A-list damages Francis Maude's standing with grassroots

The latest results from the Members' Panel for the top ten members of the shadow cabinet (other than David Cameron) will not make comfortable reading for Party Chairman Francis Maude.  For the first time in this series more Tory members are dissatisfied with a member of the shadow cabinet than are satisfied.  44% are satisfied with Francis Maude but 48% are dissatisfied.  Since January Francis Maude's net rating has fallen by 32 points (from +28%).  The controversial A-list may be the main explanation.  David Davis is the only member of the shadow cabinet to have seen his rating rise since January (from +74% to +81%).  He has maintained the top spot that he wrestled from William Hague last month.

Gary Streeter MP has agreed to write a defence of Francis Maude's Chairmanship and that will be appearing on ConservativeHome in the next few days.

Other results of the most recent survey:

• Satisfaction with Cameron rises in May
• Tory members reject LibDem policies
• Can you trust ConservativeHome's surveys?

Comments

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Perhaps a column could be added to the table to indicate whether satisfaction has increased or decreased since last month?

[Editor]

I'm trying to standardise the presentation of the results and I will add that feature next month, DVA, and every month. Thank you.

[EdR]

Does this mean the performance graph is out of the window? I liked the graph. It was colourful and easy to absorb.

[Editor]

If anyone is good at producing graphs from raw numbers and would like to help with the presentation of the monthly results please contact me- [email protected].

[Joe Bloggs]

Yes bring back the graph so we can see the performances throughout the year. Also add DC to it so we can judge his relative performance.

[Umbongo]

No surprise that Peter Ainsworth (in case you've forgotten he's Shadow SoS for the Environment) is not in the top 10. He wastes his ammunition by directing fire in the FT at Ruth Lea of the Centre for Policy Studies. What was RL's crime? She is agnostic about the so-called scientific "consensus" on climate change. Again, our new leaders' policy of "constructive opposition" (= no opposition) attacks its natural allies rather than the government and its PC outriders.

[Andrew Hardie]

Its interesting that Fox performs consistantly well, considering he has been sidlelined to deffence. I think he should have been given a more high-profile brief given his experiance and also relative youth.

I am again amazed at how well Davis performs. He has been very quite in recent months and seems to have done nothing to warrent the level of support he gets considering the possition he holds. But then i've always felt that home office is too high-profile a role for him, i always doubt both the talent and peresentation of the man.

[Andrew Woodman]

Poor Francis Maude. He's having to take the rap for the A list by the looks of it. It would be useful to know how much he had to do with that so members could judge him on the exact facts.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

I think the poll is particularly unfair to the Chairman. Having to deal with the A list was always going to be a pretty thankless task in my book. There were always going to be people disgruntled with who is and is not on the A list and whoever was left to manage the process certainly wasnt going to come top in a popularity contest.

I think one very positive attribute of our current Chairman is his willingness to listen - and indeed how he engages with members - not least through the use of new technology.

[Chad]

Tim,
Re: Charts
Perhaps you could use a heatmap with the segments representing a shadow minister? The size would show the relative popularity, and the colour could show whether and by how much the view has changed since last time. A very neat way to combine relative size and direction.

Re: Maude
Cut the rope! Time to take the blame for the a-list.

[Will James]

I'm no great fan of Francis Maude, but to be fair to him, it's not a Party Chairman's job to be popular. Although I disagree with many of his pronouncements you cannot accuse him of disloyalty or changing his beliefs in the face of strong opposition.

My advice to Maude would be to revamp the A-list to give it a more regional, hardworking, grassroots face to it. This would certainly give us a greater sense of credibility in the cities, the North, Wales and Scotland than the current crop of A-listers, who have been (fairly or unfairly) characterised as South East metrosexual, Portillistas etc.

[Le Nerd]

When Gary Streeter writes his astoundingly brave article in defence of the heroic leadership assailed by revisionist splittists, can I suggest an opening line for him? This may well fit the job: "Sir, I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability".

[Will James]

How can Andrew Lansley - our non-existent Health spokesman - be ahead of people like Caroline Spelman?! The man needs to be replaced sharpish. We need someone credible to take our current poll ratings for the NHS further. Instead of this non-entity Cameron needs to elevate the importance of this Shadow Cabinet role by appointing someone with gravitas to Health!

[malcolm]

I feel a bit sorry for Francis Maude.As somebody mentioned above the job of Chairman makes it very difficult to remain popular.To get us well ahead in the polls is something (despite Labour imploding) he should be acclaimed for.We would all have taken six months ago.His attacks on party members have disappeared recently,I hope forever.
Unlike many of you I put 'don't know' against both Hague and Fox as I've heard virtually nothing from either.Fox in particular should have had something to say about the ridiculously inadequate force being sent to Helmand to cope with the Taliban.

[Old Hack]

I have an RSS news feed from CCHQ to my home page. Most of the time there's nothing there, unlike the Lib Dem newsfeed. Wonder why?

Just what do most of these Shadow Secs do all day? Dodge the media? Write sympathy letters to their Labour opposites? From where I sit there's precious little Conservative prosecution of this disreputable Labour shambles of Government.

Sorry, just letting off steam. I realise that playing dead and not offending liberals in the hope that they'll vote for us is all part of the plan - or at least I assume that's why we're kissing up to the public sector and jettisoning every sensible policy overboard (no pun at our late fishing policy intended).

It's just as a red meat Conservative I hate this diet of Quorn. Throw me some flesh!!!

[Zhukov]

Old Hack - and how many of those Lib Dem newsfeeds do you ever see in the media? None.

CCHQ sticks to a few big stories a week and gets coverage. Lib Dems bleat about every little thing and wonder why they don't get mentioned in the press.

[buxtehude]

"not a Party Chairman's job to be popular."

Exactly. I don't think FM should view this badly. He's doing pretty well on a tricky pitch.

[Og]

I don't think Maude has been popular with the centre and right of the party for a long time, predating his appointment to the chairmanship. But he suits DC very well insofar as the more extreme modernist ideas can be blamed on him rather than the leader. But at some stage it will be clear that the party is far removed from it's traditional beliefs in policy areas where it never had a popularity problem in the first place. At some stage someone will move onto this furtile ground.

[malcolm]

Futile or fertile Og?

[John Hustings]

The figures for Letwin and May aren't too great either, so it's not just Maude. What do those three have in common I wonder?

[Og]

Fertile. "Futile" I'll save for comments regarding Lib Dem treasury pronouncements.

[Mark Fulford]

It'll be interesting to see what happens to William Hague's rating after this week's performance.

[william]

Letwin and May have had little exposure, whie Maude's been in the limelight. He sounds old-fashioned to my ear - his phrasing reminds me of the 1970's - odd coming from an arch-moderniser that he sounds and looks prehistoric.

Oh well, maybe Cameron et al need their version of a John Prescott to persuade people that the party is only human after all - and not made up entirely of youthful demi-gods. We need our pet incompetent just as Labour have done.

Also Maude is known for his skill at back-stabbing leaders so having inside the tent as it were, must allow more restful nights for the leadership. They know the knife can only arrive in the chest. The answer must be to 'keep him busy'.

[Will James]

I wouldn't call Maude our Prescott. If that's what you're after, I don't think Dave is going to offer Tebbit his old role again.

[EML]

I'd like to hear more of the Shadow Cabinet make more of a name for themselves through speeches. It all seems to be left to Cameron (whether that's deliberate or because they don't agree with the message he is putting out, i'm not sure), and the risk is that people just see Cameron as a lone voice, surrounded by names, faces and ideas of the past.

[roy]

re Will James post at 17.43: Are you really suggesting John Prescott and Norman Tebbitt are of the same level of competence? I find that a bit hard to swallow.

[houndtang]

Maude is hardly down at the Prescott level, and even if he were most people don't know who he is anyway.

[Will James]

Roy, not at all. You've got the wrong end of the stick. It was a poor comparison I admit, but certainly Old Labour Prescott is to Blair what Thatcherite Tebbit is to Cameron.

[Richard Weatherill]

An interesting feature of this poll is the proportion of respondents who didn't express an opinion about the performance of certain individuals. (Presumably because of their low profile.) Whilst only 3 or 4% had no opinion about Davis or Hague, this figure rises to 20% for Lansley and Spelman.

I suppose Caroline Spelman has some excuse in that being shadow Leader of the House is hardly a high-profile job.

[PPlayford]

I have never read such a lot of negative comments! David Cameron said he was going to change the party and this is what he is doing. It is always easy to critisise and winge but the Conservatives are up against a bunch of v.slippery operators in the Labour Gov't and whatever they say will be twisted by Labour.. after all if it wasn't for Cameron would Brown et al be talking `green'? They never did before. And Prescott off to US to talk about green issues - as if he knew anything. Cameron is certainly setting the agenda and unless we all pull together and support our party we shall be doomed to have this Gov't forever.

PIP - London

[TomTom]

Why doesn't Cameron talk about how Green the last Conservative Govt was when it opted to impose 17.5% VAT on Gas and Electricity and Labour came in and restricted it to the lower rate of 5% VAT ?

Surely Cameron should be pledging 19% VAT on Water, Gas, Electricity as the Germans are doing from 2007. That could be a real vote winner among the environmentally-aware voters

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I suppose Caroline Spelman has some excuse in that being shadow Leader of the House is hardly a high-profile job."

Not really - before John Prescott lost his department, she was his shadow, and he was arguably the government minister most in the news over the past month. I can't recall seeing her on the news once during that period.

[Mike Homfray]

As a non-Tory, I think the issue for you should be that there aren't enough people who are still willing to go ane vote for a party definitively to the right of centre. You wasted a lot of your time appeasing the Daily mail moral Right who will vote for you anyway, but in doing so, you alienated enough voters who might benefit from your policies economically, but wouldn't countenance those social values.

At present i see hardly any real difference between the three main parties. I think the rub will come at the next election when you have to present policies - it strikes me that you are still not in a position to wholeheartedly agree on a party programme.

[Prodicus]

Somone mentioned RSS feeds from central office. Hopeless! Nothing for days (sometimes weeks) on end. Last one on the economy was 13th June. Last one on immigration 1st June. Bloggers (online by definition) are clearly having an influence and/because people are increasingly getting their political news and comment online. You only have to look at the figures for BBC news online. RSS feeds are standard stuff, not black magic. Yet another info-tech-lacuna at central office.

[lewis.birt]

How short our memories are prior to the Falklands conflict, John Nott inflicted severe damaging cuts on our armed forces. In spite of that, they performed magnificently and pulled Maggies chickens out of the coop.
The past five years have seen our forces, overcommitted, pared to the bone and progressing campaigns which this labour government has ordered with nothing but lies and half truths to justify the insertion of our forces.
The shadow cabinet has behaved like a group of ostriches and has sold our forces down the river.
Wake up before it is too late and our forces are reduced to war games with the monaco palace guard !.

[norgor]

With regard to Lewis Birt's comments, it's difficult to believe how low profile certain members of the shadow cabinet are. After his surprisingly good showing in the leadership contest, I've yet to see Liam Fox make any profound, interesting or insightful statements about the terrible situation our armed forces having been put in. Week by week we're losing more and more troops to bullets and bombs, yet he says nothing. Has Cameron had one of his potential rivals nobbled ? Has he had him sent to Afghanistan ?

[John Gilbey]

I believe that we should not be in Europe but that we should take the longer, patient view to prevent others using any opportunities given. The pace of withdrawal would change depending upon national interests.

[John Gilbey]

I believe that we should not be in Europe but that we should take the longer, patient view to prevent others using any opportunities given. The pace of withdrawal would change depending upon national interests.

[Timothy Stroud]

The sad problem with Francis Maude is that
he is a political dud. I have personally heard him address the Party Conference on more than one occasion, and he has no charisma; no charm; and delights in depressing his audience by telling it how stupid it is. The Party Chairman needs to be a motivator. Francis
Maude may have a role to play somewhere in
politics, but not as Party Chairman.

[Anne Worrall]

Why is the Conservative Party becoming left wing under Mr Cameron? Has no one the courage to be a Conservative any more?
The voters who deserted us of late mostly tell us that there are no true Conservatives left to vote for.
If all parties claim the left-of-centre ground, then real Conservatives have little option but to vote UKIP or BNP. We are actually marginalizing our own people with this shift to the left.

[john Prendergast]

Francis Maude should go now, this second. Party should not increase membership fees, just prctice what it should preach, (hands of Other People's Money (OPM). We should look for a real Tory not a fake Scot like Cameron.

[Patrick Peters]

When are the leaders of our party going to start challenging the governement on the following; TAX, DEFENCE, Prescott, waste, and indifference to the people of our nation.

[malcolm]

Interesting that a bunch of people who've never posted on CH before should all turn up today to post on a very old thread.Are you all really Conservatives Patrick,John,Anne etc? Or just a bunch of UKIP trolls?

[James Maskell]

Anne Worrall is a Conservative Councillor for the High Peak Borough Council as her email address indicates. Shes talking sense....why, is that the problem malcolm? Though she can say this for herself, shes been a Councillor since 1998.

[malcolm]

Just a question James,just a question.You must admit it is a little odd.

[James Maskell]

Odd yes, but we are Tories.

[S.Park.]

I know the next election is a mile away. But, when new labour were in opposition they always had a spokesman on radio or tv to denegrade john major his colleagues and his policies, when we did not put up a spokesman,as they are now not doing. They did not always say what they would do in-stead but were always ready to destroy conservative policies. It kept their profile high in the media, and perhaps we should be looking to do the same?
I also think that we should highlight at every opportunity the responsibility g.brown has for the present pensions crisis and the collapse of the savings culture. Also, that labours in-action and spin is largely responsible for the energy crisis we now seem to be careering into at break-neck speed! Furthermore, i think we now have to question their policies on iraq and afganistan, with much more vigour; while still being seen to support our troops.

[Matthew Reynolds Oxford UK]

Voters in Bromley & Gwent prove that voters are sick of Labour under Mr Blair ( Labour fell into fourth place in Bromley & failed in a previously safe Labour seat ) - but do not want Mr Cameron in No 10 ( Tory votes halves in Bromley & they finish 5th in a seat where they were often 2nd ) . ICM have Tory & Labour level pegging because voters cannot see the difference - even their own supporters feel so board they cannot be bothered to turn out to vote for their respective parties . By having Blairite policies Mr Cameron and his dippy cronies are destroying any reason to end the Blair regime i.e. a fresh start under a new government tha will act for the small c - conservative majority . Do we really want Gordon Brown advocating socialism & David Cameron fighting on a Blairite ticket in 2009/10 ? It is bad for democracy if the choice is between two halves of the Labour Party - why should Tory voters bother except in voting out of desperation for UKIP ?

[Richard Carey]

The sniping at the leadership on this thread is incredible - I can well understand the comments by malcolm above questioning whether these come from Conservatives (unashamedly large C on my part!!) or not.

With regard to yet another attack on Francis Maude - yes, I *know* that is a Party Chairman's lot! - please listen to his podcast interview on ToryRadio.com. There's a great deal of good stuff in there - from defending localism and Party democracy to rebuilding campaigning machinery in forgotten areas of the country. (Although that's really our job on the ground in the voluuntary Party, all help is much appreciated!)

[Chris Ryder]

I read that the old party animal Mr C is raving it up in St Tropez tonight with 400 other guests (oh how jolly nice!) trying, so I believe, to make the conservatives appear more fashionable to vote for!, no really?, well if there intelligent enough voters like me down there, they might 'just' notice there's plenty of evidence of the old Cameron glam factor at work maybe yes, but sadly bugger all in the way of policies to vote for!.. Oh well never mind, least there have a nice hot summer evening to sweat & rid themselves of there by-election woes! ..looks to me a bit like having three rather expensive cars parked up in the drive, but absolutely bugger all in the fridge to feed yourself on, just simply not a logical.

[Mike Witan]

Where are the results for satisfied/dissatified for David Cameron?

[Mike Witan]

If you want to know the reason for the Bromley & Chislehurst result you could do worse than the column by Melenie Phillips in the Mail!

[Gordon Norrie]

With regard to Richard Carey's comments on Francis Maude's Pod Cast, could not the defence of localism be somewhat undermined by the threatened imposition of the centralised A-list candidates on unwilling constituencies ? The problem is that Francis Maude quite clearly doesn't see the hopeless irony in this and the gulf between his actions and his words.

[Richard Ramsey]

I somewhat naively thought David Cameron would be good for the Conservative Party by bringing a more youthful approach to Conservative values. I think I may have been mistaken. In embracing the new look, new feel, inclusive and environmentally aware Conservativism I feel that I have been marginalised. What is the point of attracting the centre and left of centre 'floating' voters if your core voters are sidelined?
I have never, until now, considered supporting another party. If I write on the left hand side of the page the aspects of life that affect / influence / concern me that list is made up of, for example, good education, low crime rates, low taxation to stimulate investment, controlled immigration, support for marriage and family values, opposition to a federal europe, proper regard for the armed forces, elimination of worthless quangos, reduced public spending, abandonment of Regional Assemblies, less intrusive state, upholding of liberties, opposition to positive discrimination (ANY discrimination is morally wrong), restoration of powers to local government, discipline in schools, getting rid of political correctness and so on and so forth.
If I write on the right hand side the politcal party that represents each core value, how often do I write "Conservative"?
Not often enough.
Clearly, you are thinking, dear reader, the rantings of on 'old fashioned right wing tory'; probably correct. Today's Conservative Party seems to be a watered down version of New Labour.
Who to vote for? Maybe that is what the Conservative 'core vote' in Bromley is thinking; if modernisation means New Labour but tinged with blue, then, it's not for me.

[Tim Hobson]

I do not trust Francis Maude because I recall the Party Conference when IDS was leader and Maude was responsible for a lot of the back room briefings against him. He was disloyal then, so why should we trust him now ?

[Mike Witan]

As Votes for English MP’s on English issues is topical, I feel inspired to submit my own thoughts.

I am a Unionist, but I am also a Federalist; so why the paradox?
Well, as Lord Baker of Dorking said in the Lords during the 2nd Reading of his Private members Bill, (Participation of Members of the House of Commons) on 10th February this year, “Devolution changes everything.”

The paradox is that in order for the Union to survive, it must change. It has served most of us well, but now, like any organisation, it needs restructuring to meet the challenges of a changing political climate.

I was opposed to the Government’s Devolution Bill, as I thought it divisive, and in its current form, totally unfair to the people of England.

The component countries of the UK should each have equally devolved parliaments for their domestic affairs, with powers of at least those currently devolved to Scotland.

The UK Government would then in effect become a Federal Government, dealing with strategic issues such as defence, finance, foreign affairs etc. With most of the domestic references being devolved, the UK Government could therefore ‘downsize’. The Prime Minister would in effect become the Chief Executive, with the Monarch of course remaining the Head of State.

In this way I believe a federal UK can survive. However if there is no radical reform, New Labour’s continuing stealth in creating expensive, non-elected, unrepresentative, and unwanted regional assemblies, that does nothing for democracy in England, will allow the UK to tear its self apart.

[Cllr Dr Howard Bloom]

I spent 7 years as a an minority group conservative councillor in the 1980s having to constantly defend so called Tory cuts in Health Services

Now we have real cuts in health services with doctors and nurses facing redundancies and reduction in patient care. There are tremendous reorganisations of PCTs only 4 years after they were established with thousands of staff uncertain of their futures in the NHS.

Why do we not have these changes being highlighted and opposed by our leadership

[Peter Goodwin]

Does the ongoing dissatisfaction with Francis Maude have nothing at all to do with the seeming lack of organisation and the nil response rate to enquiries from CCHQ?