ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Absent fathers, inadequate use of prison and knife culture all targeted by Cameron

For those - like ConservativeHome - wanting the Tory leadership to spend more time focusing on the priorities of the public, an article by David Cameron in tonight's London Evening Standard is very welcome.  Here are two key extracts (full text in pdf form here):

• The inadequacy of Britain's criminal justice system: "There are two reasons Donnel Carty and Delano Brown stabbed Mr ap Rhys Pryce. The first is that they thought they would get away with it. They had good grounds for this belief. They were both prolific robbers – the police suspect they were responsible for as many as 150 muggings in the previous seven months, sometimes as many as 15 a day. Yet Brown had no criminal record at all, and the worst punishment Carty had ever received was a conditional discharge for assaulting a police officer... As I have said repeatedly, no amount of poverty or deprivation can excuse crime: the blame belongs to the criminal. If Carty and Brown had been arrested at the beginning of their crime spree and sentenced to a stiff punishment, Mr ap Rhys Pryce might be alive today."
• The breakdown of Britain's moral fabric: "But stabbing an innocent man while robbing him is more than a rational calculation about the chance of being caught. Murder represents an absolute moral failure. And here is the second reason why Carty and Brown stabbed Mr ap Rhys Pryce. They did it because they didn’t care, and because they didn’t know the difference between right and wrong. Both violent crime generally, and violent crimes involving knives specifically, have doubled over the last ten years.  These horrific acts are simply the worst expression of a phenomenon we see all around us: a growing culture of disrespect, ‘attitude’, and straightforward delinquency. This is the consequence of an erosion of what used to be called the moral fabric of society – the sense that your status in the eyes of others depended on living up to positive social expectations. In many of our inner cities today, as we learn from reading about boys like Carty and Brown, a completely different set of social expectations prevails.  There is only so much that Government can do to repair our society’s moral fabric. We can – and should – ensure that schools have more power to discipline pupils who misbehave. We can – and should – remove financial penalties against marriage in the tax and benefits system. But ultimately it is society, not the state, which transmits moral messages to young people.  Most of all, it is families which are primarily responsible for whether a child does well – like Mr ap Rhys Pryce – or goes wrong, like Carty and Brown. And it will surprise no-one to learn that both Carty and Brown grew up in homes without fathers. I hope the men who left those boys’ mothers to bring them up alone are reflecting on their own responsibility this week."

The Conservative leader also used his article to reaffirm his commitment to a bigger prison buildings programme:

"Despite having one of the highest crime rates in Europe, Britain has a below-average ratio of crimes to prisoners. We quite simply do not convict and lock up enough criminals. And the principal reason for this is the lack of space. Prisons are close to bursting because, in spite of repeated warnings about overcrowding, the Government will not build more jails. Once again I urge the Government to reverse its policy and begin a prison building programme now."

Related link: Nick Paget-Brown on Crime and the Missing Culture of Punishment

Tories campaign against today's slavery

The Conservative Party has launched this poster today as part of a new campaign against human trafficking.  The Guardian has a full report on William Hague's remarks at the campaign's launch but here is a key extract from his speech:

"Human trafficking is an extreme example of the violation and abuse of the rights of an individual.  And yet it is being carried out on a terrifying scale throughout the world.  The prevailing economic disparities, social attitudes and law-enforcement vacuums that allows vulnerable groups of women to be suppressed in this way is also conducive to the suffering of a whole range of other injustices in family, working, community and political life.  We must tackle these problems in order to secure a brighter future for thousands of women around the world, which will, in turn, advance the security, freedoms and prosperity of us all."

Related link: ConservativeHome readers recently approved Andrew Gilbert's 100policies.com idea that Britain should ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.

What do you think of Polly Toynbee?

How should Conservatives fight poverty?

Has the membership of your local Association gone up or down in the last year?

OTHER than the Conservative Party which political party in Britain is CLOSEST to your views?

>>> These are some of the questions in ConservativeHome's November survey of the Tory grassroots - timed to coincide with David Cameron's first anniversary as leader.  Click here to have your say.

Are the police even bothering to fight crime?

The comments following this post on Iain Dale's Diary are must-read.   There is bubbling public anger at the failure of the police to take crime seriously and real disappointment at the failure of anyone in authority to be exercised about it.

I only have one complaint about Iain's account of the 'Doughty Street crime wave' - he neglected to mention that my recently acquired bike was also stolen over the weekend - from outside 18 Doughty Street.

New campaign against state funding of politics

The latest news from the Electoral Commission has exposed the parlous state of the main parties' finances (Tory / Labour).  It's easy to understand why - with such debts - the party leaders are conspiring against the public to increase state funding of political parties.  A new website has been launched by former Tory MP Phillip Oppenheim - nopublicfunding.org.uk - to make the case for parties to reconnect with grassroots sources of funding.  The website includes an excellent list of bullet point reasons to oppose increased state funding:

• "It is wrong in principle to force people to pay through taxation for parties they may not support
• The majority of the parties' central campaign spending goes on billboards, political consultants and telephone canvassing - more state funding would increase this type of unnecessary expenditure.

Serious Hague outwits ill-informed Prescott

William Hague, just back from a factfinding trip to Baghdad and Basra with David Cameron, used his first three questions to Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott to probe Government policy on Iraq.  Mr Hague asked about whether the Government planned to persuade America to involve neighbouring nations in improving the security of Iraq and whether security considerations could yet override announced plans to reduce UK deployments in Iraq "by thousands".  Mr Prescott's replies were vague but he suggested that the possibility of some neighbouring nations becoming involved in a solution to Iraq was complicated by their role in fomenting the situation in Iraq.  We learnt nothing but Mr Prescott made no big gaffe.

Mr Hague's second set of questions focused on Gordon Brown's pensions raid.  He asked Mr Prescott to tell the House the cumulative sum taken from pensions funds.  £100bn has been lost, Mr Hague, said after John Prescott had twice failed to answer the Shadow Foreign Secretary's questions and his diversionary efforts had infuriated the opposition benches.

During their previous encounter Mr Prescott exceeded terribly low expectations by combating Mr Hague's humour with scripted ripostes.  William Hague won this encounter by focusing on serious issues and exposing the Deputy Prime Minister's ignorance of detail.  Mr Prescott was given little opportunity to deploy rehearsed lines on this occasion although after William Hague's sixth and final question he tried a long-winded attack based on the Tory 'tosser ad'.   It was completely off-subject and The Speaker's failure to intervene is one reason why these exchanges are not respected by the public.

Vincent Cable asked about persistent regional inequalities.  The LibDems' Treasury spokesman and deputy leader said that the inequalities that really mattered were differences within regions rather than between regions and these differences were worse than after 18 years of Conservative Government.  John Prescott paid tribute to the Regional Development Agencies. 

Tories issue response to anti-Semitism report

In early September a cross-party committee of MPs issued a report on rising anti-Semitism.  The Conservative Party has now formally responded to the report  with a number of commitments.  The party believes that there should be...

• Intensified cooperation between the Police and the Community Security Trust;
• Better protection from Police for synagogues and other Jewish institutions from Antisemitic attacks;
• More work to curb extremist Islamist activities on university campuses;
• Condemnation of organisations that refuse to participate in Holocaust Memorial Day (which has included the Muslim Council of Britain);
• Further social action projects to inform and educate the British public about the Holocaust.

Robert H Halfon of Conservative Friends of Israel welcomed the response and, in particular, Francis Maude's commitment to hold no truck with any candidate who espouses or has Antisemitic views.  Relations between CFoI and the party became quite difficult in the summer when David Cameron and William Hague criticised Israel's "disproportionate" response to the Lebanon crisis.  Since then the relationship has improved and the Tory leadership took swift action against a frontbencher who compared Israeli behaviour to that of the Nazis.

Shock survey reveals that academics lean left!

At this lunchtime's Political Studies Association awards event Mark Gill of MORI presented the results of a survey of nearly 300 academics.  We learnt that Gordon Brown was rated the best Chancellor and Norman Lamont the worst.

Perhaps most interesting (but unsurprising) was the finding that academics clearly leaned to Gordon Brown when asked whether the Chancellor or the Tory leader would be the most capable Prime Minister.  49% chose Gordon Brown and only 14% chose David Cameron.  This 35% lead amongst PSA academics contrasts with a 7% lead amongst the public, Gill noted.

MORI also asked the academics about their expectations of the outcome of the next General Election.  Those are given in the box on the right (click on image to enlarge).  The outcome preferred by the academics is a tiny bit more left-leaning than their predictions!

Related link: Academics warm to the Conservatives

Wednesday morning update: Peter Riddell has written about this survey in today's Times.

ConservativeHome named Publication of the Year

I've just returned from the annual awards ceremony of the Political Studies Association where ConservativeHome.com was recognised as Publication Of The Year.  A judging panel chaired by The Times' Peter Riddell gave this explanation:

"www.conservativehome.com has won a deserved reputation for being the most interesting politics website in the UK. From interesting articles, through polemical platforms to the liveliest political blogs and an ability to set agendas, www.conservativehome.com has become compulsive reading for all of us with a serious interest in British politics, irrespective of political loyalties."

I'm pictured with The Spectator's Matthew d'Ancona, who was awarded Journalist of the Year.  It was a good day for Conservatives.  David Cameron was named Politician of the Year and Richard Bacon Parliamentarian of the Year.

I'm very grateful to Stephan and Rosamund Shakespeare for their unstinting support of ConservativeHome and the great Sam Coates for being a perfect Deputy Editor.  That's the closest you'll get to a Gwyneth Paltrow moment here!

It was great for the internet to receive its first PSA Award.  At university I ran a magazine that cost £400 and reached about 400 people.  £1-a-person.  ConservativeHome will receive more than 500,000 hits in November and the supporting software costs just $14.95 per month.  0.003-cents-per-hit.  We are only at the beginning of the new media revolution and the massive decentralisation of power it is producing as traditional barriers to entry are swept away.  ConservativeHome may have been the first site to be recognised by the PSA but it certainly won't be the last.

Kirkhope faces Eurosceptic challenge to his leadership of the MEPs

Tomorrow will almost certainly see Timothy Kirkhope re-elected as Leader of the Tory MEPs and Robert Atkins re-elected as Deputy Leader.  Both are facing challenges, however.  Chris Heaton-Harris is challenging for the leadership and Martin Callanan for the deputy leadership.  Syed Kamall is challenging for a seat on what is called the bureau.  The two Eurosceptic challengers will do well to win a third of the votes of the MEPs as they seek to lead the delegation to be more in tune with the Euroscepticism of the Tory grassroots and the nation as a whole.

In his letter to his fellow MEPs (which you can read at the bottom of this post) Mr Heaton-Harris emphasises the following dimensions to his candidacy:

• He is a term-limited candidate because he has been adopted as the Westminster Tory candidate for Daventry.
• He wants to secure the chairmanship of the Environment Committee so that David Cameron's environmental agenda can be pushed across the EU.  He says that he is willing to trade slots on other committees to achieve this.
• He hopes to encourage MEPs to take the lead in social action projects across the region so that Conservatives enjoy profile in seats that are not currently represented by the Tories at Westminster.
• Better whipping to avoid another farce whereby Tory MEPs recently voted for the euro.
• The letter also notes the need for more commitment to working with the Czech ODS and the new Movement for European Reform.  Some Eurosceptic MEPs fear that their current leadership team is not doing enough to prepare the intellectual and organisational ground for the delayed exit from the EPP.

Saudi Arabia's funding of Islamism

I recently reported on an excellent speech by Paul Goodman MP which drew attention to the danger of Islamism (as distinct from Islam) within Britain.  In the Commons yesterday, Michael Gove MP highlighted the Chancellor's feeble efforts to seize the assets of those people and organisations linked to extremism.  His short speech went on to highlight the role of Saudi money in financing extremism within Britain.  I publish two key quotes below but you can read the full speech from here:

"There are some 1,600 mosques in Britain, most of them exemplary houses of instruction that provide spiritual nourishment to our fellow citizens, and that teach them in a tradition that all of us would think admirable. However, there are mosques—some with direct relationships with Saudi Arabia—that do not cleave to the moderate mainstream path taken by the majority of British Muslims. I shall mention two of them. One subject of concern is the East London mosque, which is one of the largest in Britain. Its president, Dr. Muhammad Abdul Bari, is the chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain, but the speaker invited to open the mosque, Sheikh al-Sudais, had preached sermons in his native Saudi Arabia in which he described Jewish people as pigs and monkeys. He has called Hindus idol-worshippers to whom it would be wrong to speak sweetly. That is an example of Saudi influence raising profound concerns.

An even more profound concern arises in connection with the plans, in east London, for the erection of the largest mosque—indeed, the largest house of worship—in the country. It is intended to accommodate between 40,000 and 70,000 worshippers, and it is estimated that it will cost between £100 million and £300 million. The mosque, which is being built by an organisation called Tablighi Jamaat, raises profound concerns, not least because that organisation has been described by French intelligence as an “antechamber of fundamentalism”. Two of the 7/7 bombers had direct links with the Tablighi Jamaat mosque in Dewsbury. Richard Reid, the shoe-bomber, had links with the organisation, as did John Walker Lindh, the so-called American Taliban. How can an organisation that, according to the Charity Commission, records an income of just £500,000 a year, afford to build a mosque that will cost anything between £100 million and £300 million?"

C2s and 'security' boost Labour

PoliticalBetting.com is unimpressed with the reliability of this morning's Communicate Research poll for The Independent.  PB's Editor Mike Smithson says that The Independent's new monthly pollster has not 'past vote weighted' their poll (a view echoed by YouGov's UKPollingReport) and has emailed Andrew Hawkins of CR to understand why not.  I'll be seeing Andrew at CR's early Christmas party tonight and I'll see if I can learn more then.

There are ingredients to the poll that ring true, however.  The Tories enjoy an 11% lead amongst the top AB social group but Labour is making headway amongst skilled manual workers (C2s) and men, in particular.  Labour now enjoys a 16% lead amongst C2s and The Independent's Political Editor, Andrew Grice, wonders if the large improvement over the month reflects "the Government's decision to put terrorism and crime at the heart of its agenda and to portray the Tories as "soft" on security issues".

Editor's comment: "This poll is a warning to Conservatives.  The party cannot afford to be perceived as weaker on security and crime than Labour, or it will not win the support of a broad enough coalition of voters to become Britain's next Government.  A poll at the weekend suggested that security was the only area where Gordon Brown enjoyed a lead over David Cameron.  It is sadly inevitable that the international security situation will deteriorate over the coming years as civilisation's enemies gain access to more dangerous and portable tools of terror.  Conservatives should not adopt John Reid's cavalier attitude to historic liberties but we must hope that commentator Bruce Anderson's recent suggestion that Phase II of Project Cameron - with "harder-edged" policies on education and crime - really is about to begin.  The party leadership should not abandon its environmentalism or the welcome commitment to social justice but core supporters including eurosceptics, the wealth creators of the CBI and families living in unsafe neighbourhoods deserve the attention of the Tory leader, too."

The Communicate Research poll has been added to the ConservativeHome poll of polls and has replaced the most recent BPIX poll - which is now more than two months' old.      

Tony Blair apologises for Foot & Mouth disaster...

...for wasting billions on an NHS IT system that is billions over budget... for failing to reform welfare... for allowing Gordon Brown to impose a record tax burden... for presiding over massive family breakdown... for failing to build enough prisons to stem Britain's rising violent crime... for incompetence in Iraq... for surrendering to Sinn Fein... for ignoring moderate Muslim leaders in Britain... for releasing 1,000 foreign prisoners... for the Millennium Done...

Our Prime Minister has not, of course, apologised for any of the above but he has expressed deep regret for the slave trade.  It's about time he took responsibility for his own record.

One year of David Cameron

We are fast approaching the first anniversary of David Cameron's leadership.  ConservativeHome will publish a 'state of the grassroots opinion survey' to coincide with that anniversary.  The poll will go into the field over the next few days.  What questions should be asked?

Related links: Hague and Osborne bounce back in latest ConservativeHome survey and David Cameron writes for ConservativeHome on his 100th day as Tory leader.

'Doing the right thing' is getting harder and harder under Labour

The true test of Conservative poverty policy won't be fine words but whether David Cameron has the guts to take tough choices.  One of those choices is to deliver a fair deal for the one institution that does most to bind society together - marriage.  Mr Cameron's party conference speech suggests that the Tory leader has the right intentions but will he eliminate the marriage penalty that punishes the choice to marry?

The existence of that penalty is exposed (again) in today's Mail on Sunday.  New Tory welfare spokesman, Andrew Selous MP (a long champion of marriage), has highlighted the case of two newly-wed constituents.  They came to him after being told by their local Job Centre  that they'd be better off divorced.  Couples who live apart get £25 more, they were told - £1,250 a year.

That's the society Labour has created.  You're penalised if you get married or if you save or if you start a small business.  Taxes, benefits traps and red tape all make it harder and harder to do the right thing.

For information on the breakdown of the family under Labour and its costs see this week's Spectator politics column (by Fraser Nelson) and the Mail on Sunday leader.

Bad news for Brown and Ming in survey of leadership qualities

A GfK NOP opinion poll for tomorrow's Sunday Edition programme (ITV1) gives David Cameron a 10% lead over Gordon Brown when it comes to preferred Prime Minister.  The Conservative leader enjoys a 29% advantage when it comes to the freshest ideas and a 16% advantage when it comes to being most in touch with modern Britain.  The only area where Brown enjoys the narrowest of leads is on security - where the Chancellor leads by 22% to 21% on who will best protect the UK from a terrorist attack.  GfK NOP do not appear to have asked voters about economic competence (at least not in my embargoed information).  Former Home Secretary Charles Clarke has sought to exploit the security issue by attacking Tory opposition to ID cards (Daily Mail).

The poll also contains bad news for Ming Campbell.  Just 5% identify him as their preferred choice for Prime Minister.  24% told GfK NOP that they would prefer Charles Kennedy to return as leader and slightly more (7%) preferred LibDem Home Affairs spokesman Nick Clegg to the embattled Sir Menzies (6%).

YouTube link: Stephan Shakespeare on YouGov cautions against overinterpreting polls that compare Brown and Cameron.

John Major was right about the Scottish Parliament

In the final dying days of his Government John Major flew to every corner of our country in one last forlorn and largely forgotten attempt to warn the British people that the Union was in danger.  He knew that the establishment of a Scottish Parliament would open up enormous possibilities for Scottish and English nationalism.  The last Tory Prime Minister's fears look increasingly likely to be realised.

An ICM poll for tomorrow's Sunday Telegraph puts support for Scottish independence at 52% amongst Scots (almost identical to the level suggested by a recent Scotsman survey) and 59% in the rest of the UK.  48% of English voters want independence from the rest of the UK.  SNP leader Alex Salmond has always understood that devolution was a stepping stone to independence and told The Sunday Telegraph:

"The onset of devolution has made people realise that since we have a devolved parliament, it's time to have a real parliament with real powers."

It may still be possible to keep the Union together but not without significant poison entering the political bloodstream.  It certainly makes Gordon Brown's position much more difficult.  Is he the man to persuade the Scottish people of the merits of the Union or will he find himself rejected by the English as Scottish nationalism ignites English nationalism?

Related link: Christine Constable on 'City Regions, the West Lothian Question and the future of England'

Hague and Osborne bounce back in latest ConservativeHome survey

Processing snags associated with the new software underpinning the ConservativeHome Members' Panel means the latest results are only being published today.  November's questions - all focusing on David Cameron's first year as Tory leader - will go into the field next week and will be turned around at the usual speed.

The latest overall results are bullet-pointed below:

• Satisfaction with David Cameron rose slightly to 76% and dissatisfaction fell by a similar amount (by 3% to 24%).  The net satisfaction rating of 52% is the best for three months.
• Both William Hague and George Osborne saw strong increases in their standing.  William Hague's rating (+70%) is still below top-ranked David Davis (+84%) but he has reversed some of the slippage that followed his management of the delay to EPP exit and his criticism of Israel's response to the Lebanon crisis.  George Osborne's rating (+50%) is the highest since March.  Both Hague and Osborne may have been boosted by strong party conference speech performances.
• Andrew Lansley appears to be benefiting from the extra exposure that Tory health policy has gained since the party conference.  Members are seeing more of Andrew Lansley and are liking what they see.  His rating of +33% sees him better education spokesman David Willetts (+31%) for the first time in this series.  Only this week Mr Lansley was leading the Tory charge against Labour's failure to end mixed-sex wards.
• Other rankings: Francis Maude +7% (who benefited from a flattering blog post by Watlington this week); Theresa May +9%; Oliver Letwin +18%; Caroline Spelman +25%; and Liam Fox +51%.

A conservative approach to fighting poverty

I've just returned from David Cameron's speech to The Scarman Trust.  I camcordered a key extract and you can see the results in the YouTube/ 18DoughtyStreet video clip below.

The last few days on ConservativeHome - the reaction to David Cameron's Darfur visit and to Greg Clark's poverty message - have really disappointed me.  There's been a harshness in the threads and a coldness to the suffering of some of the poorest and most desperate people in the world.  I am no slavish defender of Project Cameron.  I disagree with the party's approach to climate change and tax competitiveness.  I would like to see the party putting a greater emphasis on security and defence issues but I have no trouble with David Cameron's social justice agenda.  I actually felt great pride in the Conservative Party as I listened to David Cameron speak this morning.

Here are three key reasons why this poverty agenda makes Project Cameron worthwhile:

Mrs Thatcher redistributed - Conservatives have always redistributed.   The current Tory debate about redistribution reminds me of the debate in the 1980s when Tories talked about cutting public spending but actually increased it.  If the next Conservative Government is going to maintain Britain's essentially progressive taxation system then let's not appear hard-faced unnecessarily.  We're one nation Tories that understand the need for a stretching of the income spectrum but we must not allow a section of society to become completely detached from the mainstream.  I support wealthier voters being taxed to give poorer people increased opportunities and 'a second chance' but Conservatives - unlike Labour - will always have an understanding of the disincentive effects of high taxes and never risk killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

The poor are getting left behind under Labour.  Greg Clark was probably ill-advised to have mentioned Polly Toynbee in his controversial paper.  Nothing should be done to add to the status of a social commentator whose ideas are the enemy of genuine progress.  But Greg Clark's analysis is correct.  Labour have lifted those people just below the poverty line to just above it - it's modest improvement to hit some targets.  It's not transformation.  Labour's measure of poverty is almost purely financial (and we're supposed to be the materialistic party?).  The deepest forms of poverty have persisted and many people have gone backwards.  See this YouTube clip to hear Greg explain his agenda in his own words.

Conservatives will address the causes of poverty.  According to this morning's speech, for David Cameron a lack of money is a symptom of poverty - not a cause.  The real causes of poverty are as diverse as the circumstances of the people who find themselves in poverty.  There's drug abuse, alcoholism, family breakdown, serious indedtedness, skills deficits and many other lifeshocks.  Cameron:

"What do all these things have in common?  They are all problems that can never be tackled by the state alone.  They are social problems – and they require social solutions.  That is the key.  So we need to identify the causes of poverty.  We need to disaggregate them.  And we need to deal with each of them – separately, and appropriately.  That means understanding the complexities of the causes of poverty... complexities that are often human, personal, emotional and which therefore need to be addressed through the power of society, not just the state."

I'm disappointed that Project Cameron has already ruled out certain things that would help the poor - a serious programme of school choice and reduced taxation, for example.  His stance on so-called softer drugs is not as clear as it could be.  But there are big strengths, too, within his agenda.  I think of the leader's support for marriage... for a big increase in drug rehabiltation places... for greater support of faith-based and other social enterprises... for throwing grit into the credit system that is dragging poorly-informed consumers into serious arrears... Of all the changes David Cameron is making to the party the commitment to social justice is the most welcome.

It would help if David Cameron's search for a more representative parliamentary party went beyond the superficial search for more women (who have largely the same social backgrounds as the men).  It's been at least three months since ConservativeHome identified a modest programme to address the £41,000 cost of becoming a Tory MP.  CCHQ has not responded to that programme.   Until it does there'll be huge numbers of would be candidates who simply cannot afford to become a Tory MP.  Not one word.  Not one email.  Not one modest step forward.  Many of those put off by the £41,000 cost will be social entrepreneurs and poverty-fighters who could add enormously to the party's understanding of the social problems of modern Britain.

Cameron and Ashcroft are both wrong on political funding

BBC News is reporting that Lord Ashcroft has suggested that moves toward state funding of political parties are "nonsense".  In a House of Lords debate the former Tory Treasurer said that political parties should be prohibited from being able to further poke their fingers into the public purse.  It is, of course, the policy of a heavily indebted Conservative Party to bid for extra funding for political parties in return for caps, for example, on the amount an  individual can give to a political party.  CCHQ told BBC that Lord Ashcroft was expressing an entirely personal opinion.  The Tory Deputy Chairman confirmed the opinion he expressed over a year ago - in an article for The Times - that political parties should be free to raise money from anyone they deemed acceptable but must disclose any donations much more rapidly than at present.

ConservativeHome fears that both the Ashcroft and Cameron prescriptions risk separating political parties from the concerns of individual voters.  If parties can get their money from big business or big government they won't be forced to return to retail politics and grassroots funding.

Cameron: Acting against relative poverty is new Tory goal

Hot on the heels of Greg Clark's intervention of yesterday, this is what David Cameron will say tomorrow:

“I want to look back over the last 25 years and to look forward to the next 25.  Let me summarise my argument briefly.  I believe that poverty is an economic waste, a moral disgrace.  In the past we used to think of poverty in absolute terms – meaning straightforward material deprivation.  That’s not enough.  We need to think of poverty in relative terms – the fact that some people lack those things which others in society take for granted.  So I want this message to go out loud and clear: the Conservative Party recognises, will measure and will act on relative poverty.”

It's time to put Missile Defence back on the agenda

Britain's nuclear deterrent is back in the news with this morning's Independent reporting that Tony Blair is "bouncing" the Cabinet into accepting a replacement for Trident.  In the above 18 Doughty Street video clip you can watch me interviewing Liam Fox about nuclear deterrence and my own belief that we need to put the whole idea of missile defence back on to the nation's agenda.  Although missile defence offers no guaranteed way of protecting ourselves I believe it's the obvious response to the danger of nuclear proliferation - a danger that worldleaders have largely closed their eyes to.  There are, of course, unresolved technological  issues but there have been successful missile intercepts and sustained investment might mean we become able to protect civilisation from a limited and more unsophisticated attack.  The Michael Ramirez cartoon below captures Ronald Reagan's visionary understanding of this issue and indicts the subsequent political leaders who have dragged their feet on delivering on that vision...

Tories want you to fight 'the tosser within'

Post-Falklands Margaret Thatcher once fought 'the enemy within' (Scargillite militancy)... Cameron's Conservatives are fighting 'the tosser within' (the conniving parasite who apparently lives inside all of us - encouraging us to get into terrible debt).  'The tosser within' is the star of the first video on the Conservative Party's new social responsibility website - Sort-It.co.uk.  It builds on the ideas just announced by George Osborne to tackle the huge problem of personal indebtedness.  The website declares:

"We’ve decided that rather than doing what political parties have always done - criticising each other and making promises about what they would do if they got elected – we’d like to try and make a difference now. Why should we wait until we’re in government to start changing things?  That’s the idea behind www.sort-it.co.uk. To create an online home for a whole bunch of issues, with practical things that you can do to make a difference.  We’ve kicked things off with the issue of personal debt, and will add other issues on a regular basis."

You can read all about the purpose of the site here and watch the first video here.

ConservativeHome think it's a terrific idea - as well executed as WebCameron and helpful in bringing alive the Tory commitment to tackle social problems such as personal debt.

Security first, politics second

Read David Cameron's full speech (4200 words) here.

"We must not allow the security of this country to become a political football – either between the parties or within the parties. That does not mean avoiding debate or  promoting fake consensus.  But it does mean avoiding the temptation to use national security as a political positioning exercise – an attempt to portray one side as being “tougher” than the other… whether it’s one side in a general election, or one side in a leadership election.  A strong and steady approach puts security first, politics second.  Putting politics before security leads to an approach that is hasty and hysterical - and that can never be in the national interest."

Deputy Editor

Afghanistan, Darfur and Trident dominate PMQs

Ming Campbell asked the Prime Minister about Trident.  David Cameron's questions focused on Darfur but there was also this exchange on Afghanistan:

"You've recently seen for yourself the incredibly brave work our troops are doing in Afghanistan.  Anyone visiting Helmand is immediately struck by the absolutely vital role that helicopters play.  Are you convinced all our Nato partners are doing everything they can to maximise the number of helicopters in Afghanistan and will you push this point as hard as you can at the Nato summit next week?"

The Prime Minister:

"We certainly will in relation to any of the issues that our forces raise with us on the ground. The work we are doing in Helmand, as you rightly say, is of tremendous importance. I found both our troops in the Helmand province and those working on reconstruction in very good heart at the prospects of success in what they are doing.  But it is true that at next week's Nato summit we have to make sure that not just the UK but all our Nato partners are doing their utmost to stabilise the situation in Afghanistan and give that government the prospect of success that it deserves and the Afghan people deserve."