Year2(1): Focus more on crime and security

Following on from last week's review of the peaks, troughs, modernising and reassurance moments of David Cameron's first year, ConservativeHome spends today proposing twelve actions that will help Project Cameron to make the best of its second year and build upon the modest 3% Tory lead in ConservativeHome's poll of polls.

Recommendation 1: The Conservative Party has been an imbalanced project for far too long.  At the last General Election Michael Howard focused far too much on immigration and reinforced a negative image of the Conservative Party.  In his first year as Tory leader David Cameron has placed a heavy emphasis on very different themes - notably the environment and increasing the number of female candidates.  The danger is that the 'new' Conservative Party looks as imbalanced as the 'old' Conservative Party.  Every 'Waitrose voter' gained is erased by the 'Bromley voter' who stays at home.  The south and ABs warm to Cameron as the north and C2s cool.  ConservativeHome welcomes David Cameron's greener, gentler conservatism but the 'politics of and' argues that we must also talk about crime and tax and immigration.  There have been welcome signs in recent days that David Cameron is rebalancing the Tory message and is offering some grittier positioning.  More than anything else the party must work on its homeland security credentials.  Homeland security is the coming issue.  It is almost inevitable that Britain will be struck again and again in future years by acts of terrorism.  The Conservative Party must not be weaker than Labour on this issue.  Prosperity and security, as John Howard understands, is the fundamental 'politics of and'.

Comments

[malcolm]

Not sure I buy the implication that the Conservative Party is in any way 'weaker' on crime and security than Labour. Surely you aren't going to defend ID Cards or 90 day detentions without charges being brought are you?

[Tapestry]

Has Cam pulled Murdoch?

His move Right seems to have coincided with Murdoch dumping on Gordon Brown..Stelzer, Kaletsky, Portillo and all the primary NI commentators are suddenly strongly anti-Brown.

Or was the move to the Right part of the Cam Plan from day 1? and the Murdoch move is pure coincidence?

[Umbrella Man]

We need to listen carefully to the police and security services on 90 days. If they deem 90 days' detention to be necessary for the protection of the public we should not ignore that advice for ideological reasons. We need a pragmatic commitment to the protection of the public. I worry about the Tories being on the wrong side of the police and the Sun on this issue.

[RobD]

Tapestry - Kaletsky's aricle today is an extraordinary turn around. Something is going on at NI, I just hope Dave hasn't given up too much for this change.

[malcolm]

Has there been even one case where the police have had to release someone because they ran out of time when questioning them Umbrella Man? I think the answer is no. Until the police can produce solid evidence that they are being hampered in their work by current legislation then nothing should change.To date they have not done so. I would need much more than the urgings of someone like Ian Blair to want to change our present law.

[SimonNewman]

Apparently the government is proposing to allow police to continue questioning suspects after charging them, a far better idea and far less harmful to liberty than 90 days' detention.

I certainly agree with this piece, "And theory" is vital if the Conservatives expect to win the election, it's also the right thing to do. The 2005 election I think was lost because the campaign was incredibly weak and lop-sided; the immigration message was all "nudge nudge, wink wink" and quite distasteful, when it should have been a clear statement: "We will control immigration." The message on tax, the vital message in Brown's over-taxed Britain, was weak and confused. I think the current message on tax is still weak - "stability over tax cuts" doesn't make much sense in the current environment where we have high taxes & low growth combined with low inflation. "Sharing the proceeds of growth" is deliberately fuzzy but unobjectionable in itself.

[Donal Blaney]

Being strong on security doesn't mean we need to endorse ID cards and 90 day periods of detention. A greater investment in intelligence, more proactive policing and greater surveillance of profiled groups or people is more important.

[HF]

Security is an issue where we need a clear message but one that is supportive of police and our liberty.

Is it the case that the police and CPS want to introduce recorded evidence but the security service do not because they do not want the scrutiny?

If so why not encourage ACPO to request it?

Also hammer home the message of cutting the form filling burden placed on police. Free up police resources to chase the criminals and terrorists.

[Ted]

It seems clear that John Reid is adopting a much closer position to the Conservative one than his predessors or Gordon - he "isn't convinced" about 90 days, is looking at a single minister for security (Homeland security anyone?), thinks allowing phone tap evidence might be a good idea and changing rules on further action after charging should be considered.

He has a history of rubbishing our ideas then adopting them (immigration for example).

[The Orator]

It would be fatal for DC to be at all seen as changing direction. It would be correctly seen as a sign of weakness by both sides of politics. The right will demand more and labour will go straight for the flip-flopping throat.

Let's hear David Cameron explain how what he has said in the last year is 100% consistent with his views as a Conservative. He may be left compared to alot of us but he still did not join the party of regulation and redistribution. What are the principles that make him conservative?

Let him not start getting 'gritty'. The blue-sky attitude he brought has been the best thing he's done in his first year. He's made us look like winners, not whingers, for the first time in years. What is needed is not a change of tone but an affirmation of Conservatism IN that upbeat tone.

He needs to put clear blue sky (to adapt an old adage) between us and the socialists. It is they that need to be exposed as throwbacks. DC's attack on Livingstone was a great start to this campaign, all the better for not sounding scripted.

The second best thing DC has done is NOT change the name of the Conservatives. Let's not shrink from that label but show that conservatism and compassion go hand-in-hand. It's a robust and empirically tested ideology that protects and promotes the best parts of society for the good of everyone.

[Og]

Quite why it has taken so long for the penny to drop with Kaletsky that Brown is a poor chancellor and an unreformable old socialist beats me. Perhaps he's not very bright. But I don't see it as an endorsement of Cameron - nor should it, until we see the outline sketch of Tory economic policy which makes an honest attempt at reform of our tax structure and public services.

[matt wright]

Broadly agree with this recommendation from Tim. We need to put across more on Law & Order,

Matt

[John Hirst]

Dave needs to give the human rights of citizens full consideration, including the human rights of prisoners, the most vulnerable group in society. In particular, he should support the prisoners human rights to the vote. Democracy dies when there is a weak opposition. He is killing democracy by not attacking the government over this issue. The government is weak here and he cannot see their weakness which should call into question his fitness for the leadership.

[malcolm]

What a ridiculous post from John Hirst. If someone has been convicted of something so serious that they have lost their liberty they should have absolutely no right to elect a government. The idea that this issue should determine Camerons 'fitness for leadership' is a joke. I suggest you go to the LibDems they take ideas like this seriously.