ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Tories seek to establish true cost of Gordon Brown's attack on pensions

The Conservatives have been quick to jump on the news that Gordon Brown was repeatedly warned by civil servants about the long-term impact of his £5bn-a-year raid on private pension provision.  Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, Philip Hammond, is seeking an independent inquiry by the Government Actuary to establish the true cost to savers of the changes made by Gordon Brown in his very first Budget:

“Gordon Brown must explain to the House why he acted in defiance of his top civil servants who warned that his tax reforms would cost pensions funds billions, leaving a black hole in many of them.  The Chancellor has effectively concealed information surrounding these plans from Parliament for the last ten years.  The extent of disregard he has shown towards pensioners, past and present, is unbelievable. The Chancellor’s been telling us for the last ten years these tax changes didn’t have a negative effect on pensions funds.  The documents now prove this is not true.  An independent inquiry by the Government Actuary into the total cost of this stealth tax to Britain’s pensions funds is urgently required.  The way in which Gordon Brown ignored advice that these measures would undermine pensions funds, his persistent denial of what these papers now confirm, and the sneaky way this bad news release was managed, all pose yet more questions about Gordon Brown’s fitness for the highest office.”

This morning's Times published the all-too-accurate warnings of civil servants about the likely impact of Gordon Brown's proposed reforms:

• "The lower paid would be worse off under the new rules
• Pensioners due to retire would lose out immediately
• Businesses would struggle to adjust to the change
• It would cost pension providers £4 billion a year
• Pension benefits would be cut
• Shares could drop by between 6 per cent and 20 per cent
• The value of existing pension funds could fall immediately by £50 billion
• Local authority schemes would need topping up, leading to higher public spending
• The Department of Trade and Industry would be “gravely concerned” about having to bail out pension schemes driven into insolvency."

Charles Moore: Cameron's strategy is working

Saturday's newspapers are always a treat.  You have Matthew Parris in The Times and Charles Moore in The Telegraph.  In this morning's Telegraph, Charles Moore pens a bird's eye view of Project Cameron and he is optimistic about its chances of success.

He begins by attempting to rebut the contention of "best friends and fellow-Thatcherites" that Mr Cameron has abandoned key Conservative values on tax, crime and Europe:

• "The Cameron formula about cutting taxes only by "sharing the proceeds of growth" is a statement about what, in practice, happens. No government, except in the direst crisis, actually cuts the total of public spending in real terms. It follows that the room for tax cuts is made by growth, and that it is dishonest to promise otherwise - a dishonesty which Gordon Brown is now committing."  I certainly agree that taxes will be lower under a Conservative government than under a Labour government but I regret the "stability before tax cuts" mantra and the intellectual damage that it has done to the essential idea that a low tax economy is the most stable and successful type of economy.  In the Cameron/Osborne tax formulation there is no acknowledgment that the growth which the Conservatives intend to share is partly based on cutting taxes and other supply-side measures.  [Read today's Platform where Damon Lambert calls for implementation of the Forsyth recommendations].
  
• "The notorious "hug a hoodie" speech did not say that crime should not be punished. It was an attempt to imagine why boys want to be hoodies. Its purpose was to raise points about education, male role models, social responsibility and, above all, family.  That doesn't seem Lefty-silly to me: it seems thoughtful and, in an unpushy way, Christian."  I 100% agree.  With David Cameron we really do have a party leader who wants to be tough on crime (more prisons plus police reform) and tough on the causes of crime (support for the family and more drug rehab).
  
• "Or on Europe, did you notice the other day that Mr Cameron proposed a mechanism within the European treaties which would reverse the ratchet of integration and return power to member states?"  I did notice but I worry about Cameron's steel on Europe because of the delay to EPP exit, the retreat on fishing and my fear of a retreat from democracy in the selection of Tory MEP candidates (a fear Mr Moore shares).  Like Neil O'Brien I'm also worried about trusting the EU on the environment.
  

Charles Moore ends his article by noting some of the Project's weaknesses.  He mentions green taxes and state funding of political parties.  He also contends that David Cameron "has done too little to co-opt most of his MPs into his project, so too many are bewildered or cross."  That certainly is a weakness.  Certain members of the shadow cabinet periodically complain to ConservativeHome that they are inadequately consulted.  David Cameron has none of Michael Portillo's desire for blood on the carpet but more could be done to involve the party in the next steps of a stategy that is beginning to bear political fruit.

Mandela Blasts Top Barnet Tory... Over Dodgy Shirt

You may have heard the story doing the rounds of Hale Conservative Councillor Brian Gordon who dressed up as Nelson Mandela to celebrate the Jewish festival of Purim a few weeks ago.

Gordon himself sent a picture to the Hendon & Finchley Times which was published last week, but the LibDem Press Officer Stieve De Lance has since decided to get righteous over it. Saying he should be "unceremoniously sacked" for "thinly veiled racism", she reported him to both the Commission for Racial Equality and to Barnet Borough Council officials.

The newspaper later managed to dig up a 30 year old article about Gordon advocating an end to immigration, and cited it as another example of him being accused of racism (the validity of this argument was discussed on CF Diary this week). They also contacted Mandela's office about the fuss, who replied:

"We don't see any harm in this whatsoever. If it was a fancy dress party and people were expected to arrive as a character or famous person, we are convinced there was no ill intent behind this. Mr Mandela commented, however, about the choice of the shirt and said - tongue-in-cheek - that it was a rather awkward choice of shirt to resemble his usual shirts. We are not oversensitive about matters like these. Whilst we need to be respectful towards the character in events of this nature, we should try not to read racism into actions which may be completely innocent."

How delicious to see this politically correct point-scoring backfire on the LibDems. Gordon was rightly supported by Mike Freer, the Conservative leader of the council and Finchley & Golders Green candidate:

"Are we now saying that white people cannot dress up as black people? I do not see how people can find it offensive. Just to categorise Nelson Mandela on the basis of his colour is demeaning to him."

Deputy Editor

30% of Tory voters have UKIP or BNP as second choice

This morning's YouGov survey for The Daily Telegraph gives the Conservatives a 7% advantage over Labour.  It also confirms Wednesday's Times/ Populus survey and its suggestion that the SNP is clearly set to become Scotland's biggest party after May 3rd.  "On the “forced choice” question, asking if people would prefer a Labour government under Gordon Brown or a Conservative government under David Cameron, the Conservatives lead by 10 points," notes UK Polling Report.

UKPR also identifies some other interesting findings on the second preferences of likely voters for the main political parties.  They are summarised in the graphic below:

Having a party as a second preference does not necessarily indicate a significant propensity to actually vote for that party but many of us will be hugely disappointed to learn that more than a tenth of likely Conservative voters have a inclination to vote BNP.

An end-2006 ConservativeHome survey of members (rather than supporters/ voters) found that UKIP was much more popular as a second choice and the LibDems and BNP much less popular.

Lord Tebbit becomes sponsor of 'Better Off Out'

Former Party Chairman Norman Tebbit has become the latest senior Conservative to lend his weight to The Freedom Association's Better Off Out campaign.  Lord Tebbit joins Frederick Forsyth and former Commons Speaker Lord Weatherill as patrons of 'BOO'.  Explaining his decision, Lord Tebbit said:

"From being a supporter of British membership of the Common Market in 1970 I have come to believe that the United Kingdom would be Better Off Out of the developing European Republic of the 21st century. We British have a thousand year history of self-government. We have been free and democratic longer than any other nation. The European Union is too diverse, too bureaucratic, too corporatist and too centralist to be a functioning democracy. We are happy to trade with our European friends and the rest of the world - but we would prefer to govern ourselves."

In a Q&A for today's ConservativeHome, however, John Maples MP - in charge of candidates at CCHQ - says that he and the party will take "a dim view" of any candidate that signs the BOO pledge.  "This campaign is contrary to party policy," he writes, "...[and] we expect candidates, before and after selection to support party policy."  Gordon Henderson, Tory candidate in Sittingbourne and Sheppey, is the only candidate to have signed up to BOO so far.  A poll by ConservativeHome of party members found that 30% supported the BOO campaign and another 33% had sympathy for its objectives but feared it might be divisive.

Related link: We must have the courage to break free of the EU, says Philip Hollobone MP.

"Be the change"

How well does this semi-parodic catchphrase used by some CCHQers match up when it comes to Party democracy? Charles Moore in this week's Spectator:

"Meanwhile, the Conservative party continues its devotion to openness, localism and modernised democracy in everything except its own organisation. The party has a little-known body called the National European Forum which has come up with a plan to deny party members the right to choose their candidates for the European Parliament. It wants ‘regional selection colleges’ (dominated, naturally, by Europhiles) to vet existing MEPs before they can stay on the list of candidates for the next elections. All new candidates would be nominated by the central party organisation. The current system of regional hustings would be abolished, and so ‘one member, one vote’, a quite widely known democratic concept, but one which has had only a brief and fragile life in the Conservative party, would be no more."

According to our polling 78% of Party members are against a system discriminating in favour of incumbent MEPs, instead believing that:

"They should face a vote in which all Tory members in their European Parliamentary regions can participate."

Aside from the party democracy issue, underlying this debate is a battle for the soul of the Conservative delegation in Brussels - the closer the MEPs are to Party members, the more eurosceptic they will be.

A number of MEPs gave their opinions to ConservativeHome on this important internal issue back in January (to the great displeasure of certain people). Also worth reading are the thoughts of Francis Maude and Chris Heaton-Harris MEP on which there are many comments, and Tim Montgomerie's recent (and as yet unreplied to) open letter to David Cameron urging intervention.

Deputy Editor

5pm update - The press office have acknowledged the open letter:

"At the moment we have nothing to announce in this area but we will certainly make sure that you are included in any briefing when we have something to report."

Conservatives establish 'Operation Miliband'

The category for this post is 'Countdown to Brown?' because of the longstanding expectation that the Chancellor will move from Number Eleven to Number Ten when Tony Blair steps down.  There is increasingly feverish attempts by the Mandelson-Byers-Clarke-Milburn axis to change that and the only candidate they appear to have is David Miliband.  Is that the best Labour can do?  Gordon Brown has his many weaknesses but is surely a better bet for Labour than the geeky Environment Secretary who will never out-Cameron Cameron?  Labour probably have more chance with Brown - contrasting Brown's seriousness with Cameron's inexperience.  You can also be sure that all hell would follow any successful attempt by Blairites to deny Brown the crown.

Up until now CCHQ's strategy has been built on the expectation of a Prime Minister Brown but, according to The Telegraph, they have now established an anti-Miliband unit:

"The Tory response to Mr Miliband's recent burst of speeches and media appearances has been to commit a small group of staff to the sole task of tracking his past and future utterances.  The anti-Miliband unit will scrutinise his latest speeches, media appearances and comments on his blog.  It will also dig into problems he has faced in his South Shields constituency. A Tory source said: "We would be crazy not to be watching him. It is obvious that a challenge by Miliband cannot be ruled out."

The article Mr Miliband has written for this morning's Telegraph (and, I think, New Statesman) certainly reads like a mini-manifesto for the next stages of the Labour project and, perhaps, a leadership pitch.  He divides the last sixty years into three main phases.  After the war we lived in the 'I need' phase - a phase of history where government helped to provide people with healthcare, education and basic security.  In the 1980s we entered the 'I want' society and the Thatcherite agenda facilitated that hunger for material well-being.  Now, Mr Miliband suggests, we are entering the 'I can' years where people produce and decide - as well as consume and defer.  He gives the examples  of citizen journalism, home energy production, community justice panels and co-operatively-managed parks and public spaces as examples of the 'I can' era.

Milibandism all sounds a lot like David Cameron's social responsibility and localism agenda (The Telegraph leader-writers certainly think so) and imitation is certainly the sincerest form of flattery.  Miliband may be able to steal Cameron's ideas but he cannot match his charisma.

ConservativeHome's 2nd birthday

Just to say that Tim launched ConservativeHome exactly two years ago. Please excuse there being two pictures of myself in one day!

Thanks for all your comments (particularly on this recent post about the site) and continued support. We're constantly looking at how to improve it, and are hopeful of another fruitful year.

Deputy Editor

Sam Coates and Sam Coates

Sam Coates is hardly the most common of names and so it's very understandable that confusion has been caused by the fact that there's a Sam Coates who helps edit this website and another Sam Coates who is a political correspondent for The Times.  ConservativeHome's Samuel Coates is regularly asked by friends and associates about an article that the other Sam Coates has written for that day's Times.  When the three of us had lunch together today, The Times' Mr Coates revealed that some people on the Government's side of the political divide have been more than a little concerned about him (they wrongly assumed) writing for a Conservative blog.  This photo will hopefully convince the confused that there are two Sam Coates.  'Our' Sam/ Samuel is pictured on the left and The Times' Sam on the right - loyally holding a copy of the newspaper he works for (with a slightly unfortunate headline in shot!).

IDS: Manchester casino would mean degeneration - not regeneration

A report to be released by the Centre for Social Justice confirms critics' worst suspicions about the Government's planned 'Super-Casino’ in East Manchester, saying degeneration, not regeneration, will be the outcome.  Highlighted in the report were several key facts that seem not to have been taken into account in the plans.  Download PDF of Interim CSJ paper on gambling.

‘Problem’ gambling is on the rise in Britain with over 300,000 addicts, despite the opportunities for gambling being relatively limited.  Those most likely to be affected by problem gambling are typically of lower socio-economic background, and bearing in mind that the casino’s planned locality boasts 50% economic inactivity (total dependence on the state), that makes this the worst place to go ahead with the plans.  With research suggesting that in the UK, problem gambling and people getting into serious personal debt are very closely linked, and the young being the most severely affected, the casino is a ‘potentially hazardous threat’.

The report quotes the findings of the British Medical Association that there is a ‘close correlation between gambling and other addictive activities, such as drug and alcohol abuse’, as well as clear evidence from other countries’ experience that the installation of these super-casinos often lead to ‘vice and degeneration’ in the neighbouring communities.  When Manchester already tops the list for robberies, vehicle crime and violent crime, such exacerbation of the problem is very irresponsible, and the report concludes that the placement of a super-casino in this area could have devastating social consequences.

PMQs: Cameron focuses on Iran and business tax

David Cameron's first subject of the day: No excuse for Iran taking the British personnel prisoner. What would "a different phase" would involve? Blair was very specific about the location of the British at the time of capture. Cameron said that as they were operating under a UN mandate the UN should be crystal clear in its position on the matter, and the Prime Minister should make sure there are clear rules of engagement for British personnel in the Gulf.

David Cameron's second subject of the day: Blair said it was better for business to cut corporation tax (great laughter), Cameron countered that there are two rates of corporation tax, and the one for small business is increasing. "Why are small firms being punished?".

Ming moment of the day: Menzies Campbell followed up last week's questions with very similar ones, asking why the poorest fifth of our population have a decreasing share of national income, and alleging that people earning less than £18,000 will pay increasing proportions of income tax after the Budget.

Backbench question of the day: Greg Clark highlighted how last week's budget cost charities millions in gift aid, but hid the fact in its publication.

Line of the day: Cameron said Blair should use his last period as First Lord of the Treasury to cut tax on small business, instead of spending his time in a "pointless search for the environment secretary's backbone".

Deputy Editor

Labour set to be minority party in Scotland and England

A poll in today's Times suggests that the SNP are "heading for victory" in May 3rd's Scottish Parliamentary elections.  Alex Salmond's party would have the largest number of MSPs but would fall short of an overall majority.  The Times' Angus MacLeod and Phillip Webster write:

"If the SNP leader Alex Salmond becomes First Minister, Mr Brown would face taunts that he would be a Scot in power in England whose writ did not run on issues such as health, education and transport in Scotland. And Mr Brown, if he becomes Prime Minister, would also be swiftly reminded that the Conservatives secured narrowly more votes in England than Labour at the last general election – leaving him open to claims that he has a mandate in neither country."

***
On ConservativeHome next week, in two exclusive articles, Murdo Fraser MSP and William Graham AM will present the case for voting Conservative in Scotland and Wales on 3rd May.

Tory lead down from 11% to 4%

A Communicate Research poll for tomorrow's Independent puts the Tory lead down to 35% to 31% compared to 40% to 29% last month.  The LibDems are up 3% to 20%.  A rogue poll?

9am update (28/3): "Communicate Research, it should be said, has built up a reputation for turbulence and unlike all the other pollsters has found Labour leads twice in the past five months. Its final poll before the last general election predicted an 8% Labour margin against the 3% that actually happened. All the other pollsters were closer including the firm which the Indy then used - NOP which got it spot on." (PoliticalBetting.com)

Hague on Iran's kidnapping of Royal Navy sailors

Earlier today I spoke to William Hague about Iran's capture of 15 British sailors.  The Shadow Foreign Secretary is about to visit the Falkland Islands and will be recording a video diary for ConservativeHome.com.

Related link: Weakness invited Iran's capture of British sailors

Northern Board attacked as "gimmick"

Former Tory candidate Jonathan Scott has written for today's Yorkshire Post about the Conservative Party's "northern challenge."  He believes that the actions taken so far are an inadequate response to the fact that "Tory MPs are so few in number in the North that they would struggle to fill a London taxi."  Although Mr Scott's characterisation is exaggerated (David Cameron's three most senior ministers represent northern seats) he does offer two important observations:

The new northern board: "It was instructive that [David Cameron] chose William Hague to head the new Northern Board. The Shadow Foreign Secretary is, without doubt, a very decent man and a hugely talented politician. But he is also a very busy man, and the task and responsibility of restoring the party's fortunes in the North should not have been entrusted to a full-time politician who also has literary and speaking ambitions... The fact that the Northern Board will meet only quarterly speaks volumes of the lack of urgency with which Central Office regards the crisis facing the party in the northern reaches. What is needed is a daily, hourly, assault on the key constituencies, re-building shattered constituency associations, identifying key local issues that connect with the voters, establishing links, bonds of trust, between the party and the local and regional media."

Northern voters want more than climate change: "The people of the North do care about climate change. On the east coast, they have grown familiar with the constant depredations of the sea, eating away at their homes and their livelihoods. For them, the prospect of rising sea levels is terrifying. Cities such as York know only too well how heavy rainfall and storms can spell personal and financial ruin in the form of floods. So the softer, climate change message is a good one, even here in the North. But it should not be the only message or the primary message. Like it or not, immigration, crime, welfare fraud, the dependency culture, and the politics of identity are much more pressing issues for prospective Tory voters."

Reason to leave the EPP (number 93)

Three quotations from the EPP document celebrating 50 years of the EU:

"The economic integration of the continent of Europe had always been seen as a first step on the path towards political integration and the building of a reunified Europe founded on the values of freedom, democracy and peace."

"In a globalised world, the Member States can no longer be effective on an individual basis.  They must work together with respect for solidarity and subsidiarity.  The nation state can no longer deal with the modern challenges alone.  As a result, the prospect of European integration must under no circumstances be abandoned; on the contrary, it must be strengthened."

"As far as the EPP family is concerned, there is no alternative to the deepening of European integration.  The commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome is therefore not a look back to the past, but the confirmation of a project for a shared future."

Access a pdf of the EPP paper here.

Goldsmith set to be face of Green Conservatism

Zac Goldsmith, recently selected as the Tory candidate for Richmond Park and surely about to become a poster boy for Project Cameron, has written for this morning's Telegraph about the environment (of course).  Here are key extracts:

Climate change is real and serious: "Not all scientists agree on the gravity of the problem, but we're as close as science allows to a consensus. Nicholas Stern calculated in his report last year that there will be more than 200 million refugees by 2050 because of sea-level rise alone."

Brown isn't green: "Brown doesn't get it. He talks about shifting the fiscal system away from taxing ''goods'', towards taxing ''bads'', but the actual level of green taxation has fallen since 1997 from 9.4 per cent to 7.7 per cent, while the tax take has soared... The Chancellor's doubling of air passenger duty following the release of the Stern Review will have zero impact on the environment; it will do nothing to encourage operators to be more efficient, and can be interpreted only as yet another stealth tax. The fact that it was applied retrospectively to people who had bought tickets suggests it was not designed to discourage flying."

Green is profitable: "Where companies have invested in low-carbon technologies and energy efficiency, they are being rewarded. Dupont has reduced its emissions by 72 per cent since 1990, saving more than $3 billion."

Conservatives and green taxation: "We are looking through a lens of opportunity that will see a shift in tax, not additional taxation. Years of stealth taxes have eroded people's trust, which is why the shifts we make in taxation will need to be transparent and honest."

Correcting massive market failure: "Stern described climate change as a catastrophic market failure. The market is blind to the value of the environment; but the market is a powerful force for change, and the challenge is to price the environment into our accounting system so that pollution becomes a liability, not an externality."

You can expect Zac Goldsmith to be making similar arguments from TV sofas, Party Conference stages and party political broadcasts for years to come.

Related links: Ann Widdecombe's scepticism on unilateral UK action and Technology not taxation will deliver greener future say Tory members

Cameron launches quality of childhood inquiry

David Cameron launched a quality of childhood review in Trafford today which will look specifically at the three areas of "subjective well-being", "behaviours & risks", and "family & peer relationships" - the categories in which UK children had the worst ratings in the recent UNICEF report.

The report was criticised for measuring poverty relatively, but it did highlight worrying levels of unhappiness amongst our children.

In particular, this review will focus on these important issues:

• Extended families - have we raised barriers to a broader-based family life?
• Fathers and sons - are there particular problems affecting boys?
• Advertising to children - how can society protect children better form commercialisation of childhood?
• Play and space - are children growing up in a flat world, with insufficient space and time to play and explore the world for themselves unsupervised?
• Stranger danger - have we allowed fears of strangers to obstruct normal contacts between adults and children putting too much pressure on parents and schools?

The review will be chaired by the cerebral David Willetts MP who will publish its findings later this year. Two authors critical of contemporary lifestyle - Sue Palmer ("Toxic Childhood") and Tim Gill ("No Fear: Growing up in a risk-averse society") - are amongst his distinguished panel of advisers.

Deputy Editor

Cameron's shadow cabinet A-team

We have now had three months of ConservativeHome.com member ratings of the shadow cabinet and ten names are consistently emerging with net satisfaction ratings of 20% or more: DAVID DAVIS, ALAN DUNCAN, LIAM FOX, CHRIS GRAYLING, WILLIAM HAGUE, ANDREW LANSLEY, GEORGE OSBORNE, CAROLINE SPELMAN, TOM STRATHCLYDE and DAVID WILLETTS.  The last three months' ratings are summarised in the chart above (click to enlarge).  There has only been one significant movement and that has been David Mundell's decline from +2% at the end of December to -13% now (the lowest net rating recorded in the ConservativeHome series for any individual).

David Cameron's own ratings remain steady (see graph below).  29% of members are very satisfied with the Tory leader and 41% fairly satisfied.  16% are fairly dissatisfied and 13% very dissatisfied.  In January 2006 - shortly after his election - 45% were very satisfied and 37% fairly satisfied.  10% were fairly dissatisfied and 6% very dissatisfied.

77% think it likely that David Cameron will be Prime Minister after the next General Election.  This is exactly the same percentage as January 2006.

69% think the Tory party is on the right course - 25% think it on the wrong track. 

Danny Kruger's Conservatism of individuals, families and communities

Social decay is Britain's most serious weakness says Danny Kruger in a pamphlet entitled 'On Fraternity' to be published tomorrow by the Civitas think tank:

"Hundreds of local institutions, non-commercial and quasi-commercial, were swept away in the flood of reform. Small high-street grocers and bakers disappeared. Family-run pubs were subsumed into giant chains. Whitehall desolated local government, and turned a blind eye to the steady erosion of the family and civil society by the cult of individual freedom.  This trend has grown greatly since the Conservatives left office. The emptiness in our culture is apparent in the rates of family breakdown and the prevalence of drug addiction and violent, alcohol-fuelled crime; in the neglect of the old and the precocious sexuality of children; in the cult of vicarious narcissism which is ‘reality TV’; in the popular addiction to shopping as a means of self-definition, and in the astronomical scale of private debt which is necessary to maintain the shopping habit. It is also apparent, conversely, in the receptive hearing which militant Islam gets from young Asians in Britain, and in the hostility to Asians among young whites."

Danny's views matter - not just because they are tightly-argued - but because he is David Cameron's special adviser.  Since he joined the leader's office last summer there has been a noticeable strengthening of the party leadership's commitment to reverse the decline of voluntary association and of the family unit.  Danny - along with David Willetts, Iain Duncan Smith and Steve Hilton - are emerging as the leading advocates of a 'Social Conservatism' of the kind Margaret Thatcher, according to her autobiography, most regretted never developing.

'On Fraternity' identifies three key trends that are driving society apart:

1. The emergence of a generation of left-behinds: "Some millions of people find themselves falling behind as the rest of society advances, and unable to change their lot; the consequence, in some hundreds of communities, is endemic debt, depression, drugs, alcoholism, crime, and, cause and effect of all of these, family breakdown."
2. A collapse of intergenerational relationships: "The vast army of the retired and soon-to-retire are in conflict with our increasingly strident and alienated youth, not only for material resources and political power, but also – just as important – for cultural airtime and national respect."
3. Cultural differences including "the presence of large communities with different national origins and, therefore, alternative cultural traditions."

The Brown Tories

In his column for today's News of the World (not online), Fraser Nelson says that he knows "quite a few right-wing people" who prefer Brown to Cameron.  He writes:

"They see the Chancellor as a man who understands economics, hard work and enterprise.  And they see the Tory leader as a decadent rich kid, whose idea of fiscal management is to put the whole Budget on his gold card."

Fraser distances himself from these 'Brown Tories' but he is right to say they exist.  I know one or two of them myself.  I guess the leading examples of the 'Brown Tory' tendency are Paul Dacre and even Rupert Murdoch.  Both appear to have a sympathy for the earthiness of Gordon Brown and their sceptical view of Cameron may be rooted in class.  I don't know.

The affection for Brown seems to be psychological rather than empirical but you have to hope that experience will eventually pull the wool from the Brown Tories' eyes.  At some point these poor souls will surely realise that this 100 tax Chancellor cannot be relied upon to cut taxes... that this man who failed to fund prisons cannot be trusted on security... that the Chancellor who abolished the married couples' allowance is no reliable friend of the family... that this great centraliser won't transform himself into a great devolver...

Anyhow - my guess is that there are going to be more Cameron Labourites who see the Conservative leader as more likely to complete Tony Blair's reform programme.

Cameron steels Tories to oppose Manchester casino

According to The Sunday Telegraph David Cameron has over-ruled George Osborne and imposed a three-line whip against Labour plans to base Britain's first super casino in Manchester.  The shadow cabinet - reportedly - had decided to back the plans but two factors appear to have changed the Conservative leader's mind.  First many Tory MPs were prepared to rebel against Tory support for the Government and, secondly, the revelation that Manchester appears to have been chosen because it would provide an ideal setting to test the "social impact" of a super casino.  In effect the deprived population of a great British city are intended to be used as guinea pigs.

Click here for Friday's Today in Parliament programme and to listen to Julie Kirkbride MP perform an excellent demolition job on Labour's super casino plans.

11.30am update: Whilst on the subject of gambling this leader from Friday's Daily Mail is worth highlighting:

"One of the great mysteries of modern politics is why this Government - a Labour Government, of all things - should so eagerly promote gambling, when it knows very well the harm that will be inflicted on the weak and vulnerable.  A super-casino in Manchester … smaller casinos elsewhere … an evident desire to make Britain the world capital of online betting … in her drive to encourage a freefor- all the egregious Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell seemed unstoppable.  But now, in what must be a deep humiliation for this foolish woman, the gambling industry has suffered a devastating blow at the hands of Gordon Brown with a 50 per cent tax on big casinos and 15 per cent on betting websites.  The result? Casinos are no longer quite so sure of the profits they can expect from mug punters. Online operators wonder if it is worth their while to move to Britain.  Ms Jowell's balloon has been pricked.  For the public - which never wanted a gambling explosion - this is a welcome reprieve. All credit to Mr Brown who, unlike some of his colleagues, hasn't forgotten the principles for which Labour once stood.  The Mail is not overly fond of taxation.  But this is one tax we heartily endorse."

Can Cameron hear the concerns of Acacia Avenue?

Peter Hitchens presents a one hour documentary on Channel 4 tomorrow evening (8pm) about David Cameron.  In today's Mail on Sunday he gives a taste of what to expect:

"Rather than risk being in opposition too long, Tories have for most of the past 60 years cheerfully implemented largely Left-wing policies, from comprehensive schooling to saddling the police with political correctness and paperwork and dragging us into the European Union. I often think they would have nationalised fish and chip shops, introduced 70 per cent income tax and sent the Queen to the guillotine if they thought that would help them hang on to their ministerial red boxes.  Principles, old boy? What are they? The poor dears just feel unsettled and unhappy when they and their old friends from Eton aren’t Cabinet Ministers, much as they feel uneasy and upset about the banning of foxhunting – which arouses the only true political passion most of them have. They are angry and impatient about being deprived of their birthright. So angry that they are prepared to do almost anything, and spend almost anything, to scramble back into Downing Street.  David Cameron is their revenge. And that’s one of the reasons why his toffishness and extraordinary, semi-aristocratic background is such a big theme of the programme I’ve made about him, to be screened on Channel 4 tomorrow night.  Some people think that because I’m ‘Right-wing’ I should be pleased to have the nobility back in the saddle. Not a bit of it. Proper conservative politics come from the suburbs, not from the broad acres. The gentry have no idea how much New Labour’s policies hurt us down in Acacia Avenue. They’ve never been there and regard our privet hedges and semi-detached homes with just as much horror and disdain as the Islington Left do."

Davis: We must fight terror the American way

David Davis has just been on a trip to America to inspect their homeland security systems and writes about what he has learnt for today's Sunday Telegraph.

Alongside opposition to John Reid's "ill-considered" scheme to break up the Home Office, he calls for anti-terror efforts to be more coordinated.  [According to John Rentoul in today's Independent on Sunday, Gordon Brown has squashed Reid's plans "for fear that terrorists might strike in the middle of a reorganisation"].  Mr Davis repeats the Tory demand for a Cabinet-rank Security Minister and notes that "US counter-terrorism chiefs hold conference calls three times a day, seven days a week, to ensure "situational awareness" of threats."

He then offers three main learning points:

• Invest in intelligence: "If the threat is as serious as MI5 has warned, Labour's chokehold on security spending is inexcusable. The FBI has 30,000 personnel gathering intelligence and the National Counter-Terrorism Center has more than 400 analysing it."
• Allow intercept evidence: "John Reid has refused to introduce intercept evidence to prosecute terrorists, saying it is "not a silver bullet". Yet the FBI and Department of Justice use intercept evidence in nearly all counter-terrorism and organised crime cases. It is often the critical evidence that secures a conviction. It can persuade a defendant to plead guilty, cooperate with police and give evidence against terrorist accomplices. It is the US prosecutor's legal weapon of choice, with the most reliable record for hitting the target. Yet Britain remains one of the few countries in the world not using intercept evidence."
• Improve "resilience" to inevitable attacks: "The US has put enormous energy into strengthening its "resilience" to attack, protecting communications systems, chemical plants and transport infrastructure. I examined the poison gas detection system at Grand Central station in New York. Similar systems are in place on US underground networks. Back in the UK, we are way behind. We do not even have a comprehensive underground-to-surface communications system, to allow the emergency services to communicate in the event of an attack on the Tube."

Related link: Patrick Mercer MP wrote for YourPlatform about Conservative security policy last November.

Common sense on climate change

I've just noticed that The Express has undertaken a significant upgrade of its website.  In particular I'm glad to see that its comment articles are now online and so you can expect me to be quoting a lot more from Ann Widdecombe (every Wednesday) and Frederick Forsyth (every Thursday)!  The Ann Widdecombe quotations below come from four days ago but they are full of so much common sense that I thought you'd like to read them:

What about China and India?  "China relies on carbon for 70 per cent of its energy and its industrialisation is growing fast. So is India’s. Those two countries plus the United States account for half of all the carbon pollution in the world.  So anybody imagining that it makes a jot of difference if Mrs Bloggs replaces her lightbulbs with low energy ones might just as well throw a sugar cube in Loch Ness and claim a serious contribution has been made to sweetening the water... Politicians presume to have a view on our electric fittings and propose to tax our holidays. They are wrecking acres of green fields (ironic, is it not?) with wind farms.  Yet it is all for nothing if President Bush, President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh do not get their act together."  48% of Tory members recently agreed that  unilateral action by UK consumers would quickly be overtaken by the actions of developing nations.

What about big business? "Take a look at any big city at night. Office buildings are lit up like gin palaces, advertising hoardings are illuminated so as to be seen from miles away and street lights burn every few yards. Yet we are all invited to feel guilty for leaving a washing machine on standby.  As usual, it is the ordinary citizen who will be persecuted – and almost certainly eventually prosecuted – while the big energy wasters carry on wasting."

Why not nuclear power? "Nuclear energy is cleaner and more sustainable but those who supposedly want a purer atmosphere find that too politically unpalatable to even have a full and informative national debate. Instead, they fill the countryside with ugly windmills which produce a fraction of what is needed and have no virtue other than being in fashion."  By a margin of 85% to 12% Tory members reject the LibDems' blanket opposition to nuclear power.

Full article here.