« 18 Doughty Street Talk TV launches at 8pm tonight | Main | Brown challenges soft-toned Tories with a hard issue »


Must be one of the shortest appointments in history. Must have something good lined up.

Can't Maude hold onto staff ? Terrible.

The curse of Iain Dale strikes again! He was praising Nick Pisani on his blog after conference.

I think accounts of his role at Conference have been exaggerated - and on this blog too! Although today's intro by deputy ed seems more accurate.

I guess things just didn't work out for NP!

Is he carrying the can for the registration cock-up?

I wouldn't have thought someone in charge of presentation would have the organisation of conference passes in their remit??

George, if anyone is to "carry the can" for the registration problems it'd be more likely that CCOCL's application to continue its contract will be viewed dimly, rather than the Director of a seperate section of CCHQ be forcibly resigned.

We didn't want him anyway.

This is pretty fishy. There appears to be no logical reason for this resignation.

If CCHQ were a company, its stock would be down somewhat, I fancy.....

He had a falling-out with other CCHQers in Bournemouth about what exactly his role did or did not entail.

Since no explanation has been offered, people are entitled to assume a negative situation here. Especially following on from other negatives surrounding the appointment of Francis Maude.

The cock-up at the Conference.

The failure of the A List to broaden the Party into the North, with its strict adherence to previous Party Southern type, bar a few more women and a touch of colour.

Maude's failure to resign his pornographic connections on becoming Party Chairman.

There appears to be an emerging pattern of incompetence, which could do with a bit of attention from David Cameron.

ah yes, the usual Tory bashers re-emerge, with the same old rubbish on every thread.

The Maude porn stuff is such nonsense.

We should expect this on a Labour site, not here.

Maude is a £15k/year non-exec chairman on an investment trust. The investment decision is taken by the fund managers, not Francis Maude!

Just a lot of rubbish.

In any case I'm not sure that legal adult entertainment is such an evil thing. Can't see that it's more harmful than Ken Clarke's crusade to give cancer to millions of Vietnamese through his fag selling.

Was Pisani responsible for the dreadful new scribbled logo? If he was, I am glad that he has gone so quickly.

The conference set was rather conventional - just a platform, two lecterns and a backdrop. Hardly ground-breaking!

Nothing to see here, move on. Sadly, this is a simple case of "Man not up to job, gets very stressed in difficult circumstances, is delicately walked to the door and waved off; face-saving strategy quietly implemented".

No real can-carrying going on, just wrong man in wrong job at wrong time. NP is now taking pills for his nerves and will be back at the Beeb inside six months...

Here is Iain Dale on Nick Pisani

"There are three people who came out well from last week's conference in Bournemouth and none of them are politicians. I would single out Nick Pisani, Steve Hilton and Sam Roake for special commendation. Nick Pisani is the former editor of Question Time, who has recently taken over as the Party's Director of Presentation. He was responsible in large part, with Steve Hilton, for the staging of the conference and its tone."


Iain Dale called it wrong - as did Con Home at the time - John Lewis is spot on!

The Labour Party went down the same disastrous path in 2002 bringing in a BBC producer, Eddie Morgan, as Director of Coms. He lasted for one conference which he was brought into overhaul, but failed to understand. He disappeared to a lobby company only to return, prodigal son like, back to Auntie after 6 months.

bee's buzzing with indignation at the idea that Francis Maude can be criticised for being a DIrector of a company propagating live sex pornography, condoms optional, HIV infections and all.

He should have resigned this post, or resigned the Party Chairmanship. It is simply not tenable to have any association with red hot pornography, and expect to hold down a top job in the Conservative Party. Maude knows that this is putting the party's reputation in jeopardy, and if it's only over £15,000 a year, he should resign the job immediately.

Or he should resign as Party Chairman. He cannot have it both ways.

Perhaps Pisani had an argument with another person with a presentational vision. I have ideas of who that other person might be...

If Maude doesnt want that extra job, he can always email me...I could live with that controversy for 15 grand a year!

The porn company in question is no longer trading. It went bankrupt and the assets were sold to Penthouse in April this year. http://www.pmgi.com/newsmedia_pressreleases_2006_04_20.html

Maude's Investment Trust is getting no money at all from pornography.

So it has nothing to do with Maude today now. Nothing at all. There is nothing to resign from because Maude probably wasn't aware of it in the first place, and isn't involved with it now.

Frankly compared with the average crooked Labour sleaze (which you don't seem the slightest bit interested in exposing), this is a non-starter.


And being the only shady businessman in Western Europe to lose money in pornography is a good thing?

Of course, of course. A story about how a CCHQ employee got offered a better job for twice the money and a three day week and - shock horror - took it, becomes an assassination of Francis Maude.

With "friends" like these...

Order! Order!

This is not a thread about Francis Maude's private business dealings - it is about the resignation of Nick Pisani because he has been offered another exciting opportunity elsewhere.

Do try to stay on topic please.

lucy, these people are not friends. They are not conservatives at all, and would like the Tories to lose the next election.

That is the problem, any idiot can post critical comments about the Tories on every possible thread and it is made to look like the Tory party is falling apart, when in fact it's just a few non-conservative voters trying to damage the party.

I think Mr. Montgomerie should take some action. I have no problem with reasonable debate,e.g., on the level of our support for Israel, but some of these people and their comments are just destructive and useless.

So why is he leaving, where is he going to, is he not even serving out notice? Was he blamed for the passes row?

Could not agree more Bee. Do you find as I do that the right wing headbanging is at maximum during the full moon?

We at least can take heart from the fact that the party is changing for the better under Cameron and now has the best chance of winning a general election than it has for three elections - and that is before any premature policy annoucements.

As for Mr M taking action, it will never happen - surely you know that the hidden agenda of this site is to return IDS to his former "glory"?!

'bee' is correct. We have too many trolls on here at the moment. Personally I believe that our generous host Mr. Montgomerie should be a little more generous with the IP-banning button.

As Guido often reminds us: "This isn't a public service. Go get your own blog."

For this opinion I offer my apologies to people such as "Schoolboy Error" who have posted on Iain Dale and Guido when their IP address might have been inadvertently affected on this site, but I think some of the obvious trolling is getting a bit tedious and unhelpful.

Its not been as bad as it has been. For heaven sake get over it. People will criticise the Party. It happens. This is the second day in a row now where people are calling for more bans on those who are critical of the Party. Its such a ridiculous thing to be complaining about. The whole point of this site is for there to be critics and advocates...its called debate!

True, James. Internal debate is very healthy; as is comment from our opponents with a serious argument to put forward. After all, I live with a Marxist - you should hear the political rows in our house.

Also I am all in favour of leaving the EU yet serve on the committee of my local Association with a clear conscience. I argue my point from within. If I lose that argument then I have to accept that.

It's the more obvious deliberate stirring that is starting to get on my nerves. It hinders and does not progress our debate.

Well I blame David Cameron. :-)

Sorry James, this site does get pretty ridiculous.

We have one poll one day saying Tories lead 6%, and then another the next day saying +1%, and the first comment is "why aren't you commenting on the collapse in the tory lead", when there's nothing to discuss

We get on the last thread bizarre comments like this

"Let's hope that anyone who comments in this site does not fall foul of the thought police in CCHQ as I have no doubt that they monitor these posts.It appears that anyone who disagrees with the latest statements by DC is subjected to a wave of posts all condeming them as traitors! Wonder where these posts come from!"

And then now a whole "let's bash Francis Maude using stupid smears from a labour-supporting tabloid newspaper" diversion on this one.

It does get mighty tedious.

Here's what the rest of the world sees CH as:

"The Conservative Home website is just getting less impartial and more nuts. How nuts is the headline “Dennis Skinner: Cameron is more like Mandelson than Blair” in relatio to its importance in the Tory party leadership election, especially a website that continues to call for policies to be at the fore of the campaign rather than personalities.

And I also agree that the comments on that website can be pretty horrendous and vile at times. "

"Conservative home’s comments threads are an entertaining read for connoisseurs of ranting, but that’s all. "

"Yes, I’m deeply concerned that the media are taking any old comment on the Conservative Home chat room and presenting it as though it were unquestionably posted by a Conservative activist. Don’t these people realize that one can assume all sorts of false identities on an internet discussion site? "

"I have begun posting on Conservative Home occasionaly and the bile that has been flung at me has made me rather cynical."

"The comments on Conservative Home are rabid and not worth bothering with. They seem dominated by a small group of splenetics who may well pass away from strokes at the latest news."

"I have just looked at ‘Conservative Home’. Obviously a site for unreconstructed Tories because It sent a shiver down my spine. Incase anyone is thinking of voting for Cameron’s Tories it’s worth reminding themselves of what the Conservative underbelly looks like. "

This thread saw the Maude accusation. Just ignore it. We're supposed to be mature adults. If its BS, its BS. Obviously its hard to do on this type of website where responding is very much a knee-jerk reaction but with things like this accusation where its clearly a non-story theres no need to make a thing of it.

It gets ridiculous only because people make it even worse by racheting up the anger. Read any thread where the thread gets closed and you can see its because people rise to it and try to fight fire with fire. Its playground stuff. Fighting fire with fire just leads to a bigger fire.

The argument on this one is done with. It involved three posters here and it fizzled out... Back to the issue at hand.

I don't really think there is much of an issue at hand here:

1. Man gets offered job
2. Man accepts offer.
3. The End.

There is little to discuss.

Let us hope at least the next story here will stick to topic without irrelevant tory-bashing.

Can we ban Bee ? - I think she is obviously a troll.

Tapestry is a DC fan - if against Maude. She is just whipping up an controversy, AGAIN !

I say bee, I for one am more than fed up with small minded people who seem to think that anything other than fawning admiration of the current party leadership makes a person not a Conservative or not want the Conservatives to win.This is simply another version of the NuLabour PC thought police approach to hearing anything you personally don't like and it ought to have no place in the broad church that is the Tories.

Debate and the arguing of differing viewpoints are what makes politics, unless of course you are one of those who think that politics is just show business for ugly people and so therefore the role of non "stars" is simply to worship at the feet of their betters.

There are a perfectly valid series of criticisms being leveled by people who believe, and it is a matter of belief, not fact as yet, that the party is not doing the right things to win an election and that mistakes that threaten the party's possible progress are being made. These people may be right and they may be wrong but they are as entitled to put forward their point of view as you, with your uncritical Blairite admiration, are. Oh and by the way can you actually provide any empirical evidence whatsoever to back up your claim that criticisms posted on Conservativehome are in any way harming the party electorally.......? No, thought not.

Love this myth about the three day a week job. Someone is trying to push that on Guido too! Hilarious!

I blame the A List.
Maude tells a lot of bright 40-something long-time activists that they are no longer required on the voyage. Then he hopes that their loyalty to him is massively greater than his loyalty to them.
He will be justified by success not 36%

interesting fact I learned at the conference: if you have an income of £15,000 p.a., you`re one of the top 8% of earners on the planet!(leaving aside the rest of FMs income!)

Bee/Lucy74 - I'm also fed up with relentless anti-Cameron bashing, so I'll repeat the question I asked the other week (which no one ever answered):

Can someone give me the name of a widely-read, well-written, well-informed, 100% pro-Cameron blog?

If not, why not?


Webcameron does not meet any of Loyalist's criteria, James.

The leading Cameroon blog is Iain Dale's Diary - it is now a Cameroon lovefest. All he needs now is an appropriate strapline - Giz a seat, Dave!

I was meaning 100% pro Cameron.

Without getting involved deeply in this thread I would answer Loyalist's - - - "Can someone give me the name of a widely-read, well-written, well-informed, 100% pro-Cameron blog? If not, why not?" - - - by saying that IF it was unremittingly pro-anything it would not attract bloggers.

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