The last hawk in the shadow cabinet gets his wings clipped

ConservativeHome understands that Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox has been ordered to tone down his neoconservative views and row in behind William Hague’s line on the war in Iraq and the threat posed by Iran. Dr Fox, perhaps the most hawkish member of David Cameron's team, has long argued that it would be irresponsible to take the military option off the table in the west's attempt to stop Iran gaining a nuclear weapon. That is also the official shadow cabinet view but the Tory leadership do not want any attention drawn to the issue. We gather he was called in to see David Cameron and William Hague this week and told in no uncertain terms to stop - what was described to Conservative Home as ‘freelancing.’

The party leader and Shadow Foreign Secretary were also concerned at criticisms of Poland and Hungary attributed to Dr Fox. See Guido Fawkes' report here.

This news follows yesterday's dove-ish response from William Hague to President Bush's troops surge.

Comments

[Tory At Large]

This is awful news: it's people like Fox saying the right thing that is keeping a big chunk of the Conservative Party on side.

[Umbrella Man]

There may be trouble ahead...

[Sally Roberts]

Very sorry to hear this news and I think the Leadership will live to regret it!

[Adam]

Good for Hague and Cameron. Dr Fox needs to get a grip. What does he think the consequences for our precarious forces in Iraq would be if we bombed Iran? We have to deal with the world as it is, not as we would wish it to be, and the sad truth is that pinning ourselves down in Iraq greatly restricts how we can deal with Iran.

How does he intend to respond to the Russian threat he perceives building up by aiming to throw Poland our of NATO?

Indeed, does he really think that the Poles and Hungarians are going to be keener to send troops to help in Afghanistan or even buddy up to our new grouping in the European Parliament if we keep mouthing off about how awful we think their armed forces are?

[David]

They'll be dancing in the streets of Tehran tonight!

[sino]

Its the right thing to do but very suspicious. The biggest neo con trouble makers under Howard were the Notting Hill Set. It is unlikely that they have had a conversion on the road to damascus.

[Valedictoryan]

I refer you to the pithy second post in Guido's thread.

[jorgen]

No wonder Fox has been relatively quiet lately. A shame as he is right regarding the war. I wonder who will be the first hawk to leave the Cameron experiment.

[Ted]

If his comments on Poland & Hungary were reported correctly Dr Fox (who was my preference for the leadership) deserved to be carpeted.
We want a Shadow Cabinet that takes joint responsibility and sticks to the agreed line, doesn't fly kites and give conflicting messages. This requires DC & kitchen cabinet to work with the S Cabinet in agreeing the line - its shouldn't be a one man (and Steve) band. It also means some members must compromise their views.

[Peter Hatchet]

Fox is an idiot.

Why isn't he crucifying the government over the Royal Navy cuts instead?

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Good on Cameroon.

[Phil]

Bad news, although I would disagree with Fox if he wants Poland and Hungary suspended from NATO – we should surely see those nations as key allies. Adam at 1520 makes some good points on this. Aren’t they more Atlanticist than “Old Europe”? Would they be part of a better group in the EU than the EPP for us to link with? Surely we should be seeking to deepen our relationship with them, and from that encourage them to increase their share of defence spending.

If Dr Fox has been told to fall in behind Hague on the war on threats posed by Islamism, and also by a nuclear Iran, then it is worrying indeed. We need Churchillian, not Chamberlainian leadership! Any talk of grovelling to Iran to help us in Iraq, or giving excuses to terrorists (such as the Israel/Palestinian situation) is nauseating.

Valedictoryan, the 2nd post on Guido’s thread is nasty and in bad taste, as are some of his others.

[Matthew Dear]

I'm with Adam - well put fella.

[malcolm]

I thought Fox would be an excellent Defence Secretary but to date he has been quite disappointing. Opposition to MOD mismanagement has primarily come from senior Army officers not the Conservative party.
Later today Blair is apparently launching a debate about the future role of the Armed forces. That debate should have been launched by us months ago.

[Phil]

I meant to say "If Dr Fox has been told to fall in behind Hague on the war on terror, the threat posed by Islamism, and ..."

[Guido Fawkes]

This is Fox's chance to be Churchillian. He should do the honourable thing and make his case from the backbenches. If he is right his day will come.

[Richard]

Iran is not Iraq. They actually ARE trying to obtain nukes!

[Neil Yates]

"They'll be dancing in the streets of Tehran tonight!"

Too right - after all, there are few members of the Iranian public who do not take a keen interest in the internal machinations of the British Conservative Party.

[Daniel VA]

Liam Fox has apparently been in a bit of a sulk ever since he made way for William Hague and David Davis didn't, and was alleged to be the un-named 'senior shadow cabinet member' responsible for some divisive off-the-record briefings last year.

I'm not sure if that speculation is true or not (and I hope it isn't), but this intervention from David Cameron and William Hague shows strong leadership and is a timely reminder of the importance of the shadow cabinet all singing from the same hymn sheet on matters like this.

Liam Fox has a lot to offer the Conservative frontbench and it would be a pity if he allowed his talent to go to waste through impetuosity.

[tired and emotional]

Fox is right about Iran - and it is obviously true that taking any options of the table is a laughably bad idea when dealing with Iran.

Iran does not intend to stop until it has nuclear weapons - when they have them they will use them. Fox is right about Iran. They must be prevented from going nuclear. The costs of sitting back, letting them get nukes and relying on their good nature will be enormous.

[ToMTom]

Liam Fox fancied himself as David Owen, but Owen was a twerp and Fox has managed to emulate him

[Mark McCartney]

>>The biggest neo con trouble makers under Howard were the Notting Hill Set.<<

Yes, particularly Gove and Osborne, and no doubt their principles are sincere enough, whatever one may think of the disasters that have resulted from the Neocon policies they used to support.

The real lessons to be learned are as follows:

Firstly, that the party leadership seems to have moved into a principle-free zone in which everything must be sacrificed to winning the next election. Neocon policies bomb with the public, so out they go.

Secondly, that the centralised totalitarianism that has replaced the old "Broad Church" of the Tory party will not hesitate to strike down anybody - be he never so high - who gets out of line.

So it's not just local councillors making off-colour jokes about gays and ethnic minorities who are going to get the order of the boot.

The new ethic runs right to the top (well not quite) and if a cabinet minister is caught supporting some principled doctrine that has just been reversed for reasons of pure expediency, he will receive the same draconian treatment as some drunken member of CF who dons a Hitler uniform and gives Nazi salutes during rag week.

Still, I suppose you can't say they aren't being even-handed.

[Jack Stone]

Cameron showing what some of us have thought for some time that he as excellent leadership qualities.
Fox should row behind the good ship Cameron or jump ship. I suspect if he did jump ship he would only be missed for a day or two as he as been ineffective in all of the positions he as held in the shadow cabinet.

[Simon Chapman]

"Blair is apparently launching a debate about the future role of the Armed forces. That debate should have been launched by us months ago"

Malcolm, Liam Fox has been making this point ever since he became Shadow Defence Secretary. He has constantly said that we need to ensure that our armed services have the capacity to ensure we can meet our foreign policy commitments.

I haven't time to dig out an example now, but will do so in due course.

It is an immense pity that Hague & Cameron are taking this line. I suspect the influence of Cameron's foreign policy advisors - Hurd, Patten et al. Bad news for the party, and bad news for the country and for global geopolitics when we get back to power.

[Mark McCartney]

Jack Stone confirms exactly what I just wrote about the "attitude problem" gaining ground within the Conservative party.

I have encountered many people who drop their aitches when speaking, but Mr Stone is the only person I have ever come across who drops them in writing.

Frankly, it doesn't inspire much confidence in his judgment.

[Alan.]

I think people should stop characterizing Fox as a "hawk". More important to me that he is a man with moral standards.

[Alan]

"... a man with moral standards" - which he undoubtedly is.

[David Sergeant]

From my little place at the bottom of the heap I have never heard Fox's views as mentioned above. What I also havn't heard is many views from Fox about the crisis in defence. Frankly Fox seems hopeless. I also thought he was useless as party Chairman and if we had had a proper one at the last election, say as good as Tebbit, Blair's majority would be a lot smaller.

I suspect that there is a general problem within the party of mistaking internal egotist policies for real political campaigning to influence the electors. I suppose Fox, at a sherry party, come across as a nice guy. To electors he comes across as a bit of a creep.

[Larry Green]

Last time I came on this blog I resolved not to post again I was so disgusted by the views of a noisy leftist minority. However I have been following posts and was particularly encouraged by the many excellent posts on the recent "gay rights" thread.

So far this thread is a disappointment and once again I detect a minority undercurrent of anti-semitism.

We will stand or fall alongside Israel and America which are warriors for western civilisation and democracy against Islamofascism.

Among some posters I detect the yellow streak of the same appeasement which plagued the pre-war Tory Party.

[ThePrince]

Fox is a waste of space, he has failed to look like a statesman at every opporunity, he is out of his depth on foreign affairs and can't campaign on well on important issues and can't get attention for anything he does not even his moronic remarks about poland.

[Matt Davis]

Once again Jack Stone advocates the divisive view that all those not wholly supporting the LibDem err I mean Cameroonian line should leave the party. If that were to happen then there would be very few members/activists/MPs left Jack. Let's address recent history a little here Jack, if the same had been said of the left of the Party under Hague/Howard/IDS would you have then left Jack? No didn't think so and what's sauce for the goose must also me sauce for the Gander so please stop this Stalinist rubbish about people who don't agree with you or the Blue Labour tendency leaving the party.

[jorgen]

Watch out, Matt and Mark. "Jack Stone" is probably Cameron himself in disguise. His unique grammar is a little bit too perfect to be true.

[Will James]

Although I condemn Fox's comments on Poland and Hungary as idiotic, Cameron and Hague's 'wing-clipping' is bad news for all those who, like me, wish to see the Conservative Party argue for neo-conservative foreign and defence policies.

Recent announcements from Hague and Cameron have smacked of opportunism, from DC's announcement that Conservatives and LibDems think the same about Iraq to their position over the Israel-Hizbullah conflict last summer.

We should be making a forceful case for strengthening our armed forces, backing the democratic governments of Iraq, Afghanistan and Israel, standing up to Iranian and North Korean nuclear development/proliferation, defending our relationship with the USA and making concrete proposals to combat Islamic extremism both at home and abroad.

Instead Cameron wants to follow opinion polls and focus groups, because he is too afraid to be labelled something he thinks will go down badly with swing voters.

The best option availiable is for DC to reshuffle Fox back as Shadow Foreign Secretary, with Hague as Shadow Chancellor, and Osbourne as Environment Secretary. This will guarantee an effective Conservative foreign policy, and also raise the Environment profile at the same time.

Please Mr. Cameron, make the gritty decision. Not the easy one!

[ToMTom]

Fox should row behind the good ship Cameron or jump ship.

This analogy is funny - you have either to "row behind" or"jump".......so clearly there is no room for anyone else on-board.

That is interesting.

Then again if the good ship Cameron is in fact being towed to the breakers being some distance behind seems advisable

[Tanuki]

Instead of clipping Fox's wings over Iran, Cameron should be setting Fox to 'kill' and launching him into battle against the sad mess which is New Labour's wholly inadequate ongoing support for the MoD, wherever they happen to be in service. My view is that it's utterly irresponsible to adopt a doveish attitude to Iran's global nuclear ambitions. Just what is the point of a 'conservative' party if not first to defend the UK against global threats?

[Jon Gale]

"I suppose Fox, at a sherry party, come across as a nice guy. To electors he comes across as a bit of a creep."

Well said David Sergeant,

My abiding memory of Fox is from the 2005 election campaign. He was on Radio 4's PM regularly - and was awful each time, failing to explain or defend policies on immigration, health, tax, whatever. Even when he was telling the clear truth he manged to sound evasive and shifty. Eddie Mair took him apart. I breathed a sigh of relief when he was knocked out of the leadership race.

He has probably just been bollocked for his freelance comments on Poland and Hungary, and is now briefing that he is being punished because he is a hawk.

[John Wilkinson]

I don't have much time for Cameron, and before last summer, I used to have a lot of time for Fox. But the way, for example, 'ConservativeHome understands' anything about private, and deserved, bollockings Fox has gotten from the party leader goes a long way to explaining why there are so many people like me who have gone off Liam in the last year or two. If he thinks cameron's in the wrong, say so, or resign, but don't brief like this.

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

I see Mitzy Green is back with us. It's true to say that many people see Fox as a "creep". He's also an arrogant so and so. That said, I didn't think he was too bad at Health.

[congaconga]

hmm... I detect a plot to destabilise Fox. I can't believe that many of the posts here and on Guido's blog are from genuine ordinary party members.
Fox has a very strong fan base for a reason. He is hero worshipped in the scottish university associations. He went down a storm at a Kensington and Chelsea ward event the other week, got the crowd litterally whooping with approval. Fox is a tremendous asset with the grassroots wherever he is deployed. I'm not sure that ganging up on him is good for the party or ultimately good for Cameron.
Part of the reaction to him is fear I think, from the left of the party and also from the many labour supporters who read and comment on this blog.
Incidentally, Hungary has behaved quite disgracefully towards its NATO allies, reneging on a pledge that it made as to the proportion of its GDP it had to spend on defence. The problem is that if a small group of countries do this it imperrils the entire defence pact. Remember we have to defend Hungary now, and if they bring nothing to the table of any military worth (ie defence spending), ultimately it makes us weaker as a nation. Even a small number of countries doing this within a large defensive agreement can completely destroy the agreement, for obvious reasons.

[Valedictoryan]

"So far this thread is a disappointment and once again I detect a minority undercurrent of anti-semitism."

Larry - what were you referring to?

[Matt Davis]

Jorgen I don't for one minute imagine that Jack Stone is actually DC. I do have considerable doubts as to whether he is a real person, suspecting that just like Changetowin he is in actuality some adolescent CCHQ hack pretending to be a long standing activist in order to post views that no-one real wants to.Either that or it's Steve Hilton, a man who patently cares not one whit for the Conservative party, only for his focus group and spin based empire building.

[btw]

"Steve Hilton"

Great job with those Blair "demon eyes"...

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Fox has been disappointing in the jobs that he has done, the sad thing is that people support him purely because of what they perceive his politics to be and not his ability. He has made little impact at defence; a role which should be a good fit for him, and he needs to shape up quickly otherwise he should be replaced.

[Ian]

"Jorgen I don't for one minute imagine that Jack Stone is actually DC. I do have considerable doubts as to whether he is a real person"

Isn't he the guy who claimed to be a Tory activist in Southend or somewhere and then didn't know the number of MPs in his own town?

I hope he'll correct me if I'm wrong.

[Sally Roberts]

To get back on topic - and all I would say on the point about David Cameron is that why on earth would he want to come on this blog under a pseudonym? He has WebCameron and numerous other ways of expressing his views under his own name!!! - I do sympathise with and understand the point that Larry Green is making - The reason that so many people are decrying Liam Fox is that he has shown himself to be a staunch friend of Israel and I well remember the excellent speech he made at the CFI Fringe Meeting in Bournemouth back in October. Larry, I cannot see that there has been any "anti-semitic" tone in this thread - but I do remember previous occasions when there certainly has been and I assume this is what you are referring to.
To attack Israel is to attack the front-line which is defending Western values and the Western way of life. The safety and security of that small state is of paramount importance to us all. I realise this comment will attract a "deluge" of comments - but it is my view and I stand by it.

[Alexander Fisher]

Liam Fox is an absolutely first-rate politician and one of the best members of the shadow cabinet. The leadership is 100% wrong to reprimand him in this way and will have to face the consquences if he decides to take action.

DC is playing a very dangerous game. At some point the party will require a reassertion of its traditional principals which are best exemplified by LF and DD.

[Ian]

"To get back on topic - and all I would say on the point about David Cameron is that why on earth would he want to come on this blog under a pseudonym?"

Er...is it just possible this may have been a joke?

Although I was unhappy about the Iraq War and I often feel that Israel does itself few favours, I am also concerned at the level of "Anti-Zionist" posts on this Conservative site.

The West is indeed under threat and what I find astonishing is that those who are often most concerned to play down the meanace Islamic extremism are the very left-liberals who are most likely to be its targets.

[Jack Stone]

I don`t want Fox kicked out of the shadow cabinet primarly because of his views which are bad enougth but because he is useless.
I don`t want all right-wingers kicked out of the party I just want them to support Cameron the way those in the centre and the left of the party supported the leader when the party was unfortunate enougth to have a leader from the right of the party.

[Simon Chapman]

Malcolm & David Segeant were worried about Liam's views:

One example, October 2005. Fox's conference speech, which summarises much of what he has said before & since:

"This year, here, in the United Kingdom, we will spend only 2.5% of our GDP on defence. Let me put this in perspective. This is the smallest proportion of our national wealth that we have spent on defending our country in any year since 1930.

By the time the new Wembley Stadium is finished, we will be able to seat all the other ranks of the British army inside it. The Royal Navy is now smaller than the French navy. And the RAF Museum at Hendon now has more attack aircraft than the RAF.

Since Labour came to power the Army has been cut by 9,000, the Royal Navy has been cut by 10,000 and the RAF has been cut by 16,000.

Yet our armed forces have seldom been under such a strain. They have never been asked to do so much, with so little.

It leads us to an unavoidable choice for both our country and our party. Do we reduce our commitments to match the size of our resources or do we increase our resources to match our commitments? The choice we make will have the most profound consequences for our country.

Under Tony Blair, there has been too little strategic thinking about our foreign policy. So defence policy has constantly had to play catch up with overseas commitments made in the latest summit communiqué. This is no basis for a sound defence policy for the United Kingdom.

That's why under David Cameron's leadership, William Hague and I are determined that the Conservatives will have a properly integrated foreign and defence policy so that the shape and size of our armed forces will properly reflect the strategic interests and defence requirements of this country.

VALUING OUR FORCES
This year I have had the opportunity to visit our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. I believe that they are the best in the world. And I believe that their families and we, their country, have every right to be proud of them.

But pride alone is not enough. Our troops are our greatest asset. They should never be sent into combat without being properly equipped. To see British soldiers killed, because there was not enough body armour to go round, would have brought resignations from more honourable governments than this one.

And let me tell you another scandal: To have our troops return home wounded and put them in civilian wards is simply unacceptable. For those who have been traumatised in combat, healing of the mind is as important as healing of the body. The best place for this to happen is in a ward which is exclusively military, where they can recover along side their comrades who understand what they have gone through. We owe it to those who have risked their lives on our behalf to treat them with dignity."

[Mark McCartney]

>>when the party was unfortunate enougth to have a leader from the right of the party.<<

Would that be a reference to Margaret Thatcher, Jack Stone?

That thoroughly disloyal insult says a lot about you, doesn't it?

[Simon Chapman]

We need some consistency here. If the Party has decided to focus on new issues that the Conservatives have not traditionally been associated with, and to "stop banging on" about Europe, imigration, tax, Defence etc, with the party's media & communications team delivering that brief and the shadow cabinet being instructed accordingly, it is then a little much to berate the Defence spokesman for not getting headlines that the party leadership doesn't want to be got. It's also a little too easy to undermine someone by then suggesting that they haven't been effective as a result.

This story is absoultely not about Liam's effectiveness. It is about the direction the Conservative Party is taking in relation to Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy may not win elections as a primary issue. But it says a great deal about the character vision and foresight of the party. Liam Fox set out a principled and attractive vision for British foreign policy in 2005. Since then he has led on energy security, and Putin's decision this week to shut down energy supplies to Germany & Poland has proved him right.

It looked for a while as if the party was going to keep to the course Liam mapped out. Now it looks as if we are returning to the little european worldview that has predominated since 1945 and which has contributed to rather than solved many of the geopolitical problems we now face. This is a great great shame.

[Simon]

I make no apologies- i'm in the Liam Fox fan club. So what if he's been slapped on the wrists by the 'ok ya' brigade! I agree with Simon Chapman regarding Fox in his role as Shadow Defence Secretary. If anything we should be hearing MORE from him considering the 'horlicks' over forces personnel accomodation ( in Carterton/ RAF Brize Norton- Cameron's constituency; is that why Fox has been relatively quiet...)and the 'two' messages coming out of the government vis Portsmouth's long term future.

[Valedictoryan]

>>when the party was unfortunate enougth to have a leader from the right of the party.<<

Would that be a reference to Margaret Thatcher, Jack Stone?

That thoroughly disloyal insult says a lot about you, doesn't it?

Yes, that's right, Margaret Thatcher was the last leader from the right of the party, wasn't she?

Still, I'm glad to hear that, unless you're a hypocrite, you won't be insulting or disloyal to our leader!

[TomTom]

To have our troops return home wounded and put them in civilian wards is simply unacceptable.

A stupid policy when John major introduced it, as was his policy of selling off MoD housing to Nomura Bank.

As for Foreign Policy - this country hasn't got one because not one of the politicians has a clue. Labour has only ever had one decent Foreign Secretary - Ernest Bevin......but the country is run by men with no understanding of History, Economic Geography, or Realpolitik.

The problem is severe and a consequence of having too few highly-educated specialists in Parliament but too many student politicians and men-on-the-make

[Mark McCartney]

>>Still, I'm glad to hear that, unless you're a hypocrite, you won't be insulting or disloyal to our leader!<<

Is there a leader?

[malcolm]

Thank you for your effort Simon Chapman. I am aware of that speech from Liam Fox. Although I would agree with every word it hardly sets out a strategic vision of how the Conservative party would manage our Armed forces,reposition our defence commitments in view of our current capability and has had nothing practical to say about the appalling deficiencies we face in men and material in Afghanistan. I criticise our shadow ministers very reluctantly and whilst it is true I disagree wholeheartedly with Liams' neoConservative views it is on the basis of his holding of the MOD to account that I rate his performance as Defence secretary. I still hope that he can raise his game and give Browne the kicking he so richly deserves.

[malcolm]

Larry Greens comment that all criticism of Liam Fox is motivated by anti-semiticism is outrageous and untrue. Very disappointed that you chose to support him Sally.

[congaconga]

"Although I would agree with every word it hardly sets out a strategic vision of how the Conservative party would manage our Armed forces,reposition our defence commitments in view of our current capability and has had nothing practical to say about the appalling deficiencies we face in men and material in Afghanistan."

Come on malcom, be serious, Cameron has banned all real policy announcements until we get closer to the next election. Fox isn't allowed to do any of the above that you mention.

[Sally Roberts]

Malcolm, I did point out to Larry that I did not detect any anti-semitism in this thread but I do stand by my comment that there has been some on previous occasions and that I was assuming he was referring to those incidences. I certainly do not think that ALL criticism of Liam Fox is motivated by his stance towards and support of Israel but it is certainly a factor.

[Jez B]

Some talk of moral standards on this thread. I seem to recall that we were promised that our MEPs would be pulled out of the EPP during Cameroon's leadership bid.

An honourable man would honour his promise.

[Valedictoryan]

"I certainly do not think that ALL criticism of Liam Fox is motivated by his stance towards and support of Israel but it is certainly a factor."

The subtext to this seems to be that criticism of Israel = anti-semitism. That can not be true.

[Sally Roberts]

Not all criticism of Israel equates to anti-semitism - but anti-semitism always includes criticism of Israel!

[Daniel VA]

"The subtext to this seems to be that criticism of Israel = anti-semitism. That can not be true."

That's the trouble I find whenever I try to have a rational discussion about the Israel/Palestine situation.

Criticism of Israel is seen as anti-Semitism or sympathy towards terrorists.

Similarly, the merest hint of negativity towards Palestine is instantly branded as Islamophobia or militant Zionism.

Ok, I may have exaggerated the point a little above, but the fact remains that rational discussion of the Israel/Palestine situation remains impossible while people remain determined to polarise the debate in such crude terms.

[Oliver McCarthy]

For once I think I'll be sensible here and suggest that actually nothing has changed as far as the Tories' foreign policy ethos is concerned. I think what has happened is that Dr Fox shot his mouth off about Poland and Hungary, and so his 'freelancing' days may be over... or at least for the time being.

[Tapestry]

The one thing that people like William Hague, who specialises in talking bollocks, cannot stand is someone like Liam Fox who tells it like it is. Hague and his fudge-making can only survive if all attempts to confront reality are eliminated. Cameron is worryingly too closely allied to Hague.

This relationship has caused the key frictions during the Cameron regime - e.g. over the EPP. It saw some stupid anti-Israeli comments during the Lebanon crisis. Seems that history will be repeating itself over Iran.

Cameron should split from Hague, and allow Fox to tell people what is actually going on. We've had a bellyful of Hague fudge, and folk're getting sick of it.

[Mark McCartney]

Personally, and witing as one who always opposed the war in Iraq, I see the dramatic policy shifts that have taken place since Cameron took over as totally cynical.

I am frankly disappointed in Hague. I had a lot of respect for him and would have preferred that he stuck to his guns, notwithstanding that his current position is much closer to my own.

The problem with tacking to sail with (what you perceive to be) majority public opinion is that every time you do so you may get lukewarm applause from a majority and undying hostility from a minority. Do it a few more times and a "coalition" of minorities becomes a majority.

Larry Green's posts highlight the fact that the party's change in direction seems to have caused enormous offence among its influential Jewish backers. Stanley Kalms issued an outspoken attack at the time, and I was told only the other day that Doreen Miller resigned some party post over it.

They may be able to calm these people down but they will have difficulty in regaining their fullhearted support.

[Valedictoryan]

"Larry Green's posts highlight the fact that the party's ..."

Larry Green's posts remain completely unsubstantiated, but his ability to complain about anti-semitism while simultaneously applauding anti-gay would be laughable if it weren't so tragic.

[Mark McCartney]

>>Larry Green's ability to complain about anti-semitism while simultaneously applauding anti-gay would be laughable<<

Why should that be, Valedictoryan? As I understand Mr Green is Jewish, so his concerns about anti-semitism are understandable.

In my experience devout Jews (like devout Christians and Muslims)do not tend to be favourably inclined towards homosexual practices.

[Valedictoryan]

"Why should that be, Valedictoryan?"

If the "why" isn't obvious to you then it's very unlikely we're going to make any progress on this. I'll save my breath.

[Liz Morgan]

Another disappointed Conservative Activist hearing this News regarding LIam Fox. I have always thought that LIam rightly reflected my views and those of many of my Conservative collegues....makes me think for the first time that the Party are moving away from many of the party activist's opinions..wonder do they know in London that we exist and should matter to them?