David Cameron's African mission

David Cameron has made a surprise visit to Africa and has issued an enthusiastic statement after meeting Nelson Mandela:

"Nelson Mandela is the most remarkable statesman of our age, and I found his insights into the challenges facing South Afric, the continent of Africa and the wider world hugely valuable... What struck me most were his personal qualities - his warmth, his wisdom, his sense of humour and his optimism...  Engaging in the challenges facing Africa is a key part of modern Conservatism.  I think it's vital to learn first-hand from the people and organisations working on the ground."

BBC Online carries a report of the Mandela-Cameron meeting.

Editor's note: "David Cameron's approach to Africa has been a welcome contrast to his approach to the environment.  In both cases the Tory leader is rightly attempting to broaden the appeal of the Conservative Party by emphasising issues that have been neglected by his predecessors.  In his approach to the environment he has broken ranks with other international conservative leaders and embraced the failed environmentalism of Kyoto.  Fortunately, in his approach to Africa and global poverty the Conservative leader has largely recommended authentic conservative solutions.  Recently, for example, he proposed aid vouchers as a more effective way of targeting development assistance and his development spokesman, Andrew Mitchell (pictured), has  recommended a free trade zone for Africa.  One of David Cameron's best speeches during his leadership bid was on global poverty last November.  He emphasised the importance of property rights, attacked Christian Aid's disdain for capitalism and called for a focus on 'killer diseases'.  The appointment of Peter Lilley as head of the global poverty policy group was a further reassurance for authentic conservatives.

As David Cameron continues to 'modernise' the Conservative Party, ConservativeHome will always pose two tests:

1. As we drive our tanks on to our opponents' turf - as David Cameron has been doing on the environment and on global and domestic poverty - are we fighting with distinctively conservative weapons or are we adopting the failed methods of the left?  When David Cameron spoke to the Centre for Social Justice about UK poverty in January he gave strong indications that his approach to poverty-fighting would be authentically conservative with an emphasis on the voluntary sector, welfare reform and strengthening of the family.
2. As we occupy new territory are we dangerously abandoning existing strongholds or are we broadening the party's appeal?  With David Cameron's renewed emphasis on homeland security and a more robust position on immigration from new EU member states, there have recently been welcome signs of a movement towards ConservativeHome's 'politics of and'.

PS Let us hope that while in Africa Mr Cameron makes a significant statement on Darfur.  The Tory leader made much of his commitment to this deeply troubled part of the world during his leadership bid but has been strangely silent on the situation in Sudan ever since."

Comments

[Oberon Houston]

Funny old world Ed, given the changes in positioning of our party (long long overdue), and now we hear that later on today Ruth Kelly is going to make a speech on multi-culturalism and promises an "honest debate" (mmm). Usual waffle, meaningless headlines and spin from our Government of the day, but the failures of the politically correct labour party are now coming home to roost.

Much of the time I look at the Labour Government and don’t get angry but just roll my eyes, these guys are in a self imposed deadlock, their political philosophy is a misnomer to the electorate, so in order to gain power they have self imposed upon themselves a hotchpotch of diluted disjointed policies, and most of the time they don't actually do anything, much, just hold press conferences the topic of the day. Meanwhile the everyone else just gets on with their lives best they can.

Now – the difference with Cameron is that he is actively engaging with the electorate and using conservative policies to demonstrate what could be so much better. I reject the ConservativeHome suggestion that he is ‘moving to the centre’ (and away from conservative principles of policy). Cameron is a true conservative; he just understands that we are first and foremost a political party who need to engage the electorate, not a right-wing talking shop.

[ToMTom]

Brilliant idea for Cameron to canvass ex-pat voters in South Africa. This is the way to win key marginals. I hope he will go to Florida next and visit those key voters wintering there

[James Maskell]

Well, if he cant pick up voters in Florida, Im sure he can pick up some polling day tricks!

[changetowin]

In his approach to the environment he has broken ranks with other international conservative leaders and embraced the failed environmentalism of Kyoto. Fortunately, in his approach to Africa and global poverty the Conservative leader has largely recommended authentic conservative solutions.

I am very uncomfortable with the way the Editor has attempted to split policies into "authentic conservative" ones and the rest. I feel that the subtext is that modernisers who espouse policies he disagrees with are somehow "inauthentic" Conservatives.

There is a rich Conservative tradition of concern for the environment and of being pragmatic when it comes to finding solutions to problems. I resent the implication that the party's concern about the environment and willingness to work with the rest of the world to tackle the problem is somehow unconservative. By all means disagree, join those who don't believe climate change exists if you must, but please don't divide us into camps of the select true believers and the rest.

And before you tell me that this thread is about Africa, I was not the one who brought the environment into this. It is really positive that David Cameron is meeting world leaders and taking Africa seriously. Perhaps we could for once just be content with saying, "good for you, well done".

[John G]

It's good that Cameron is shoing an interst in the wider world, an interest noticably lacking in previous Tory leader.

Right now the Americans are busy preaching to the Third World. It's time to show Africa that we reject neo-colonialism. We're prepared to listen and engage.

However, I think that we need to keep on-side as regards Global Warming. Anybody who now seriously doubts that it is a fact is one level above a flat earther.

[Chad]

PS Let us hope that while in Africa Mr Cameron makes a significant statement on Darfur...but has been strangely silent on the situation in Sudan ever since."

I completely agree Tim and hope that he does not just say something vague, but uses the opportunity to make a real difference.

[Editor]

Great job at misrepresenting what I wrote changetowin. I welcome a Tory emphasis on the environment. I just wish it was hardheaded. Europe and Canada berate America for being outside Kyoto but it is such hypocrisy given their failure to meet their own Kyoto targets. Australia, outside of Kyoto, is actually doing better at controlling emmissions than the average Kyoto member. Technology is the answer to the world's environmental problems and I make no apology for suggesting that the approach of the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development is more authentically conservative than Kyoto.

[Umbrella Man]

The Editor is being unreasonable in expecting David Cameron to talk about Darfur. Can he not comprehend the difference between a campaign slogan and a heartfelt commitment? Mr Cameron cannot be silent about the death of 400,000 people for six months and be credible by start talking about it now.

[Jon Gale]

Changetowin,

I also do not like thise divisions into "real" conservatives - "broken ranks" indeed - there are no "ranks", conservatism is not monolithic.

Having said that, I agree that technology is the aswer, not Kyoto.

[Chad]

Better later than never Umbrella Man.

If Cameron seeks to make a real difference about Darfur then he should be supported, not attacked for waiting six months.

Criticism will only to due if he ducks the issue.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Europe and Canada berate America for being outside Kyoto but it is such hypocrisy given their failure to meet their own Kyoto targets. Australia, outside of Kyoto, is actually doing better at controlling emmissions than the average Kyoto member. Technology is the answer to the world's environmental problems and I make no apology for suggesting that the approach of the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development is more authentically conservative than Kyoto."

A 'do nothing until green technology comes along' approach you mean?

[changetowin]

Sorry Editor, but since you've just written that you believe that your policy prescription on the environment is "more authentically conservative" then I don't see how I am misrepresenting what you wrote.

I welcome a Tory emphasis on the environment. I just wish it was hardheaded.

I don't know where to start. Heardheaded? David Cameron is looking at binding limits on carbon, environmental taxes and personal and corporate responsibility on this issue. These are tough policies. The Asia Pacific Partnership is an empty talking shop with no mandatory targets for reduction in carbon emissions. What the Cameron solution does is to use market mechanisms to protect the environment. By setting a price on carbon emissions, people have to pay for the negative externalities they are causing to the environment. Firms can choose to abate their pollution in the most efficient way - this may be by buying allowances to pollute on the market or may be by using technology to reduce their admissions. Technology is absolutely at the heart of Cameron's policy. But he has the insight that the only way to incentivise R&D and take-up of this new technology is to set a price on carbon. (I suppose state subsidies might work too - hardly something I think the Editor would propose).

This approach was pioneered by an AMERICAN REPUBLICAN governments in the early 1990s. A cap and trade system was introduced for SOx and NOx emissions. It was immensely successful at reducing emissions. The trading scheme in carbon that has been established in Europe because of the binding Kyoto limits is directly based on this US experience.

This issue is not as simplistically pro-technology vs Kyoto as you make it out to be, Editor. How do you suggest we incentivise technology without a long-term framework to set a price on carbon?

[changetowin]

Australia, outside of Kyoto, is actually doing better at controlling emmissions than the average Kyoto member.

Australia's emissions are RISING!!! Let's not suggest they are doing well - they are not!!!

[malcolm]

Blimey,for the first time I find myself in sympathy for 'changetowin',what's going on?

[MH]

An interesting read and thread. What worries me is that Dave's Conservatives will fall into the usual politically correct trap on Africa. Tens of billions have been poured in and syphoned off by corrupt tyrants and dictators who butcher their own people. Unless these individuals are dealt with and democratic reform tied to any aid, the region will continue to fail to make any humanitarian progress.

[christina speight]

I am sorry to strike a sour note but this smacks of another touchy-feely photo-op initiative.

Migration Watch today says forget the Polish influx which may be temporary but who in any case have many of the same values as we do. It is Asian and African immigration which will destroy Britain's identity. Last year immigration from Non-EU countries was 179,000. The Pakistani and Bangladesh populations here are due to show increases of +50% and 70% over the next 15 years I don't suppose for a moment Cameron has any ideas on this at all.

As for Kyoto it always was a politically correct load of cobblers. If we stopped emitting carbons altogether the INCREASE from China and India would completely outstrip those savings. Added to which the emissions from the sun are vastly more important and over the millennia have shown a habit of correcting themselves eventually. [so the dinosaurs died, but there's nothing we can do about the sun! ]

And only yesterday the hole-in-the-ozone layer has gone into reverse as was always predicted.

But Cameron signs up to anything trendy and ignores the big issues.

[Chad]

Tim wrote:
"Australia, outside of Kyoto, is actually doing better at controlling emmissions than the average Kyoto member"

Daniel wrote:
"A 'do nothing until green technology comes along' approach you mean?"

How do you equate Tim's statement about Australia's success as doing "nothing" Daniel?

[changetowin]

Blimey,for the first time I find myself in sympathy for 'changetowin',what's going on?

Thanks Malcolm! Maybe I'll even win Tim round too - let's see how he answers my question...

[MH]

Well said Christina. The scientific evidence is contradictory at best. Does smack of another photo op. Mind you, given the cycling to work debacle, we'll probably find the photo is a fake.

[Gildas]

"However, I think that we need to keep on-side as regards Global Warming. Anybody who now seriously doubts that it is a fact is one level above a flat earther."

I would love to see you be able to back up that assertion. Oh, but you can't - and because you can't denying that the debate exists has become the latest strategy of the Global Warming lobby:

http://www.anenglishmanscastle.com/archives/003076.html

[Gildas]

Let us hope that while in Africa Mr Cameron makes a significant statement on Darfur

Since he's in South Africa, how about a statement on Zimbabwe?

Not that statements will do anything to help the benighted parts of Africa - unless they involve announcements of large numbers of armed men being sent in. But I guess that's 'neo-colonial' of me.

Since realistically none of that is going to happen, could we at least start sending guns to the victims of oppression to give them the opportunity to fight back?

[malcolm]

I'm no expert Gildas but there are a very large number of scientists throughout the world who consistently argue the case for the dangers of global warming.The majority of governments throughout the world have accepted their advice hence Kyoto.Of course it would be better if the EVERY country signed up and governments actually displayed the political will to enforce it but they haven't.
Why would all these people go to all this trouble if your implied assertion was correct and global warming doesn't exist?

[changetowin]

Tim wrote:
"Australia, outside of Kyoto, is actually doing better at controlling emmissions than the average Kyoto member"

How do you equate Tim's statement about Australia's success as doing "nothing" Daniel?

May I be so bold as to attempt to answer this? Tim's statement certainly seems to be misleading. Best stats on greenhouse gas emissions can be found here

http://ghg.unfccc.int/graphics/graph1_05.gif

This shows that from 1990-2003 the change in greenhouse gas emissions was:

AUSTRALIA: +23.3%
US: +13.3%
EU: -1.4%
UK: -13%

Hard to argue that Australia and the US are great models to follow if you are serious about controlling Greenhouse Gas emissions!!!

(I suspect that Tim is being very clever about using statistics to confuse. As you may know, developing countries were excluded from binding targets. This happened because it was seen that their emissions would rise hugely because they were moving from completely undeveloped societies. But they are technically Kyoto members. So Tim may be comparing Australia to all Kyoto signators, rather than other developed countries like the UK. This may allow him to say that Australia is doing well, but it is more than a little misleading...)

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

Chad wrote:
"How do you equate Tim's statement about Australia's success as doing "nothing" Daniel?"

Chad, it's wonderful to see you taking time out from your one-man vendetta against the only moderniser in the UKIP leadership campaign (and the one who is closest to the progressive values you claim to espouse) to visit a Conservative discussion forum and pontificate about the Conservative leadership and global issues yet again.

To answer your question, let me start by saying that I do not square the Editor's statement about Australia with 'success' - indeed, the Editor did not use that word.

The statement 'Australia, outside of Kyoto, is actually doing better at controlling emmissions than the average Kyoto member' is a misleading statement which fails to acknowledge various key factors, such as differences in population and the size of the industrial sector.

The contributor known as 'changetowin' has stated that Australia's carbon emissions are growing - that isn't 'success' in my book, Chad.

Kyoto isn't perfect, and it is lamentable that there are some Kyoto signatories who seem to be on course to miss their targets for emission reductions, but at least the Kyoto signatories have acknowledged that there is a problem and have identified how the problem is going to be addressed, which is significant progress on where the world stood before and an important first step in the fight against climate change.

Like it or not, the APPCD is dependent on technological developments that haven't happened yet, so it is effectively a charter to 'do nothing until green technology comes along', whereas I feel that the Kyoto protocol should act as a framework for tackling the emissions problem until that green technology has come on-stream and is widely available.

[changetowin]

Spot on Daniel.

The key question that the talking shop environmentalists haven't answered is how they will incentivise technology. Technology is often very expensive in terms of R&D and then to buy when it is released. To suppose that firms are going to install expensive carbon cutting technology out of the goodness of their hearts is laughable! Cap-and-trade schemes like those set up to meet Kyoto targets make it economic for firms to do this. This is a conservative policy - it uses the market to tackle the problem. The talking shop environmentalists are just about more hot air.

[Chad]

Oh Daniel, grow up. Why must you always resort to personal attacks when you knowledge of the facts is sketchy.

For your reference, only one candidate in the UKIP leadership election has pledged to adopt my core value of "No Preference, No Prejudice" and that is David Campbell Bannerman.

So therefore I have been true to my values and voted for him. So you see, I have voted for the person closest to my own values. Happy now?

[changetowin]

Chad,

To be fair this was meant to be a thread about David Cameron's fantastic visit to Africa. The Editor brought the environment into it. I think a UKIP debate might be a step too far off subject!!!

[Chad]

I agree ChangeToWin, as usual I was on topic, but must be allowed to respond to the usual inaccurate personal attacks from Daniel.

Back to the thread-->
Daniel is perfectly entitled to question the accuracy of Tim's statement, but I just raised the issue that he was not doing that.

However, it has been answered now and we are back on subject until Daniel wades in again.....

[changetowin]

Haha!

[John G]

For your reference, only one candidate in the UKIP leadership election has pledged to adopt my core value of "No Preference, No Prejudice" and that is David Campbell Bannerman.

Is he UKIP? He was definitely a Tory a few years ago. Leading Bow Grouper.

What's UKIP's line on Africa?

(do they know where it is?)

[Mark]

Cameron would do well to take the advice Desmond Swayne gave him in private emails, erm, the pages of the Sunday Times a couple of months ago- talk about the damage the EU does to Africa.

EU trade barriers and tariffs do a huge amount of harm to the African economy (denying them much more than we ever give in aid). This is a topical and important issue in the current day and age, as well as being a very valid eurosceptic concern with a Tory solution- free trade.

[Chad]

"Is he UKIP? He was definitely a Tory a few years ago. Leading Bow Grouper."

Come on guys back to the topic! The "personal vendetta" Daniel mentions relates to the fact that I found out and exposed that Richard Suchorzewski was actually seeking to stand as a Tory candidate for last year's general election but only jumped ship when the Tories reject him.

Combined with the fact that Suchorzewski's key ally is running a pro-Conservative forum, I felt justified in publishing my concerns.

Enough! Cameron's in Africa. Instead of personal attacks, can we focus on Darfur as it is vital that this is addressed

[Richard]

"Technology is often very expensive in terms of R&D and then to buy when it is released. To suppose that firms are going to install expensive carbon cutting technology out of the goodness of their hearts is laughable!"

Rising energy prices are the usual incentive.

As for Mandella, didn't he pop up at a Labour Party conference once?

[changetowin]

Richard,

Certainly true that rising energy prices can play an important role. But I was more thinking of technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage. This is really expensive stuff but has the potential to really make a difference. The only market mechanism I can see to incentivise investment in CCS technology is a cap-and-trade scheme which sets a long term price on carbon. i.e. David Cameron's policy. The US is reduced to giving state subsidies to CCS plants - how "authentically conservative" is that???

[Al Gunn]

I wonder who Cameron is supporting in the upcoming Zambian elections?

Hichelema is certainly an interesting prospect. Or has Mwanawasa done enough to earn a new mandate? Can an opposition party actually take power democratically, is probably the more pressing question.

More pressing than glad-handing Mandiba anyway. He should have met with Kalaki!

[Richard]

I was watching BBC News 24 late last night and was intrigued to see a feature on the governor of Montana. It seems he is encouraging the use of Montana's coal reserves for the production of synthetic oil. Supposedly there is enough to fulfil America's energy needs for the next 40 years.

However, one must question the impact this will have on the environment.

Another important issue: is global warming happening due to natural causes (we know the earth has changed temperature throughout the ages) or manmade causes or a combination of both? Is there any accurate way of measuring this?

[Mark]

Richard said: Another important issue: is global warming happening due to natural causes (we know the earth has changed temperature throughout the ages) or manmade causes or a combination of both? Is there any accurate way of measuring this?

Nothing like opening a can of worms, is there!

[Editor]

A few quick responses, changetowin...

AUSTRALIAN STATS: I will investigate further but John Howard told me that Oz was doing better than EU in his interview with me so there must be some basis for his numbers! It may depend upon the time window used. Or, perhaps, I'm too trusting of conservative politicians!

KYOTO IS THE PROBLEM BECAUSE IT DOESN'T INCLUDE DEVELOPING NATIONS: There is little point us burdening our economies with command-and control/ cap-and-trade so long as China and India etc are not bound in a similar way. Such burdens would amount to unilateral economic disarmament and won't help global pollution levels.

A QUESTION OF TIMING: Kyoto adherence is expensive. The Copenhagen Consensus has shown that there are plenty of better things we can do with our money NOW. Fight HIV - spread access to water - fight malaria, for example - many more lives would be saved than acting now to counter global warming.

TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENT. The other advantage to waiting is that green technologies are improving all the time. Fight malaria etc now and use new technologies tmrw. Win-win... if, of course, Iran hasn't blown us all up by then.

[Gildas]

"I'm no expert Gildas but there are a very large number of scientists throughout the world who consistently argue the case for the dangers of global warming.The majority of governments throughout the world have accepted their advice hence Kyoto.

Yes. And there are a very large number of scientists throughout the world who consistently argue the case that i)global warming is unproven or ii)human contribution to it is unproven.

My comment was in response to someone who characterised those who do not accept anthropogenic global warming as 'one step above flat earthers'.

Incidentally, the majority of governments around the world do a great many things that I wouldn't want our government doing.

"Of course it would be better if the EVERY country signed up and governments actually displayed the political will to enforce it but they haven't."

By the predictions within the Kyoto protocol (ie if you accept manmade warming is real, and you trust their computer models) if implemented it would delay warming by 5 years. Hardly worth wrecking the world economy for, so no, it would not be better.

"Why would all these people go to all this trouble if your implied assertion was correct and global warming doesn't exist?"

Because they are wrong. People make mistakes all the time. Governments even more so.

[changetowin]

Yes Richard. I saw that too. Interesting, wasn't it? Rising oil prices and security of supply concerns are really causing the US to look at coal again. Since they represent the talking shop environmentalist tradition and have no binding targets on CO2 emissions, the worry is that there will be little incentive for US firms to invest in clean coal technologies.

[changetowin]

Editor,

Thanks for the response.

My main quibble with what you write is why would firm's bother to invest in researching and implementing carbon abating technology if there is no long term price on carbon emissions? Most of the major carbon capture and storage implementation and research is happening in Europe because firms believe that there may be a real economic cost to carbon emissions in the future. I don't see why carbon abating technology is just going to drop from the sky with no economic incentives. Sure there will be energy saving technologies because of high energy prices, but what about carbon abating technologies such as clean coal?

[Editor]

changetowin: I have sympathy with you on the advantages of government incentivising use of technology but for the reasons given above - ie the Copenhagen Consensus - I'd rather government used its money on other things for the time-being.

I've enjoyed our exchange of opinions!

[changetowin]

Me too Editor! Perhaps we can continue our discussion at Conference... ;-)

[Laurence.Davies]

I have followed this website for a couple of months now. I am really starting to wonder, reading the comments by some of your contributors, why I have stuck with the Conservatives for 25 years. I suggest that, instead of Mr Cameron going on a fact finding mission to Africa, he should come into the real world that confronts many decent hardworking residents. Maybe he can start in Custom House in East London.

[David]

Ah it only seems like yesterday, I was reading reports of members of the F.C.S. singing 'Hang Nelson Mandela' How times have changed!

[MH]

Laurence, I know entirely how you feel. I was a Party member for 20 years, am a serving local councillor and former Chairman of a Conservative-held seat. I came to a similar conclusion and tore up my membership card earlier this year.

[CJ]

Africa is the real world for the many people that live there! Have you tried it? It's not fun in many African countries; corrupt governments, raw sewage running down the streets, no food or money and disease.

This site is a catalyst for discussion on a whole range of topics - not just Africa -and in the most part contributions are thought provoking - hence the heated debates that sometimes take place.

Politics is about a whole lot more than just what goes on in your backyard.

[changetowin]

I would suggest that helping hard-working people in London AND in Africa are not mutually exclusive. The world is interconnected - what happens in other countries directly affects us. Even if you don't buy the moral arguments for action in Africa, there is also a self-interested one.

Tough choices do need to be taken sometimes in politics, but I don't see why David Cameron needs to choose between caring at home and abroad.

As a great Conservative once said, "Charity begins at home, but it shouldn't end there". Hopefully we'll be looking at solutions that are much more long-term than charity - both in East London and in Africa.

[christina speight]

Changetowin

The country is being flooded with not just EU citizens but 179,000 Africans / Asians last year. The Africans and the Muslim Asians make no attempt to assimilate and are changing the very nature of our country.

As far as Africa is concerned we should - as someone has pointed out - stop subscribing to the EU policies which HARM the African people and enrich their corrupt rulers. As for aid - forget it. Spend the money which we can't afford in putting back the border controls which this government has destroyed and which Reid says he'll do by 2014! 2014? There won't be a recognisable Britain by then.

Typical of Cameron to go for the politically correct and ignore the "elephant in the room". Mandela is a good man I'm sure, but politically inept and past it.

[aristeides]

Slightly confused as to why Laurence and MH spend their lunchtimes perusing the comments sections of Conservativehome given their disillusionment but never mind.

Regarding Africa, I am afraid this is all about platitudes and photo-ops. It won't change things one iota.

[CJ]

Here we go again. I really despair sometimes. As changetowin says "Charity begins at home, but it shouldn't end there".

I note the hysterical use of the word 'flooded'. The asylum seekers I know work themselves to exhaustion to better themselves and their lives. Do you know any? And the comment you make about 'Africans and the Muslim Asians make no attempt to assimilate and are changing the very nature of our country.' is simply not true from those I know. Don't tar everyone with the same brush.

Not all monetary aid works, granted, and there are many other ways to help as well as giving money. But I just wonder if some people really want to help at all.

And as for your comment about a 'recognisable Britain by then' - pleeeeze

Interesting you see helping Africa as merely 'politically correct' - how insulting

[Deputy Editor]

Ah it only seems like yesterday, I was reading reports of members of the F.C.S. singing 'Hang Nelson Mandela' How times have changed!

And how thankful I am that they have.

I'm happy to go on record, however, saying that there are many, many people who deserve Nelson Mandela's demi-god status more than him.

[Deputy Editor]

p.s. whilst we are on the environment, the LibDems have just launched a website - Green Tax Switch.

[Jon Gale]

Politics, especially in opposition, is all about photo ops - this makes Cameron look good and wins votes.

It will only become a problem if DC starts wanting Britain to intervene in every third-world hell-hole and waste more taxmoney on the black hole that is africa.

[esbonio]

Why shouldn't former members and Conservative voters who have in my case supported the party over the last twenty odd years not peruse and contribute to this website? If my Tory MP is going to get the votes in my household I want to know what the party and its supporters think. I have not renewed my membership because I am totally unconvinced by Cameron. I believe my local MP is a different kettle of fish and because of that I may still vote for him. It really depends on how Project Cameron continues.

[changetowin]

Changetowin

The country is being flooded with not just EU citizens but 179,000 Africans / Asians last year. The Africans and the Muslim Asians make no attempt to assimilate and are changing the very nature of our country.

Christina,

Interesting with you how everything turns into a debate about immigration adn the EU, isn't it?!?!

But seriously, as I said, the world is increasingly interconnected and there are self-interested reasons as well as moral ones for helping Africa. One of those is related to asylum and immigration. We certainly want the brightest and best from Africa to stay there and enrich their society where possible and for fewer Africans to feel the need to flee from persecution and war. So a more stable and prosperous Africa will lead to fewer Africans wanting or having to leave their continent.

That's a policy prescription that is much more far-sighted and built to last than simply saying scrap aid and stop 'em all coming in. Your comments do not recognise the interconnectedness of the modern world. To coin a phrase, which I'm sure you love Christina, we're all in this together.

[malcolm]

Sam, I'm interested to know,who?

[changetowin]

Interesting website Deputy Editor. Even more interesting map on the site. It suggests that Northern Ireland has already been flooded by the melting ice-caps. Or could it be that the Lib Dems don't care about Northern Ireland?!

[christina speight]

CJ - 640,000 immigrants in 2 years justifies the word "flooded". AND i live in the London borough with the highest non-EU immigrant population. AND YES I do know immigrants - the Hindu Indians are a great asset and are becoming enthusiastic Britons.

So stop an attempt at an ill-informed "put-down" please. The Muslims keep largely to themselves and the Somalis - of which there are a lot round here - are monstrously lawless. I travel by bus and tube and at times we are the only obviously Anglo-Saxons in sight. In the local X-Ray department last week at one point I was the ONLY non-Asian person and some of the others needed interpreters.

This is the end of Britain ( Yes - a recognisable Britain) if it is not checked and Reid dawdles his way to doing something too late - in 2014.

Instead of addressing this crisis in on our national well-being Cameron goes off to chat to a politically correct icon.

British voters have the right to expect our government to preserve the nation's integrity. Blair's lot won't and the problem doesn't appear to have surfaced in Cameron's mind yet.

With the figures I gave of immigration and birthrates I would have hoped that even you, CJ, might be concerned.

And WHOM am I "insulting" by calling the waste of resources by subsiding African crooks "politically correct" To use your own phrase -Pleeeeze!

[Al Gunn]

Can't understand this obsession with talking about the environment on a story to do with Africa. Thoroughly sympathise with those who think that Britain ought to be the focus of British politics. I live in Leeds not Lebanon! However, for those who actually care about the topic at hand:

Where can one find more information on whether free trade would work in Africa? Both sides of the argument sought here.

Is Mandela still relevant to Africa as a statesman? He has spent so long out of government now. His shadow obscures the failures/achievements of his successors on that continent. Not to mention everyone fetishises South Africa at the expense of other more enchanting/troubled/successful(?) nations.

I also wonder whom the Deputy Editor has in mind for the status of demi-god? Perhaps, like the African Orthodox Church, he sees the late John Coltrane as somewhat saintly?

http://www.saintjohncoltrane.com/

(Clearly Charles Mingus was the true Black Saint! But lets not segue into that.)

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Sam, I'm interested to know,who?"

I think Sam probably had Nelson Mandela's terrorist past and unfortunate habit for cosying up to political undesirables (Fidel Castro, Moammar Gaddafi, Robert Mugabe, Tony Blair) in mind when he posted that comment, Malcolm.

[christina speight]

Changetowin - The EU is central to everything. We can't change many of our taxes - The EU says not. We can't change the Convention on Human Rights - The EU says not. We can't help our farmers or fishermen - The EU says NOT. In area after area we are unable to govern ourselves. And YOU - Changetowin- think it doesn't matter

You'd like a "stable and prosperous" Africa. But it's the EU's trade policies that prevent this to enrich French farmers.

THAT's why I revert to the EU - THAT and the fact that Cameron has betrayed us and broken his only promise over - THE EU.

It's the canker that has destroyed government after government.

[aristeides]

"Politics, especially in opposition, is all about photo ops - this makes Cameron look good and wins votes." Jon Gale

I could not agree more - I didn't actually mean to sound that critical. It still won't change anything though.

"Why shouldn't former members and Conservative voters who have in my case supported the party over the last twenty odd years not peruse and contribute to this website?" esbonio

Didn't say they shouldn't - was just confused as to why they did. I would have thought a constant reminder of one's disillusionment would sap the soul rather but hey, it's the internet! Everybody's welcome!

ps... I always enjoy your contributions, esbonio.

[Chris D]

". whilst we are on the environment, the LibDems have just launched a website"
Sam, they seem to prefer the blue and green to yellow, looks like the campaign the tories ran had an effect.

changetowin, It would help if they could remember all parts of the UK, didn't the EU leave Wales out of a map?

[Confused]

So let's get this straight - Global Warming is going to melt the ice caps and cause a flood of immigrants from Africa, and that's why David Cameron doesn't want to hang Nelson Mandela any more?

[malcolm]

Nice of you to include TB in with that little lot Daniel,lol!
There are few politicians that I can think of from the modern era who in any way deserve 'Demi God' status. Even my hero,Winston Churchill had many glaring faults. However after being in prison for so long Nelson Mandela exhibited such a spirit of forgiveness to his captors and to the upholders of the apartheid regime that he rose incomparably in my opinion whatever other mistakes he made.
But the purpose of my post to Sam was merely to ask him who he thought had done better,that's all.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

I agree with you Malcolm in that it is difficult to think of any political figure worthy of the demi-god status seemingly bestowed upon Mandela.

I've been thinking about this for a while and the only name I can think of is Aung San Suu Kyi.

[esbonio]

Thanks for clearing that up Aristeides and I am glad you like my contributions. I do however get the impression from some contributors (not you) that concern and scepticism about the leadership and direction of the party should not be discussed.

[Chris D]

"I've been thinking about this for a while and the only name I can think of is Aung San Suu Kyi." Daniel, its just a shame that despite the efforts of amnesty international she does not get the same publicity that Nelson Mandela got.

[changetowin]

Christina,

I am all for a more flexible Europe in which more decisions are taken by the nation state. To achieve this end we need to work with others in the EU who are sympathetic to our case. These include many Eastern European states - the very states we are attempting to treat like second class members of the EU.

I am also for change in the CAP. But again, in the real world we need to work with other EU member states to achieve this. Other centre-right parties such as Angela Merkel's in Germany want reform - we should work with them to achieve this.

Politics is not as simple as you make out, Christina. When you see a problem with aid to Africa your response is to scrap all aid. When you see a problem with integration in Britain, your response is to stop all immigration. And when you see a problem with the EU your response is to leave it.

I suspect that David Cameron shares many of your concerns, but he recognises that your simplistic response to these problems is (a) electorally impossible and (b) undesirable. We gain from aid, immigration and the EU. There are costs too - and it lies with responsible Conservatives to work to reduce these. That means engaging with others to build a new politics that is built to last - not engaging in a fantasy that all our problems could be solved by retreating into ourselves and ignoring the world.

[Jon Gale]

Christina,

I totally agree with you about the problems of mass migration, (and EU) but Cameron has to go for the photo-op, say how great Mandela is, how evil apartheid was, etc.

Then, when (if) he proposes limits on immigration, no-one can automatically dismiss it by accusing him of racism (and he has the photo to prove it).

In the same way as Frank Field can say things about immigration no Tory could get away with.

If we can also sell CAP reform as part of helping Africa, then that sounds better than just attacking the EU as a waste of money

[Oberon Houston]

Although Cameron is taking a bit of stick for his visit, and in some cases a few are so outraged that they kicked the dog and ripped up their membership cards in disgust, I still think that we are erring on the indignantly ignorant.

If one adopts the premise that every voter counts, then a strategy must be adopted to at least interest each vote to look at us a little closed (and hopefully find out a bit more about us and like it in the process). There are a huge amount of votes (some maturing by the next GE), especially in the 16-20 year old bracket that he is wooing here. Many yong voters will use a strong environmental position as a single issue vote, Cameron by meeting Mandela and discussing these issues is saying "look you can identify with us, here is some common ground, look a bit more and you may decide to vote for us".

To foam at the mouth about this, in my view, is failing to broaden your view to the political reality in modern Britain, and also failing to appreciate just how far vast swathes of the electorate feel apart from the Conservative Party. Cameron will win us the next election with his tactics, we will get a Conservative Govt., and conservative policies will follow.

I've got that headache again.

ps, Tim/Sam, whats the plan for CH at conference?

[malcolm]

You get a lot of headaches Oberon!Ever thought about aspirin?

[CJ]

Christina

I am not attempting an ‘ill-informed’ put down – just trying to have a rational discussion about Africa, poverty and global aid. Immigration is a related but separate issue. Having worked in Africa, seen asylum seekers to the UK go through the process and having personal friends who are missing in Zimbabwe I am hardly ill-informed.

You may feel that 640,000 immigrants is too many; I would not use the word ‘flooded’. So what if the Muslim community keeps largely to themselves – what are you implying by them doing so and so what if you were the only non-asian in the X-ray department.

This is not the end of Britain. What are you so scared of? Why do you think that we will lose our ‘integrity’? What is wrong with change and integration?

You are insulting the people of Africa by implying that DC’s visit and interest is a waste of time. It is not a waste of time to them!

And as for your comment about Mandela – he was imprisoned for his beliefs and is an icon to many around the world, like it or not. Could you survive 20 odd years imprisoned in a hellhole for your beliefs?

We are a global village and what happens in Africa – and everywhere else around the world - does and should concern us all.

[Richard]

"So what if the Muslim community keeps largely to themselves – what are you implying by them doing so"

Because they don't integrate, which merely encourages suspicion and cultural fragmentation. However, I don't believe they should be forced to integrate by the government - a dangerously illiberal idea that is likely to cause antagonism.

"What is wrong with change and integration?"

It depends whether or not it causes instability and conflict. Conservatism doesn't oppose change but it prefers gradual organic change and the preservation of "what works". In the past immigration was small-scale and integration successful. But for the past few decades there has been a notable lack of integration amongst some communities. The sheer size may have been a reason for this because it made it harder for "absorption" to occur.

[aristeides]

"You are insulting the people of Africa by implying that DC’s visit and interest is a waste of time. It is not a waste of time to them!"

Whilst I agree with some of what CJ says, I am not sure the David Cameron phenomenon has spread the length and breadth of the entire African continent.

[John G]

This is not the end of Britain. What are you so scared of? Why do you think that we will lose our ‘integrity’? What is wrong with change and integration?

What is wrong is that - whatever your own opinions - the British people may not desire that change.

We need to help our African friends at home - their home. Not encourage workers to leave the continent in the lurch by fleeing to Europe.

As a Christian I'm very excited about Africa. It is now becoming a powerhouse for faith in action and as traditionalists (that is what Conservatives actually are) we need to stretch out the hand of friendship and assistance.

That's why I welcome David's visit to Nelson Mandela - one of the truly great world statespeople of the twentieth century.

[Og]

Mandela is obviously a charmer and DC has said no more or less than all others say after an audience with him. But I hope DC will let on what was said about Zimbabwe, which should be a priority foreign policy item for government and opposition, but barely gets mentioned. Presumably the sainted Nelson has a dim view of Butcher Bob.....

This is all profile-raising stuff, barely worth the carbon footprint of his return ticket.

The good news about the sea-level website is that it creates me and Goodwood racecourse as an island, cut off from Brighton, Portsmouth and Crawley. We'll take our fair share of Bulgarian stable-lads, but the rest of mankind will find the visa restrictions quite stringent.

[Blue2Win]

Daniel V A Actually Mandela is the only significant politician to publicly tell Mugabe to retire.

There can be little doubt that Mandela was involved at least in planning violence in his early days ( there is a lot of speculation about whether current building work will unearth his pistol that was such a key element in his trial).

But the thing about Mandela is that he used his time on Robben Island to think through his philosophy, strategy and tactics.

Having lived in South Africa after the big change I have massive regard for the man and what he has, with de Klerk, managed to peacefully achieve.

I don't agree with some of his policies nor do I like some of his friends that financed him before his release. But i respect his fundamental democratic and humanitarian instincts. Mandela is a realist and knows ( unlike some on this site) that there is rarely a direct road to any political goal. Sometimes you have to dance, talk to your enemies and tolerate difficult friends.

[Editor]

Oberon: CH plans for conference are proceeding well but you'll have to wait a little longer to hear what we'll be doing!

[Ted]

Al Gunn 11:51

if I get a chance I'll drop a note on a suitable thread about Zambia elections as I'm in country for them. If I could only find my 1970 Zambian ID card I could probably vote (though I think my colour might raise queries... and the 60's length hair on the photo has unfortunately dropped out).

What is different in Zambia today - despite Chiluba's end of term wobbles and Levi's win with less votes than Blair got - is that democracy is alive and well. People talk about the President as a person not a dictator and criticise him, very different from the socialist one party years of Kaunda.

There are still issues about property rights, fear of white Zambian involvement in politics and sporadic political violence but Zambia is a beacon in Africa for post dictatorial civil rights. And despite widespread poverty most HIV/Aids suffers are now on ARVs.

Shame they didn't employ Steve Hilton for PR or perhaps DC would highlight the advances a bankcrupt state has made with trade liberalisatin and democracy :-)

DC could also put a word in for political asylum for Zimbabweans Roy Bennett and associates refused this in South Africa.

[christina speight]

Changetowin - Where on earth did you get the idea that we gain from 1. aid; 2.immigration; and and 3. the EU. All are a dead net loss to us.

Much of the rest of what you write is just not true. Merkel wants to ratify the Constitution and have a fully federal Europe. Nobody but Britain [because we are the ones who pay] cares about reforming the CAP.

Of course I say - as any sensible person does - if you are doing something wrong - very wrong - the first thing to do is to stop doing it. Your brand of wishful thinking has been the mantra of one government after another since 1972. ALL hopes and optimistic scenarios have been proved utterly false.

==========
Oberon Houston - the most eurosceptic section of the voters are not the elderly but the young. 75% of them want to leave the EU!!!
===========

CJ - My comment about Mandela was that he IS an ICON and that he is a GOOD man but that he is now being used as a politically correct icon and is out of touch with reality. He backs Mugabe for a start.

And it is a very stupid remark to say that I am insulting the people of Africa. The corrupt politicos maybe but the people have never heard of Cameron

"We are a global village" THAT's the cliche of the week
==============

The trouble wsith the people who have disagreed with me is that they all put the British people second to some nebulous ill-thought out utopia. Cameron is just so too.

[Richard]

"Oberon Houston - the most eurosceptic section of the voters are not the elderly but the young. 75% of them want to leave the EU!!!"

Where does this figure come from? I recall opinion polls showing that the majority of the young were opposed to joining the Euro and were generally Eurosceptic but EU withdrawal is a blank spot in my memory.

[Ted]

A very good precis of the 21st century little englander view of the world.

Shame we depend on world trade for a living.

[Richard]

Ted, where has anybody opposed trade or promoted protectionism?

[Deputy Editor]

My comment about Mandela was that he IS an ICON and that he is a GOOD man but that he is now being used as a politically correct icon and is out of touch with reality.

I'm pretty sure he is a good man (I don't know him, and I'm loathe to criticise someone who has sacrificed more for their beliefs than I have), but if even New Labour was half as corrupt as Mandela's ANC government there would be riots - and any hopes Blair had of becoming an "icon" would be annihilated.

[Ted]

Richard

Christina's please stop the world I want to get off diatribe - leave EU, stop immigration, stop aid. So Africa, Asia & South America look to China even more closing off markets, Europe gets the hump and all those British expats lose their jobs.

The world is a complex organisation and we have to make a living in it - that means compromising and wheeler-dealing.

[Geoff]

Ted, "compromising and wheeler-dealing" is not the same as abject surrender.

I should clarify that I am one of those who understands that Mandela is a convicted terrorist but that political pragmatism says that we should say sweet things about the nice doddery old man who wears the awful shirts. It's not a popular point of view but, hey, sue me.

Explaining to the public that he conspired to kill people doesn't win votes, but then again it seems to work in N Ireland.

I'd have personally dropped the noose on Adams and McGuiness too, but now they are part of the Establishment so we have to smile and give them taxpayers money as MPs. I'm considering a 100 Policies proposition about that, but it would be too controversial for the Party to realistically consider so will probably save the energy.

[Ted]

Geoff

Mandela is unlike Adams and McGuiness. A hothead in his youth he reflected during his long years of punishment - and he was punished for any crimes he committed - and came to understand his enemy as well as his friend.

In Northern Ireland at next International the Irish Rugby Team will not let God save the Queen be played alongside the Irish Rugby anthem - Mandela kept Die Stem and joined it with Nkosi Sikelele'iAfrica. He gloried in the South African Rugby Team. He's no saint and Sam is right that he accepted a degree of corruption in his party and continues to show underserved loyalty to those despots who supported the ANC in their struggle but he managed to get the respect of black, white, coloured and asian South Africans.

The other difference is that for black South Africans there was no democratic alternative whilst for Adams & McGuiness there was. Even though I'm Catholic I get really het up about the BBC & "progressive" opinion putting Rev Ian Paisley as equivalent of Adams/McGuiness. Paisley is a democrat, Adams/McGuiness belong to a murderous organisation with no respect for ballot box or peoples right to disagree.

Though my church tells me it's not up to me to decide how God will judge I think Paisley has a better chance of eventual salvation and Adam/McGuinness of well deserved damnation.

[malcolm]

Well said Ted. I wonder if Geoff was one of those smug well fed arrogant FCS who used to sing 'Hang Nelson Mandela' when they'd had a few drinks. I was embarrased then but to have him compared to Adams/Mcguiness now seems to me to be incomparably stupid.

[christina speight]

Oh NO Ted. You're mouthing slogans and cliches. If we were to leave the EU we could then save ourselves the 42 Billion NET that Blair has just given away to the EU over the budgetary period (£12bn a year in the later years) ; we could pursue internationalist trade policies instead of the protectionist ones of the EU which are more suited to our Global Trading nation. This would help the 3rd world more than any tied aid.

The "aid" goes straight into the Swiss bank accounts of some very nasty Africans and in any case destroys local industries.

So what you call my "diatribe" is in fact a positive and dynamic way forward. One of the things that Britain excels in is international trading especially with those countries which share our commercial legal system. You in contrast are stuck in a 60's time-warp where the state is supreme. No wonder you like the EU. It's the solution to a problem of 40 years ago.

[John G]

Whatever Mandela did in the past he has more than made up for it since.

As I have said, Mandela is one of the few truly great statesmen of our time; an shining - verging on saintly - example to us all.

Sadly I do recall the rather disgusting FCS and their key slogan "Hang Nelson Mandela"

I also recall their commitment to a range of other perverted and anti-social behaviours.

Unfortunately it is plain that a number of these debauched racists remain with the party today as hangers-on. Rumours are rife as to the level to which they have penetrated.

A clean sweep of the far-right FCS brigade would do wonders to improve the image of our party.

[John G]

Though my church tells me it's not up to me to decide how God will judge I think Paisley has a better chance of eventual salvation and Adam/McGuinness of well deserved damnation.

Quite right Ted.

I'm glad that we - as fellow-Christians - agree on this.

[Richard]

"A clean sweep of the far-right FCS brigade would do wonders to improve the image of our party."

I think you have to distinguish between the libertarian and authoritarian wings of FCS. I believe the former was dominant although I don't know which faction was keen on the hang Mandella chants.

However, it must be noted that this was back in the 1980s before Mandella's release i.e. before he obtained virtual sainthood. He was still known to many as a terrorist. That may not excuse the cries of "hang Mandella" but it does put them into context.

[Blue2Win]

Deputy Editor The South African Deputy President has been charged and stood trial for sexual assault. Can the Labour government claim the same level of probity as the ANC government? With Prescott still getting off scot free?

Corruption there certainly is in the ANC as there is in New Labour, but who is worse is a moot point. Is the selling of peerages worse than taking a cut in government contracts? Is dragging your governmental feet on AIDS worse than invading Iraq and generating a civil war? Is the dodgy dossier worse than ..... well you get the point.

[Al Gunn]

Ted,

I look forwards to an appropriate thread! I still can't make my mind up about who I want to win. Sata seems like old news, Mwanawasa has presided over the best period of Zambian history, bar independence, in terms of economics and governance but this Hichilema... apart from anything else, it would be fascinating to see a democratic change of government for the first time. Not something that has ever happened in South Africa or Zimbabwe to name but two. I will be following the whole thing with great intrigue. He also seems to be a very smooth operator but then maybe I don't read the Times as much as the Post!

[Geoff]

...I wonder if Geoff was one of those smug well fed arrogant FCS who used to sing 'Hang Nelson Mandela' when they'd had a few drinks....

No, Malcolm, I wasn't. I am too young to start with. However luckily there are people of my generation who aren't blindly accepting the deification of this man.

I accept the political reality: if terrorists manage to force their way in to the political process with a gun and the outcome is a peaceful solution then maybe that painful way forward is the only method to achieve a long term peace.

However Adams, McGuiness and Mandela are all responsible for bombs being detonated and innocent lives lost. I loved Ted's description of a convicted terrorist as a "hothead". Have you considered a job at the BBC? Their editorial policy only allows them to be described as "militants" which would suit your appeasing double-speak nicely.

[Graeme Archer]

My eyebrow also raised at the Editorial use of the phrase "authentic Conservatives". So nice to know that there's someone out there who knows exactly what it is that makes a Tory! There was me thinking it's quite difficult to pin down exactly, being a mixture of freedom, nostalgia, evolution, culture, etc etc. Thanks Tim. I now know I'm inauthentic :-0). Also -- to paraphrase -- "Australia must be doing better than EU because John Howard told me" :-0). I'm not carping, just grinning widely.

Trying not to fall into a cliche' trap, but failing, probably as a result of my limited and inauthentic mind, the following occurs to me:

1) Understanding global phenomena is quite difficult (understatement) for humans who are part of said phenomena

therefore

2) I doubt if anyone on this site is in fact qualified to speak authoritatively about environmental change; no more, anyway, than the BBC newsreaders who mouth phrases like "Southend will disappear in a fortnight because of global warming" (which put the fear of god into Mr Keith, as Southend is his favourite away day, where god knows how much of our income gets shoved into amusement games).

and so

3) I'm going to make a stab of a guess that most of what we (here on Conservative Home) say about the environment isn't about the environment per se, but is probably more a function of our geopolitical world view. Hence Tim's support for the environmental policy of the anglosphere. Hence the fact that I'm more than a little in love with Bjorn wossisname, because he's a statistician (hurrah! the one thing we can all agree on is the need for MORE STATISTICIANS) who takes a centre-right approach to solving immediate, visible needs of the world's poorest.

What I'm not seeing really is the supposed innate contradiction between making it harder for the developed world to pump out emissions (I think there's very low probability to attach to the hypothesis "carbon emissions cause zero damage to the atmosphere") and the pragmatic Bjorn-view about spreading good water supplies, combatting HIV infection etc etc.

I know that in the limit you could argue "close down the economy in order to control emissions", which is the green-left-stalinist "environmental" position (see what I mean about non-scientists filtering their views through their innate political position?) but that's not the view of any Tory is it? "Make the polluter pay" is a sound Tory principle - it was ours first ( (c) Chris Patten ~ 1990, I think) - what's wrong with putting a market into emissions, with the objective of reducing them, and building an aid strategy for Africa that will bring real improvements to real lives?

No doubt I'm missing something really obvious, not enough tea in my system yet :-0)

[Ted]

Geoff

It would be nice to have your moral certainty. My position on acts of terror against civilians is that they are wrong. I do not believe they should go unpunished. Mandela was punished.

However if you belong to a community stripped of civil rights, your land taken, your families dispersed to reservations, limited education possibilities, having to carry an internal passport whenever you travel, huge areas of the country to which you are denied entry, beaches, buses, parks, shops, cinemas to which you are barred, regular casual violence from authorities & police - then a violent response is understandable and often glorified in case of Warsaw & resistance/independence movements across history.

The grey area is in looking at how resistance moves into terror - blowing up railway lines, police stations, fuel depots, dams can and probably will result in civilian deaths. The French & other WWW2 resistance movements did these things and civilians died. If your land is taken and settled by others is it right to attack the settlers?

[Old Hack]

I still don't get it - what exactly was Cameron in SA for? Despite blather about 'fact-finding' and platitudes about reconciliation and AIDS it seems the main purpose was a happy snap with Nelson.

Does anyone actually believe that is a productive use of taxpayers or party funds?

One final thought. If all DC rely flew to SA to do was have his picture taken with Nelson, what steps is he taking to make his visit carbon neutral?