ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Dan Hannan is Nott impressed with the BBC

I recently took part in a Radio Five Live discussion about the BBC.  I was the critic of the BBC and someone from The Guardian (naturally) was its defender.  Sounds balanced?  Not a bit of it.  Throughout the whole interview I was intensely questioned and interrupted while The Guardian's representative was given softball questions.  I make no great complaint.  I've got used to such treatment but the biased interviewer/ anchor is one of the most prominent ways in which bias is manifested.  In addition to presenter bias there are choice of topics which receive attention, promotion of unrepresentative voices of opinion, unnecessary polarisation and simplification of arguments and general mischaracterisations.

Dan Hannan records his own latest experience of BBC bias on his Telegraph blog.  Up against two Europhiles - who are introduced  as impartial experts, Dan Hannan is introduced as a fierce critic of the EU.  Dan then reports how the BBC presenter "listened to the Euro-enthusiasts in respectful silence, but took exception to almost everything I said."  John Nott-style Dan walked out of the interview - read the rest of Dan's account here.

As we mark 50 years of the EU it is important to remember how the BBC has systematically been sympathetic to the EU.  The Wilson Report of 2005 concluded that the BBC was systematically Europhile.  The report found that negative stories about the EU - including budgetary fraud - were significantly underplayed by the BBC.  Robin Aitken, in Can We Trust The BBC?, notes that "during the European elections of 1999, in more than 250 hours of main national news coverage by the BBC, not a single Labour Eurosceptic had appeared on air."  Five years of BBC monitoring by Minotaur found an overall 2-to-1 bias in favour of Europhile speakers and "scant analysis" of Eurosceptic alternatives to the current direction of the EU.

Meanwhile a TNS poll of all 27 member state populations (17,443 people in all) by Open Europe finds widespread Euroscepticism:

"Across the EU as a whole, 28% think the EU should have more powers than it has now and that more decisions should be taken at the European level.  23% think the EU should keep the powers it has now, but should not be given any more.  41% think the EU should have less powers than it has now and that more decisions should be taken at a national or local level.  In the UK the equivalent figures were 11%, 27%, and 58% - a clear majority for taking powers back."

Full poll details here.

Will The Sun finally set on Brown?

On Thursday morning ConservativeHome gave The Sun a 'Brown-noser' award for its Budget coverage.  The Sun talked of an "income tax gift" from The Chancellor to the British people and its leading article warned that the Tories' opinion poll lead could easily melt in the spring sunshine.  Well... a Populus survey for The Sun's sister newspaper, The Times, shows that it's Brown's opinion poll standing which is facing the heat.  Just 11% of Populus' respondents expect to pay less tax than before the Budget and many more - 26% - fear that they will pay more tax.  "The most worrying finding for Mr Brown," says The Times, "is that the number of voters thinking that he will be a good prime minister has dropped from 40 to 30 per cent since last December."  Yesterday's Telegraph/ YouGov survey gave a similar message.

The irritation of The Sun at Mr Brown's smoke-and-mirrors Budget was, I think, revealed by Trevor Kavanagh, The Sun's veteran political commentator, at the end of this morning's Today programme.  Compared to the positive piece Mr Kavanagh wrote on Thursday morning he was very downbeat today.  The Sun won't have enjoyed being made to look a fool by Mr Brown.  There could be consequences.  Let's hope so. 

David Cameron's Jewish Chronicle interview

In his interview with the Jewish Chronicle Mr Cameron accused Ken Livingstone of showing  "borderline anti-semitism" through his treatment of Evening Standard journalist Oliver Finegold and courting of Yusuf Al-Qaradawi.  Other key quotations below:

"We thought Israel had a right to respond vigorously to the rocket attacks, as their own people were being killed. But that does not mean you should not also be able to say that elements were disproportionate...I think attacks on Lebanese army units, bombing of Christian parts of Beirut, the use of cluster bombs, were disproportionate."

"The continued growth of settlements, in combination with parts of the wall, is making a 2-state solution more difficult...what we need is a 2-state solution: a secure Israel, secure in its borders, not at threat from terrorists or its neighbours, and a state of Palestine based on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Britain should be doing what it can to help try and facilitate this. That means being very clear to the Palestinians that we shouldn't give money to a government that includes people who won't recognise the right of Israel to exist...you can't negotiate with people that are literally murdering your citizens and trying to destroy you."

"I am a participating member of the Church of England. I have a faith, its important, but not something I wear on my sleeve. I believe in God, but I don't think I have a direct line."

Wednesday's Budget wasn't about tax or the economy - it was about the character of the man who aspires to be our Prime Minister

As today's YouGov poll shows - Wednesday's Budget has not fooled the British people.  The Conservative lead is higher since Gordon Brown got to his feet than it was before.  Wednesday's Budget has done nothing to alter the course of the British economy or the growth of the British state.  Under Gordon Brown, Britain has become a much more European-style economy with high levels of tax and spending and with a huge increase in dependency.  If only we had an Opposition willing to deliver a fundamental change of course (but that's a topic for another day).

The 2007 Budget did nothing to repair the damage that Gordon Brown has done to UKplc.  But it did - hopefully once-and-for-all - prove that the Chancellor is every bit as manipulative as Tony Blair.  This was a Budget where all the tax rises were hidden and the tax goodies trumpeted. 

George Osborne got it right yesterday during the Commons debate on the Budget:

"If people want to know what this Chancellor would be like in No. 10, they should look no further than yesterday’s Budget—stealthy, sneaky and unable to tell the truth. He is not the man who can restore public trust in Government, because he is the reason why people do not believe a word that they say any more."

It is a lasting legacy of the New Labour project - a project that we must never tire of describing as the Brown-Blair project - that hardly anyone believes a word from any politician.  One challenge for Mr Osborne is to devise a new way of handling the whole Budget process so that it is transparent and that announcements will become more believable.

The Budget flops

Since the Budget and the Conservative Party Spring Forum the Tory lead has grown by 2% according to YouGov.  The Telegraph didn't even mention the LibDems - who are down again to just 15%.

46% of those surveyed for The Daily Telegraph agreed that the Budget was not fair.  Only 34% thought that it was fair.  18% thought that they and their families would be better off as a result of Gordon Brown's measures.  48% thought that they would be worse off.

Respondents were equally divided when asked: "Which would you trust more to take the right decisions about taxes and public spending?"  28% chose a Brown-led Labour Government and 28% chose a Cameron-led Conservative Government.

Uncharitable to the bogeyman

It's probably uncharitable to point out that there's a YouTube movie on Guido's blog in which (if you have the stomach for it) you can see the Chancellor picking his nose during yesterday's PMQs.  It's probably uncharitable but you could say the same about Mr Brown's Budget speech.  Greg Clark MP, Shadow Charities Minister, has just released a press release that notes that the cost to charities of yesterday's 2p cut in income tax will be £70m.  Greg Clark MP commented:

“The Chancellor’s Budget has conned Britain’s charities.  In his Budget speech he was cowardly enough to make no mention of the fact that his tax changes will hit hardest Britain’s good causes.  Gordon Brown must have known about this, but instead he kept quiet and hoped no-one would notice.  It is typical that in robbing Britain’s charities, the Chancellor made no provision to protect them from the impact of this sting.”

Download charity_sting_press release.pdf

As is always the case with Gordon Brown's Budgets the devil is in the detail.  Tonight's main story in the London Evening Standard notes that homebuyers in the capital are being hit by a £3.4billion rise in stamp duty bills.  London homebuyers now pay an average £8,615 in stamp duty compared to just £1,795 five years ago.  This massive increase in tax reflects the Chancellor's failure to raise the higher stamp duty thresholds in line with inflation.  A spokesman for the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors told the Standard:

"The Chancellor should have raised the bottom threshold of £125,000 to at least £150,000 in order to help first-time buyers on to the housing ladder given that up-front housing costs are a key issue for many buyers."

Has Brown "decontaminated" tax cuts?

"Decontaminating" the Tory brand has been a big part of Project Cameron.  In a comment on another thread William Norton wonders if a lasting effect of yesterday's Budget is that Brown has "decontaminated tax cuts."  If Brown is happy to be associated with lower taxation it should be harder for him to paint a (real) tax-cutting agenda as irresponsible.  Let's hope so.

The Budget press awards

Columnist Award: Jeff Randall.  Mr Randall's piece in this morning's Telegraph is almost the only thing you need to read about yesterday's Budget.  It is magisterial in its analysis of what the Chancellor's words mean for business, pensions and the nation's finances.  The article's opening paragraph also wins the Best Quotation Award:

"For most taxpayers, Brown's final Budget feels like being given a few quid by the burglar who has been robbing our homes since 1997. Not exactly a cause for wild celebration; a glass of Tesco's cheap fizz at best."

Brown-noser Award: The Sun.  Britain's best-selling newspaper's front page headline is bad enough but today's Sun Says is unbelievable:

"While the Tories have ducked firm pledges on tax, Mr Brown has steamed ahead and sensationally cut them. Cameron’s 15-point poll lead may now melt like snow in the spring sunshine."

Does Ms Wade really think her readers are going to believe that guff?

Can't-make-its-mind-up Award: The Daily Mail.  Paul Dacre can't quite get over his admiration for Gordon Brown and the Mail's main leader declares "Final flourish to ten remarkable years."  Opposite that leader Stephen Glover announces to readers that Mr Brown has been a "great Chancellor."  Fortunately the rest of the newspaper subjects Mr Brown to more searching examination.  "What Gord Giveth, Gord Taketh Away," is the front page splash.  Within the newspaper Edward Heathcoat Amory questions Gordon Brown's record on marriage, City editor Alex Brummer makes the case for lower and lower taxes and Quentin Letts calls it an exercise in "befuddlement."

Most honest front page of the day: The Daily Express. "Tax Cut: It's Just A Big Con," the Crusader informs its readers.

Most incisive coverage overall: The Business.  Allister Heath and Fraser Nelson confirm their reputations as two of British journalism's foremost analysts.  Their coverage yesterday was fast and insightful.

***
See here for how The Mail and The Sun covered last year's Budget.

George Osborne on Today

George Osborne was good on the Today programme at 7.09am this morning but he spoilt his performance at the end.  He was good in that he highlighted the craftiness of the Chancellor and the fact that you cannot trust what he says.  Mr Osborne reinforced the crucial point that it is the craftiness/ slyness/ lack of honesty that Mr Brown has displayed as Chancellor that makes people sceptical about him becoming Prime Minister.  Where Mr Osborne would have confused people was in his suggestion that Brown was in some ways imitating Project Cameron.  He said that on sharing the proceeds of growth, the environment and families, Labour was copying Conservative ideas.  I don't think that's true.  Yesterday Mr Brown did not share the proceeds of growth between lower taxes and extra spending - yesterday's budget increased taxes very slightly (and after years of substantial tax hikes).  Yesterday Mr Brown did not introduce green taxes of the kind the Tories are proposing - in fact he ridiculed Tory plans for taxation of domestic flights.  And, thirdly, and most importantly he distanced himself from David Cameron's support for marriage.

I'm afraid that it's more true that the Tories are imitating Gordon Brown.  The Tories only propose modest reductions in taxation and refuse to make the supply-side case for lower taxation... they have largely accepted his European levels of public spending... and they are afraid to seriously reform Labour's complex maze of tax credits.  I still think on tax and the economy George Osborne will be better for the economy and much more more honest than Gordon Brown but the gap between the Tory and Labour positions is far too small for my liking.

How will the newspapers report the Budget?

It'll be interesting to see how the newspapers report tomorrow's Budget.  The Chancellor will have been delighted at the "Brown cuts 2p off your income tax" headline that appeared above Joe Murphy's front page piece for the Evening Standard's 'London Lite' freesheet.  He will be less pleased with the headline given to the same Joe Murphy's piece for the Budget final version of the Evening Standard: "Brown's tax cut is final trick."

For me it is the trickery that should be the focus of the Conservative attack on a fiscally neutral budget that follows years of tax-rising budgets.  We need to nail Brown and Blair together - two masters of spin who have debased politics by more than ten years of misleading announcements.

Don't trust Gordon Brown

George Osborne is calling the Budget a "con."  He is, of course, right.  ConservativeHome may wish that Mr Osborne was much more committed to making the economic case for lower taxation but Mr Brown has zero credibility with us on tax.  The 2p cut today had a lot more to do with yesterday's 28% poll rating for Mr Brown than anything else.  There's panic in 11 Downing Street as they consider the possibility that the dismal rating will drive panicking Labour MPs into the hands of David Miliband or even John Denham.  Today's announcement of a 2p cut comes from the stealthiest tax riser in British history.  This Chancellor has presided over a massive expansion of the state and huge additional complexity within the tax system.  No Conservative should ever give him comfort.  He has been steadily raising taxes since the moment he entered Downing Street and we won't know the true impact of this Budget until we've all read the small print.  Every one of Brown's budgets has contained sleights of hand and my guess is that this one will not be an exception.  The sooner Mr Brown leaves all Downing Street addresses the better.

PS The Mail and Sun were far too soft on Brown this morning and in response to last year's Budget.  I hope they do their readers a favour tomorrow morning and expose this Budget for its deceit.  If they can't think of what to write themselves they should copy and paste this from The Spectator.

PPS There's also this from The Business:

"The net effects of all his tax policies is a tiny reduction in Mr Brown’s net position to the tune of £525m for 2007-08 but an increase in the tax burden of £280m in 2008-09 and £125m in 2009-10. On balance, therefore, and for all Brown’s bluster, this was a tax raising Budget. After years of bleeding the economy dry with well over 100 tax increases, and a massive increase in the tax to GDP ratio, the Chancellor has not changed his spots.  He remains a tax and spend Chancellor, who thinks he knows better than the market and individuals what makes an economy tick. He unveiled another plethora of extraordinarily complex and detailed initiatives on Wednesday, many of which will take weeks for teams of accountants to work out their full implications."

Cameron responds to Budget...

Very difficult job for Cameron after Brown's announcement of a 2p cut in income tax (from next April).  Cameron responded by saying that the Chancellor had, after all, accepted the Tory idea that you could cut taxes and raise spending through the proceeds of growth.  He said that Brown only normally cut taxes before an election - this time he must have his mind on the Labour election.  This budget, he said, would not compensate for all of Gordon Brown's tax rises of recent years.

The Tory leader kept asking the question: Where has all the money gone?

Best line from Cameron: "The Chancellor who has taken one tax down but put 99 up."

Got to go now.  More later...

PS The guys at the TPA clapped as Brown concluded his speech.  All this political cross-dressing is very confusing.

4pm update - BEST TWO STALIN JOKES FROM CAMERON'S SPEECH:

• "The frontbench are all standing for the Deputy Leadership because they know from history that it is the best way to avoid the Gulag."
  
• Gordon Brown has "the tendencies of Stalin and the poll ratings of Michael Foot."

Live Budget blog

12.30pm: And we're off with a typically modest comparison with him and Gladstone - the last time a Chancellor delivered 12 budgets was when Gladstone combined the jobs of Chancellor and Prime Minister!

12.31pm: Joking reference to Lord Turnbull - this is the 'new Brown' who can take a joke!

12.32pm: Claiming credit for 59 quarters of continuous growth although many of these predate Labour's coming to power.

12.35pm: Brown is talking about boosting human capital and skills - sounds like another quango on the way...

12.37pm: Brown is claiming to have met the golden rule but this is the rewritten rule and how much is hidden off balance sheet in PFI.

12.39pm: Brown rattling off a stream of borrowing figures - we'll have to double check the fine print - he only ever lingers over good news.

12.42pm: First surprise - significant gains from asset sale (privatisation) to be "reinvested" in key frontline services but the Departments benefiting are the Inland Revenue, the Attorney General and the Lord Chancellor.

12.43pm: More gobbldygook figures but he's relying on Gershon savings - so there anyone's guess.

12.45pm: Large cash boost for the NHS - but no sign of reform to correct for misspent money in the past.  Expect further targets and quangoes.

12.47pm: Brown keeps harping on about stability - score that as a tribute to George Osborne

12.48pm: Three priorities - global competitiveness, savings and the family.

12.50pm: 2p cut in mainstream corporation tax - score that as a victory for the TaxPayers' Alliance's campaign - to be paid for by an overhaul of capital allowances (expect more work for the accountants).

12.51pm: Oh dear - smaller companies' tax rate goes up?

12.53pm: Announces competition to develop greener technology.  Let's hope that Blue Peter aren't manning the phone lines!

12.55pm: Package of measures to improve energy efficiency in the home.  It won't be enough to satisfy the green lobby (thank God).

12.57pm: Here come the stealth taxes... Steep rises in landfill, aggregates and climate change levy and "underused business property" to pay higher rates.

1pm: As expected tinkering with the taxation of fuel - 'greener vehicles gain - dirty vehicles lose.'  Goes on to reject George Osborne's VAT ideas on domestic flights.

1.01pm: The first real good news - duty frozen on spirits.

1.03pm: Worthy sounding - but complex - proposals on the voluntary and charitable sectors.

1.05pm: Further extensions to the Working Family Tax Credit system - not clear how this complicated system achieves his objectives of global competitiveness - why not just make work pay by lowering the tax rates?

1.06pm: Big boost to pensions protections payments - a big issue among Brown's comrades.  Is there an election coming up?!  More worryingly suggests that the pensions system is worse than we thought.

1.08pm: Rejects Cameron's marriage tax proposals as unfair to too many children.  Claims that longstanding tax breaks for inheritance tax and CGT achieve the same end.

1.10pm: Phased rise in inheritance tax exemptions but probably not as fast as house prices.  Surprise increase in cash ISA limit.

1.11pm: Phased increase in child benefit - is Brown attempting to open a flank on the family against Cameron?  The battle of the nannies?

1.14pm: Significant phased increase in income tax allowances for pensioners.  So why is it such a good idea to help OAPs this way but not working age poor people?

1.15pm: Quite a complicated package - shifting between income tax and NIC - basic rate is widened but the lower rate of income tax was scrapped - unclear as to who is winning and losing.

1.18pm: Massive boost for education spending but you'll only get value for money when the schools standards offer genuine choice.

1.19pm: Oh! Basic rate cut by 2p to 20p from next April... er...

PMQs: David Cameron highlights deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe

David Cameron's first subject of the day: Zimbabwe.  David Cameron called for a wider assets freeze, the cancellation of visa access for Mugabe's acolytes, and to ensure no Zimbabwean participation in the forthcoming EU Africa conference.  (Related link: William Hague in last weekend's Sunday Telegraph called for the screw to be turned on Mugabe).

David Cameron's second subject of the day: The anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade.  Following on from his Wilberforce Address of last night David Cameron challenged the Labour leader to do more to provide trafficked women with a safe house when they escape from their traffickers.

Ming moment of the day: Tony Blair disputed the LibDem leader's charge that the wealth gap under Labour was wider than under the Thatcher years.

Backbench question of the day: Geoffrey Cox asked Tony Blair about the implications for sports and arts projects in West Country constituencies like his of the Olympics-sized cost over-runs.

Line of the day: "Why is the Home Secretary smiling? He'll soon be running a power station in Siberia" - David Cameron.

CCHQ press release on Lyons report

"Gordon Brown’s Budget Day report into town hall finances today dropped a tax bombshell on working families and pensioners across the country Conservatives have warned. The small print reveals:

• New home improvement tax: On top of new banding, the report recommends not just a council tax revaluation, but regular revaluations (p.240). The council tax revaluation will mean Gordon Brown’s inspectors, the Valuation Office Agency, will inspect, photograph and catalogue every home, and every sign of a nice neighbourhood. Council tax bills will rise purely for living in a quiet road, being near to a bus stop, or having a parking space. People who rent will be taxed just as much as those who own their home. Inspectors have the right to enter people’s homes, on pain of £500 fines. Unlike at present, council tax will effectively become a home improvement tax.
• New death taxes: Pensioners face the prospect of being pressured to sign away their homes’ equity to local government tax collectors (p.259). Town halls will encourage pensioners to ‘defer’ their local tax bills, and instead pay - with interest - when they their property is sold or on death of the surviving resident spouse. Such a policy though will pressure many pensioners on fixed incomes to sign away their equity if they are struggling with their tax bills. A typical pensioner in England will face a net debt of £64,000 after 20 years.
• New bin taxes: Town halls will charge new bin taxes to collect household rubbish (p.280). Microchips will be installed on compulsory wheelie bin and new municipal bin inspectors will police every bin. The taxes will damage the environment and public health by causing a surge in fly-tipping and backyard burning. Based on Ireland, the charges will be £451 per year to collect 2 bin bags a week.
• New bed taxes: Town halls will be able to levy new bed taxes top of existing business rates and VAT on hotel bills (p.316). Based on similar taxes in other countries, this could potentially add £100 a week to the cost of a family holiday or visit to Britain’s tourist destinations. Less well-off families will be the hardest hit. People will be punished for going green and holidaying in Britain.

Caroline Spelman MP, Conservative Shadow Secretary of State for Local Government, said:

“Gordon Brown’s town hall tax report has dropped a tax bombshell on working families and pensioners across the country.  The green light has been given to intrusive and expensive inspections of family homes. Nice neighbourhoods and the rising value of homes will all mean higher council tax bills. Regular revaluations will turn council tax into a home improvement tax – taxing your patio, your conservatory and garden.
 
I fear the elderly, struggling with soaring council tax bills, will be pressured into signing away their homes to the taxman. Vulnerable people face either forfeiting their children’s inheritance or have the bailiff knocking on their doors for non-payment of rising council taxes.  Every household faces the prospect of new rubbish taxes on top, combined with their bins only being collected once a fortnight. If you don’t pay, your bins just won’t be collected. These taxes will lead to a surge in fly-tipping and dangerous backyard burning. It will have devastating consequences for the local environment and public health. This isn’t a green tax – it’s an excuse to tax more by stealth.
 
To top the lot, families wanting to go green and holiday in this country will be punished with new bed taxes, fatally undermining Britain’s struggling tourist resorts.  On Gordon Brown’s final Budget day, higher taxes are on the way from your town hall - engineered by Labour - without any improvements in local services. This is a tax con – pay more and get nothing. Conservatives will fight hard against these tax plans and stand up for working families and pensioners who deserve better.”

Central Office at its best.

WebCameron's 99 tax rises video stunt

"The Cameroons"

There is an important profile of David Cameron's top advisory team in today's Guardian.  Here are a few key observations from the extended piece by Andy Beckett - for which he has clearly been granted considerable access:

• Little known: Most of David Cameron's back office are unknown with the exception of Steve Hilton.
• Inexperienced: Michael Portillo observes that the team is "bright", "nice" but a "bit thin." He continues: "It's not surprising. The Tory party has lost layer after layer of talent over the past decade or more."  Ed Llewellyn, Cameron's chief of staff, was aide to Hong Kong Governor Chris Patten, however, and also adviser to Paddy Ashdown whilst the former LibDem leader was in Bosnia.
• "Nice": "Gabby Bertin, Cameron's press officer since the latter stages of his leadership campaign, is quick to frame this new political etiquette in party terms. "People love to make the comparison between us and Labour in the 90s. We couldn't be more different. We're honest. We're transparent. We don't go around threatening people. We don't go round lying." A Cameron aide has a more worldly explanation: "In the 90s Labour seemed wet and needed to show they were tough. Our problem is the opposite.""
• Loyal: Cameron has picked people he knows and trusts. He does not want to repeat the mistakes of past leaders who accepted the recommendations of colleagues and ended up with staffers who weren't necessarily loyal to - or understanding of - the mission.
• Young: "Bertin is 28 and has only been working in politics for four years. Danny Kruger, one of Cameron's two speechwriters, left university in 2000. Osborne, Hilton and the Conservatives' campaign director George Bridges are still in their 30s. Cameron's chief of staff, Edward Llewellyn, is barely 40."
• Male and Etonian: "Bridges' trajectory is typical. Like Cameron, Kruger and Llewellyn, he went to Eton. In public most of the Cameroons dismiss this as a minor biographical coincidence, but it's nothing of the sort. Eton has a unique ability to produce Conservative politicians... Eton is also, of course, all male. The Cameroons are also mostly men. Most of the women involved tend to be in more minor roles."
• More 'right-wing' not so long ago: "[In 1999] Bridges called the respected environmentalist Lord Melchett, then director of Greenpeace, "evil" and "anti-progress" in his column in the Times. Cameron's current press secretary, George Eustice, remained a prominent activist for the UK Independence Party and other Eurosceptic groups until 2003. In 2002 he publicly defended a cinema advertisement in which an actor, dressed as Hitler, endorses the euro."
• Close to Blairites: "Nowadays, for all their declared distaste for New Labour's methods, Cameron's people remain respectful of Blair and his machine. Some of the admiration is personal and mutual. Hilton is friends with Tim Allan, Blair's former press officer and still an influential Blair advocate. Rachel Whetstone, Hilton's partner and a semi-detached Cameroon, is friends with Ben Wegg-Prosser, 10 Downing Street's head of strategy. Wegg-Prosser gave a reading at the wedding of the Conservative MP and Cameroon Ed Vaizey. Some of this is just the usual mingling of sharp Westminster operators with networking instincts and work in common. And, of course, both groups are united in their dislike of Brown."
• Hungry to be governing again: "A more junior team member, whose politics are to the right of his leader's, has a more long-term worry. He fears that in downplaying traditional Conservative causes, in changing the party to be more in tune with modern Britain, the Cameroons have in effect accepted that they won't change the country much in office...  But then he changes his tone. "I don't want to spend another five years in opposition doing this nonsense," he says with sudden fierceness. "I want to be handing policies to civil servants, not journalists." ...The Cameroons are not really a clique or a nice new kind of Tory. They are part of a tribe accustomed to running Britain. They think it is well past time they had another turn."

'Wilberforce Conservatism'

Last night David Cameron gave the annual William Wilberforce Address to a gathering of more than 850 Christians at an event organised by the Conservative Christian Fellowship.  When I organised the first Wilberforce Address nearly ten years ago the attendance was only a third of that number.  It is a mark of the progress of the CCF under its current director Elizabeth Berridge - and of the star status of David Cameron - that last night's event was so well attended.  The quality of the audience was also high.  The Bishop of Liverpool James Jones (and my hope to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury) chaired proceedings and many black church leaders were also present.  The Conservative Party needs more organisations like the CCF that represent the party to, in its case, the churches and the churches' views to the party.

Not such a free vote after all

The Telegraph's Jonathan Isaby has done an excellent job in recording that 12 shadow cabinet members joined David Cameron last night in supporting the Government's doctrinaire attempts to bring Catholic adoption agencies within the scope of gay equality legislation.  This dozen - plus Cameron himself - accounted for a huge 45% of the vote against the Catholic Church's position even though they account for less than one-eighth of the parliamentary party.  All other shadow cabinet ministers abstained.  Not one shadow cabinet minister joined the 85 Tory MPs who voted against the illiberal regulations that would compel Catholic adoption agencies to place children with gay couples.  82 Tories abstained.

It seems that the shadow cabinet is either very unrepresentative of the parliamentary party or was subject to clandestine whipping.

David Cameron's decision to support the Government against the Catholic Church on this issue is one of the most depressing acts of his young leadership.  He is denying faith-based charities the freedom of association and belief that is necessary for his 'big idea' of social responsibility to really flourish.  Catholic and other churchleaders are not asking to ban gay adoption - merely that they do not themselves have to place children with gay couples.  It shouldn't have been too much to ask in a country that purports to value religious freedom.

7.30am Wednesday morning update: From Phil Cowley's revolts.co.uk it is also clear that the 2005 parliamentary intake do not share David Cameron's view on this issue: "Just six of the 2005 intake voted with their leader. A full 23 voted against - and of these 23, 20 have also already defied Mr Cameron on a whipped vote. The modernising agenda has clear limits amongst the backbenches of the Conservative parliamenty party."

An open letter to David Cameron on MEP selection

"Dear David,

You will know that ConservativeHome successfully helped to lead opposition to Michael Howard's attempts to scrap party members' right to elect his successor.  Given how members voted in the last leadership election I'm sure you will agree that members are wiser than many of their critics suggest!

I am writing to ask you to protect members' democratic rights in the selection of our next slate of European Parliamentary candidates.  I understand that the Party Board is about to consider a paper from the National European Forum.  The NEF has, I am told, recommended that a college of Association Chairmen, Area officers and other selected high-ups form new regional electoral colleges.  These colleges will then assess whether sitting MEPs have done enough to retain their top-of-the-list rankings.  These electoral colleges may even have the power to re-order MEPs - overturning the democratic ranking that all party members gave to MEP candidates before the last European elections.

I do not know if members will have any say in choosing and ranking candidates who are not incumbents but I hope that you will publicly intervene in defence of the principle of party democracy.  78% of party members want to keep their say in ranking MEP candidates.  As a candidate in the last leadership election you understandably felt it improper to state a position on the nature of the process although I was grateful that some of your key lieutenants - including Michael Gove and Ed Vaizey - felt able to support party democracy.  I would encourage you to publicly recommend to the Party Board that there is no dilution of party democracy in the selection of European candidates.  It may be right that some changes are made to the process but the franchise should not be restricted.

On a practical level, although there might be political difficulties if certain unpopular candidates react badly to being ranked less highly there may be greater dangers, in this internet age, if Conservative candidates at the next European Parliamentary Elections are out-of-touch with the grassroots' Euroscepticism.

With very best wishes,

Tim

Tim Montgomerie
Editor of ConservativeHome.com"

Related link: Francis Maude wants your views on European candidate selection

Tory family policy must communicate compassion for lone parents

Yesterday ConservativeHome noted how Tory members were underwhelmed by the party leadership's plans for green taxation of air travel.  Today we report the membership's enthusiasm for David Cameron's family agenda.

The graphic on the right summarises the reaction of members to six statements on family policy.  There is overwhelming support for the suggestion that family breakdown is a leading cause of the social problems beginning to engulf certain sections of urban Britain. 
David Cameron's pledge to introduce a tax allowance for married couples wins the support of 72% of respondents.  3% more back the tax allowance alongside a wider package of pro-family policy ideas.  Politically I think it is very important for the Conservative Party to present a broadly-based family policy that - while including tax fairness for married couples and two parent families - offers compassionate support for other families, too.  Ideas on healthcare and schooling, for example, need to be part of the Tory family agenda so that lone mums do not feel forgotten.  Liam Fox's ideas on special help for servicemen's families could also be highlighted in a Tory family policy manifesto.

Approximately a quarter of members offered support for two laissez-faire statements.  28% thought government had no business in how people organise their family life and 16% wanted the party to eschew traditional family values in favour of personal liberty.

Where is the 'Stop Brown' blog campaign?

Last night we learnt that David Cameron would enjoy a notional lead of 15% if Gordon Brown was Labour leader.  If that didn't upset the Chancellor this morning's FT must really have got him worked up.

Lord Turnbull, who was Mr Brown's Permanent Secretary at the Treasury for four years before becoming Cabinet Secretary, accuses the Chancellor of "Stalinist ruthlessness" and using his department to treat ministerial colleagues with "more or less complete contempt."

According to the FT's Nicholas Timmins Mr Brown holds a “very cynical view of mankind and his colleagues”.  “He cannot allow them any serious discussion about priorities. His view is that it is just not worth it and ‘they will get what I decide’. And that is a very insulting process,” Lord Turnbull said.

This is not, of course, the first time that people who have worked closely with Gordon Brown have found his conduct wanting.  A Downing Street insider (perhaps even Blair himself) once told Andrew Rawnsley that Mr Brown was psychologically-flawed and Charles Clarke launched an extraordinary attack on his Cabinet colleague after resigning last year.

Labour MPs must surely now be considering the once-impossible thought that Gordon Brown is not the man to succeed Tony Blair.  Unlike Iain Dale, I do not worry about David Miliband.  Someone recently told me that Mr Miliband looked like the sort of boy who would be bullied in the school playground.  I don't think he could best Cameron.  If I were Labour I'd be very interested in the idea of John Denham.  The idea - floated on PoliticalBetting.com a little while ago - may be Labour's last and best hope.  Articulate, respected by colleagues, representing a southern seat, very knowledgeable about crime because of his Chairmanship of the Home Affairs Select Committee and only out of the Cabinet because of his decision to resign over the Iraq war, Mr Denham could be a credible opponent to Mr Brown.  He would be a man much more likely to represent a breath of fresh air.  Interesting times.

This is certainly the time for a powerful Labour blogging community to emerge.  On Comment is free yesterday, Mike Ion argued that left-of-centre blogging was on the rise and could be a big factor in the deputy leadership race.  My advice is this: the most powerful Labour blog will be the one that begins a Stop Brown campaign and now.  The US left wouldn't have waited this long.  Labour's grassroots shouldn't wait for Milburn and Clarke to act - they should begin a netroots movement now.  Perhaps we Tories should be mounting a Save Brown campaign?

Wow!

"Brown as leader would be gift to Tories" is the headline in tomorrow's Guardian above a poll that puts the Tories 15% ahead should Brown succeed Blair.  The Tory lead is 10% - with Tories on 41% - with Blair as leader.

I'm off to watch Man Utd's FA Cup replay now.  More thoughts at 10pm-ish.

9.30am update on Tuesday morning: The poll suggests that the strength of the Conservative position is despite public opposition to green taxation.  62% of those questioned by ICM disapproved of extra taxes on motorists or airline passengers. Interestingly 58% thought that any extra green taxes should be used to fund environmental projects whereas 36% agreed with the Tory policy that they should fund other tax cuts.

Members: Technology not taxation will deliver greener future

ConservativeHome published the headline results of the March members' survey last Friday and over the next few days we'll examine some of the findings in more detail.  As promised there'll also be a comparison of the data collected for members as against supporters.

The table on the right summarises members' reactions to the leadership's controversial consultation on green taxation (click to enlarge) - with most supported statements at the top of the graphic and least supported statements at the bottom.

Here's my attempt at a summary of the findings:

• Tory members believe that technology is the best tool in our fight against climate change.
• Unilateral action is not sensible given that developing nations are tomorrow's polluters.
• Only a quarter of members reject the idea that climate change is happening although it is not clear how many think that it is man-made.
• One-third buy the leadership's line - trumpeted in Nottingham - that the green tax policies show that the party is willing to take the tough decisions for the country.
• More members (by 36% to 26%) agree that the overall impression on voters will be that the Tories want to raise taxes rather than that David Cameron is serious about the environment.

Related link: Unpopular green taxes fail to dent Tory lead

"The party has gone to war with ConservativeHome"

The headline of this post is taken from an article in today's Times by Sam Coates (not ConservativeHome's Samuel Coates!).  It'll give ConservativeHome's Sam and I plenty to talk to him about when the three of us have lunch together next week.

I know that there are a fair number of people in CCHQ who would prefer that this website did not exist but it is wrong to suggest that many high-ups want "war" with this site.  David Cameron and Steve Hilton were very warm when I chatted with them in Nottingham.  Members of the shadow cabinet and their staff are in touch with me on a daily basis - sharing news and offering comments.  An MP writes for this site most weeks.  I'm having lunch with Francis Maude next week for a catch-up.  The Times' Sam Coates quotes one "senior Tory close to Mr Cameron" as saying about ConservativeHome that “it’s 30 people talking to 30 people."  The party leadership knows that that isn't true.  Many thousands of activists, parliamentarians and journalists visit this site every week because it offers the most comprehensive account of developments in the Conservative Party.  At Nottingham I lost count of the number of people who came up to me to say how much they valued this website.  'It's the only way I find out what's really going on,' was the most frequently-made comment.  The blog threads aren't representative - and I have never suggested that they are - but the monthly survey is a fair insight into the mood of the Tory grassroots.

Given what The Times has written today I thought I'd recap on the main purposes of this website - as Sam and I see it:

1. To provide a one-stop guide to all major developments in the Conservative Party.  The front page is the guide to all of those developments and it is what David Cameron told me he found most useful.
2. To contend for the 'And theory of Conservatism.'  I advocated this 'And theory' well before Mr Cameron became Tory leader - it is, in fact, the inspiration for the masthead of this site.  The eleven shields represent eleven great components of the conservative movement (from left to right): home and family, prosperity, personal compassion, law and order, the worth of every human life, faith, conservation, the power of culture, patriotism, internationalism and political participation.  I believe that the Conservative Party is at its politically most potent when it is not narrowly focused on a few issues but determined to be a government-in-waiting - blending a familar focus on tax and crime, for example, with a passion for social justice and a cleaner environment.  As I wrote recently - for The Guardian - that balance is beginning to emerge more clearly and is driving the party's improved opinion poll performance.
3. To give party members a voice.  There are still too many people in the Conservative Party with a we-know-best attitude.  John Maples' weekend remarks to ToryRadio that he could get "the right candidates in the right seats" with "the right percentages of women and ethnic minority candidates" were very unfortunate and revealed an anti-grassroots mindset that sits at odds with the party's emphasis on localism.  ConservativeHome's traffic first started to rise when we campaigned against Michael Howard's attempts to take the vote away from members in the election of his successor.  This site covered that story when the national newspapers largely ignored it.  We'll continue to champion a more democratic, open party and are ready to defend members' voting rights in the selection of European Parliamentary candidates.

ConservativeHome is, of course, far from perfect and I know you won't hesitate to use the thread below to tell me where we're going wrong.  All comments - particularly constructive ones (!) are always very welcome...

PS The ConservativeHome masthead appears on the mug that you receive if you donate £35 or more to the CH Appeal.