Tories to set up Implementation Office

It's hardly a sexy news story but page two of today's London Evening Standard appears to suggest something very grown-up about David Cameron's Conservatives.

The Tory leader is planning to establish an 'Implementation Office' early next year which will draw up "the most detailed preparations" for an incoming Conservative government.  Every Tory frontbencher will have to liaise with the IO's permanent staff of business professionals and former civil servants.  Slowly but surely every shadow team will build up a 'to do list' for civil servants with detailed information on the Conservative legislative programme.  The IO will also be responsible for training Tory frontbenchers on how to manage their future departments.

Editor's comment: "This initiative is very welcome.  It begins to address the claim that Project Cameron is all style and no substance.  Over time the IO's 'prospectus' is expected to come to 40,000 words of detail on the Tory programme.  The Implementation Office could also build a perception that David Cameron is leading a government-in-waiting.  It will also contrast with Labour's inability to implement what they promise - this Labour Government's greatest failure (see David Cameron on Labour's graveyard of initiatives)."

Comments

[hf]

Great move and will help flesh out the policy by translating it into detailed action plans.

[kingbongo]

For all the UKIP and leftie piffle about 'all style and no substance' I think Cameron will continue to plough the correct course and let his actions speak for themselves.

The problem for some tories is they have got used to being in opposition and are finding the transition to 'government in waiting ' painful and more drawn out than they would like. By sticking to the plan the shadow cabinet will prove itself fit and proper to be trusted with the power of government.

I suspect the conference next year will be a lot more beefy for the Wat Tylers of this world.

[Kevin Davis]

Fascinating and certainly needed. The biggest problem with Labour ministers is there utter inability to understand whether they are there to set policy or to implement policy. I believe there has been far too much meddling by Ministers.

One presumes this new initiative will address this.

[Pimlicoite]

If only George Bush had set up something similar when he invaded Iraq, many of today’s problems might never have arisen. Equally, thank god Labour did not make similar preparations, or we would all be using the euro today. This is very good news and will only serve to reinforce the view we are a government in waiting (which of course we are!)

[NigelC]

Where are the jobs advertised?

[Monday Clubber]

Get rid of Cameron. Blah Blah Blah.

Vote UKIP.

BLah Blah Blah.

I hope the Conservatives lose the next election.

[malcolm]

Tell us something we didn't know Monday Clubber.

[Louise]

Mmmm

How about a fully-staffed campaigns office to ensure a win in the election?

[Tory Solicitor]

editor, do you think they might advertise for the permanent jobs in the IO on conservative home? just an idea

[Tory Solicitor]

editor, do you think they might advertise for the permanent jobs in the IO on conservative home? just an idea

[Paul Kennedy]

Excellent idea and it should certainly help our people to "hit the ground running" and with all of the problems Labour will be leaving behind, there will be no honeymoon period.

[Zhukov]

All rather strange after the last few years... standing our ground refusing to promise things we can't deliver, setting up an implementation office - for the first time in years we are seriously preparing for government.

Furthermore this concentration on process is what made Conservative governments so successful in the past - we get things done. All very encouraging.

[Richard Weatherill]

Is it intended that this Implementation Office be disbanded as soon as (or perhaps shortly after) the Conservatives are elected to office, its work done?

One piece of advice they could usefully give prospective Ministers would be on how to reduce the legislative burden and ensure that whatever new laws are needed are well focused and workable. If they need a counter-example (for tutorial purposes) on how NOT to do it, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 would be an excellent place to start. (Though I suppose they'd be rather spoilt for choice after 12 years of the current mob.)

[michael mcgough]

I do hope they attend to this task with more urgency than than has been shown in setting up the Movement for European(EU?) Reform.

[Richard]

This is very promising. I believe the article also mentions that the Tories did something similar in thw 1970s, publishing a document called The Right Approach, from which policies were chosen. Council House sales was one of them. Maybe some of the 100 policies will get a mention!

[David Belchamber]

Zhukov @ 16.25 is absolutely correct in focusing on "this concentration on process".
That is the daily chore of government and it will be a blessed relief (if it happens) for us all to have a working PM, making policy round the cabinet table, enacting legislation in the HoC again and not insisting on "eye-catching initiatives" that redound to the PM's personal glory. We have seen over the last 9 years or so where that gets the country.
This comes as excellent news for those of us (an increasingly large number) who were becoming very concerned at the lack of policies. It will be easier now to be patient, as we now know that the Party's manifesto will be largely shaped by the end of next year and it is to be hoped that we on CH will be able to continue feeding in ideas until then (or an earlier election, of course).

[Rachel Joyce]

This is excellent news and demonstrates how well thought out the whole process is.

When we get a full set of policies, I believe these will be of high quality (as are the few we already know about, and the interim findings of the policy review groups).

[Monday Clubber]

In case you haven't guessed, the spoof post at 14:36 was not made by me (check the email address).

I see Malcolm has been taken in, but no surprise there.

[malcolm]

It could have been you'though francois the frog.Exactly the sort of thing you would say.Perhaps if you had the guts to post under your real name these things wouldn't happen.

[Monday Clubber]

Well Malcolm, francois the frog is a school nickname it amuses me to use, particularly given my views on the EU.

There are a lot of people on this blog who post under pseudonyms, including what I suspect is a small troupe of Cameroon sockpuppets.

Would you care to call the colour of their "guts" into question also?

[malcolm]

I've no idea about others Monday Clubber but I really don't think much as you've already guessed of someone who hides behind a cloak of anonymity.What are you so frightened of?

[Monday Clubber]

Sorry to disappoint you, Malcolm, but having started pseudonymously I intend to continue as such and I'm certainly not going to be browbeaten by you into changing my policy.

I suspect I concern you more than other posters because (despite your protestations to the contrary) you are only too well aware that I am a party member of very long standing and well steeped in party traditions.

I personally am now somewhat semi-detached from the party and likely to remain so until "Dave" departs. However, in the KGB-like atmosphere of today's party I certainly wouldn't blame other more ambitious posters for concealing their names.

This blog is monitored by CCO - fact not speculation - and any named individual who puts their head above the parapet will not be getting on the "Z" list let alone the "A" list.

Wouldn't you agree?

[malcolm]

I can't believe that you would think of applying for any official position within the Conservative party so what difference would it make whether people know your name or not?

[Richard Carey]

I see nothing entirely wrong with concealing an identity on here. That doesn't mean that I agree with what certain identity concealers say.

I agree that one of the strengths of the internet is that you can say whatever you like in semi-anonymous security.

But if you do that, you are going to have to accept that your words will carry less weight with people than if you have sufficient belief in what you are writing to put your name to it. It does amuse me sometimes that those who scream about their "principles" are often the first to hide behind a cloak of internet anonymity.

And you say that people from CCHQ read this blog. I'm not surprised that people who work for the Party read this site. I work for it (on a voluntary basis, not a paid one, before you ask), and I read it regularly.

I'm more surprised about the number of people who already strongly support other parties who find spending time here a good investment! I hope the fact that you're here means that you're still open to persuasion regarding our current direction.

[Tam Large]

An Implementation Office is only good news if the policies it will be helping to implement are Conservative policies: I see little evidence of any coming from the Cameron Party so far...

[Gwendolyn]

There are different aspects of anonymity. I was stalked for three years after a picture and some articles about me in national newspapers to do with legal matters and councils. I would never again allow my proper name on a site like this though I would be prepared to give my details to the editor,outlining my support for the Consrvative Party and my background as former secretary of my branch.

[Monday Clubber]

"I can't believe that you would think of applying for any official position within the Conservative party"

Malcolm, you can sleep comfortably in your bed tonight. I haven't the slightest intention of applying for any job with the party.

They couldn't afford me.

[Chad]

Tam, congrats on your Radio 4 PM appearance handing out the BOO leaflets. Francis Maude's frosty reaction was classic.

[Monday Clubber]

The BOO meeting was a splendid, tub-thumping event. The real heart of the conference.

In contrast, the picture of Camerons audience in the BIC - with serried ranks of octagenarians well to the fore - drew hoots of derisive laughter on a TV chat show last night.

Comments ranged from "Cameron got a 10 minute ovation. By the time it ended nearly everbody had managed to get on their feet" to some unrepeatable quips about incontinence!

Yes I really do have to accept that the party has changed.

They're all a year older.

[NigelC]

BBC reporting
" the work would be done by party staff consulting with experts and that there would be no "Implementation Office" as such."

[Tam Large]

Thanks Chad! It was all so lucky with Maude showing up right on cue. The Better Off Out meeting was packed, with well over 350 people there (I counted), and standing room only. That should annoy Francis Fraude even more - the knowldge that so many real Conservatives haven't been bamboozled by his smoke and mirrors.