« ConservativeHome to provide alternative coverage of Party Conference | Main | Labour 1% ahead in MORI's world »


I love it. It's modern and different.

Really incompetent. Really ugly. Really disappointing.

I showed it to my daughter. She said: "Did David Cameron give his baby a pen?"

Cost a six figure sum I'm led to believe. Pretty poor design imo, but we'll see what the reaction is.

Just don't get Mori to measure it!


this logo is perfect for the "Conservative Party".

incompetent, ugly, retarded...

I think it is fantastic, bold with a little rightward lean, If you look at the logos of our contemporaries in Europe they are modern, clean and fresh (I particularly like the Norwegian Conservatives Party logo) and I see no reason why we should not follow suit. No doubt some people will also get angry at the softer (non union jack) shade of blue that is used; get your heads out of the political sand!

Nothing more than a scribble. Exactly what message is this logo going to convey? They need to rethink ... quickly

I know what this image says to me: 'give me a razor, and I'll cut a line'.

I think the new logo is perfect. It shows exactly what I am going to do to the Conservative Candidate's name on my ballot paper at the next General Election.

I think the only way to make some posters on here happy is to have Thatchers face as our logo! People were disgruntled when Labour dropped the red flag and adopted the rose, those who like it will like and those who don't will get used to it.

The Red Rose was a good idea. The pre-cut mess is a bad one. Spot the difference? But to pick up on your general theme, 'there are some posters on this site who ...' would, if Cameron spat in their mother's face, turn round and tell the rest of us that, she had it coming.

Thats a poor comparison. It's only a logo for goodness sake. Furthermore our 'beloved' torch was actually Labour's symbol up until the 70's (which also included a crossed pen and spade) It was also a PR invention designed to symbolise Thatcher's new style of conservativism. Logos change, ideas change and the electorate changes and people have to get used to that.

Afleitch is right. The electorate changes. That's why so many loyal Conservatives are planning to ditch the party under Dave.

If you refuse to accept the values held by the British public, values that have seen the Conservatives loose 3 elections in a row because we are not in touch with modern Britain, then so be it; we can go back to being a party in opposition, stripped back to the core vote and without a hope in hells chance of winning in the suburbs, completelely out of touch with the social and economic values of the elctorate. We are in our best shape for the best part of two decades because Cameron has the guts to wrench the party out of its malaise and begin to save it from itself. There are plenty of new Conservatives like myself who are more than willing to fill the gaps caused by your departure.

I give it about as long as Royal Mail lasted as Consignia.

When you've got a strong, recognisable logo/name, modernising for change's sake is pointless.

Sorry. It's crap.

I hope this is a joke. If so, it's not very funny.

Best shape for 2 decades? Hmmmm. Remind me at which parliamentary by-election the Conservative vote went up since Dave took over. I appreciate you seeing the back of me. Not sure how you replace the other 285 members who have left my old Conservative association since last year.

No dears, it's not a childish scrawl. A child couldn't capture the basic form of a oak tree with just a few strokes of a pen. It is, nonetheless, a weak logo -- and inappropriate to the slogan.

The party is not meant to deliver for you or even it's members; it is meant to deliver for the country and be in tune to their demands. I want whats best for the country, not for myself. I'm a libertarian flat taxer and I want to see our state education system put out to tender, that puts me at odds with most party members and about 95% of the country! But the partys duty is to the country. All I want is to see us win and to see the back of the New Labour experiment. The Conservatives will never give me personally what I truly want, no party will, but we all have to agree on compromise and the pursuit of the greater good.

If you think that there's a cigarette paper between Dave and New Labour, then you need serious professional help. If it's about what the country wants, why are increasing numbers of voters in all polls saying they don't like any of the parties currently on offer?

Printers are notoriously unreliable and it looks to me that they accidentally used a design that had been scribbled through. I hope they can get the reprint done in time!

I'm all for change but this design is just pants. If Mr Hilton had anything to do with it, can we have our money back?

The torch came from an age of certainty, where you knew what you believed in and you fought for it. This no longer suits the times. The fuzzy tree owns up to the lack of definition and uncertainty of today. Maybe people don't want definition in politics, so everything's up for grabs. The image invites you to do better, to join in the process of creativity for the next phase.

I don't need professional help, thats a rather cheap shot. I have however studied political marketing for the past year at university and I know how frustrating change can be when it first occurs, but Camerons positioning (and not only himself but Redwood, Hague et al) of the party and its prefrences more so than policies are shifting groups of individuals up and down the country in our favour. What we offered in 97, 01 and 05 was not what people wanted, not only were we not adressing their concerns, we hardly even talked about many of them. And it must be remembered that millions more people have voted in local elections and local by-elections than did in Bromley. In my native Scotland, the Tory vote is up by 5% in local by-elections this year and we are well placed going into next years elections where I will grind my feet to the bone to make sure we do well.

A child couldn't capture the basic form of a oak tree with just a few strokes of a pen.

Wanna bet? Tomorrow I'll ask my 5 year old to draw me an oak tree!

In any case, I disagree that these designers have captured the form of an oak tree. For a start, oak trees don't lean. The visual pun of a vaguely defined tree is idiotic (though possibly appropriate) for the Conservative Party.

Afleitch, apologies for a cheap jibe. Remind me who won the By-election in native Scotland, Fife wasn't it? Did the Tory vote go up or down? Anyway, this is about the logo and it's rubbish.

"I love it. It's modern and different."

That doesn't make it good.

My opinion is nothing to do with kneejerk anti-Cameronism (I'm generally supportive of him), I just think it looks awful. Why couldn't we have a smarter and neater design?

"Logos change, ideas change and the electorate changes and people have to get used to that."

I sincerely doubt the electorate will be amazed or impressed by this. I wouldn't be surprised if Private Eye had some fun with it.

"What we offered in 97, 01 and 05 was not what people wanted, not only were we not adressing their concerns, we hardly even talked about many of them."

And I'm sure not one of them mentioned our logo. Although I was opposed to the logo change I accepted that if it was going to happen, the Oak tree would probably be the best design. But this tree looks like it was drawn by a cretin on steroids. It's just...scruffy!

MH: It went down in Dunfermline; thats what happens when one party (the Lib Dems) races from a distant second and Tory voters, along with others vote tactically to unseat Labour. It's happened in by-elections for decades and there is nothing new in the phenomenon. In Moray, despite being second and facing a combined negative campaign against our candidate, the Tory vote actually went up.

The new logo is terrible. I actually can't believe how bad it is. I like the oak-tree idea, I like "project Cameron", but I really hate this scribble. It will look silly on ballot papers too.

Is it 1st April?

I've looked at it again, I know my eyesight isn't perfect but what is it, is it the flight path of the "oomli-goomli bird".

Maybe it is a failing on my part and it is actually a brilliant idea, I just don't know. Has the word Conservative been dropped or will that be elsewhere on the logo.

Are you sure this isn't wind up, and I've fallen for it. ;)

I really hope it is a joke! Can't get over how ridiculous it is - not only does the ConservativeHome approved logo look much better, cleaner and bolder, it also captures the themes of DC's leadership. Perhaps with a heavy dose of membership dissapproval CCHQ will think again.

Is it really possible to completely rubbish an organisation from the inside and make it a laughing stock ? We shall see !

Can you start an online campaign to stop that becoming the logo, if I was trying to get elected with that stuck on me, I would be to embarrassed to knock on someone’s door!!

I, too, am normally very supportive of David Cameron's drive to modernise the party and seek a new image. But this logo REALLY is lousy! On a practical note, have CCHQ thought about what it will look like on black and white In Touches? A ghost, I suspect!

That is hideous. I was attracted to the idea of an Oak Tree as our logo, but not a bastardised version such as this. CCHQ must rethink.

I do not like the new logo. Lets have a real oak tree.

Please tell me that this is an early April fools joke.

It's worse than Redbridge Council's new Canabis Leaf Logo.

I don't mind that the torch logo is being ditched, but for this?

Could be very apt. It looks like my car windscreen when I'm trying to clear bird droppings and can't see where I am going.Does 'New Direction' mean I have going the wrong way all these years and will now have to thumb a lift with some other Party ?

Can you imagine this image on a ballot paper as the Party's logo?

This sort of rubbish tells us more about the leadership than it does about the lead.

Speaking as a massive supporter of the Cameron project, this logo is, well, pants. Please, Tim, use the influence you have to get them to change it! The 'scratchy' effect, while a dubious idea in the first place, is done in a really inconsistent way so that the top left part of the tree doesn't even look like its part of the same logo. The image has no definition. Imagine what it'll look like on news programmes when they use the logos as graphics...

The only good thing is I guess it shows they haven't spent much time or money on it, so I assume they must be putting all their energies into policy development.

PS I think all the other ideas for conference are fantastic, and its great to see sceptics such as Ann Widdecombe and Janet Daley given a prominent platform - this party is not afraid of debate.

What does Jack Stone think?

What the f***? is the reaction I gave initially. Now Im resigned to the fact that our leadershuip has no bloody idea how to do even the simple things, like doing a Party logo. The key here is symbolism. What does this symbolise? Weve had hints of cocaine, ghosts, scratchcards, a tree (christ knows what type)...what the hell is the lkogo supposed to mean? And the logo. How long did it take them to think of that?!

What the f***? doesnt even begin to sum up my thoughts about this stupid, incompetent, simple-minded bunch of toff snobs who know nothing about fighting from the gutter. We have a Shadow Chancellor who I am terrified of the thought of running our economy and a Leader who thinks the personality of the cult is more important than the Party actually working together. Centralising socialists we elected in December. Well done people. Pat yourselves on the back. Youve just lost us the next General Election...

James Maskell, may I please buy you a pint? It sums it up perfectly. Sadly, I have a similar background to Dave, am the same age as Osborne and work in the City, but have been a loyal member for 20 years. This bunch are so incompetent, arrogant and Blairite, it shames me to think this is what used to be the oldest and most successful political party in the world. God knows who I vote for in 09 or even if I will.

So we've just 'lost' the next election because the logo isn't very nice?...

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I think we get it now MH, you hate DC.Why do you blog here almost everyday making the same point again and again and again.It must be as boring for you as it is for us.
As for the logo....utter crap,but who cares what difference is it going to make?

I agree Malcolm. All I ever see on here is continous moaning over what Cameron does or does not do. It appear to be a knee-jerk reaction for some, it's moaning for the sake of moaning. The good side of it all is that those who actually like what Cameron is doing don't feel the need to come on every day and bang on about it.

I am also filled with disbelief and fear at the current leadership. I actually think they will not win the next election because that part of the electorate which bothers to vote will see through the crass cynicism. Which is a shame because we need a real alternatve to Labour.

Underwhelmed is my first reaction. However interested to read the comment from Odessa Calling with regard to the Redbridge logo. Knowing who I think Odessa is, he should have had the courage to stand up and voice his opinion at the time in the Council Chamber.

Very sweet of you Malcolm, but I'll resist the temptation to respond in kind with handbags at dawn. Yes, I do detest Dave. Had my fears about him when he was elected. He has proved worse than I ever feared. If there's one point upon which I hope you would agree, many good lotal activists are now leaving at a rate that is not covered by new replacements (and mine is a safe Tory seat). If there is no alternative to New Labour in terms of policy and principle, the whole system becomes rotten. That's where we are now. More than anything it saddens me as I spent 20 years serving as an activist, councillor and Association Chairman.

The Redbridge logo is a horse chestnut leaf a native and sadly endangeresd tree. What's wrong with that?

So you've told us again and again and again.

Its a fair cop - it was me who described it as the remains of a frenzied scratch card addict. I think I was being a bit unfair - but it isnt logos that win elections. I have to say it doesn't inspire me, but should it have to? If I was giving it a school report I have to say it would get nice try, could do better, more work needed.

Malcolm - true, but it doesn't make me wrong. I'll raise a glass to you as Dave goes down in flames in 09.

I can understand your concern MH, but I believe it is misplaced; Blair responded to Thatcher's style, in persona and in policy making and Cameron has responded to Blair; it is as simple as that. Political marketing has pervaded all parties, from the smallest to the biggest left to right. People say spin and style don't work on the people; but it does and it works well and the Conservatives have missed the boat election after election; quality of life is more important to people than tax cuts and the voters don't give two figs about Europe. Alienating the young, ethnic minorities, gays, single parents and in my part of thew woods, Catholics is electoral suicide and is the antithesis to real conservatism.

MH, if you genuinely want Cameron and the party to loose in 2009 and 'will raise a glass' to it, then I'm sorry but I don't believe you are capable of serving the party as an activist anymore. No one should wish their party to loose based on what appears to be a personal grudge.

If DC goes down then it is likely that Brown will be PM,I trust that will make you happy MH. Sadly for you though much as you may hate it it does seem despite todays poll that far more people are switched on by the Conservative party than are turned off. After all the bitter disappointments of the past 10 years I'll be sending a nice bottle of Champagne to 'dave' at 10 Downing Street if he makes it.
On topic though,I'm amazed that so many people seem to care about the logo. Maybe I'm wrong but in 20 years in advertising I've never seen company logos make a damned bit of difference (except BA).

Afleitch, fair comments, but I take issue at the personal grudge. It is based on a beliefe that Dave and his cohorts are utterly on the wrong track and will destroy that which remains of the Conservative Party in their desire to ape New Labour (and its worst aspects).

You are absolutely right about 09 and I came to the same conclusion myself. I left the Party this year and serve as an Independent councillor now until I step down next May. This is all done in sorrow, believe me, and not anger.

I'm a pretty big supporter of the Cameron movement... but I think this is probably the single most appalling decision made under his watch. I thought the logo was a nonsense, fluff issue but this actually so dire, so utterly ludicrous, so embarassingly feeble that I think it's probably about as damaging as any of his big, controversial policy moves. Because it's obvious. On politics coverage, election coverage, on leaflets and posters, it's there and it'll become linked with the party and with Cameron in the public consciousness. And it's awful. It beggars belief that they could have got it so wrong.

I wonder how many people were actually involved in the design of this. I have a terrible feeling this was done in the back of the minibus in India!

No more commenting on each other please!

Then Im pleased that you folloed your conscience above all and decided to leave. I happen to believe that Cameron is re-discovering core Conservative values of personal freedom, humilty and care for the family and the family working environment that we abandoned when we worshipped at the altar of Thatcherism long after the ideology itself had passed into the hands of Labour. While it may not admit it, Labour is essentially Thatcherite in its character and agenda. The Conservatives can now rediscover itself. I do not believe Cameron's foreign policy speech a few days ago was 'aping' Labour, nor is its tax policy, or social policy, or family policy or its defense of personal freedom (opposition to ID cards and the religious hatred bill for example)

In the next few weeks I am hitting the university trail hoping to welcome new members or my age (Im 22) to the party. I believe this year will be a good year on the campuses and we can work together to help us to victory whenever the time comes!

To the editor- apologies for my last comment, your post was submitted while I was typing it and I was only able to read it when it had already been posted.

This is the first time that I've seen people from all wings of the party united - in disgust at this logo.

I'd like to know which focus group approved this tree. Steve, George and Samantha?

They clearly werent focusing very hard...

Typical CCHQ crap!

Doesn't look like an oak tree. It's just a childish scribble. Looks more like an afleitch to me.

Chad - very funny at 22:13

How did Cameron as a PR man let this be chosen ? It must be a joke to play down expectations, with the real logo being launched at conference. ( He said hopefully )

I am a Cameroon but this logo is APPALLING!

It is not a worthy replacement for the Torch. It is a complete mess.

This MUST be rethought asap!

Mark Fulford - Im not sure it was Steve, George and Samantha. More likley it was Geoffrey, Bungle and Zippy!

Come on Og, there was no need for that. If you disagree with my views take them on and dont result to insults.

I have just had a thought, are we sure that this isnt some kind of teaser, before the real thing is released like they do with film trailers, because it would explain why it has been released 7 days earlier.

We seem to have been inflicted by some trolls this evening. I don't agree with Afleitch's opinion on the logo - I think its terrible - but his opinion should be respected and not treated by childish comments like that of Og.

Utterly pathetic

But a fit symbol for the morally bankrupt principle-free zone that is "Cameron's Conservatives"

Its OK, very Post-Modern. I get it, im sure anyone over 50 doesnt though. The text is the powerful point.

The word 'inchoate' springs to mind, both with reference to the present Conservative Party under David Cameron, and to its appalling new logo.

A dreadful, meaningless mess - just like the Tories. Good one Cammers.

Well, that's the monochrome version, it seems.

The Times has the colour version in it's story:


At first, I saw Ian's blog entry and was somewhat disappointed (an understatement). But I've had a couple of hours and have revisited several times, and it grew on me a bit (no pun intended).

And then I saw the version in the Times article, and it is much, much better.

Stand back from your computer screen a bit - keep going back until it softens, and then it becomes more and more like an idealised oak. The right-wards slant to the trunk disappears slightly, and becomes a broadening of the boughs instead. And that, I think, is how it will be mostly viewed - on billboards, backdrops, etc.

The green and blue work well together - modern, not harsh on the eyes.

In short, the colour version changed my mind. I can live with this.

Is it a tree or a magic mushroom?
Was Dave (still?) on dope when he approved this scribble?

It symbolises the Cameron Party perfectly: it is fuzzy and nobody knows what it really is; it is bending the way the wind blows instead of standing firm; it is well camouflaged and will blend in with the scenery; it cost a fortune and is worthless.

And I'm a Tory supporter: heaven knows what our enemies will make of it.

The first point to make is - a logo is not the most important thing in the political world.

But then, yeah, it's coke. Or maybe crushed pills. Whatever drug of choice you prefer to hoover, this logo seems to be similar. I suggest a change, or a revert to the blurry oak tree from last month, becuase this is quite silly.

I seem to recall the current torch logo can be used to put the candidates name in such a place to allow the "wave" and torch to be wrapped around the name... where would the candidates name go here?

"So we've just 'lost' the next election because the logo isn't very nice?..."

Well, forgive me if I'm wrong but you seemed to be implying that our previous logo assisted us in our previous defeats!

"Alienating the young, ethnic minorities, gays, single parents and in my part of thew woods, Catholics is electoral suicide and is the antithesis to real conservatism."

And this scribble is going to help bring them back?

Was Dave (still?) on dope when he approved this scribble?


And I'm a Tory supporter: heaven knows what our enemies will make of it.

Tam, coming out with things like that, if you consider yourself a Conservative supporter, then we don't actually need enemies anyway, do we? We seem to do fine all by ouselves!

Yes our opponents will criticise - of course they will, that's part of their jobs. Rebut it and get used to it.

But we have made a change in branding here, a break from the past. We're moving on - and although it's just a logo, and not something I've lost any sleep over, the very act of changing it symbolises this. I'm quite happy to use the new logo, and will be changing my local literature templates over to use the new branding as soon as it is released on the CCHQ extranet.

Let's get on with the job, people, rather than giving the media quotes!

I don't think anyone argues that the torch logo needed changing. Not only is it dated but it has ever been a design nightmare to place on a header [especially after that Soviet-style arm was added]. I'll be glad I won't have to try to find somewhere for it on our next leaflet. However, the necessity for getting rid of the torch doesn't imbue the squiggly tree with instant sanctity. Good as it looks in the colour version [I suppose that is what seduced the Powers-That-Be] not enough attention has been paid to how messy it would come out in mono. Unfortunately, this is how most cash-strapped associations would be printing it. Worse, when it is reproduced by a basic printing process--such as photocopying--much of it will disappear altogether.

Well, surprisingly I think it is a very good logo indeed. The Tories have rightly changed themselves very considerably before considering a change of logo and I think that this accurately reflects the new direction, is genuinely a piece of modern graphic design and I think looks great too.

It is very very far from a child's drawing. The ability to conjure an image with values and which is clearly recognisable out of a freeform scribble of a pen is the product of real talent and years of experience.

I've found a replacement logo. Can I have £40,000 please?

Click on my name to view it.

Stu, that looks like something a Johova Witness would put thru my door.

It could be difficult to fit the whole picture on a ballot paper. Also Id be pretty suprized if a Johova Witness put one through my door...Id expect a Jehovah's Witness to put one through my door though...

It is not that I dislike it but am I now also a member of the Woodland Trust? - not bad but certainly not 40k good

How about this as a concept - the new logo is actually an acorn (click on name again for a picture of an acorn) and then when (if?) the Tories get into power the logo changes year on year into a bigger and bigger tree until eventually when they self destruct again on some hot potato issue like Europe the logo is the tree being felled by a logging company. That idea is (c) Stu 2006 - my lawyers aren't watching.

"The Tories have rightly changed themselves very considerably before considering a change of logo"

Is that so sebjames?

We know all about Cameron and his "spin", but would you like to tell us precisely how your local association has "changed"

I'm still a member of a ward committee I've belonged to for years. I've moved away from that area now so I only attend occasionally to meet up with old friends.

The last time I attended it was the same group of people still complaining about a lack of members and a lack of funds. There was no mention of Cameron either pro or anti.

Perhaps the party should have waited for REAL change to take place before changing the logo. The trouble is, that might entail waiting for the entire membership to die off.

simple yet somewhat....significant...."stands for strength, patriotism, conservation and tradition" indeed tis rather great!

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