« YouGov records 7% Conservative lead | Main | The best arguments for cutting taxation... »


It will be interesing to see how the poll is written up by tomorrows papers. It seems to confirm that a party can and should focus on its core issues - such as law and order whilst ALSO talking about issues it isnt traditionally seen as being strong in.

This is promising news. We should highlight the fact that taxation is an assault on freedom that takes away the ability of taxpayers to decided how to spend their own money. At best it is a necessary evil but one that should be minimised as much as possible.

This could be combined with a general message of getting the government off of peoples' backs and allowing them more control over their own lives.

If all this is a true indication of how the country feels (I have a problem with opinion polls due to its small numbers) then this is what we need to jump start a campaign on low taxes. Osborne should be happy that this poll is coming out.

Im perfectly happy to campaign hard on tax. If it can be balanced with reform of public services, even better. Im willing to campaign for it.

I say this with a warning to the Leadership. If you want tax cuts, or lower taxes, the campaign must start now. In fact its late in the day. I dont want to see a simple win in 2009 or whenever the election is held. I want to see a Slaughter of the Socialists. We must campaign to free people from state control, taxes being a form of this. Come on Cameron. Back a cut in taxes and you will be closer to bringing the right in.

"New poll suggests Britain is ready to vote for tax relief"

Hooray! :-)

Lets make sure that our tax cuts favour the poorest. Lets start with a proposal for a huge increase in the tax free income tax allowance.

Maybe at the annualised level of the over 21 minimum wage TopTip?

What organisations make up the Taxpayers Alliance?

There is surely nothing new in this poll . Have not all previous polls showed that people want lower taxes . The problems and disputes always come when you have to specify what services will be cut to enable taxes to be cut and who gets the bigger share of the tax cuts . Most people will say they deserve the tax cuts more and their services not cut .

James Maskell says that:
""Osborne should be happy that this poll is coming out.""
Possibly, but expect no action or commitment from him. Instead I fancy he will offer to STUDY the FEASABILITY of a POSSIBLE reduction in tax at SOMETIME in the FUTURE.
Dear God, to be so young and yet so fearful of thinking for himself.

Lawabiding citizens are prepared to pay reasonable taxes (reasonable of course means one thing to one person and quite another to someone else!), provided they can see that they are being put to good use!

This government has been guilty of such ASTRONOMICAL WASTE OF TAXPAYERS MONEY, together with spindoctors who covered up the shambles until they could do so no longer, that a growing majority of the public has lost all confidence in what ANY minister in this government says.

The public in general have become increasingly distrustful of politicians over the years, but it has taken this government, with its cheap newspaper headline policies which prove to be illusory, and its tampering with statistics, that has finally made people realise that it is very INSULTING to the taxpaying public to misuse and waste their taxes. The benefit brigade (one presumes to be the friends of labour), of course would not be bothered one way or the other -- YET, but it will affect even them eventually!

The number one priority is for council tax to be reduced, which just happens to be something which is out of central govt hands.

John Coles, thats exactly what I am worried about. I doubt Osborne will have the cahones to speak out forcefully enough for tax cuts. He will undoubtly say that the Party is looking into possible tax relief but is awaiting the results of the economic competitiveness Policy Group first, a Policy Group which Im pretty sure Osborne will ignore...

I am skeptical about whether this will happen, but I cant understand why Cameron and Osborne are so scared about even discussing the possibility of tax cuts. Their sharing growth isnt a possibility...its a delaying tactic.

greg, council tax is far from being outside central government hands. Firstly, council tax can be more or less regarded as the balancing item between what the government tells a council to spend and what the government gives that council in grants to cover that expenditure - with a few bits and bobs from charges for services, parking fines etc. Secondly having set a council that problem to solve, the government then sets an upper limit on their solution. So the government could immediately reduce the proportion of local expenditure which is met by council tax - which is what they've actually done in the Labour heartlands, using tax revenues raised in Tory heartlands ... but really the linked questions of central control of local government activities, and central control of local government finances, should be considered together. Inevitably he who pays the piper will insist on calling the tune.

Is there any chance that Tory leaders will frankly admit that after the longest and deepest recession since the war, greatly exacerbated and prolonged by the ERM fiasco, the last Tory government left public services in a chronically underfunded and shambolic state, so of course taxation had to rise for a time to try to sort out those problems? But nine years on, and after a lot of money has been spent not very well, now's the time to start easing the tax burden back down to levels which won't cause long term damage to the economy.

1) Abolish IHT

2) Cut income tax

3) Rethink Council Tax

4) Abolish CGT

Sure vote-winners.

Let's make it happen!

Stamp Duty ? Is Osborne nuts ?

That should please those who churn share portfolios but does nothing for the bulk of people - and those who pay IHT plus CGT on assets are left high and dry.............but I suppose Osborne knows what trusts are and resents stamp duty on its investments

A complete No-Brainer. Of course cutting tax is a vote winner and the only way of getting smaller Government. The party leadership is working on out of date polling data which shows voters worried as to where the cuts would come. But the average voter is now"convinced2 that a large proportion of tax income is wasted - and will always be wasted by ANY government.

Stamp Duty ? Is Osborne nuts ?

I think the correct word is challenged with a prefix.He clearly has a great sense of priorities if his first (and only?) tax cut is to stamp duty

It is interesting to see Labour's response to Osbourne's proposal to cut Stamp Duty on share trading, namely, "that's a £4bn cut in revenue, what services will he cut to pay for it".

This is scare-mongering of course as a 12 year old could probably find £4bn in waste in a week. However, it is important to realise that this is what we face and deal with it properly.

We should be setting out proposals for public service reform, explaining how they would work and what the benefits would be. Once we've got people on board with the ideas of a more liberalised system, with more competition between suppliers and therefore a tendency to reduced costs as well as improved quality - after all, that's what markets deliver - then we can point out that there will be savings over time and then we can cut taxes.

I felt in both 2001 and in 2005 we were approaching this the wrong way round and in saying we would cut £x billion and pay for it this way, laying ourselves open to just the sort of challenge set out above.

We should say what we want to do, work out how much it will cost, then devise the tax regime we need to pay for it. It is far more considered, far easier for people to buy into and far less prone to Labour's attacks. It is, to some extent, what the James Review did.

if Osborne was actually looking at stamp duty primarily as a vote wining tax relief measure then null points. But it is not about tax relief it's about Gordon Brown.

Gordon Brown and Pensions, Gordon Brown and the destruction of private pension schemes, Gordon Brown and his economic legacy.

Osborne plays a cagey game - he's not taking on Gordon Brown as Chancellor but trying to undermine Gordon as potential PM. Re-inforcing the message steadily that Gordon has played fast & loose with your money. He's taken your future prosperity and splurged it on inefficient public service spending.

Like Mike Smithson I think its easy to under-estimate Osborne but he is doing just what many critics say we should do - play the long game to prepare the ground for the election campaign. Rather than put up policies Labour can start now to attack or adopt he's getting to the heart of its incompetence.

I am instinctively a tax cutter, but that is sadly not what Voters have in their top 2 priorities.

The informative research produced by Lord Ashcroft after the last GE is essential reading before any debate on tax and voters. Some findings were=
The top issues stated by people that affected their vote were
NHS 58%,
Pension/Social/minwage/poverty = almost 50%, Crime 37%,
Jobs/Growth (about)35%
TAX just under 33%. (44% in Conservative voters)

My view is that IF we are going to advocate tax cuts we need a coherent communications plan to convince Voters that their top 2 priorities (NHS and social issues) are not going to be affected.

More effort needs to be expended more on how to communicate that as we failed to convince the Voters on the past 3 occasions.

As to George Osbourne's share tax cuts, it is the wrong priority. If we need to cut something it should be a tax that everyone agrees will help the low paid. Do the low paid buy shares? 90%+ Do Not. Some of the low paid will benefit from share costs in pensions but that is hidden and difficult to communicate.

No comment on this finding in that very same poll !!!!

The poll shows strong disillusionment with the main political parties. Only 24% of people identify with the Labour party, 17% with the Tories and 9% with the Liberal Democrats. Four out of 10 people do not identify with any party.

As I said before, TomTom, the new Tory support is very "soft"

We ignore that reality at our peril.

Mr Osborne also said (quote from BBCi)

Mr Osborne also told the Sunday Telegraph one of the areas he was looking at now was taking more low paid people out of tax altogether.

He also said he "basically agreed" with Labour former Cabinet minister Stephen Byers, who last week said that inheritance tax should be scrapped, although he could not give "some cast-iron commitment" to abolish it.

NuLabs defence now isn't cuts in Hospitals or Schools but "But the Treasury said: "Anyone who wants to abolish this tax need to explain how to plug the £4bn gap in public finances.

"That's double the amount that we're spending this year on counter-terrorism and security."

Expect a lot more about Tories puttting security at risk through not supporting Govt measures and cutting spending.

Britain desperately needs substantial tax cuts and/or sane redirection of public spending.

Three suggestions:

Petrol is now too costly to be taxed. It makes business costs uncompetitive.

These Gordon Brown hand outs to 18 year olds will in many cases be wasted on wild parties and visits to entertainment complexes- many teenagers are exactly that- teenagers (it is not a negative judgement on them-they all grow out of it). Redirect the money and boost it: BUT it can only be spent on a) Tuition; b) Housing. This will help the housing market, all related business like home builders and help our youngsters get on the housing ladder.

Councils must merge like any big business- and by so doing, cut costs and reduce council tax.

I'm not in favour of merging councils - that's effectively a form of centralisation and makes them less responsive to specific local needs.

Tax cuts are still electoral suicide. In their subconscious, voters still equate cuts in taxes with cuts in services. Every time you talk about tax cuts, you lose another few thousand votes.

There is now a huge payroll vote in the public sector, and they have a high turnout rate. The Conservative Party must attract a proporition of them if it is ever to form a government again. Antagonising potential switch voters, in order placate the core vote is senseless, and would make 2009 a repeat of 1997/2001/2005.

I thought the idea of "one more heave" was done to death in 1914-1918. It seems not.

"Anyone who wants to abolish this tax need to explain how to plug the £4bn gap in public finances.

Well we currently lose £ pa to Tax Credit Fraud apparently............we spend £ on Management Consultancy for HMG.

Then again re-engineering the system should throw off lots of money (let me take charge and I can find lots of spending changes) - let's take the £800 million spent to private the Tube and the fact that PFI bid costs are paid by the Govt.

Let's think about the extra £ pa Blair offered the EU to support its budget.

Let us remember how much is being filched from The National Lottery to bolster public spending.

Then again, the Govt is paying £300 million to the EU as a penalty for not paying English farmers on time.

How about the £ spent on Foot & Mouth

We have not considered the £ support costs for asylum-seekers.

We have not considered the £ cost of Tax Credits............nor the £ subsidy to Network Rail

Councils must merge like any big business- and by so doing, cut costs and reduce council tax.

No they should demerge to cut costs.........smaller is cheaper with far fewer grandiose posts

Hear! Hear!

And let's start by getting rid of the utterly wasteful and idiotic London Assembly.

Nothing would please me more then to see that appalling anti-Semitic extremist Livingstone back in the trashcan where Maggie put him.

That's why we need a mayoral candidate committed to abolishing the whole caboodle.

Nick Ferrari?

Councils are not "businesses", they're part of our democratic system. There are costs associated with running a democratic system, but the costs of not having democracy are always infinitely higher in the end.

No need for a London Assemby though John.

The London Boroughs can be relied upon to do the job. No need for duplication.

I reckon it's very sensible to have a democratic body covering the whole of the metropolis. If at present it's dominated by Livingstone, whose fault is that?

The Conservatives must never again make the mistake of Hague, IDS and Howard. All three leaders began by talking the modernising talk and ending by a lurch to the right.

The party has a strategy and it is working. We must stick to it. If we don't, the media and the electorate will conclude that all the talk of change was just talk. Of course, we have to argue that over time it is better if the proceeds of growth are shared between tax relief and public spending. BUT the sort of sweeping tax cuts that people here seem to want are quite a different matter.

Yes, voters are going to say in a poll that they want to pay less tax. Of course they do. But they still don't identify with us and will mistrust our motives for cutting taxes. If we suddenly turn round and promise sweeping tax cuts people will rightly ask why we've suddenly become less cautious. Was all the talk of stability first just rubbish?

The Conservatives have a strategy which was approved by the party membership by a margin of 2-1. We must have a full economic policy that is not merely about how much tax we can cut. We need to rebuild our shattered reputation for economic competence, stability and concern about public services. As the economy grows we will return some of this growth to the public in the form of tax cuts. This is a long term strategy, which in the long term will actually allow us to offer tax relief in government. It also recognises the reality that reforming public services may be expensive at first.

People may want tax relief, but the evidence is they have not wanted it from people they do not trust. (just as the public liked our policy on immigration, but didn't like it when they heard it was associated with the Conservatives).

I say stick to our strategy and don't allow yourself to be blown of course no matter how loud the bleats are from those who believe that our problem in 2005 was that we weren't right wing enough on tax! Strategy should not be altered for opinion polls that offer no new insight.

Be honest changetowin. You're not a dispassionate observer but a committed "wet" who wants (naturally enough) to see the party move in your direction.

Your attitude on the EU alone should be sufficient to make staunch Tories very suspicious of your motives.

Sadly, history shows that your approach has failed, while the robust Toryism of Margaret Thatcher set a gold standard which can probably not be equalled, let alone surpassed.

Of course certain changes were necessary. Less snobbery; reaching out to council estates and tower blocks; understanding the worries of ordinary working people. All these have been neglected in the past.

True, we have to overcome our reputation for economic incompetence but that cannot be achieved until David moves young Master Oborne to some relatively junior role more in line with the level of his talents.

"The Conservatives must never again make the mistake of Hague, IDS and Howard. All three leaders began by talking the modernising talk and ending by a lurch to the right."

And under all three, Tory support rose irregularly and very slowly, but the general trend was upwards, and there isn't yet any proof that the last eight months under Cameron has seen a significant break to a faster rising trend.


Yes. Even Blair and Co haven't trashed the spadework done by Kinnock and Smith. We should likewise respect the work of Hague IDS and Howard.

Incidentally Hague put his finger on the truth when he described the sleazy Britain of Blair's "Cool Britannia" as "A foreign land"

Foreign indeed, to every basic sense of decency and propriety.


If you see it fit to label me a "wet", would you like me to label your politics?

You constantly propose the most extreme policies in the most unpleasant way. For example, in support of your drive to end ALL immigration, you told us how you admired Pim Fortuyn's policies but disapproved of his sexuality.

Can you really suppose that talk like that is the way for us to win the support of nearly 50% of the population? I grant you that next to you I am delighted to be called soaking wet!

According to the opinion poll in the Sunday Times last week, only a small percentage of Britons want a complete cessation of immigration. But compared to recent rates of immigration the median response for the preferred annual limit was very low - only about 10,000. In other words, half of the population would think that 10,000 a year was too high a rate of immigration, while the other half would think that a limit of 10,000 a year was too restrictive.

For example, in support of your drive to end ALL immigration, you told us how you admired Pim Fortuyn's policies but disapproved of his sexuality.

Yes ctw, that's my opinion. Presumably you would prefer that I lied and pretended to thnk exactly the opposite?

Judging by recent polls Fortuyn's policies would be very popular in the UK at the present time.

As for Fortuyn's sexuality, that was his personal business. My own approach is simply the basic Christian view reaffirmed this morning by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Deplore the sin but love the sinner.

Yes I think you're a "wet", not comparatively but absolutely. Your view on the EU gives the game away.

Let's not turn this thread into a discussion of homosexuality please and changetowin's European views are irrelevant to this discussion John G. Let's play the ball - not the person. I've warned you on that before, Mr G.

OK. No problem.

Thank you.

Nobody has commented yet on the tpa/icm poll viz - people want non-MPs as ministers and elected mayors in charge of police.

i think both of these would enormously help the Party restore the sense that it is on the public's side versus the Establishment - exactly as the tpa says...

reagan ought to be the model for the Party but unfortunately tory MPs don't seem to get this. that wd be real modernisation

Good call Editor - staying on topic and off personal attacks is something to always remember...

I think this poll is misleading especially as the questions were so leading. I also agree with changetowin, It would look silly to start cutting taxes willy nilly when the leadership are trying to regain the Conservative Party's traditional reputation for economic competence. I think a good example of this is George Osbourne trying to remedy the pensions problem that Brown helped to create, which is symptomatic of the short-termism of this government. Indeed I hope the longer term outlook is extended, so instead of focussing on accounting wheezes (PFI) and phoney growth (Buy to Let) combined with using immigration to artificially keep wages low. Looking at a much longer term real strengthening of Britain's economy is what we should be aiming for.
At the same time we should I think be looking at efficiencies in the public sector like increased home-working, delayering management (through natural wastage), implementing performance related pay (with a customer feedback element so it is seen to be fair and objective), and perhaps rewarding staff who give suggestions that lead to cost savings with a percentage of the savings.
I think these measures may help to reduce the nightmare headlines that new labour are facing about wastage and incompetence.
Once all this is done then I think tax cuts should be looked at and even then less as sweetner for election and more as how will this help the country longer term.

Does anybody remember the Conservative Students' memorable poster demanding tax cuts and depicting scissors cutting bra straps?

That's the radical forward-looking spirit to which we need to return.

We're simply apeing New Labour. It's an uninspiring strategy which will look even less attractive when Blair goes and Labour acquires a new leader.

If Osborne really wants to help pension funds, this would be one way to do that:

"Davis in pledge to end £5bn pension 'scandal'"


"A Conservative government led by David Davis would make it a priority to reverse Labour's £5 billion-a-year tax grab on pension funds."

But of the £4 billion tax revenue relinquished by abolishing stamp duty on share transactions, only a (small?) part would benefit pension funds, the rest (most?) would be spread around and some (most?) of it would benefit the managers who unnecessarily "churn" their investment portfolios.

I expect there were two very surprised breakfast tables this morning in Notting Hill and a good deal of spluttered tea and toast.

Never mind, the most important lesson in politics is the supreme unimportance of being right. They're the best Leader and Shadow Chancellor that we've got.

"I thought the idea of "one more heave" was done to death in 1914-1918. It seems not."

Actually, 'one more heave' is what won in 1918. Because our side was the only one with anyone left to do the heaving. Given the direction Labour's activists and turnout are headed, something to remember :)

Some here have commented that this poll doesnt really explain the need for tax cuts. Then what are we waiting for? What is the sign that talking about tax cuts is right? Why cant we give people the idea that we care that they are forking out ever larger sums of money to the Treasury and that we want to reduce it? The Party wont even put the case forward and avoids discussion about it. It shows a distinct lack of passion and courage.

Lets actually talk taxes. If Cameron and Osborne were to support tax cuts and make a speech saying so, Id back it. Lets set the groundwork and put the case forward that we can reduce taxes and not kill off public services.

Why are we so scared? Lets get some balls and get on with it. 60 million Brits are relying on us...

Why are we so scared? Lets get some balls and get on with it. 60 million Brits are relying on us...

Dead right James. Let's make it happen.

No tax cuts - no election victory.

James @ 16:18 Perhaps we need to have the debate with some non-partisan economic experts if possible contributing. At the moment however I think it would be difficult to sell tax cuts to the electorate without the Labour Party replying how many hospital's or Prisons is that going to cost. If a case can be made and all possible arguments and counter arguments looked at in a rational and objective way then it may be possible? but even if rationally it was the right thing to do I think it would take an awful lot of work to say morally it was the correct thing to do, when the NHS is in such a state etc.

So the Tories rediscover the wheel. No convictions just bandwagon hopping as usual when the latest focus group creates a soundbite policy on the hoof.
If you want Flat Tax go here:

Redwood has cited this poll to put pressure on Osborne to cut taxes.

Redwood. He's the man we need to get the joint jumping.

Osborne used to support flat rate tax. Seems the fire has gone right out of his belly.

30% or so of tax collected is spent on gathering it. Taxation is so complicated that even the Inland Revenue does not always know the answers to accountants’ questions.

Taxation itself is a barbaric method of funding. It is outright extortion and violation of liberty.

We pay income tax, often before we get the money, and VAT when we spend it. We are taxed twice therefore. Tax reduces the competitiveness of industry where there is corporation tax and all sorts of incentive tax schemes.

The answer is to drop all income taxes, stamp duty and all the rest and put it on VAT. With the resultant saving on collection we could achieve a large cut in taxation.

Crude offers of tax cuts will fall foul yet again of Labours clear tactic of saying "what services will you cut". We can claim till we are blue in the face that efficiency savings/greater income will offset this but significant numbers of the voters will not buy it. I think we need to approach this from the other direction in addressing directly how we would run health and education and how we woulf reform the tax system to make it simpler/fairer. There would be room for a specific cut on a tax that could not be painted as leading to a service cut. Emphasis and language is important


"Crude offers of tax cuts will fall foul yet again of Labours clear tactic of saying "what services will you cut"."

Whereupon we reveal our plan to transform the NHS into a European style social insurance system...

And sack all the outreach workers.

Taxation itself is a barbaric method of funding. It is outright extortion and violation of liberty.

Can't disagree with that, Fred.

Whereupon we reveal our plan to transform the NHS into a European style social insurance system...

That would bankrupt the country............I suggest you pop over to Frau Merkel's Germany where they are busy bringing ALL health Kassen and the private insurers into one BIG Health Insurance Fund and the so-called Buergerversicherung which will look remarkably similar to Canada.

You are so far behind the times on Health - insurance-based systems are trying to converge on the UK system before employers sack even more workers as health insurance premia break their payroll budgets.

Germany like the USA has a health care funding crisis

I agree no to insurance based schemes. I was astonished to find how much antipathy there was to the US system amongst a group of Stanford medical students to whom I lectured last year.

We should give everyone a medical "voucher" to spend on their health. If people had their "own money" to spend on their health they would be a great deal more careful how it was spent. Its the only way to control demand. It would also be an incentive to maintain their health by not smoking etc. No one for instance would buy the advice of a Five-pieces-of-fruit adviser and this bit of Blairite waste would disappear without the public obloquy of a new Conservative government sacking her.

Jon, the only problem is that in presentational terms "vouchers" just don't sell to voters. They sound gimmicky, impractical etc,


"That would bankrupt the country"

Well, I was going to add "hopefully without all the cockups".

Even if other countries wish to move nearer to our system the fact remains that their health services produce better results than ours does. Why is this? Is it because people are prepared to pay more?

Unfortunately the American system is tied up by regulations and subsidies so we've got no real model of what a genuinely free market system would look like.

Whereupon we reveal our plan to transform the NHS into a European style social insurance system
Funding the NHS by charging for service on a commercial basis to cover any costs not covered by whatever if any monies supplied by charity and\or through Public Sector financing, in Malaysia for example one state owned hospital began charging for organ transplants to cover costs - there is no reason why state owned or not for profit organisations have to be loss making, in New Zealand in the 1990's most state organisations that were retained were re-organised to operate on a commercial basis. The NHS should be broken up and transferred to private charities limited by guarantee to run on a not for profit basis but as commercial organisations cross subsidising some functions through profit making services - the NHS is British Leyland writ large!

What a lively discussion I have previously only contributed on a couple of Arts subjects where progress is glacial. I see this where you philistines were hiding…
One subject I didn’t notice was a realistic forecast of the seats the Conservative Party might win by campaigning with a tax cutting agenda. We are, apparently, basking at 40%, but even so only just about getting a hypothetical majority. We are already way ahead in most of the seats likely to move on tax Partly this is a worrying regional development but also it is because taxes have risen dramatically in the last nine years with out it being a `commitment`. There is, then, no need to talk about cuts to have the possibility of considerable blue water between ourselves and Gordon Brown.
The alienation not only of public sector workers , but of the many voters in the North dependent to some extent on Government support , cannot be risked. This is exactly where the swing seats will be, we can forget Wales and Scotland.
For this reason I can see that David Cameron would be foolish to hand a weapon to the opposition. It will impress no one that a poll shows people preferring to pay less tax by the way. The fact that so many are excited by it (and the recent ICM poll) is an exercise in dangerous wishful thinking amongst the faithful.
We are living in a country visibly not falling to pieces as it was in the seventies prior to the Thatch. Many many people, mid terms grumbles aside, are more bored with than actually against the government. I would dismiss the importance of a couple of recent polls and stop talking like a government in waiting. David Cameron is playing a poor hand pretty well, not a good hand badly. That is why he is highly sensitive to the feelings of swing voters in marginals and not at all to core Conservative voters. Exactly what he should be doing in fact and it is irritating at times of course

I would like to see the development of tax simplifying policies. The notion that the government shouldn’t hide charges when a supermarket would be in court for the small print is easier to sell than specific cuts which are, in any case academic. Also the sort of structural realignment I would like can only be made politically possible by changing the voter’s relationship to the taxes he pays.
As the Labour party and everyone else, know what the effect of de -stealthing taxation would-be I would like David Cameron out of it completely .Shadow cabinet outriders should be fighting the dangerous ground sending up the flare and taking the flak in required. Where are they ?


As I see the position of Mayor mentioned …... In a fit of Pooterish frustration really I filled in a Mayoral Candidature form. In it this is what I had to say about the position of Mayor. I have tried to agree with everyone. ……

`The use of any Regional authorities has been chiefly to confuse the voters, especially with regard to national planning strategy. I would like to unravel the Central Government, Regional Authority, Local Authority knot and engage in continual transparent debate. This debate would include, vitally, a direct, formal and strong decision making role for London’s Boroughs. It may be counter intuitive, but increasing the Mayors paper powers leaves him powerless to affect London’s real problems which to a large extent are the remit of national Government. A population the size of Scotland with much larger tax revenues should be able to wield political power. We call Ken Livingstone "King Ken" but he is a King of America, a nonentity in representing us to the outside world. To speak for London the Mayor must be more Presidential, a conduit for democratically expressed wishes. Not a Dictator or worse still an apologist for New Labour mistakes.


The Mayor is currently too powerful, we know. That he is, as a consequence, isolated and powerless is a problem that deserves our attention as well

If the Conservatives will not reduce taxes and if they persist in talking about increased public spending, then the party will no longer hold any appeal for me. Beware the Bromley effect - there's a good (and growing)choice of right wing alternatives out there...UKIP, New Party, TPA, maybe even a Country Party on the way...
Cameron, Letwin and the rest of these people pleasing, public school pseudo socialists should be truly worried.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker