« Edward Leigh fires warning shots at Cameron | Main | A good day to bury Built to Last »


The same point as with the CF ballots...how many people are even getting their ballots. Also, the costs of voting are very high. Its almost prohibitive.

My worry is that the vote will storm through as a Yes vote on a low turnout. Thats the worst of situations as not only will Cameron get the affirmative he wants, he will have gotten away with it without hurting too many people.

If this vote is anything like the voting numbers from the so-called membership rates consultation (hehehe...telling the respondents what answers you'd like them to give...you just cant make this up with this Party), we should be very worried indeed.

If the vote goes yes, Cameron will be able to argue he has his mandate. As we can see from these pages, he really doesnt.

If this prediction is true it should come as little surprise. Although the second version of BTL was an improvement on its wholly anodyne predecessor, I still feel the exercise was a complete waste of time.

I was going to add "and money", but it's possible that the whole thing was dreamt up by CCHQ as a fund-raising exercise. I don't suppose we'll get the breakdown, but it would be interesting to know how many people followed DC's encouragement, in his covering letter, to vote by text or phone (at premium rate).

ah, the thrice-daily 'Bash Cameron' fest..... Is there any story, even one of only two words, that cannot be twisted by a 'Cameron sucks' reply?

"My worry is that the vote will storm through as a Yes vote on a low turnout. Thats the worst of situations as not only will Cameron get the affirmative he wants, he will have gotten away with it without hurting too many people."

How dreadful. Imagine that.

What next, the Tories might even win an election!

The document has no real value, so an affirmative vote gives Cameron the implied mandate to continue with the policy announcements thus far announced. On a low turnout it actually is misleading as to how much of a mandate he has.

You might not think the BtL document is important, but to me - and I suspect to a lot of other people - it does matter. This document will justify everything announced already and justifies in advance any policy announcements made afterwards.

As for the whole moaning about those of us who disagree with Cameron, you may call it the Bash Cameron fest. I call it bringing up genuine concerns. You may not like it but there are a growing number of unhappy members, feeling left out of policy making and objecting to new policies. There are Associations feeling the pinch and not enjoying the growing fist of CCO over them. Moving the Party to the left without giving something to those on the rightwing is a dangerous move to make.

On the basis that we become passionate about things we object to, a low turn-out normally favours the "no" vote.

It should Mark but you can see what Camerons going to say...he'll simply ignore the turnout or say that they didnt vote against it so if they could vote they'd support it. Its the fallacy of presumtive agreement, if such a thing actually exists. If the vote goes in favour of Cameron, he wont care. He got the result he wanted and thats that.

Built to Last will win a huge majority because I think the majority in the party know that Cameron is the party`s only way of winning.
They know that the right-wing have failed and that no one in the party will make a better leader than DC.
Margaret Thatcher once said there is no alternative. There isn`t now if you want to win.

"What next, the Tories might even win an election!"

Or at least, someone masquerading as a Tory might win one ...

hahahahahaha. Great joke Jack...oh wait. You were serious... I can think of one person who'd make a better leader. You might have heard of him. hes called David Davis... As for your comment about why itll pass, do you really believe that?

Im curious...how can you quote Thatcher whilst supporting efforts to destroy what she brought to the Party?

Also, the costs of voting are very high.

Unless you vote over the internet, in whcih cae it's free.

Of course, James. I do wonder when the numbers come out how many people voted with each voting method.

I would imagine there wasn't enough in the document to inspire people to take the time to register their vote.

I never got mine. Probably because I recently moved house.

Don't blame me I voted No (and so did my wife)

The one thing that amazes me about all the nay-sayers is that so far not a single policy has been announced that isn't pretty much core vote strategy. Yes, the more left wing ideas have dominated the media, but not of these are actually policies, just areas that Cameron has said he wants investigated.

I'm not happy about Cameron being so policy light, but I believe when the policy groups report we'll begin to see a torrent of centre right policies being announced, but in a form more palatable to the electorate.

The press release shows CCO on full Alastair Campbell type spin. "92.7 approve" Stalinist that!(Matthew please note)

If only 25% of the party members approved why doesn't someone deplore the fact that 75% didn't approve.
Didn't like it but still see themselves as members?
Or thoroughly fed up with Cameron and have "done a Bromley" and sat on their hands?
Or torn up their membership cards but still on the books?

This suggests a paid-up membership of c.250,000 which is down on the figure at the time of the leadership election.

I can understand that there are three good reasons for not getting into defined policies yet (i) because the policy review groups have been given a generous timetable in which to research the issues properly, (ii) DC knows that Blair (or possibly GB) will immediately pinch ideas that are within the ambit of Nulab's thinking and (iii) there could be 2 or 3 years to go before the next GE.
All that is fair enough but the conservative party is a very broad church and, to be successful, it must appeal to right, centre and just left of centre, it must speak to young and old, to the English, Scots, Welsh and Irish, to the North, as well as to the South.
All it needs is a form of words, not a formulation of defined policies, at the conference for all to feel that the core issues - studiously off the agenda at the moment - will be addressed by policies that do not conflict with traditional toryism.
If a current way of life is good for the nation, conserve it; if it is not, reform it.

The CCO gave the facts as follows
Notes to editors

(1) The full results are as follows:

Yes 60,859 (92.7%)
No 4,787 (7.3%)
Blank 193
Spoilt 23
Rejected 27 (e.g. tendered ballots rejected)
Turnout 26.7%

(2) These results mean that 24.6 per cent of the total membership voted in favour of Built to Last and 1.9 per cent voted against.

It is Alastair Cambellish to distort the facts and say 75% did not approve, there may be many reasons why people did not vote, but you, Mme Speight know no more than I why they did not.

There were undoubtably somethings to like in BtL, much to ignore as being anodyne, and parts to frankly dislike. My worry was, and is, that the present leadership will now continue to ram down our necks unpopular issues such as the A list and a refusal to come out with tax cuts, saying they have a mandate for everything within BtL. No they don't, they have a loyal party. If they want a mandate, they can ask specific questions on the individual policies, they won't as they know they would loose such votes.

All politicians should beware of assuming a sweeping mandate on low turnouts, that goes for internal party polls as well as general election results.

A friend of mine, not a tory, not anything, says this of DC.
"He is being incredibly careful and thorough about policy. 150 people working on the environmental policy according to Zac Goldsmith.
The first leader of either of the two major parties to come from the mid to late sixties generation, therefore represents a whole new spirit in British politics. A new Zeitgeist. The seriousness with which he is taking environmental issues suggests that he does indeed
embody this new Zeitgeist, he is a true child of the sixties, and this is not coming from Labour, where we would expect it, but from the Tories. Labour does not have a monopoly on idealism." So listen up all ye doubters! If an outsider can sum DC up in such considered terms, What is your problem???? This is how DC comes across in the real world out there. So lets try a little support shall we, and watch DC develop policies that will be well thought out, and probably fireproofed agaist the usual Nulab elephant traps.

Hmm, I'm not sure that's much of a recommendation that your friend's giving, Annabel.

Annabel - how is it that your friend inhabits "the real world" whereas those of us who have doubts about the DC project (by implication) do not?

Absolutely fantastic result. Only on this site could this be written up as a disappointment! Indeed it probably is a disapointment to many on this site because it confirms that the nay-sayers on this site are actually a tiny minority of our membership.

Last year two thirds of Conservative members voted for a leader pledged to "change to win". After a year of this leader over 90% vote to pledge their support. The vast majority of our membership embraces change - the leadership and the media must never think that Christina and the other extremists on this site are in any way representative of the modern, compassionate Conservative Party.

90% based on a less than 25% turnout. The argument that this is a massive vote of confidence in Cameron is rubbish. This vote is completely meaningless.

Yes - wholeheartedly endorsed by almost a quarter of the Party membership. Yippee!

"Absolutely fantastic result."

A 27% turnout and a 7,000 drop in membership?

Sean, it wasnt even 25%!

James the Pedant...

James - the turnout was 26.7% so (allowing for rounding) Sean is correct. It was the pro-BtL vote that didn't quite reach 25% of those eligible to vote.

Richard the UberPedant ... ;-)


James the Wrong...

I never received a ballot.

David Davis is a man of yesterday. His right-wing values were rejected by the people at the last three elctions and were resoundingly rejected by the party membership in December last year.
Having him as leader would be a moved backwards and to certain defaet for the party not a move forward, onward and upwards to victory

Jack, we know you lean towards the left but lets not go using Labour Party slogans now... eg forwards not backwards. Also onwards and upwards...

26.7% turnout is only a bit higher than the total turnout in the Council Ward I live in in Local Elections.

His right-wing values were rejected by the people at the last three elctions and were resoundingly rejected by the party membership in December last year.
Rather they voted for David Cameron because they thought he could be sold the same way as Tony Blair was in the mid 1990's, the final outcome of the leadership elections had hardly anything to do with policy because actually David Cameron hardly mentioned any at the time, if David Cameron were for any reason in this or the next parliament to go as leader then David Davis if he stood would probably again be one of the main frontrunners if not the actual final winner, in 10 years time it will be someone else but perhaps with a much clearer agenda although not simply a carbon copy of past agenda's.

Changetowin- claiming "compassionate" for the mess that Cameron leads is obscene. I have listed TRUE Tory principles here that are more compassionate than anything our luvvy-dovey leader has dreamt up.

He proposes to perpetuate the increasing dependence of the less-privileged on the state - creating a proletariat. It's Tory beliefs to HELP people who need it not make them helots.

To add to Christina's point there, its Tory to allow people to make their own way, albeit with a safety net of support from the Government. Small Government is such a beautiful thing.

I'm not at all surprised the turnout was so low if my own personal experience was anything to go by. I received a reminder to vote from my local Association so I contacted CCHQ to ask why I'd not yet received it. They said it was all being dealt with by a private company and nothing to do with the Party and gave me the telephone number of the company. I rang them. They apologised for me and my husband not getting the Built to Last ballot paper and that they'd send it right away. We received them yesterday, Monday 18th Sept., at the end of our working day. Needless to say the ballot "box" was closed. I'd love to know how much the private company charged the Party and how truly important it was to the disinterested sounding girl on the other end of the phone that we'd not got our chance to vote. Shame really because I feel Built to Last does very much reflect the social concience of us Tory Modernists.
Dawn Parry

Could you name this private company please? Ill understand if you'd rather not.

My congratulations to David Cameron! I thought his spin about the EPP pledge being fulfilled was rather rich, but his spin on this is black forest gateux!

The big problem for the Leader is that those who voted against 7.3% are in the main,those who took the time to read the whole score. There is so much double talk,for instance,a meritocratic Party then going on to say that there must be a way found to have more candidates who are women etc. What is meritocratic about that statement? Please would anyone who can answer that please get back to me. Probably those who voted against consist of the workers!

I received my ballot in the same post as the form to re register as an Overseas voter. The latter was so bland one might as wwll relect Bliar.I feel after years of service to the Party totally disenfranchised. I am not prepared to jettison my core beliefs.

I am in two minds as to send back the voting papers this time.

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