and the BNP claim that all our problems with health and education will be fixed by 'dealing' with immigration.

The counter-strategy for both parties is simple.

We lay out our policies for fixing health and education, affordable housing, crime and other problems that affect the aspiring classes. We talk about them enthusiastically and non-stop until the next election.

[Peter M.]

Oh, people... I am so sorry. I have just realized that my previous post could be understood that I agree with Simon Heffer. No No No No! I meant Simon Newman!!! So do not make any mistake, these are the lines I agree with:

Simon Newman wrote: "I think Cameron wins by keeping it positive, that's what people want. Cameron can easily weather attacks from people who don't like his fluffy-bunny clouds & flowers environmentalism. But he should always avoid negativity - calling UKIP 'closet racists' insults all Eurosceptic Conservatives and risks driving them away for no good reason."

[Chad]

Right Graeme Archer (rolls up sleeves and looks as menacingly as possible - i.e. not very),

My education does not even give me the beginnings of a chance of understanding your comment. If it is criticism then poo to you, if it is praise then thanks. :-)

[TomTom]

Since you position Heffer and Hastings as polar opposites one of them may be right.

We shall have to wait for the next election to tell.

Perhaps the Conservatives will simply not have enough seats but lots of votes in the wrong places.

Heffer and Hastings write for money and neither will be much disadvataged by another Labour spell; Oliver Letwin can still work at Rothschilds and the others can melt away into directorships.

Why all this effort is wasted on journalists I don't know. The voters are in the constituencies. In this area the ocal newspaper boasts it has a bigger circulation than all the dailies combined - yet I don't read it. It is a real danger that groupies read Heffer orr Hastings and forget that to most voters you might as well quote Horace an Pliny because it has no impact on their daily lives.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Oh dear. The Heffersaurus Wrecks (nice one, Iain) has surpassed himself with this latest effort. The main is now so ridiculous that he's beyond parody.

I usually get criticised for attacking Heffer's 'tone' without addressing the 'substance' of his comments, so just to appease John Hustings (where is he these days anyway?) and James Hellyer, I've cherrypicked the following remark to tear apart:

I am alarmed by the number of readers who write to me to say they have voted, or will vote, BNP. The entirely respectable UKIP now stands at four per cent in the polls, and almost all its support is precious votes taken from the Conservatives.

Firstly, the notion of the BNP as a drain on a Conservative support is nonsense - the BNP have always been strongest in working-class, traditional Labour strongholds, which isn't really all that surprising, given that they are actually a rather leftist party (a fact that tends to get lost by the determination of hand-wringing liberals to demonise anybody opposed to unfettered open-door immigration as being 'far-right').

Secondly, saying that most of the support for UKIP comes from disaffected Conservatives is also nonsense - a look at the 2005 results in seats in the East Midlands where UKIP performed strongly (Boston is the first that springs to mind) or the 2004 voting breakdown for the regions where UKIP performed strongly reveals that Labour is just as susceptible to a surge in support for UKIP as well.

[TomTom]

BNP claim that all our problems with health and education will be fixed by 'dealing' with immigration.

No ! No ! No !

They are campaigning on Law and Order just as Tony Blair did in 1997. Tough on Crime, Tough on the causes of Crime - causes being unrestricted, uncontrolled, undocumented immigration.

The bits on Education and Health are part of the Socialist Manifesto within the BNP but the real focus is on Law and Order........and frankly looking at stabbings, gun crime, rape, drugs - who believes any mainline party will deal wth it ?

The supercilious approach of professional politicos in attacking BNP candidates as low class or quasi criminal ignores the fact that they are often more representative of the constituency and speak the language of ordinary people more than the candidates selected by London-based parties.

The mainstream parties are in a completely different paradigm - prawn cocktail rather than fish and chips

[wasp]

There's also a missunderstanding in Heffer's logic.

He seems to think that there a millions of conservatives who don't vote because the blessed margaret is not in charge anymore.

Actually the abstentions from Conservative voters are staying at home because they don't have anything to vote for. The reason being that the Conservative Party isn't going to win.

Its the same reason why there aren't as many Leeds supporters as there were 5 years ago.

[malcolm]

I think that's rubbish Tom Tom.If that were true why is it that so few BNP candidates successfully retain their council seats.Generally they really are inadequate people and some really are 'quasi criminals'.
That in no way excuses the main parties for their many mistakes in dealing with crime however.

[TomTom]

Thank you for your considered response Malcolm. Nothing further to be said then.

Continue discussing personalities andinternal party matters

[Ted]

Sorry TomTom the BNP are a nasty racist party and like others before them they'll use fear to help them get into power. They blame all the perceived injustices on an identifiable group.

[Ted]

There is an issue to be dealt with regarding the inequalities and failed social policies that have left so many of our population under-educated, ill housed, dependent on the state. This doesn't have a single cause nor does it have a simple or single solution.

The issues aren't new either - back in 1964 fears on immigration led to this phrase in an election leaflet "... favours continued control of immigration, stricter health checks and deportation of those convicted of criminal offences. ... will give local authorities greater power to help overcrowding. ... will provide new and better housing."

The ... party = Labour (Patrick Gordon Walker's election leaflet just before he lost Smethwick).

Hopefully IDS's work on the Social Justice agenda, together with the Environment (not just Green but cleaner neighbourhoods, anti-graffiti), good Education policies, strong but fair criminal justice and local policing will be a coherent approach towards providing the basis for action on the causes of people's fears and remove the dependency culture that makes them believe they can't do anything but vote for racist bigots.

[christina speight]

Graeme says "In other words, we should have frothing UKIP type nutters (they are, they so are) as well as squeaky-keen LibDem types"

Well this blog appears to consist largely of squeaky-keen LibDem types and is so isolated from what the non-political majority think that they can't grasp that people of otherwise "sensible" attitudes are contemplating voting BNP because that is born of desperation... "There is nobody else to vote for and if enough of us vote BNP the wishy-washy Tories might get scared and listen"

And to talk of UKIP members as being "frothing UKIP type nutters" is the epitome of toffee-nosed twits who don't even bother to find out that 80% of our laws are not made in Westminster but in Brussels. UKIP members - I'll ignore their utterly corrupt leaders - are essentially British patriots who are angry that we are being ruled by foreigners. If that makes them nutters, count me in.

[Mike Christie]

"They are campaigning on Law and Order just as Tony Blair did in 1997. Tough on Crime, Tough on the causes of Crime - causes being unrestricted, uncontrolled, undocumented immigration."

Please tell me you aren't seriously suggesting immigration as the only cause of crime, or even a particularly major cause of crime. The fact that people from some ethnic groups are disproportionately likely to be criminals is a symptom. The same group are also disproportionately likely to be victims too.

Poverty is the biggest cause of crime, whether it be financial poverty, poverty of hope, ambition, opportunity, responsibility, positive role-models. We won't address crime until we address these issues.

That isn't to say that we should do without strong punative deterrents to crime, or that we should continue our current 'open borders' immigration shambles.

[Jon Gale]

Please look at this back in February:

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2006/02/left_and_right.html#comments

It is a poll showing where the public put themselves and see the various leaders and parties on the right/left scale. - is Left, + is Right. (if anyone has a similar more recent one it'd be helpful)

Labour MPs -27
Gordon Brown -21
General Public +2
Tony Blair +4
David Cameron +35
Tory MPs + 53

David Cameron has got to change public perception so the tories are down to + 20 at the most. At the moment (well, Feb) Gordon Brown is seen as closer to the centre than David Cameron!

Talking about the environment, chocolate oranges, GWB, etc. pushes perception of us gently towards the centre. Talking about immigration, Europe etc. pushes perception of us to the right.

Howard lost because everything he said, no matter how reasonable, came from a (public perception) position of +53 and was automatically "Extreme Right" and not worth listen to or voting for, despite the exact same policy being very popular without the Tory name attached.

When the public see the Tory party as +20 instead of +53 we can start talking about immigration and people may actually listen instead of dismissing it out of hand.

Heffer must be at about +70!

[Richard Allen]

It is always good to see that Simon Heffer's critics remain so mature and grown up and don't resort to pathetic personal attacks and childish name calling.

Simon's views might not be fashionable but they are overwhelmingly right. Cameron's arrogance in believing that he doesn't need to look after his base is his greatest weakness. It will cost the conservative party dearly.

[Graeme Archer]

TomTom I think that Malcolm is right. While I do not at all believe that everyone drawn to support the BNP has racist horns on their head, it's a fact that they couldn't run a full slate of candidates in Barking because they couldn't find enough supporters who didn't have criminal convictions.

I don't actually think that law and order or immigration is the root cause of their recent flare-up of support. I think it's to do with disempowerment of the working classes. If no-one listens to you you start kicking shins to gain a hearing.

I know perfectly well that I don't have a racist bone in my body; but I do wonder sometimes, as I'm making my way from Bethnal Green tube back home, did no-one ever think to ask the indiginous east-enders: would you like the entire fabric of your cultural life changed?

There are posters all over the rebuild of the Museum of Childhood (the bit of the V&A that got left at Bethnal Green!). Excited kiddies looking at the exhibits. There are photos of dozens of children. Only one of them is white. It's not racist to notice that - is it? In other words - I admit - I was annoyed at the explicit political posturing that the V&A photographer used to plaster a bit of Bethnal Green with the not very subliminal message that nearly all the schoolchildren who come to the museum aren't white.

That's not really anything to do with immigration - the east end children are born and bred british - it's more about finding space for the indigenous culture to see representations of itself - much as we used to need ethnic minorities to point out to white anglo saxons like me, that it was ridiculous there were no black or Asian people reading the Six o'clock news, for example.

I hope I expressed myself OK there, such a difficult issue to even find the right *language* to talk about!

[TomTom]

Mike Christie - what is your reading age ?

You have clearly hesard Pavlov's Bell and come out with some homily. Yo have not read what i wrote and you have not even bothered to thnk.

I make a clear case why BNP polls 27.5% locally and the Tories lose 5 seats to Labour but you have your idee fixe and facts on the ground do not match your prejudices.

There is nothing to be done with people who refuse to think.

[Mike Christie]

TomTom, rather than resorting to extemely pathetic personal attacks, maybe you would like to explain exactly what you did mean by

"causes being unrestricted, uncontrolled, undocumented immigration."

As someone who lost a council seat, partly due to the BNP going from 0 to 30%ish of the vote, I can assure you I've been giving this a great deal of thought, and talking to people who either voted for the BNP or were very tempted to do so.

[Graeme Archer]

Christina Speight, at 1311, writes:

--If that makes them nutters, count me in.

Well Christina. If the cap fits, love.

[Bruce]

Ten years ago (May 1996), Labour had a double digit poll lead over the Tories (31%, 21%, 27% lead according to Gallup, ICM and MORI, respectively), and had had a double digit poll lead throughout the period 1994-96. In May 1997 the Labour lead was 13% in all three polls. A 6% poll lead after all of the recent Labour Party troubles is of course welcome but NOT impressive.

[Graeme Archer]

@ Richard Allen - i'm paraphrasing, but your post suggests that some of the anti-Heffer brigade use childish name-calling. I agree, it's appalling isn't it. Why the anti-Heffer ("a dreadful little man" - (c) Annabel) group don't grovel at the feet of this colossus among political thinkers, I don't know. After all he's done for the party through the years!

I for one consider myself *humble* to live in a world where his message of hope, optimism and fellow-feeling shines out like a beacon! A beacon I say!

OK, back in the real world. Richard: the reason I am contemptuous of Heffer is that he is contemptible.

[christina speight]

Graeme says
===============
--If that makes them nutters, count me in.
Well Christina. If the cap fits, love.
================

Out of your own writings you commit yourself to the proposition that you do not care that power is not at Westminster any more and that 80% of our laws are made in Brussels - largely by foreigners .

YOU've said it - and the Tory party would be well rid of anyone who thinks that way. There's no point in having a pretend Tory government backed by those who don't care about their country.

I am PROUD to be British .

[Sean Fear]

I can't say I agree with either Simon Heffer or Max Hastings. Ranting and raving against the 21st century won't help us; nor will wet snobbery.

Cameron has to offer the Right enough to keep them on board, simply because Right wing voters do have the option of either staying at home, or voting UKIP or BNP, and he won't come close to power without their support (Butler and King do support the view that UKIP did pull votes disproportionately away from us in 2005).

But I doubt if it would be possible for any Conservative leader to win the full approval of Simon Heffer - and counterproductive to do so.

[torylady]

Mike,
I wouldn't waste my time debating with TomTom. He complains at 12:53 that people are attacking personalities and then goes on to do the same thing less than an hour later at 13:33.

How anybody can think that
Tough on the causes of Crime - causes being unrestricted, uncontrolled, undocumented immigration
is a rational comment is beyond me.

The July 7 bombers did not arrive in the UK on July 6. Such people are born and bred passport-carrying British Citizens and they can't be deported or sent elsewhere.

Just as ethnic minorities are more likely to be victims of as well as perpetrators of crime, one must remember that not all ethnic minorities are immigrants, and not all immigrants are ethnic minorities. The BNP has a problem with non-whites, more than anything. A visit to their website contains rants against inter-racial marriages.

No doubt TomTom thinks inter-racial marriage is a cause of crime as well.

[lucy74]

I think we should have a Heffer-o-meter. On one side a scale showing how many negative things he says about DC per column, and the other showing how much our polls ratings go up accordingly...

[matt wright]

I don't agree with Heffers analysis. Most swing votes are in what is termed the "centre" (we can debate "what centre" means though) and I know from past election experiences on the doorstep our shrill single issue approaches were not working (or certainly not well enough to win a general election). In my travels I know for a fact that much more people are now coming back to us and its not entirely because Labour are imploding. I think DC is right to change perceptions first or people will not listen to our policy messages. However we do have to be distinctive as well. There is no reason why "centre" has to equal muddled or soft. You can address centrground issues with distinctive new approaches in the form of practical and strong policies. DC has the right approach but he should always keep his eyes open and listen to practical voices outside of the Westminster village,

Matt

[Ted]

Sean Fear
Surely Heffer isn't ranting against the 21st Century, he's still ranting against the 20th!

[TomTom]

No Tory Lady - nor do I think "David Cameron is a hottie dot com"

[SimonNewman]

Peter M 12:10:
"Oh, people... I am so sorry. I have just realized that my previous post could be understood that I agree with Simon Heffer. No No No No! I meant Simon Newman!!!"

I knew what you meant. :)

Re the fringe parties - FWIW I think UKIP draw primarily from Conservative support, BNP from Labour support. Certainly UKIP's slant seems libertarian individualist right-of-centre, while BNP are nationalist-socialist - communitarian, anti-free trade, and advocates of the Entitlement culture where you deserve eg a council house (in BNP's case due to your race & birth rather than the regular left's focus on 'vulnerability' and 'disadvantage').

[TomTom]

So the Kurd who controlled 90% heroin imports into the UK was born here was he ? The Somali gangs operating in North Londn and spreading into Bradford. The Albanians running prostitution and the Chinese people-smugglers are all legally reident and documented.

The "David Cameron is A Hottie" trading under the name Torylady mentions terrorism - I do not that is not criminal activity it is not normal. Since Beeston is a lot nearer me than it is you I think I have a better idea of what goes on there.

That was really minor after all MI5 had them under surveillance and telephone tap - so they knrew who they were.

I am more concerned with the Iraqi who murders a Pakistani on Lumb Lanre in Bradford and skips off to Northern Iraq; or the Namibian shelf-stacker on a work permit who raps a woman before downloading her ATM and fleeing to Namibia. My question is why a Namibian needs a Work Permit to stack shelves unless this was a Home Office dodge to reduce asylum numbers.

This doesn't interest you because it doesn't affect you - but it does affect lots of people when they find police unable to control crime.

Why Torylady makes the truly asinine point that ethnic minorities suffer crime is surreal. Whatever did he/she think ? A dead police constable outside the travel agency/hawala in Bradford is testimony to the miserable faiulure of the Met to deal with Somali gangs in London.

The wrst performing police force in Britain is in London and considering policing takes up £12 bn each year it is time it performed.

Silly asides about interracial marriage make me think torylady is a deranged social worker in Lambeth. Silly insinuations get nowhere but emphasise the inability of people like that to grapple with issues rather than stupid asides. The voters are not waiting for a chance to vote Conservative, around here Conservatives are frankly the third, maybe fourth party

[lucy74]

I am with you Tory lady - DC is indeed a hottie! Although I am more keen on his policies and his ability to win the next GE than him physically :)

[SimonNewman]

Torylady:
"Just as ethnic minorities are more likely to be victims of as well as perpetrators of crime, one must remember that not all ethnic minorities are immigrants, and not all immigrants are ethnic minorities. The BNP has a problem with non-whites, more than anything. A visit to their website contains rants against inter-racial marriages."

Thus it's reasonable to characterise the BNP as racist I think (despite their image makeover) - they still judge people primarily by their skin colour rather than the content of their character. Even if they ceased to be racist though (and I'm inclined to believe that their move away from anti-Semitism is genuine, though opportunistic) they'd still be a totalitarian party, which makes them the bad guys in my book.

Re immigrants and ethnic minorities - perhaps worth noting that many groups of both commit considerably _less_ crime than do white-British. Chinese for instance commit very little crime. South-Asians as a whole are in jail at a significantly lower proportion than are whites, though they do have a higher murder rate.

[Mike Christie]

"Silly insinuations get nowhere but emphasise the inability of people like that to grapple with issues rather than stupid asides"

Does this include your 'silly insinuation' that I can't read when I tried to grapple with the issue of one of your earlier comments?

Please practice what you preach, rather than indulging in blatant and ridiculous hypocrisy.

[TomTom]

So the conclusion is that Coinservatives lost 5 seats to Labour on Bradford Council because 27.5% vote went to the BNP making them second in 9 of 16 wards - these voters are racist - and therefore Conservatives can only ever run Bradford Council with support from LibDems.

Similarly not a single Parliamentary Seat in Bradford can be gained by the Conservatives.

Well that solves that.

[Sally Roberts]

Hastings is 100% right. Frankly I don't CARE if we offend the Dinosaurs and the "Blue Rinse brigade"!! They are people who would rather stick pins in their eyes than vote Labour or Lib Dem. The worst that can happen is that we lose a few of them to UKIP. We should be appealing to those disaffected with Labour - and I don't think changing Blair for Brown will make much difference there - or those that see that the "Minger" isn't going anywhere! The polls are telling their own story at the moment - we are moving ahead. We have tried moving to the right and we flat-lined. People will support us if we broaden our appeal and make ourselves look like 21st century human beings, not "flat-earthers"!

[Jack Stone]

The BNP are a bunch of nazi extremist who wipe up racial hatred for there own ends not some sort of well meant campaigners against crime.
When you get these people elected you get what as happened in Barking more racially motivated crime.
Tell the victiums and families of those who have been stabbed and beaten up in Barking since May for no other reason than the colour of there skin that the BNP are not so bad. Please lets get real and lets not pretend that the BNP are something they are not.

[Helen]

Oh my, isn't this wonderful? Do not dare to point out that we have no conservative ideas at all. That is extremist, right-wing and makes us unelectable. Wake up and smell the coffee - your party has been moving away from conservative ideas since 1997 and that is what made you unelectable. People do not want to vote for Blair-lite and why should they? People are staying at home in droves because they do not want to vote for you. Which bit of it don't you understand? At the political stage we are at, the Conservatives should have got 500 seats in the local election minimum. It should 20 points ahead in the opinion polls. Why the heck aren't you if you are so clear that those old-fogey-retired-majors are the only ones whom you have lost?

[Sean Fear]

"Frankly I don't CARE if we offend the Dinosaurs and the "Blue Rinse brigade"!!"

I've never understood why people who despise traditional Conservative supporters involved themselves with the Conservative Party.

[Chad]

Hi Sally,

In isolation, the "modern looking" bit has gone very well, and Cameron deserves the credit for this. The party leader has a much fresher, modern outlook, and performs well in parliament against the tired Blair and woeful Ming. People are listening again, and that is a big achievement in itself. Well done Mr C.

So the polls are reflecting this positive, modern message, but of course, eventually, the policies will need to match the promise or it will seem as though the party peaked to soon.

So the background music is good, Built To Last, on the whole sounds good, so all Cameron has to do is to ensure the policies match.

Unfortunately, even at this (planned) policy-lite stage, the proposals that have emerged seem a stark contradiction to this popular mood music:

For example (from B2L)
The music: "We want to see more local democracy, instead of more centralisation "
The reality: Centrally-imposed candidate lists

The music: "The right test for our policies is how they help the most disadvantaged in society, not the rich"
The reality: Cameron supports selective education based on parents' wealth (private schools) but doesn't support selective education based on kids' ability (grammar schools) thus helping the rich and disadvantaging the poor.

The music: "equal opportunity are achieved by empowering people and communities – instead of thinking that only the state can guarantee fairness."
The reality: Centrally-created equality quotas.

The music: "We believe that government should be closer to the people, not further away."
The reality: State funding of political parties will insulate the parties from the people.

The music: "We will act to ensure that our Party, at every level, is representative of modern Britain."
UKIP achieved 16% of vote in last euro election, so how is this view represented on Cameron's front bench? He has banned anyone in favour of eu withdrawal from working for him.

The music: "We will enhance our environment by seeking a long-term crossparty consensus on sustainable development and climate change – instead of short-term thinking and surrender to vested interests"
The reality: No suggestion as yet that the vested interests of the great polluters, the airline industry will be tackled.

And this is before Cameron builds a full manifesto based on his "policy groups".

The mood music is great. It has been driving the polls upwards along with the current state of the government. Unfortunately, for genuine modernisers like myself who want the reality to match the music, there has been little to believe that the change is anything but superficial.

So it is not just the 'right' that are unhappy, but genuine modernisers too.

[TomTom]

Jack Stone in this country it is OMOV

One Man One Vote

If you are od enough you have just as much a vote as the next man. If 27.5% electors vote BNP and keep Conservatives from being elected just why have Conserfvatives failed.

Think about that. In a competitivce market place people do not trust Conservatives - why ? What have Conservatives failed to do ?

Can you get off your high horse and engage with voters ? {People don't want windmills and solar panels - they want security on the streets and not to be held up at gunpoint in the Tesco car park - or to find the police have vanished and when they see a girl being baten up at 6am on a Sunday morning they end up in call centre in Scotland as they report it.

People are not interested in whether Cameron uses Pampers or terry towelling nappies - they don't care about the salesman just the product. A very good salesman has just duped the country for 9 years with three significant military adventures, a breakdown of administration, privatisation of the NHS, and deep integration into the EU.............people do not want Blair II.

[Sally Roberts]

Sean - maybe because we support Conservative VALUES! By the way I am in no way saying that I "despise" the Party's traditional supporters - only that I despair for those who will not move with the times (and that includes "Young Fogeys" just as much as those with grey hair and wrinkles!)

[Ted]

Sean

Embarrassed by rather than despise is truer. There are generational changes which means the norms and beliefs of many of those born between the wars (or earlier) are an embarrassment - the retired major stereotype and others (and as Annabel says this includes family members).

Surely you don't mean that anyone who doesn't believe what your "traditional conservatives" believe shouldn't get involved in the Conservative Party? Do we leave it preserved in aspic as the traditional conservatives age and die?

There are some so-called "traditional conservatives" that support a vision of this party and a set of beliefs where I'd be happier if they do go and support those parties closer to their beliefs, whether UKIP or BNP.

[torylady]

I am shocked that TomTom accuses others of not being able to read when evidently he can't either. Or write for that matter.

I do not that is not criminal activity it is not normal.
Hunh? What on earth...

Since Beeston is a lot nearer me than it is you I think I have a better idea of what goes on there.

I see you must be psychic.
I've been careful never to mention where I live on this blog, yet you know for a FACT that Beeston is a lot nearer you.
What an ass.

Silly asides about interracial marriage make me think torylady is a deranged social worker in Lambeth.
Ignoring the rant about social workers and what I presume must be a slur on lambeth... Any political party that thinks inter-racial marriage is a hot topic must be full of idiots.I was merely pointing out that your statement about the "BNP being all about Law and Order" was farcical and I gave you an example of something else they campaign passionately about which shows they are not all about Law and Order.

I can understand that you might be having difficulty following through the logic of a thread and its multiple posts. You clearly forgot where you started from.

I will try and keep my posts down to one sentence and use mono-syllabic words after this one to assist you. NOT.

[william]

torylady is tired of people like that "William" fellow who keep stating that the BNP and UKIP are viable alternatives to us, because they are not.

Pulease. Not what I've been saying at all. On the contrary I am saying that the growth rate of BNP support is enough at 2.5 X in 2 years (using council election results from two years ago compared against the recent lot)to project the party to a significant size in another two-four years from now when the next election will probably be happening.

No one knows the future but extrapolating current growth trends should put Cameron on notice that the electoral situation he will be facing when the time comes could be a very different one from that at the previous election.

Other evidence of a drifting away of support from the major parties is that the total %'s of the three added up in opinion polls is reducing, implying that minor parties are attracting more support than previously. From 18% up to 21% in most recent polls on Conservativehome.

I am not suggesting a minor party will form the next government, but a continuing stream of knifings and murders on British streets will be enough to force people to seek out Parties that offer solutions to the problems they are concerned about. Unless they see Cameron starting to offer a solution, they will inevitably be interested in listening to others that claim to do so.

Cameron has not offered to exit the ECHR, only the HRA. This is not enough to get at the problem.

Conservative MP's are ahead of him it seems in their wiolling ness to confront EU Lawmaking, with 146 voting for Bill Cash's amendment during the Regulatory Reform Bill. Cash proposed that the Bill should if necessary override the provisions of the 1972 European Communities Act. 146 Conservative MP's voted in favour of this, which is surely an historic moment - and one which got not an inch of newsprint in any newspaper that I saw..

While Conservative MP's for the most part are now willing to challenge EU law-making in Parliament from the back-benches, Cameron has so far held back from permitting such policies to become 'Party'. As long as he does so, this will allow the minor parties to pile into the gap, and claim the mantle of leading the movement away from living under EU Laws.

That is what I am saying. I want the Conservatives to lead the movement to seize back control of British law-making, not allow racists to use our weakness to build up their strength, and change British tolerance into sectarianism. Because that is where this will probably end up if Cameron doesn't move.

So we agree torylady. BNP and UKIP are not viable alternatives. Conservative MP's are leading the way and they are the only alternative. The question is 'will Cameron follow them?'

[Richard]

"Firstly, the notion of the BNP as a drain on a Conservative support is nonsense"
According to the Joseph Rowntree survey that's where they got the majority of their support from, although that is not to deny the significant support they get from Old Labour voters.

[TomTo]

Torylady - it is impossible to slight Lambeth.

As for you - my point was that 27.5% voters voted on Crime because no other party has done anything abouit it. You are a race obsessive. Who cares about the BNP ? Clearly 27.5% voters do - did you know in some wards they outpolled the Conservatives ?

[Sean Fear]

In general, Ted, I'm not embarassed by the views of my fellow Conservatives, whether of my generation, or of my parents' or grandparents' generations. There are a small number of people in our party whose views are unpleasant.

Sally, I think that you should be more careful then about how you refer to our supporters.

[Jules]

Well, what a load of pusillanimous tosh! The modern Tory party seems to
be saying to itself 'We lost three elections being ourselves so lets
turn ourselves into a new Labour clone'. What happened to standing up
for your principles? Losing three elections doesn't make your arguments
wrong it just means that they're currently unpopular. If the Tory party
gets elected by offering basically the same policies as Labour but
presented by a fresher faced leader then they have done what Labour did
- sought to gain power merely for the sake of it.

The underlying problem which the Conservatives face is the colonisation
of the cultural high-ground by sixties lefties (e.g. BBC, universities).
In contemporary public debate right wing ideas are inherently treated as
being morally suspect. This, essentially, destroys any chance the Tories
have of being elected on a right wing platform. Contrast this with the
US which, although the media and academia are pretty left wing, has a
thriving right wing intellectual community which is prepared to think
about and argue for right wing policies.

From a personal perspective I am unashamedly right wing. I'm 38 and have
been a Conservative voter for most of my adult life (apart from a brief
spell of voting Labour in a childish attempt to wind my parents up). I
believe in some pretty conservative and traditional things; the central
importance of marriage for stable society, individual liberty (as
opposed to licence) and the rule of law.

I feel that the modern Conservative party doesn't represent my
interests. Where does that leave me? The BNP are thinly disguised facist
thugs and UKIP are pretty much a single issue party.

So, if voting Tory would yield a new Labour-lite governemnt I don't
think I'll bother to vote. I'd rather give time and energy to an
institution which does attempt to maintain its principles over time -
the Catholic Church. I imagine other potential Tory voters will also opt
out of party politics in order to give time and energy to organisations
which better reflect their interests.

Very sad really.

Jules.