Blair's popularity falls to new low

Tony Blair's popularity level has fallen to its lowest ever level in a MORI survey for this morning's FT (subscription required).   67% were dissatisfied with Mr Blair's performance and only 23% satisfied.  Fewer than half of Labour supporters are satisfied with the Prime Minister.

Tony Blair's reduced rating may be connected with his resolute support for Israel over the last fortnight.  The improvement in the LibDem rating might reflect Sir Menzies Campbell's aggressive criticisms of Israel over the same period (or it might simply be a reflection of Mori's volatility).

The Tory lead in ConservativeHome's poll of polls is a solid 5% again but CCHQ tacticians will be concerned to see that - for the first time in Mori's polling - more people are now dissatisfied with David Cameron than satisfied.  Could it be a result of the hug-a-hoodie episode?  PoliticalBetting.com has been running a competition to predict what policy surprise David Cameron might announce next.  Mike Smithson chose this as the winning entry:

“Gypsies to be the new environmental roll models. All towns and villages to provide parking space for travellers caravans free. Special dedicated parking space for Caravans in HOC car-park. All councils objecting to be fined heavily. Campaign to be known as “Let a Gyp kip”"

Comments

[Duncan Crow]

That competition winning entry was for novelty rather than accuracy.

While it is disapointing Cameron's ratings have fallen, they must be higher than Blair and Campbell.

[anananaon]

Cameron needs something else to get him back on track. The idiots who sanctioned the ridiculous hoodie speech should be sacked... they are the same losers, sorry intellectuals, who have dogged the party in recent years.

The best asset the party has is being destroyed by bad advisors

[Richard]

How volatile to MORI tend to be? I seem to recall some of their other polls have raised question marks, or maybe I'm confusing them with someone else.

[TomTom]

roll models

All in favour of gypsies being rolled but certainly not as role-models. Let's roll gypsies ! Now there's a New-Con Slogan !

[Andy Stidwill]

Very strange to see the Lib Dems back up at 24% again.

[EdR]

The hoodie speech was excellent. It was a failure of spin, not substance, that led to it being branded 'hug-a-hoodie' and dismissed.

[MagicAldo]

How can we be pleased to see Blair lose share to Campbell regarding their respective pro-Israeli and pro-terrorist statements in recent days? As Bruce Anderson says in the Independent today, we should admire a PM who shows such disdain for the Labour Party, not criticise him. This an opportunity for the Tory party to show some backbone, not pander to ill-informed anti-semitic votes.

[John Coles]

The hoodie speech was banal.
Mr Cameron must start to offer policies with substance that address today's problems. But then how can he when the EU, taxation and immigration (for example) are seemingly precluded from debate?

[Jon Gale]

"The hoodie speech was excellent. It was a failure of spin, not substance, that led to it being branded 'hug-a-hoodie' and dismissed."

I agree, Tony McNulty must be Blair's new favourite after that "hug a hoodie" soundbite.

[Jack W]

Richard @ 2.17 & Andy @ 8.31.

MORI have a reputation for picking up a volatile trend in public opinion. That foreign affairs have lept up the concerns list to match health and the Lib Dems @ 24% are not unrelated.

Nevertheless in the round MORI perform well. Their last poll at the General Election was :

Lab 38% .. Con 33% .. LibDem 23% .. Not too shabby a result.

[Yet Another Anon]

All in favour of gypsies being rolled but certainly not as role-models. Let's roll gypsies !
The term gypsy actually really has no real meaning, originally it was used of the Romani (The Roma and Sinti) when they first starting arriving in Europe, it was mistakenly believed by many that the Romani had come from Egypt, aside from the Romani there are long standing traveller groups who are neither Romani nor Irish nor the New Age Travellers and who are believed to be a remnant of the Beaker People which was an ancient Mediteranean population - in Scotland they have their own seperate clan system parallel to the Scottish Clan system.

The main trouble though comes from Irish Traveller groups (especially recent ones) and New Age Travellers - these people historically are not travelling people and have no concept of maintaining any kind of balance with or concern for the local environment and in many cases are little more than bands of thieves, the best thing to do with troublemaking Irish Traveller groups would be to repatriate them - exactly the same as should be done with any other group of people causing trouble in this country who are from abroad, in addition the full penalty should be used against anybody regardless of their ethnicity or whether they are travellers or settled if they breach the law.

[john]

This poll is obviously at variance, with the others we have seen recently. As I've stated before. The floating 5% have struck again, I know yet another anon disagrees, but the floating 5% are different, they are a relatively new occurance. Unlike previous floating voters, these have almost a herd instinct, uniformly left/liberal, they move between the 3 main parties at will. They stuck with Blair up to Iraq, then off to the Libdems, they moved to the Tories because of DC, now they are moving back to the Libdems because of Lebanon: possibly.

Obviously this is one poll, and we should not read to much into it, but watch future events. It would be good if Mr Shakespeare could throw some light onto it!.

[James Maskell]

The people getting the blame now are Polish people, something I dont like. I am the only Englishman in a house of Poles and I was pretty pissed off to see that frontpage on the Mail yesterday.

[Bob B]

As I recall, the original objection to Hoodies made by that Essex shopping centre that banned them was a thoroughly practical one.

The concern was that in practice hoods were often deployed to avoid identification on CCTV images of store thieves, muggers, vandals and graffiti artists. How does "hugging hoodies" overcome that entirely sensible, crime-stopping concern?

Regular viewers of the BBC Crimewatch programmes might reflect on how often the police have scanned CCTV images to help identify likely criminals ranging from the London bombers on 7/7 last year to perpetrators of bank heists. Why make deterring crime even more difficult than it already is?

[Og]

Hug a Hoodie was a recycling of Tough on Crime, Tough on the etc.

Nothing new was said, and it depends on your liberal instincts as to whether you enjoyed the mood music of it or not. Personally, not.

I despair at the sheer vacuousness of the Cameron project. Of course I can understand that he and Maude want to change the perception of the party in the eyes of those who used to support us but don't, or have never voted for us. And I can understand any organisation deciding upon a complete review of its modus operandi.

But the limbo created by the timidity of the party leadership in espousing even the most straightforward, common-sense, popular old conservative principles and values and confirming that they will continue to be policy in the future, leaves everyone scratching their heads: just what does this party stand for? Obviously not what it stood for in 92/97/01/05, as it is the express intent of Cameron and Maude to change the party, and to make those changes "faster, wider, deeper" going forward. Furthermore, Thatcherism has (perhaps wisely) been declared the right treatment of the unique national sclerosis inherited by the party in 1979, but no longer applicable.

So it's a new party, with a new product. CCHQ need to count on core support retaining its brand loyalty, but are changing the brand - they need to sell this new brand to the core just as much as to the centre-ground LibDems and Blairites. The evidence of Bromley is that they ignored their friends, so keen were they to make new ones. And their friends said: stuff you, then.

Cameron is indeed making politics interesting again, and there is all to play for. But he is "making things interesting" in much the same way as being in a car driven by a 15 year old.

[christina speight]

"PoliticalBetting.com has been running a competition to predict what policy surprise David Cameron might announce next"

That's the whole point. He hasn't announced ANY policies yet?

[William Norton]

Y.A.A.:The main trouble though comes from Irish Traveller groups (especially recent ones) and New Age Travellers - these people historically are not travelling people and have no concept of maintaining any kind of balance with or concern for the local environment and in many cases are little more than bands of thieves, etc etc

Be a rage unraveller:
Shoot a New Age Traveller

?

[Bob B]

"Thatcherism has (perhaps wisely) been declared the right treatment of the unique national sclerosis inherited by the party in 1979, but no longer applicable."

I fully appreciate that "Thatcherism" has been thoroughly demonised in the sentiments of a segment of the electorate and invocations of it are therefore perhaps best avoided.

However, the undeniable fact is that Blair and his governments have readily embraced much Thatcherism - such as the privatisation of state owned business assets and parts of the public services as with the NHS. And notice that Blair's governments have not sought to repeal most of Thatcher's and Thatcherite industrial relations legislation.

It tends to be overlooked nowadays but the nationalised British Steel Corporation was making losses of £1 million a day in 1970s money when Mrs Thatcher was elected to government in May 1979. In those times, it was considered routine for government to bail out failing manufacturing business - not so now. More than a million manufacturing jobs have been lost under New Labour. Of course, one big difference is that Woof Woof Blair makes pious, hypocritical noises about how valuable manufacturing is. It also tends to be overlooked that by the end of 1995, Britain's standardised unemployment rate was lower than that of France, Germany or Italy, and the employment rate of working age people higher. The Blair government has sustained that difference over the other major European economies. Oh, I almost forgot, who now talks about the calamities that would befall Britain if we don't join the Euro?

From the perspective of an economist, one big change brought in by Mrs T was that the yawning gap between the ways of the world as construed by successive British governments and the world as presented in economic textbooks shrank. She broke sharply with the prevailing post-war consensus over fiscal and industry policy - remember Butskellism of the 1950s and early 1960s? But I don't see too many nowadays trying to revive nostalgia for the 1970s and before.

Few may want to admit it but the truth is that a huge chunk of Thatcherism has been fully absorbed into the conventional wisdom of our times now.

[Jon White]

Bob B - what a spot on post. Margaret Thatcher was quite simply the best PM this country EVER had, in War or Peace. As you point out, her 'radicalism' is now pretty much mainstream.

In a nutshell, she saved the country, and we as Britains should never forget the huge debt that we owe to her.

[M P Tagg]

David Cameron should appoint Matthew Parris as his principal adviser. Mr Parris has the experience, intelligence and intuition to guide Cameron's path to No 10. I cannot understand the continuation of the soft soap all things to all people approach. Talk Law and Order, Hospitals, Economy, Education with smaller dollops of Green, Chocs at WH Smith, childrens clothes. Blair may be unpopular but to me he is making Cameron look like a complete lightweight.

[Og]

Well said, Bob B. Don't for a minute suppose that I have anything but unqualified admiration for Thatcherite reform of British industry and enterprise.

[BoristheSpider]

I find it endlessly amusing to read, on the one hand, coverage in the national press (eg Sunday Times mag this week) praising Cameron to the hilt and news stories showing the best poll results for well over a decade - and on the other, the disgruntled blatherings of masochistic pin-stripers railing against anyone who dares try to change the Tory direction of travel (ie down...further down...over and out).
Cameron, as has been endlessly pointing out, is trying to change the perception of the party, from one that is hated on sight by a swathe of the electorate, to one that is at least listened to. At that point, and only at that point, he will be able to launch policies in the hope that they will get a fair hearing from people who are used to ignoring anything that is branded Tory. Anyone who thinks, even for one second, that banging out messages to the 'core vote' will do anything but destroy the party is barking.
The government is drowing in a slurry pit of its own making. The only thing that can help it out is a Tory lifeline. Rushed policies, concrete promises, old-school rhetoric will allow the Labour machine to deflect attention off its own problems. No - keep with the mood music, let Labour tear itself apart and then present a properly-considered alternative to an electorate that not only wants rid of Labour, but is beginning to think that the Tories aren't as bad as they always thought they were.

[christina Speight]

BoristheSpider might like to explain why Cameron's ratings are going negative, why half the Tory vote in Bromley stayed at home and why the Labour poll ratings are not falling away to zero.

The "Modernissrs" and Cameron will lead the party to yet another defeat unless of course people are so shallow that they have just got BORED with Blair.

[Yet Another Anon]

The "Modernissrs" and Cameron will lead the party to yet another defeat unless of course people are so shallow that they have just got BORED with Blair.
Tony Blair and John Prescott are both going anyway at the next General Election as MP's having already gone as Leader\Prime Minister and Deputy Leader\Deputy Prime Minister respectively so so far as boredom goes in regard to them they won't have an effect on the next General Election and even their own political beliefs will have diminshed as a factor and people will increasingly be looking to the candidates who are around - as it appears David Cameron, Francis Maude and George Osborne for the Conservatives; Gordon Brown, probably Patricia Hewitt (Deputy Leader I think), Alastair Darling, Ed Balls and Dawn Primarolo for Labour and Lord knows who leading the Liberal Democrats but no doubt Vincent Cable, Lembit Opik, Chris Huhne and Nick Harvey will figure highly among those at or near the top of the party.

[BoristheSpider]

Ah yes, Bromley. Bob Neill gets in ahead of an A-lister and its trumpeted as a huge defeat for Cameron, the traditionalists flexing their muscles etc etc. Bob gets a kicking at the ballot box and its trumpeted as a huge defeat for Cameron, the traditionalists flexing their muscles....
How can both be true?
Christina, you say the modernisers will lead the party to another defeat. As opposed to what? A glorious success under a 'proper' Conservative, like, er, the three last ones?
Bromley was a by-election, by-elections are rarely good barometers for a general election, and yet it is held up by both Labour and the die-hards in the Tory ranks as proof positive that Cameron will fail.
And maybe he will. But at least he will have recognised the need to address what had left the Tories so becalmed for the last decade. I'm not a slavish follower of Cameron and sometimes I do wish he'd grasp the nettle a bit more, but I recognise what he's trying to do and while his popularity may have peaked for now, it's still in nosebleed territory for a Tory leader.

[TimC]

This is the sad state of political debate these days. Cameron came out with a thoughtful angle. NuLab responded with a cheap slogan. All that gets reported is the slogan; Mao would have been proud of this situation.

[Drew]

Ah yes, Bromley. Has anyone had their thank you letter from three jobs Bob yet?

You can't blame Cameron for Bromley, i am afraid that was well and truly down to the usual Central Office campaign, i.e. they have no idea how to tackle the Lib Dems.
We also picked a candidate who was less than er, how can i put this, 'representative' of the electorate. I honestly thought pin stripe suits were now the sole domain of all those CF types.

[Umbongo]

So am I to infer from BoristheSpider that Bromley was actually a success for Cameron? Can I also infer that 10,000 Conservative voters sat on their hands in protest that an A-list candidate was not selected?

The modernisers and their supporters should be aware (as everybody else is) that whatever the Party had proposed and whoever had led the Party there has never been any realistic prospect of winning any GE since 1997: no-one was listening or wanted to listen. Now, just when a Conservative agenda is becoming acceptable to the public at large (after all the last 9 years of non-Conservative policies have visibly failed) a leader is selected who tries to out-Blair Blair and who, moreover, failed to carry through the only concrete and unequivocal commitment he has ever made. A 5% lead in the polls against the present government is not just pathetic it's tragic for this country let alone the Party.

[christina Speight]

BoristheSpider asks "Christina, you say the modernisers will lead the party to another defeat. As opposed to what? A glorious success under a 'proper' Conservative, like, er, the three last ones?"

At the last election under Howard many Tories returned to back the party - including me - and in England we won the popular vote.

Now - see Bromley - we are refusing to back a spineless, unprincipled, wet gutless creep who isn't a Conservative in the first place. He never has anything to say where it matters - like on defence or the Middle East war - and he has broken the only promise he made.

[Chris Ryder]

So dear Dave's perosnal poll figures takes a bit of a knock does it? well what a surprise ..not! The Tory's may well have voted him leader knowing that drafted policys wouldn't come yet this early (case naughty Labour nicks off them) but you've forgotten we the voting masses didn't!, so you know what we think ? we don't hear a policy programme for a future government, so we have no interest in what the conservatives have to say! ..simply really!, you see the loyality off us voting minions is not there any more for a whole catalogue of reasons, but if you really want office (and god knows why given the total balls up your get to inherit off Blair) then I guess in order for you to keep us from losing interest completely, if not so already, your best bet is to look at this issue sooner rather than later than just hoping we'll settle for the odd speech an open neck shirt and smile!. ..Oh and when I talk about policy I do mean real 'conservative' policies that don't look and feel like those of that of other bunch of losers currently pretending to be government!, but with maybe just a splash of commitment to actually follow through on them to? that would be wonderful!, something old Blair hasn't quite got the hang of even after ten years of fart arsing about at this country's expense!.

[Fred Baker]

Mr Cameron has a Middle East Policy and politics can move very fast at times. This is one of them.

The whole world is disgusted with Blair, Bush and the Israelis.

We allow the planes carrying missiles, bombs etc from the USA to refuel here. I am ashamed that we facilitate the transfer of this child and orphan making equipment.

This is 2006 not 1945.

This is part of the Israeli imports from the USA for Fiscal Year 2005:

MISSILE HARPOON SPARE PARTS & SUPP EQUIP 1 6,500
MISSILE LAUNCHER SPARE PARTS & SUP EQUIP 452 23,436
MISSILE SPARE PARTS ( NON-SPECIFIC TYPE) 10,001 118,263,996
MISSILE, AMRAAM SPARE PARTS 1 12,500
MISSILE, PATRIOT SPARE PARTS & SUP EQUIP 37 28,046
MISSILE, SPARROW SPARE PARTS & SUP EQUIP 75,506
MISSILE,ANTI-TANK (ALL TYPES)EXCEPT TOW 1 19,000
MISSILE,SHRIKE SPARE PARTS & SUP EQUIP 100 631
Country Total $923,670,567

Pretty much looks like this phoney war was being planed right back then!

With half of the cabinet being of the Jewish faith, the country now equates Tory and Jew.

Not much help to our popularity right now!

The Telegraph became so one sided that we gave up on it. Duncan Smith was voted in by 155,933 people and ousted by just 8 these included Davis, Howard, and Bercow. So in all probability he was deselected by race!

Cameron has a Middle East Policy, it can be summed up like this “Don’t mention the war”.

This may keep him as leader but will not make him Prime Minister. He should be out there doing somthing like Kissinger used to do. At any rate getting involved.

[Yet Another Anon]

these included Davis
David Davis is not actually Jewish.

He should be out there doing somthing like Kissinger used to do.
Henry Kissinger of course is Jewish.

The fact is that the deselection of IDS shameless as it was was purely to do with the failure to accept that Kenneth Clarke and Michael Portillo had lost the leadership election and in revenge for his active opposition to the Maastricht Treaty, obviously Kenneth Clarke or Michael Portillo weren't going to be made leader so they compromised on Michael Howard whose views on Israel are actually no different than IDS's or Margaret Thatcher's.

Louise Ellman who has been a dedicated supporter of Israel from the Labour side has not been thrown out as MP, Gerald Kaufman who is Jewish has a seat in Manchester Gorton that has a very large Muslim population and he's as popular as he ever was - he's always been somewhat critical of Israel. Many Jewish people are critical (some are even opposed to the existence of the State of Israel) of Israel and many who are not Jewish are very supportive.

When it comes to the next General Election the subject of Israel is unlikely to even be an issue unless there is actually some major ongoing action at the time and even then it won't be a leading issue in the election.

[william]

Now - see Bromley - we are refusing to back a spineless, unprincipled, wet gutless creep who isn't a Conservative in the first place. He never has anything to say where it matters - like on defence or the Middle East war - and he has broken the only promise he made.
(Christina Speight - no respite)

Bromley? If someone had asked me to vote for a sold out europhile, I would have stayed at home - especially in a seat where the previous MP had been Eric Forth. Bob was a very odd choice, not just because he wasn't a young woman!

Francis Maude said on radio that his research has established why people stayed at home at Bromley and didn't vote, but he has yet to divulge what the reason was -n I wonder if it was merely that Bob's a euronation enthusiast.

Cameron is principlied - on the environment, social justice and localism. The latter especially is as revolutionary in its implications as Karl Marx was, pre-1916.

The selling out on the EPP and the uquivocation on Israel's defence of her territory is all William Hague at work. If Cameron wants to establish respect, he must distance himself from the Hague brand of fudge.

[Yet Another Anon]

Why does it do - how come it does that, seems absurd that formatting somehow carries on after a message - presumably I can still close the italics here
here's hoping.

[Yet Another Anon]

>>>>The selling out on the EPP and the uquivocation on Israel's defence of her territory is all William Hague at work.<<<<
David Davis, David Cameron and Liam Fox are all favourable towards Israel so which ever was elected Conservative Party policy would still have been favourable towards Israel, in fact if it was really as obsessed with backing Israel as Fred Baker supposes they would have backed Liam Fox who was the most strongly Pro-Israeli of all the candidates, would any government or opposition either Labour or Conservative since the creation of the State of Israel been opposed to Israel defending itself except perhaps for the Opposition under Michael Foot?

[Fred Baker]

"David Davis is not actually Jewish".

Oh! you can have a Bar mitzvah, but you cannot become a Jew, is that it?

[Yet Another Anon]

David Davis was born to English parents, his mother then married a Polish Jewish man apparently but David Davis was brought up an Anglican and remains an Anglican to this day as I understand it.

[Bob B]

Some folks were absolutely outraged by the interview with Jonathan Sacks in the Guardian four years ago:

"On Aug. 27, in an interview with the London Guardian, Great Britain's Chief Rabbi, Dr. Jonathan Sacks, made hard-hitting comments on the 'morally corrupting' effect of the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict and Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Despite the fact that he is a fervent supporter of Israel, so much so that he has alienated many of the pro-peace elements within the Jewish community, he came under sharp attack by the right-wing Zionists and the government of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. His statements have initiated a strong moral debate throughout the Jewish community in the Diaspora as well as in Israel."
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2002/2936_rabbi_vs_israel.html

"Rabbi Sacks said, 'There are things that are happening on a daily basis which make me feel very uncomfortable as a Jew.' He said that he was 'profoundly shocked' by reports of smiling soldiers posing for a photograph with the corpse of a slain Palestinian. 'There is no question that this kind of prolonged conflict, together with the absence of hope, generates hatreds and insensitivities that in a long run are corrupting to a culture.'"

[MM]

- Cameron has a Middle East Policy, it can be summed up like this “Don’t mention the war”.

Good point 'Fred Baker', it's interesting that Cameron has not uttered a word about the Middle East since the G8 debate in the House of Commons two weeks ago. When he did so he fully agreed with Blair's approach to the conflict. Surely if Cameron wants to gain left-wing voters he needs to be making clear that he does not support Israel's approach? Or is his approach to keep quiet and hope Middle England forgets about this current crisis?

I know that Ming Campbell is much hated by the press and many dislike the Lib Dems viewpoint in the crisis. But I think he has done the right thing in showing a principled stand in the crisis, ok it may well lose some support. But it will also gain support and if one looks at the various polls it would suggest that the Lib Dem approach chimes with the general viewpoint in Britain.

[Umbongo]

Oh yes, let's follow Ming (and Straw and Livingstone) down the road of chasing the Muslim vote which is characterised by MM as taking a "principled stand". If you look at the electoral arithmetic then 2 million Moslems trump 250,000 Jews every time. By now DC/FM must have made the connection and, now I come to think about it, the first stage of moving Conservative policy from a broadly pro-Israel stance to a pro-Hezbollah one would be a discreet silence. A straw (?) in the wind was the Nicholas Soames pronouncement concerning Lebanon on "Any Questions?". I would be very surprised if NS had not taken his anti-Israeli position without reference to DC/FM.

"Fred Baker" and "MM" can accordingly rest assured that the apparently malign Jewish influence on British politics in general - and the Conservative party in particular - that they imply is not only in steep decline but is in the process of being replaced with a countervailing Muslim influence. I hope they will be happy with the consequences.

[Dick Wishart]

Whether our leadership is for or against Israel matters not a jot, but the lack of any pronouncements about the current crisis shows a distinct lack of leadership,the crisis will not just go away if you ignore it.

[Patsy Sergeant]

An interesting post - Yet another Anon @ 10.22, and I agree with your conclusion!

[Patsy Sergeant]

Fred Baker had better watch out that he doesn't curdle himself - maybe he needs to cuddle himself!

[Fred Baker]

<<

What are you talking about?

[Yet Another Anon]

Very strange to see the Lib Dems back up at 24% again.
Maybe Menzies "The Merciless" Campbell is directing some kind of Mind Control Ray from Planet Mungo?

The Liberal Democrats always do far better in Mid Term anyway, in the last parliament they got 30% of the vote in one of the Local Elections, they were somewhat lower than that this time - only 25% and generally they tend to get a much higher vote in Local Elections than National Elections.

[graham wood]

Amidst all the doom and gloom in the Tory party following Mr
Cameron's decision about the EPP, I have an excellent suggestion for
reviving their electoral prospects beyond their wildest dreams.
It is simple, completely 'foolproof,' and will virtually guarentee a return
of all the wandering sheep from the Tory fold, and prove to be very
attractive for the rest of the electorate.
All that Dave needs to do before the Party conference is to issue a Press
release affirming his party's new position on the EU. The policy
statement should promise, unequivocally and emphatically, that a future
Conservative administration is definitely committed, not within a few weeks
or months, but never, yes NEVER - to withdraw the UK from the EU - and that this will be his personal promise. It simply cannot fail!
Graham Wood
32 Station Rd. Poppleton. York YO26 6PY

[Yet Another Anon]

The policy
statement should promise, unequivocally and emphatically, that a future
Conservative administration is definitely committed, not within a few weeks
or months, but never, yes NEVER - to withdraw the UK from the EU - and that this will be his personal promise.
That would be an insane thing for any party leader to do, no one can be entirely sure what changes any national or international body will go through, I happen to think think that the UK should withdraw from the EU but even those bodies I support, it would be irrational and in fact impossible to guarantee that the UK should remain part of any body irrespective of events - if a majority of NATO members for example were to turn hostile to the UK then the UK would have to contemplate leaving NATO, supposing that having decided to join the ERM that John Major had refused to recognise that the UK's membership was not valid and had insisted on remaining in indefinitely, it's not even a matter of whether something was a good idea or not, something can go wrong with any organisations or they can cease to be relevant because other newer organisations are more relevant.

[Chris Anderson]

I think the "hug a hoodie" idea is the answer to all crime problems, especially if you use two hands, clasped together, to hug the hoodie's windpipe until he stops breathing.