The wisdom of Norman Tebbit

Norman Tebbit has answered Independent readers' questions this morning.  Here are four highlights:

Have the Tories gone soft?
"I do not think Tory supporters have gone soft, but I think the Tory leadership believes the electors are too soft to take the hard decisions which the country is now facing."

Why are you so angry all the time?
"I am not angry all the time. But I am angry that a country which has been capable of independent democratic self-government longer than any other, should be reduced to the status of a European province led by a puppet of the President of the United States."

How far should Britain follow the Bush administration into the moral abyss?
"Since the United States is a more religious country than the United Kingdom and President Bush's policies - right or wrong - are more principled than those of Mr Blair, I think the question lacks meaning."

Have you ever owned a leather jacket?
"Yes. I bought it second-hand for ten shillings just after the war. Alas, falling off bicycles and motor bikes did it no good and I sold it on after several years for half a crown."

Read the full Q&A here.

Comments

[Michael]

Norman Tebbit is absolutely spot-on.

The party has been chasing after votes which will always go back to the left. We need businesspeople, family men, and men committed to Christian (or Muslim) principles.

It's also telling untruths, because when I look around me I can see that the party hasn't changed.

It's just got older!!!!!

[Zhukov]

Is this Michael guy for real? He's been leaving very odd posts all over the place and very conveniently been quoted on Chad's site.

[Alan]

Tebbit is a good person and should be listened to.

[Keith Bedson]

It's not wisdom, it's bitterness. I've read the whole interview and he does not have a good word for anyone but Mrs Thatcher. Tebbit is just a right-wing Heath.

[Denis Cooper]

Having disliked Tebbit in the eighties, I now agree with Alan.

[Esbonio]

As usual a great deal of common sense from Norman Tebbit who tells things as they are and not how some might like them to be.

[Andrew Woodman]

It's fashionable amongst some to bash Norman Tebbit, but people don't specifically say where he is so wrong in his views.

He has had a good word to say about David Cameron btw. Listen to his Tory Radio interview.

[Huntarian]

As ever Lord Tebbit is spot on in his assessement of what the vast majority of the Tory membership think about the issues of the day. His consistant theme of late has been that the present leadership should not neglect the core vote, in favour of seducing the Guardian readership. They will never support us and will always drift left.Tebbit is right, he is a man of immense political courage and conviction, and lest we forget, not only did he reform the Unions but he himself was a trade union activist as a member of BALPA, therefore he knew the issues from the otherside of the fence.
Comparing Lord Tebbit to Heath is about the stupidest insult I have ever heard.
Just quote me one instance when Norman Tebbit has ever compromised on his principles.

[malcolm]

Keith,interested to know what specifically you object to within this interview.Sometimes I think Norman Tebbit harks back to a golden age which probably didn't exist but his analysis of the issues facing us now seems to me to be absolutely right.

[Keith Bedson]

No Huntarian - read the whole post. My objection is that I have not heard Lord Tebbit say a good thing about a senior Tory in a long time. Read his comments on his fellow senior Tories. He calls them by the surnames without any title and he attacks their record.

His view of History is rather twisted: He seems to blame Lords Heseltine and Howe for the fall of the Thatcher government in 1990 - but this is nonsense, they were just responding to a situation that had got out of hand. Equally, who else, apart from Major, would he have had as leader in 1990? Hurd? Or maybe he wanted the job himself - maybe that's where his bitterness comes from.

Tebbit is a critic who has no real vision for the furtue.

[Graeme Archer]

Be careful Keith. Stating that you don't enjoy listening to miserable people harking back to the good ol' days is tantamount to treachery in these parts. If only the party would just dust down the 1983 manifesto and scream loudly about Laffer Curves Doncha Know or even the tebbit cricket test we'd be 4,500 of your earth points ahead in the Poll of Poles. Unfortunately, being in Poland, the Poles won't have an impact on our election, but we'd feel ever so good in our ideological purity.

[Yet Another Anon]

He seems to blame Lords Heseltine and Howe for the fall of the Thatcher government in 1990 - but this is nonsense, they were just responding to a situation that had got out of hand.
If Michael Hestletine hadn't challenged Margaret Thatcher in 1990 then she would have continued as Prime Minister and won the 1992 General Election, with a reduced majority as Labour had been strengthening since about 1984 but probably larger than John Major got, a lot of people didn't turn out to vote Conservative especially in 1983 but also in 1987 because of how obvious it was that the Conservative Party was going to win a majority anyway and so many either couldn't be bothered or were worried about the size of the majority being what they considered too large - the Conservatives could easily have had a far larger majority in both General Elections, in 1992 though the Labour vote was actually as strong as it was in both 1974 and the 1979 General Elections, the Conservatives were going through mid-term problems and it appeared that actually in the Autumn of 1990 they were recovering, also Margaret Thatcher would have probably come publicitywise out of the First war with Iraq far better as she had a good aptitude for appealing to British patriotic nationalist sentiments, people quote polls but actually after a very brief surge then the Conservatives went back to where they had been; John Major and Norman Lamont then embarked on a hugely extravagant programme of spending increases and tax cuts that pushed up borrowing and totally undid much of what Mrs Thatcher had achieved which was a situation in which the accounts had been in surplus and public spending was coming down - having promised tax cuts in the 1992 General Election John Major then delivered the largest peacetime tax hikes in peacetime and ultimately this lead to a Conservative loss in 1997, actually I rather think that probably Margaret Thatcher would have gone by 1997 anyway because she did have some health problems that showed themselves, no one of course can go on forever.

As for alternatives to John Major, well he was a compromise candidate - surely Peter Lilley would have been a possibility or John Biffen perhaps?

[James Hellyer]

My objection is that I have not heard Lord Tebbit say a good thing about a senior Tory in a long time.

Perhaps you should have read the whole thread. Andrew Woodman has already cited Tebbit's complimentary comments about Cameron in his Tory Radio interview. I'd add his response to Cameron's hug a hoodie speech. He says lots of positive things - if only you listen to him.

He calls them by the surnames without any title...

Aparet from when he refers to Mr Cameron, obviously.

And Graeme, nice straw man.

[John Hustings]

It's easier for Graeme to produce a preposterous parody which bears no relation to Tebbit's views than to attack what he actually *says*.

[Keith Bedson]

Yet Another Anon - nice counterfactual. However, the starting point of "If Michael Hestletine hadn't challenged Margaret Thatcher in 1990" is a weak one. The fact that Heseltine did stand is an indication of the depth for feeling against Mrs Thatcher at the time, both inside and out of the Tory Party. Tory MPs are always ruthless when they see their seats in danger and they would have got rid of Mrs Thatcher without Lord Heseltine.

[Kevin]

Yet Another Anon - "If Michael Hestletine hadn't challenged Margaret Thatcher in 1990 then she would have continued as Prime Minister and won the 1992 General Election, with a reduced majority as Labour had been strengthening since about 1984 but probably larger than John Major got"

You are living in cloud cuckooland. Mrs T was 20 points behind in the polls. She would have been slaughtered in the 1992 general election.

[Keith Bedson]

Yet Another Anon - sorry, but John Biffen! Peter Lilly - didn't he have a little problem, real or imagined, that kept him out of the leadership? If that's the best you can do I think my original point stands.

[John Hustings]

"If that's the best you can do I think my original point stands."

Not many people at the time would have thought of John Major either.

[Yet Another Anon]

Apart from the fact that opinion polls have been shown to be way off on many occasions, apart from the fact that in 1981 and in 1986 the Conservative Party was supposedly very unpopular they still bounced back to win and of course John Major tookover in Autumn 1990 at exactly the same point in the electoral cycle, actually the Conservatives support had dropped in 1989 and had fallen to a low and actually started to rise again already in 1990, even the opinion polls which people quote frequently and even these days appear to describe as being results while they showed a big initial bounceback by the Conservatives as it recall it they then very shortly after actually went back to where they had been and then even in 1991 were showing regular leads for the Labour Party right up until the weekend before the General Election itself, this notion that somehow John Major took over and dispersed the clouds and that otherwise the Conservative Party would have headed for some catastrophic victory in 1991 or 1992 are actually pure fantasy, ultimately Labour stood on a platform of more redistribution and higher taxation to achieve this and the slogan Labour's Double Tax Whammy ultimately was one of the things that lost them the General Election along and Neil Kinnock's sense of triumphalism made people more suspicous.

[Yet Another Anon]

The fact that Heseltine did stand is an indication of the depth for feeling against Mrs Thatcher at the time, both inside and out of the Tory Party.
Who else would have mounted any kind of significant challenge against her, Michael Hestletine had been campaigning for the leadership for 4 years, everyone knew he was coming for a point of opposition to her - if he hadn't challenged at best there would have been another stalking horse and as public opinion started to return then the parliamentary Conservative Party would have abandoned any thought of removing her, it wasn't simply jitters by MP's with small majorities but also the strongly EU Fanatic tendencies of Michael Hestletine, Douglas Hurd, Kenneth Clarke and others in that clique.

As for Peter Lilley there have been odd stories about him as there have been about all politicians, if he had stood he would have been a possibility, John Major was chosen because it was believed that he would continue where Mrs Thatcher left off with only some very small modifications, actually though he dumped a lot of the agenda and even reversed some things that had been done in the 1980's.

[Keith Bedson]

"Not many people at the time would have thought of John Major either." - Yes they did!

Yet Another Anon - You mix up the popularity of the Tory Party and the popularity of Mrs Thatcher. The difference in 1990 is that Mrs Thatcher was very unpopular - she was past her sell-by date.

[Yet Another Anon]

You mix up the popularity of the Tory Party and the popularity of Mrs Thatcher.
She always maintained a large block of solid support, large enough even with Labour reaching close to 35% of the vote to carry an election, in the 1980's the Conservative Party very much was bound up with the perceived achievements of Mrs Thatcher and what the other parties would do, ultimately it was her agenda they were voting for and even though a majority did not like her, amongst that majority there were many who did not vote, those who did not like her were split across many partys and there were also many who did not like her but who thought that ultimately she was probably right, she was seen by many as being nasty but efficent and someone who would deliver economic success and the only hope for strong defence and a strong policy on law & order.

[Keith Bedson]

Yet Another Anon

Two Words - "Poll Tax"

That was the thing most people associated with Mrs Thatcher by 1990. Would she have scrapped it - no.

Were you around at the time?

[John G]

I was around at the time and I remember the Poll Tax as an excellent idea. It was out flagship policy and extremely popular with the party at large.

Margaret and the poll tax were undermined by far-left extremists.

[Keith Bedson]

"I was around at the time and I remember the Poll Tax as an excellent idea. It was out flagship policy and extremely popular with the party at large.

Margaret and the poll tax were undermined by far-left extremists."

lol

[John G]

Sorry? Are you trying to make an intelligent point.

Maybe you'd like to tell me how many Tories opposed it at the time.

I seem to remember Nicholas Winterton, but he was always carping anyway.

The party was at least 95% behind the tax and many still regret its passing.

[Keith Bedson]

Sorry, John G, I thought you were being funny. I didn't realise that the widespread unpopularity of the poll tax was created by a fifth column of communist agitators. They were clearly flowing in from the collapsing regimes of Eastern Europe with the intention of undermining local government finance in the hope that the capitalist system would finally fall apart under its own contraditctions and so allow the Soviet regime to triumph.

Geoffrey Howe was really a Soviet agent and his resignation speech was written by the editor of Pravda, who inserted the cricket reference in an attempt to make it sound less Leninist.

[John G]

Oh really?

So Mrs Thatcher forced this through against the opposition of her party, did she?

I mean. You were actually around at the time weren't you?

I wouldn't like to think that you hadn't the faintest idea what you're talking about.

[Yet Another Anon]

Two Words - "Poll Tax"

That was the thing most people associated with Mrs Thatcher by 1990. Would she have scrapped it - no.

Were you around at the time?
I was in my late teens at the time these things were going on, certainly the Community Charge had it's flaws and of course Nigel Lawson did his best to supply as little money as possible towards actually sorting out early administrative problems.

It was as nothing compared to the chaos over the Maastricht Treaty, the disaster of the back to Basics campaign, the Cones Hotline, and all that rubbish about Leo the Lion which had something to do with Road Traffic policy and was so ineffectual and incomprehensible that I can't even recall what it was supposed to be about, Michael Hestletine's bonfire of regulations that saw thousands more regulations introduced by the dti than were actually scrapped and what did they put in place of Community Charge - The Council Tax which is based upon arbitrary assessment of property values which is what was being attempted to get away from in the first place, basically it was the new Rates under another name.

The Community Charge would have been fairer if people had had to pay it on every property , maybe if there had been an element based on land area of properties - land area is something far more easily measureable than property value which is wide open to dispute.

[Keith Bedson]

No John, the thing that makes me laugh is:

"Margaret and the poll tax were undermined by far-left extremists"

[Patsy Sergeant]

Keith Bedson @ 11.19 and 13.06. I would say that Mr. Tebbit has had good reason during his life for his 'bitterness' as you call it now. I wonder if you have ever had experiences as tough that you have ever had to overcome?!

[Keith Bedson]

"The Community Charge would have been fairer if people had had to pay it on every property , maybe if there had been an element based on land area of properties - land area is something far more easily measureable than property value which is wide open to dispute."

So you admit it was wrong in the form it was produced.

[John G]

Mr Bedson, you appear to be dodging my question.

I attended a party conference which gave a standing ovation to the announcement of the community charge.

Later, when Heseltine challenged Margaret Thatcher, the grassroots party were aghast.

Care to tell us what your conservative role was at the time?

[Yet Another Anon]

So you admit it was wrong in the form it was produced.
You name a new measure that doesn't have some problems.

Certainly the ability for people with more than one property to pick where they registered so that they could minimise how much they paid whereas someone with one was stuck paying where they were, the transitional relief scheme was rather absurd and seemed to favour a few London councils over everywhere else, Macclesfield in fact ended up with the highest Community Charge level in the country although only because Chesterfield was capped, there were people I knew of who because of transitional arrangements despite living in large houses on high incomes in the same Council area actually ended up paying less than people on YTS Training Allowance but then again the general principle of the Community Charge had it's merits, it was one policy among many and improvements had been being introduced and it wasn't as if the Council Tax hasn't had major problems as well, and the rates, and of course so would a Local Income Tax - certainly it would have been better to have stuck with the system once it was introduced and attempt to reform it and make it more comprehensible but many seemed determined not even to see how it turned out and give it a chance to improve.

[John G]

"Margaret and the poll tax were undermined by far-left extremists"

Yes those violent riots were a real hoot weren't they, Keith? Obviously started by middle-of-the road people from the Tory Reform Group.

Yet Another Anon has been good enough to tell us how old he was at the time all this was going on. Now I think you should tell us to.

[Yet Another Anon]

Of course another way of funding Local Authorities is charging for services, in many ways this is fairer than any tax - requiring libraries to charge membership fees and a deposit for books taken out, maybe charges for entry to parks (as there used to be in fact), obviously such would be unlikely to fully cover all costs of Local services but they would help. Everyone agreed including Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Party in the 1970's and 1980's that something needed to replace the rates, it was just a matter of what that something was.

It has to be said though that when at the time it turned out Norman Tebbit had been well overdue in his payments of Community Charge it certainly wasn't particularily edifying, much the same of course as John Prescott failing to declare his cowboy suit on the way through customs.

[Esbonio]

I have been visiting this website from its beginning.I never cease to be amazed by commentators who appear anything but proud of the achievements of the likes of Maggie Thatcher and Norman Tebbit.

As for the Poll Tax debate, I thought it was a fair tax. Unfortunately the left made whipped up public opinion against it aied by an ever aquiescent media. And does anyone believe the current government would tolerate the riots we suffered in London?

[Yet Another Anon]

And does anyone believe the current government would tolerate the riots we suffered in London?
There have been major rioting since including The Anti-Capitalist Riots in 2000 and major disruption by Fathers for Justice, certainly rioting should not be tolerated under any circumstances, if it had been up to me the rioters in the Community Charge Riots and the Anti-Capitalist Riots and during the Miners Strike would have been opened fire on by the police.

[David]

Every time the Tory Party has tried to 'do something' about local government involving reorganisation or taxation its been a disaster, which has always rebounded on the Party. Peter Walker's reorganisation of Local Government Act 1974, was the worse piece of legislation introduced by any government since the end of the second world war. What ever the merits of the Poll Tax, it was too complicated to administer, and was open to avoidence on a massive scale, people just disappeared. The reason the Tory Party has been destroyed in Scotland is due in no small part to its premature introduction there, the memory of it still lingers.

[Esbonio]

David

I do not have chapter and verse for you but I seem to recall a statistsic bing quoted that just before its abolition the Poll Tax had as good as if not a better avoidance rate than rates.

[Dean]

I do, to a greater extent, buy in to the Cameron project and the need to present a new image and come up with policies that make the Conservative Party relevant to today.

However, reading the full Q&A with Norman Tebbit, my god I wish there were somebody as substantive today who could rally people around what they believe in and give real direction.

Norman certainly does tap into the core instincts of Conservative voters in the same way that Maggie did.

Another interesting article was from Lynton Crosby in yesterday's Telegraph (also shown on here). Explaining John Howard's success "[He] implements unpopular policies and makes them popular. That's leadership". One can't help but think that this is something sorely missing today.

[Yet Another Anon]

Every time the Tory Party has tried to 'do something' about local government involving reorganisation or taxation its been a disaster, which has always rebounded on the Party.
Every government that has attempted to do anything about a re-organisation of Local Taxation or structure has had problems, so far every Labour government has steered clear of reforming taxes for funding Local Authorities, Jim Callaghan managed to avoid doing anything about it, Mrs Thatcher's first 2 terms had extensive arguments over what to put in it's place and in fact the 3rd term was really the first serious attempt to address the issue by any government since the rates were setup to do more than have a revaluation.

Actually many Local Authorities were by 1992 reporting that actually collection was almost up to the levels it had been under the Rates, although it was thought that because of people disappearing to avoid paying by not registering to vote actually was enough to amount to the difference between the Conservatives 21 majority and probably only a bare majority although I don't know if any surveys were done about how many people didn't vote Conservative because of it, although of course it is always important to note that people lie in such surveys and that someone who actually wouldn't have voted Conservative anyway might have then said they would have if it hadn'tve been for that in the hope that maybe that would help kill the idea off for good.

[Keith Bedson]

John G.

You really have no idea - do you really think the Poll Tax riots were the only opposition to the tax? Do you really think that they had any real influence on the fall of Mrs Thatcher? In the end it was a section of her own party that killed her off politically. Now you can try and make up some sham version of history if it makes you feel better, but don't peddle it as the truth. The left at the time, including the Labour Party, were incapable of bringing her down and we should not give them the credit.

The Tory Party sacked Mrs Thatcher, it may hurt you to read this, but grown ups need to be able to cope with the truth.

The Conservative Party needs to move on now. It needs to find its values, which may be the same as those under Mrs Thatcher, and then it needs to sell them in a way that will appeal to the electorate of the early 21st century. Trying to refight the 1992 election will not do the party much good.

To take this thread back to Lord Tebbit, he says in the interview "I think the Tory leadership believes the electors are too soft to take the hard decisions which the country is now facing" - this shows how outdated he is. The electorate will not buy hard nosed politics, things are too quiet - this is not 1979, we have not had a "Winter of Discontent" and people do not want Tebbit-style leadership. Some of the people making posts on this page clearly want this style of leadership, but as the market tells us, you can't sell a product people don't want to buy.

Now you have a choice - ideological purity and opposition, or compromise and power. Labour made that choice badly in the 1980s and paid a price.

By the way, I was in my early 20s when Mrs Thatcher resigned.

[John G]

You may have been in your early 20s but I doubt that you had anything to do with the party. Some other party, possibly.

But if I am wrong about this, maybe you'd be so good as to tell us what you did to combat what you obviously regard as a huge error.

[Esbonio]

Dean

I did not vote for Cameron and still do not buy into Project Cameron. I do think however that the quotation you cite is wonderfully apposite. My worry with Cameron on the evidence so far is that he were he to get into power he would implement the wrong polices.

[Keith Bedson]

John - enjoy opposition - you are going to be there for a long time.

[Yet Another Anon]

I recall at the time that she had been looking for a successor in her mould but then came out and announced that she was going to go on and on and be carried out in her wheelchair in 10 or 20 years time and there is no doubt that many realised that this would end their hopes of ever being Prime Minister because probably things would have moved on by the time there was a vacancy, certainly she would have been better saying that she had work to do and had no plans to retire, Michael Hestletine of course - the man who at school apparently designed a plan for his life that included him becoming Prime Minister naturally was worried at the prospect of Mrs Thatcher turning things around and winning in 1992 not only an unprecedented 4th General Election but also possibly taking the UK out of the EU, certainly Mrs Thatcher and Norman Tebbit having been condemning Labour in the early 1980's for their hostility to the EEC were in the late 1980's becoming far more suspicous and indeed regretting having extended EEC powers over the UK during the 1980's while Douglas Hurd, Michael Hestletine and Kenneth Clarke were eager to push the UK towards a common currency with the EU right from the start.

[Chris Ryder]

Keith, when did you get the moral authority over what I as a younger voter wants in this 21st century?, as for what it's worth I quite enjoyed reading what Lord Tebbit had to say at least he 'is' a conservative in the true sense of the word not this half mix of nothing I see now, as Lord Tebbit correctly says 'Don't take voters for fools' especially after Bliar's present reign in office is finished because you will be caught out if you think that 'compromise' just needs to be a little bit of a re-work of Blair's failed offerings.

[BorisforPM]

Reading the comments section on this page reminds me why we have been in opposition for nine years, and makes me fearful of nine more.

Lord Tebbit has some views with which I profoundly disagree. But there is no doubting that he is a serious figure; he speaks sincerely and earnestly to a major part of the electorate whom we need to have on board. I could say the same about Lord Heseltine, Ken Clarke, Iain Duncan Smith, Michael Portillo, David Cameron...

The point is that we are united in a very general sense, around a high value for individual liberty based on a negative conception of freedom. Party policy, if it is ever going to accommodate the views of more than a tiny group, is going to involve some degree of compromise.

So rather than squabbling about who might have won in an alternative version of a leadership challenge that passed 16 years and 3 Prime Ministers ago, we should be discussing how our policies fit with our core ideals. We can - and should - start our discussions from the point where we agree, on maximising individual freedom.

Where some worry that by being too active in wealth redistribution we suffocate that liberty, Oliver Letwin says if we don't act we endanger poorer people's freedom to engage fully with society. Where Lord Tebbit encourages us to rely very strongly on non-state institutions such as the family, some worry that in fact we alienate those with different home lives and undermine their freedom to choose them.

These are the sorts of discussions we need to have. Starting from the outlook we share, and discussing how best to reflect that in practical terms. That means listening to and reflecting the concerns of Lords Tebbit, Heseltine and Lawson altogether. Slinging mud at them and engaging in mindless spats about contemporary British history make us look ridiculous, and undermine our cause greatly.

[Keith Bedson]

BorisforPM - You are spot on.

[Dean]

Esbonio

I share your concerns entirely. My instincts are torn and I am giving Cameron the benefit of doubt but my loyalty is being tested . . .

[Patsy Sergeant]

Mr. Bedson @ 19.03 - John - enjoy opposition - you are going to be there for a long time.

You obviously think Mr. Bedson that you are not going to be in opposition even after the next but one election!

[Keith Bedson]

Sorry Patsy, I'm not a member of any political party. I am simply interested in politics and would like a choice at the next election - you need to win me back, I am a floating voter in a marginal seat.

Sadly, having spent some time looking at these pages, some of your number will prevent any serious choice as they will keep the Conservatives in their current unelectable state.

[John G]

OK Keith. I'm glad you've finally admitted you're not a Tory at all.

That's fine by me, but what you can't deny is the FACT that the Tory grassroots were overwhelmingly in favour of the Poll Tax, that they were in shock when she was deposed, and in denial when the Poll Tax was abolished by Major.

Actually, from a purely pragmatic point of view, I can see the problems with this "flagship" policy, but that doesn't alter the fact that to amny Tories it was manna from heaven.

[TomTom]

and in denial when the Poll Tax was abolished by Major.

Yes we had 15% VAT before this debacle and 17.5% afterwards

[Huntarian]

Having now re- read the whole thread concluding with Keith Bedson's final admission that he is not a member of any political party. My conclusion is obvious, just how far to the left of Blair & Co do we have to move to attract the Bedsons of this world: certainly too far for most of our core vote.
Let’s start getting real; people like Keith, in my experience seldom actually ever bother to vote. I’ve canvassed a fair few in my time and they love a good baiting argument on the door step and it always begins with the poll tax, but when you check the marked register after the election invariably you find they didn't vote at all. That's their privilege. We are not going to remodel our party to be something it never will be –a wishy washy rag bag of the left.
A Lord Tebbit makes clear neglect out core vote at your peril.

[James S]

Bedson said of Norman Tebbit: "Read his comments on his fellow senior Tories. He calls them by the surnames without any title and he attacks their record."

Having ticked off Lord Tebbit for not showing enough respect to "senior Tories", throughout this thread he has done the same referring to them by "surnames without any title".

Hypocrite!

[Patsy Sergeant]

Mr. Bedson @ 21.30 - as it seems unlikely (from what you yourself have said), that anything will really convince you to grace the conservative party with your esteemed vote in the forceable future, perhaps you should consider joining an-other party, where even if you saw the rotten wood you would see the sleaze!

[Patsy Sergeant]

The end of my last post at 12.26, should have read - 'where even if you saw the rotten wood, you would NOT see the sleaze!

[Keith Bedson]

James S - Not true. What a shame you have to stoop so low!

Huntarian - I have voted in every election since my 18th Birthday - I have voted Tory in some. No wonder the people you canvas do not vote, your offensive tone will put some people off.

[John G]

I don't think we need to be dictated to by the likes of Keith, and I doubt he's ever voted Conservative in his life.

We need to hold our heads high as proud Tories and to promote true Tory pinciples.

The public will return to us in the end, just as they voted for Maggie again and again in the 1980s

Those were great days, and they'll be back!

[Keith Bedson]

I voted Tory in 1992 and in local elections since.

Fine, I'll leave it here John because my word is being doubted and the personal comments do no one any favours.

But if you believe what you are saying why get Tim to run a campaign on CH to get David Cameron to offer the community charge (in the same form as you did before) in the next manifesto. I don't think you will because you know you have to "pander" to the voters.

[John G]

Once again, Keith, you miss the point.

Obviously the CC can't be revived now. The point I made was that when it was introduced the Tory rank and file were VERY enthusiastic about it.

I was there so I know. You weren't, so you wrongly blame it all on Thatcher.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the tax that's the truth about how the party thought then.

[Graeme Archer]

I gave a speech at the 1986 Scottish party conference in favour of the Community Charge. I actually said something like "I'm a student and I WANT to pay my contribution". Hmm. My cheeks still burn at the memory.

The charge was a great idea, appallingly implemented - proof that with a major reform you can't take a FINGER off the policy control levers or an EYE off what the opposition were doing. With hindsight a coupla things were clear: Labour councils would take advantage of any change in "the rates" to shove up their expenditure alarmingly; and the fact that England and Wales did not have statutory rating revaluations (while the Scots ones happened ever 4 years, those in E&W were at the discretion of the Sec of State for the environment ... and so hardly ever happened - who needs the grief? See current debate about council tax banding for details) - and so original projections of reasonable per capita charges quickly became a ridiculous burden to send to the vast majority of many boroughs who had never previuosly contributed a penny.

I still believe the principle is completely sound - we don't pay different prices for the food that we buy, based on our income, so why pay different prices for council services, like refuse collection? And broadening the base to flatten the charge will always feel appealing. However I fear that we made such a dog's dinner of it last time that the idea is lost for a generation. (Also local govt has been turned into an arm of the social services, rather than a provider of household services).