Partial retreat on grammar schools

I tried.  I honestly tried.  But nine-and-a-half hours later and it's difficult to move on when the front page of the London Evening Standard is correctly portraying a partial "retreat" by the Tories on grammar schools.   The fact is Tory spokesmen have been saying publicly and privately that there would be no new grammar schools.  But when Dominic Grieve MP publicly argued that Buckinghamshire should be able to build new grammar schools if needed - to meet the county's rising population - the party leadership decided that they couldn't afford another frontbencher to be forced out.  The party is, of course, denying any retreat but the whole thing is becoming a shambles.

Comments

[Adam Tugwell]

So, somebody is listening then...

[Scotty]

I hope this is not a U turn on this policy. Following Sky News Graham Brady was quick to jump in and crow about it being one, in fact he was quicker of the mark than Labour who have are now claiming it as a U turn as well.
Thanks Mr Brady!!!!!

[passing leftie]

Thank you, thank you, Tory grass roots, for spoiling every attempt to get votes from outside the foaming core. Keep it up!

The rump nature of the Tory parliamentary party means that the right will continue to hold the leadership hostage, and voila, another Labour win. Hooray!

[Policy Dog]

passing leftie - credit given where it's due, at least the Conservative Leadership are aware that there are grass roots - they even value floaters, rather than thinking of them as something to be flushed away, once the campaign is over.

[Alex Fisher]

I assume that this could well be the end for Willetts - his policy is being rapidly adopted and torn to shreds. It's so sad that education policy, which should be one of our primary issues, is being held back by ludicrous incoherence for which the leadership simply must take full responsibility.

May I also note that this is a shocking example of double standards. When a hardworking northern MP from an area with grammar schools speaks out against the policy he is forced to resign. When a southern MP who is 'in' with the leadership speaks out they change the policy to suit him. That's not a criticism of Dominic Grieve who I have a lot of time for but of the leadership for its hypocrisy.

BUT and it is a big BUT - this could be the crucial first step to bringing that coherence we need back. Let's have a national policy stating that decisions on schools can be taken to suit the local area. Let's allow grammar schools to expand where appropriate. I really hope that areas which do not currently have grammar schools will be allowed to put forward their own applications for such schools to be set up.

Obviously we will need to wait for real clarification on this but it does seem much more promising that what they were saying before.

[TomTom]

Thanks Mr Brady!!!!!

Posted by: Scotty | May 31, 2007 at 18:24

Yes... Thank you Graham Brady - Man of Integrity

[Chris]

Alex Fisher,
Brady was briefing the press against the leadership, Dominic Grieve simply said was is now apparently our policy.

[Chelloveck]

"I assume that this could well be the end for Willetts"

Well Osborne's authority is in tatters too after his loud "we'll block any new grammar schools" threat is ignored and u-turned less than 24 hours later.

Looks like power is draining from the Tsar and his tsarinas.

[Alex Fisher]

Chris - Grieve didn't state the policy, he stated his opinion which within hours WAS the policy. And I wouldn't say that Brady's New Statesman article or his Sunday Times piece was briefing against the leadership, just stating his opinion and backing it up with evidence, much as Grieve did.

Chelloveck - Very true. This brings Osborne's authority and influence under much scrutiny.

[Deborah]

Dream on, Chris.
It only became policy after Grieve said it.

[jorgen]

Good, now we can move on: let's move on to small state and tax cuts! Mr. Cameron?

[Andrew S.]

This is deeply worrying… the way in which Cameron and Willetts have handled this situation is appalling. It seems their authority on this matter is nonexistent, and therefore to satisfy MPs and grassroots members, they’re willing to sway back and forth regarding policy, leaving only incoherence.

Not good at all (the blame, however, lies as much with MPs and grassroots as it does with Cameron and Willetts IMO).

[Choice]

Rejoice ! Rejoice ! (well at least once anyway!)

[David Belchamber]

Editor, maybe we can help the leadership sort this row out.

First, Cameron and Willetts should eat a bit of humble pie and apologise for making such a mess of their presentation.

Then, Ed, why not print Anthony Seldon's article in The Telegraph on 24 May: "Teaching happiness is no laughing matter" to draw our attention away from grammar schools.

It might instead concentrate our attention on what really matters in education and put all the brouhaha about grammar schools into perspective.

Seldon says: "We need a new education debate about the purpose of schooling. For too long, we have been debating the structure of schools rather than their aim".

He identifies the eight "intelligences" in every human being: "logical, linguistic, sporting, artistic, personal, social, moral and spiritual".

Let us ignore what the tory party is doing for the time being and put forward our suggestions for an educational system capable of developing all those intelligences.

[Vote Freedom]

So Cameron can't lead his own party so how can he lead the country.

[Traditional Tory]

Looks like power is draining from the Tsar and his tsarinas.

It may not be the beginning of the end, but it is assuredly the end of the beginning.

Fight on!

[cleo]

This is a real shame. Education is such an important issue and raising outcomes for all pupils a key priority for any government. A needless and public row over grammar schools.

[cleo]

Voters do not like disunited parties. Labour is uniting behind Brown and the Conservatives can not unite behind a position that Cameron made clear in his leadership election.

[Drusilla]

If anyone wants the gauge exactly how much David Cameron has done for the Conservative Party, he or she need look no further than tonight's Channel Four News: a downright painful interview with David Willetts, followed by a tart little announcement that the Party's new press director had resigned from the News of the World after one of his employees was imprisoned following a conviction for tapping Prince William's 'phone.

Yes, our Party is clearly changing, all right!

[Bill]

What a farce. The sole responsibility for all this lies with Cameron and Willetts. It is their fault they look stupid. They should have done their homework better, had more respect, and known when to retreat gracefully.

[Ash Faulkner]

Did anyone else just see Willetts on Channel 4 News? It was hilarious, worthy of Michael Howard and Newsnight.

[601]

The Etonian is for turning!

[richard]

The Tory party is historically very short of patience with those who fail to deliver. If Labour win a snap election in October (I expect both events to occur) then Dave will have plenty of time to fit wind turbines to his Notting Hill mansion AND his Witney 'cottage' - looks like a £750,000 pad to me. I don't think the Cameroons have the slightest idea how Cameron fails to connect with the electorate north of the Watford Gap.

[Alan Douglas]

Conservatism used to mean enabling people to "do their thing" - now it seems to be almost indistinguishable from Liebour authoritarianism. How sad. In the book "Megatrends" the author made this remark which really impinged on me : "Leadership consists of getting ahead of the right parade".

Come on DC, DO THAT. That is what Mrs Thatcher did, and sadly, that is what Blair did, although he never meant it.

Alan Douglas

[towcestarian]

If this was an orchestrated Clause 4 moment, the U-Turn shows massive lack of leadership by DC. If it wasn't meant to be a Clause 4 moment than Willetts is a total buffon and must go - and DC's initial support for Willetts shows a massive lak of leadership.

[Downsize the NHS]

Maybe Dave should be fitting a wind turbine to his backside. There should be enough gas power there to provide lighting and power for a fair-sized village.

The news is fantastic. Sure let's move on.

Downsize the NHS!

[HF]

The policy making process in this area has been exposed as an utter shambles. Anyone seen Letwin as he is upposed to co-ordinate policy?

We have had Willetts by passing the policy team, quoting findings on an issue that less than 1 in 10 parents are affected by and which are of such dubious merit that a former shadow education minister says are wrong. The PR folk then fan the flames by briefing against him. Why?

Then Osbourne stamps his foot and says "no more" which is patently ridiculous. The Leader calls any contrary view of this "delusional". Now today we hear some commonsense that where required there may be a few more.

So Mr Willetts, WHAT EXACTLY WERE YOU TRYING ACHIEVE BY RAISING THIS MATTER IN THE FIRST PLACE? ANOTHER ELECTION DEFEAT?

[cleo]

If the grassroots continue to undermine the leadership and harrp on about policy positions that lost the party 3 general elections and if the leadership does not stick to its policy decisions then yes Labour will win this year or in 2 years time.

[Terryholbrook]

The Grammer Schools move pupils from their sometime underacheiving envirom=nment covered by the local Compehensive and enable the pupils to go forth and multiply
at least they did in my case,

[Traditional Tory]

Cameron can take the heat out of this situation and save at least some face by apologising to us, the people of the Conservative Party.

Some of us voted for him; the rest of us have to put up with him. Either way it's our party and has been for years. He's just a lightweight Johnnie-come-lately who got his big break when the star goofed up.

Grammargate has proved that People Power is stronger than Gleichschaltung. Now it's time for Dave to show some humility for once in his life, apologise to the grassroots and invite Graham Brady to return.

[David Cameron's Lapdog]

I find todays events intriguing and it led me to recall which media mogul had much to do with keeping us in power for 18 years. I happended to see this comment in the Sun yesterday.

"TORY MP Graham Brady was right to quit if he cannot accept collective responsibility.

Nobody is going to build new grammar schools.

We must make the best of what we’ve got.

But that includes our brightest youngsters.

David Cameron must accept that if we can’t have grammars, we must have streaming.

And whichever way he turns, that means selection."

Is it me or does the wording of this seem a little cryptic?

Now we hear Andy Coulson has come on board and we have an amendment to the previous statements on Grammar Schools.

Intriguing indeed.........

[HF]

Cleo. I just want policy positions that are clear and consistent. I just want shadow ministers to act properly and consult their colleagues.

I personally do not want more grammar schools. I do want a party that has in the senior positions people that can make the right political decisions and not pick a fight with an issue that means little to most voters but matters a lot to some of our people.

It is called political intelligence.

[chrisblore]

Right, after all this, perhaps we need to clarify for everyone what our policy actually is, because I sure as hell don't know anymore! How exactly are we (the party membership) supposed to campaign when even we can't tell what our policy is?!

On the other hand, maybe that's not such a good idea as the leadership thought they were just clarifying the old policy when Willetts made that disastrous speech!

I am currently seriously considering dropping my membership until Dave takes his wind turbines elsewhere and this country has a proper conservative (note small "c") party again. He has made to be look like a complete fool over this one and the honeymoon period is well and truly over!

[Gawain]

I hope he is turning 601. I suspect that in time this frenzy will have some good consequences:

- The Cameroons will have learnt not to announce policies until they are fully formed and based on fact not ideology. Spinning doesn't work like it used to.

- The Party Leadership in general will have to be more cautious before attacking the membership.

- Above all the arguments in favour of grammar schools are actually being heard. I have an eldest son at a comprehensive school in an authority without grammars and a younger one at a grammar school in the next door education authority. The grammar school is unquestionably the better school and having seen what my eldest has to put up with I firmly believe that comprehensives just do not work. Brady's statistics suggest that my eldest would be better off if this authority had grammars. This point needs to be made over and over again quietly and politely.

- Finally, comprehensive education has been shown up for what it really is, an oxymoron. Passing Leftie and his friends need to explain why a comprehensive in an affluent part of the country with a middle class intake and a so called "grammar stream" can only get lass than 50 % of its pupils 5 decent GCSE's including English and Maths ! Brady can show that in grammar school authorities the high schools can get 70 %. The comprehensives in the inner cities results are even worse even after ten years of Labour spending.

The proper education debate is just beginning.

[Simon Chapman]

What a mess. This was entire;y predictable, and predicted, a week ago.

[working-class ex-grammar school northerner]

Posted by: 601 | May 31, 2007 at 19:19
The Etonian is for turning!

Yeah, but only by another Etonian!

[Bill]

Where is Cameron?

[chrisblore]

Bill @ 19:47:

On holiday, craftily keeping himself well clear of this shambles. I wonder if this holiday was planned in me before this all blew up? The cynic in me says no!

[Libertarian FCS]

Things are hotting up. It's getting just like old times again.

For the first time in years I feel excited about being a member of the party.

¡A luta continua!

[KEVIN COCHRANE]

Sounds like David Willetts is in want of advice on his education policy - what a bunch of wankers!

[Bill]

I'd love to know the basis on which Grieve's comments were made. Were this U turn to be coupled with a bit of humility on the part of the Cameroons and a recognition that they cannot continue to insult and ignore trad tories and their values, I also might consider rejoining the party.

[Denis Cooper]

cleo @ 19:32 - "... if the grassroots continue to undermine the leadership and harp on about policy positions that lost the party 3 general elections ..."

Is there any evidence that policy on grammar schools lost the Tories 3 general elections, rather than the catastrophic and unprecedented loss of confidence in their ability to manage the economy after the Black Wednesday fiasco?

[cleo]

Denis Cooper- the Black Wednesday fiasco was a key issue of course but there were surely many issues why the party could not gain more than 33% of the vote across 3 general elections including party infighting and lack of confidence of the electorate in the party believing in and wanting to improve schools, hospitals etc for everybody. I don't think support for grammar schools and selective education is a key concern for the electorate.

[Alex Fisher]

I looked up our 1997 manifesto earlier today. What a refreshing change from a lot of what is nowadays by both major parties. This should be our policy now - expansion of grammar schools where parents want them but not where they don't coupled with specialist schools and the return of the Assisted Places scheme to ensure that independent schools are not the preserve of the rich. I particularly like the title which I think sums up what an education policy should be about.

Extract from manifesto:

Choice and Diversity

When we came to power in 1979 the school system was totally dominated by one type of school - the monolithic comprehensive. The system failed our children. It treated every child the same. It told parents where to send their children. It did not give schools the freedom to run their own affairs.

Since 1979 we have created a rich diversity of schools, to serve the varied talents of all children and give parents choice within that diversity, because we believe that parents know what is best for their children.

That is why we - and only we - are committed to giving the parent of every four year old child a voucher for nursery education so they can choose the pre-school education they want for their child, whether in a play-group, a reception class, or a nursery school in the private or state sector.

We will give more talented children, from less well-off backgrounds, the opportunity to go to fee-paying schools by expanding the Assisted Places Scheme to cover all ages of compulsory education, in line with our current spending plans. We propose to develop it further into a wider scholarship scheme covering additional educational opportunities. The freedoms and status of fee-paying schools will be protected.

Grant-maintained schools have been popular with parents across the country - whatever their politics. We will encourage more schools to become grant-maintained and will allow new grant-maintained schools to be set up where there is sufficient local demand. We will give all grant-maintained schools greater freedoms to expand and to select their pupils.

Grant-maintained schools are leading the way. Local authority schools are also benefitting from our policy of local management of schools. Our ultimate objective is that all schools should take full responsibility for the management of their own affairs. In the next parliament we will take another step towards giving them that freedom.

We will extend the benefits of greater self-governance to all LEA schools. We will require local authorities to delegate more of schools' budgets to the schools themselves. We will give them more freedom over the employment of their staff and over admissions. And, where they want it, we will allow them to take over ownership of their assets, so they can make best use of the resources.

Local authorities will continue to be responsible for their schools' standards. They will provide funds, and compete with other organisations to provide services to schools. We would expect the increased responsibility of head-teachers, and their role in achieving efficiency-savings, to be recognised by their pay review body.

Schools are stronger and more effective where head-teachers and governors can shape their own distinctive character Sometimes that means developing a speciality in some subjects. Sometimes it means selecting children by their aptitudes: where parents want this we should not stand in their way. Special abilities should be recognised and encouraged.

We will continue to encourage the establishment of more specialist schools in technology, arts, languages and sport. We aim to help one in five schools become specialist schools by 2001.

We will allow all schools to select some of their pupils.

We will help schools to became grammar schools in every major town where parents want that choice.

The high standards, real choice and genuine diversity which we have introduced will produce the best results for all our children.

[David Cameron's Lapdog]

Cleo:

I agree - so can you explain to me when the Conservative Policy is about all education, Why did David Willetts focus on a tiny group of 164 successful schools in his speech?

[bill]

Black Wednesday was not a fiasco. It and the reasons for it were a national tragedy. The intellectual stupidity (to put it kindly) of shadowing the DM and the attendant loss of control of money supply resulted ultimately in
hundreds of thousands losing their jobs and homes.

[hotspur]

Maybe some common sense will come out of this debacle. It seems everyone here agrees that grammar schools do a good job. Most seem to agree that more would be a good idea. Even more seem to feel that education is so important that it should be decided at local level. The example in a letter today that the only Tory MP in Manchester happens to coincide with a lone constituency that boasts a grammar school speaks volumes. We have to stand by our guns that academic selection is a good thing that also enables those peers around them. On message manipulation of MPs for half baked theories is not the sort of Blair legacy we expected Dave to embrace. Let's get real and come forward with something innovative that wins us the support of the electorate, rather than trying to win it by default as we wait for Labour to carry on shooting itself in the foot.

[Michael Hewlett]

So many anon comments. So much joy at the perceived troubles in the party.

Why do we keep on showing the public that we are a split party who are seemingly unfit to govern.

Let's hope this puts an end to this collective hysteria among the grassroots that is not endearing us to the public.

In the fine words of Malcolm Rifkind:

' We have to remember that the Conservative Party is not a debating society. Is is not indulging in internal discussion for some sort of literary purpose. Politics is about power'

[John]

Well, you now have no chance of my vote at all, I'm from a working class family from Liverpool and Grammar schools helped me and my siblings to the middle class, and as an ex Teacher who has experinced the state system, I send my children to private schools. You are a disgrace, I bet Cameron's Offspring end up in a 'Good Comp' - selection by income rather than ability, that is the reality of the State 'Comprehensive' system.

[Michael Hewlett]

So many anon comments. So much joy at the perceived troubles in the party.

Why do we keep on showing the public that we are a split party who are seemingly unfit to govern.

Let's hope this puts an end to this collective hysteria among the grassroots that is not endearing us to the public.

In the fine words of Malcolm Rifkind:

' We have to remember that the Conservative Party is not a debating society. It is not indulging in internal discussion for some sort of literary purpose. Politics is about power'

[Richard]

I note that some former members are planning to return to the party when Dave gets brought down. I'm afraid that I can't see myself doing that. Dave did not become leader on his own. He was elected first by MPs who rejected, amongst others, Liam Fox, and then by the membership who rejected David Davis. A party who is prepared to elect such a leader for whatever reason is either liberal or stupid (or both). Whichever it is, I don't want to be a part of it.

[tapestry]

It's all a media game. And it's getting us the media. It makes us seem more likely to be in power again that we get the media. As for the content, well it's bound to be a shambles as it was only a media ploy in the first place.

If we can make politics exciting by spinning against ourselves then keep it going. 'We're the next Blair'. 'We love Polly Toynbee'. 'Grammar schools are socially divisive'. what's next? Health presumably!!

[Deborah]

"hysteria among the grassroots"
- not a good way to build bridges, Michael.

Perhaps the leadership should try and understand the grass roots point of view - power without principle is pointless.

[Matt Wright]

Re Richard at 19.21 - sorry this is just rubbish. Last time I looked the Vale of Clwyd is well north of Watford and I got a 7.6% swing from Labour to Conservative. The amount of complete drivel that flows from this site just amazes me by the day,

Matt

[Traditional Tory]

In the fine words of Malcolm Rifkind:
' We have to remember that...Politics is about power'

There's nothing fine about those words (or about Rifkind)

Politics is either about principles - or it is a worthless exercise in pork barrel snouting.

[Fed up..]

Cameron is supposed the 'leader'. This whole unedifying spectacle has been a complete and utter shambles and has shown little by way of leadership from the top.
If the Tory party goes much further in trying to be Bliar Part 2 then, frankly, another term for Labour won't be that big a deal...

[Matt Wright]

Blair aped us. He pretended to copy our ideas but largely failed to deliver them because his party didn't really understand or support the principles. For a time it hoodwinked the electorate. So in effect what some people seem to be saying on this site, when they critcise us for picking up from Blair, is we shouldn't be ourselves!! Most of the stuff that is being proposed by our party eg what Willetts was saying on education, would have fitted perefctly into a Thatcher Govt when she was in power. Yet still the headbangers rant on. I wonder whether there is just an element that don't want to win, that are just adddicted to the comfort zone of whingeing,

Matt

[Robson]

This is turning into an unmitigated disaster.

Something like this can put back the 'recovery process' months.

A year of good work in 2006 is going down the plug-hole every day this botch job continues.

[Traditional Tory]

Yet still the headbangers rant on

By using this kind of unpleasant and intemperate abuse against anyone who dares to disagree with them the Cameroons continue to dig themselves further into a hole.

Are they unable to see the gulf that is opening up between their dwindling ranks and everybody else?

After Grammargate it's going to be unbridgeable.

[Hancock]

Michael Fallon MP is in today's Sevenoaks Chronicle saying he wants a grammar school built in his constituency (Sevenoaks doesn't have one), to ease the amount of travelling kids have to do to get to the nearest grammars elsewhere.

Can someone tell me if this is okay with Willets, or is it going against what Willets is saying?

I'm very confused.

[cleo]

Many people on this website seem to want Cameron to fail, the content is forever negative. It is not about ditching principles. Tony Blair realised that he had to renew Labour's principles for the modern age which had been shaped largely by Conservative principles. David Cameron knows the world has moved on and recognises that to win votes he has to renew Conservative principles so they meet today's challenges. I am not a member of the party and recognise the current government's failings and want to see a different government. David Cameron could deliver that and I am very enouraged by this. This disunity simply means that Labour continues in office for many years to come.

[Richard]

"Thank you, thank you, Tory grass roots, for spoiling every attempt to get votes from outside the foaming core. Keep it up!"

Except that the polls show grammar schools to be popular.

Fact is though that this whole farce would never have kicked off if Willetts hadn't mentioned grammar schools in his speech. By being seen to criticise them while at the same time promising to defend those that existed he looked like a hypocrite. The only logical way to defend this would be to say "it's up to local people" but as far as we know this isn't Tory policy. How he thought the criticism wouldn't antagonise the party membership I don't know. Cameron also acted foolishly by using patronising and intemperate language that ought to be below him. Instead of addressing the concerns of the grass roots he simply tried to shut off the debate.

[Chelloveck]

Surely tomorrow's papers will pick up on Osborne's humiliation, and note that he is just one step from the Tsar himself?

It was sad enough watching squeaky George try to come across all tough with his "WE'll block new grammar schools" threat, but all it took was a principled conservative like Grieve to tire of the tsarinas and speak his mind and Squeaky ended up with egg on his face.

Watch for the phrase "Cameron's clique" in the press tomorrow as he is shown to be ever more isolated from the rest of the party.

[Traditional Tory]

Many people on this website seem to want Cameron to fail

We don't want him to fail; we want him to go

If you aren't a member of the party you can have no idea how widely he is disliked within it.

It may well be that polls still show a majority of Tories backing 'Dave' but most of those who love him love him less than their dinners.

Those who oppose him detest him more than the devil himself.

[Ash Faulkner]

Cleo, I can see where you're coming from. But David Cameron does not command support simply because he is a card carrying member of the Conservative Party. If politics is about principle, he shall receive support on the quality of his character and his vision. On this particular test, many Tories consider him to have failed (I think the rest of what has been said sounds promising, but ruling out grammars was foolish).

If Cameron is not delivering on Conservative principles - and many feel he is not - then of course they don't want him to do something that they feel would be bad for the party and, more importantly, bad for a whole generation of children. Whatever your stance on 'Grammarsgate', and whatever your position in or outside of the party, Cameron cannot take our support for granted. It is not, and never has been conditional, and he has got to learn that.

[cleo]

And then the party will be destined to opposition forever.

[Deborah]

"Yet still the headbangers rant on. I wonder whether there is just an element that don't want to win, that are just adddicted to the comfort zone of whingeing" - Matt Wright @ 21.16

Is this the same Matt Wright who @ 20.38 wrote on the "Time to move on" thread

"We really need more constructive and positive debate" ?

[cleo]

'Grammarsgate' is only helping the government. How will the party move on from this?

[Edison Smith]

Who should replace him then 'Traditional Tory'??

David Davis?!

Fact is, most people can't stand the fact Cameron is more popular than the party he leads.

If Cameron goes in a coup, that is the death knell for the Conservatives as an electable political party. Forever. No coming back from that one.

Labour will win in a landslide in 2009 and by 2013 the Tories will be fighting with Nick Clegg's Liberal Democrats to finish as the second biggest party.

The beaten Tories with become 'The Daily Mail Readers' Party of Britain & NI'.

[Henry Mayhew]

Kevin,

The correct term for the enemy within / Tory leadership is: Wunch of Bankers. You inadvertently seem to have got some of the letters mixed up.

Let's all recognise and celebrate that if "Dave" had closed down selective state education he would have achieved the greatest jape in the whole history of the Buller. Tally Ho!

[TomTom]

Did anyone else just see Willetts on Channel 4 News? It was hilarious, worthy of Michael Howard and Newsnight.

Posted by: Ash Faulkner | May 31, 2007 at 19:19

It's on the Channel 4 Website....Willetts is like a 14 year old who won't confess....I bet Jon Snow enjoyed watching him squirm. I think this is one of the best comedy teams on TV today.....trouble is with Willetts, Osborne and Cameron they need more exposure and more material......this could make politics amusing

[Ash Faulkner]

"And then the party will be destined to opposition forever."

Cleo, you miss the point. Power for powers sake is worthless. Some of us at least have principles. We don't support the Conservative Party because we want comfortable offices at Westminster or we like the look of red boxes, or we enjoy the high profile of being a party of government. We support the Conservative Party because we value every individual, because we support the nation state, because we recognise that this country has a great past and should have a great future, because we believe people desire to be, and should be, free, because we support the institutions that have made this country great, because we believe that people have a social responsibility to eachother.

If a Conservative Government does not commit itself to that, it will not have our support. Calling itself 'Conservative' does not make it so, and if a Conservative Government is no better than a Labour one, then it can stay on the Opposition benches for as long as it likes, because in that situation, this country has no future.

[Mike Egan]

As a floating voter, perhaps someone at Conservative Home could enlighten me as to what the New Tory party actually believes in. If DC sees himself as a Tony Blair Mk II then so be it, but I suspect that adopting the PM's clothes with the hope of winning the next general election will prove to be an exercise in futility; another 4-5 years in opposition beckons.

Unfortunately Joe Public is shrewder than the current crop of Old Etonian Tory "strategists" appears to believe and will find the current education (ie today's) policy unconvincing. Perhaps if they had the benefit of a bog standard state school education they would recognise the part that grammar schools can play in raising standards for all.

[Drusilla]

Fact is, most people can't stand the fact Cameron is more popular than the party he leads.

Cameron is indeed more popular than the party he leads, in the sense that many people who would never dream of voting Conservative under any circumstances prefer him over other Conservatives.

So what? I prefer John Reid to Gordon Brown, but who cares?

The problem for Cameron will come when most people who have previously voted Conservative, or might consider doing so, find his whole 'modernising' project superficial, cynical, incompetent and repulsive. Brands that display contempt for their established consumers tend to have real problems. I care less that Cameron's wrong about so much, than that he's so manifestly incompetent.

[Tony Hall]

Well, as a 'Grass Roots' Member I still don't know what our policy is. I thought I knew. I thought when I saw Cameron taunting Blair in Parliament about the Education Bill needing to allow selection across a range of qualities INCLUDING ability, that our policy was to allow schools to select on ability, whether on ability alone or along with other qualities I didn't know or care. Whether this meant only existing Grammar Schools would stay or more would be built I didn't know or care. The important thing was we need to affirm that somehow, somewhere we should be ensuring that pupils who are academically able should be encouraged and receive appropriate education, not be discouraged by having to run the gauntlet of name-calling and dissaproval by their less able peers, nor their development slowed by being in a school, or being taught by teachers, with have an axe to grind about 'equality' AKA 'Socialism' in schools where no one fails and no-one succeeds.

[Matt Wright]

But the party doesn't want power for powers sake and is not ditching principles at all. Most of the announcements have been deeply Conservative and based on Conservative principles (perhaps with the exception of some of the green agenda). Its not a black and white issue, life isn't. Parties have to take the voters with them and that means they have to use basic principles to underpin a set of policies that aren't pure but can be delivered.

Matt

[Bradford Lad]

What's the next topic on which David Cameron is going to make a fool of himself?

[Henry Mayhew]

Some people are so dense. It is quite clear what the policy is which is why it is time to move on.

If you are a Southern constituency with a public school MP, preferably educated at Eton, you may keep your grammar schools and have new ones.

The opposite applies to Northern constituencies with a state educated MP.

What could be clearer than that.

Next topic now please. Do keep up.

[Ash Faulkner]

Oh I agree with you Matt, and I think overall the education 'policies' are good ones. But Cleo's simple statement that 'then the party will be in opposition forever' seemed to be putting power before principle. I was simply saying that power without principle is pointless and shallow. Overall, I am personally becoming increasingly pleased with Cameron - though rhetoric and action are two different things (see: Anthony Charles Lynton Blair), and this pointed grammars mess up has been an annoying blip.

[Teesbridge]

Hurrah. Old farts regain ground, Brown enjoys fourth term, Tory administration before 2015 impossible. Well done, all.

[Roger Taylor]

Apart from the "wind ups" this is actually serious. I was a candidate in the local elections and night after night I was questioned about Shameron. He is an unfunny joke, he never ever for once talks about traditional Conservative values. He is there for himself and in the north of England we are shedding votes (to BNP/UKIP) like there is no tomorrow because of him.

The Assisted places and the academic ability to gain a grammar school place were once the mantra of our party. Now we squirm as Shameron drives us further down the slope. Not a word about crime and the lack of punishment, not a word about the floods of illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers, and then the latest rosette is turquoise!

Shameron is destroying us, some younger ones and in London and the South East he may be liked but you don't win an election without the "northern" votes.

Wake up Shameron and start supporting some Conservative principles like offering support to those who have worked for their pension and brought up their children. Drop the silly spin and use it when the election approaches. But most of all stop driving our core vote away in droves!

PS: Willets? Resign!

[richard]

Re: Matt Wright at 2100. I said Watford Gap, not Watford. The two are different. But it doesn't make any difference. Cameron will lose the next election whenever it comes.

[TomTom]

Calculus

Some people are so dense. It is quite clear what the policy is which is why it is time to move on.

If you are a Southern constituency with a public school MP, preferably educated at Eton, you may keep your grammar schools and have new ones.

The opposite applies to Northern constituencies with a state educated MP.

What could be clearer than that.

Next topic now please. Do keep up.

Posted by: Henry Mayhew |

You forgot the attractions of having Selection by Ethnicity which is a vote winner in Northern cities.......

and of course, the fact that Academies are in "deprived areas" as replacements for sink schools show how public schoolboys see the future for candidates with grammar school potential in Northern England

[cleo]

My point about being in opposition forever referred to tbe suggestion that there could be a coup against the leadership. I agree that all policies have to be underlined by principle and don't see Cameron as abandoning principles, just updating them for the modern age.

[TomTom]

by principle and don't see Cameron as abandoning principles, just updating them for the modern age.

Posted by: cleo |

You mean like John Prescott ?

Traditional values in a modern setting

This is like a remake of an old movie...

[cleo]

Parties have to renew their principles to deliver on today's problems. They also have to make policy and stick to it.

[Henry Mayhew]

Because it is time to move on I didn't go into detail. Also, since it is only a partial retreat there is not much to discuss.

Any non-approved thoughts on the subject would be delusional in any case.

[Traditional Tory]

Just watching ITV news. The Cameroons are really having their noses rubbed in it. Likewise Ceefax and, I presume the BBC.

'Climbdown', 'disarray', 'damage', 'chaos', etc.etc., and Cameron has done a runner.

Grammargate has been a disaster for the Cameroons, but a triumph for Tory democracy.

[Richard Tesh]

I regret to say Cameron has failed on this one and brought it about himself. He set up a policy review committee but before it had completed its work he had his revised policy rushed through the shadow cabinet and got Willetts to make a speech without making sure all his senior colleagues were on board. He then insulted many who felt very strongly about this issue.

I believe this shows both a lack of leadership and poor judgement, indeed almost juvenile inexperience, of those within his inner team. Frank Lundz (whatever the spelling) said a few weeks ago that Cameron was only one flawed spinning exercise from disaster. This may well have come about.

So what has to be done. Cameron has got to recover from this himself by realising what went wrong. He then needs to address this by making changes within his inner team. If he does not get this right then he will certainly be toast.

[Edward Taylor]

Why can't they just admit that they've made an oversight, rather than giving us all of this embarrassing spin that just helps to undermine Team Cameron's repositioning work of the past eighteen months? There's clearly been no real U-turn (a Conservative government would hardly stop new grammar schools for demographic reasons in areas where they already exist) - just accept there's been a lack of clarification and move on.

[cleo]

A triumph for Tory democracy maybe but it is also a triumph for Gordon Brown. Why does the party prefer to fight the leadership than the Labour government?

[MrB]

Dear me, the pathetic whining here really does have to stop now.

The whole issue about grammar schools is mostly irrelevant to today's education system. That is the sad truth, even though they seem like excellent places...

I left my comprehensive last year and it was a good school where people were put into classes according to ability. I'm now at a good university and don't know of ANYONE who went to a grammar school. Therefore it seems to me that even though they may have been good, they are of a bygone age!

If there has been a retreat saying that new grammar schools won't be prevented, so what? It shows they are listening. Young people are so disinterested in politics now days and this tedious arguing over almost irrelevant issues is one of the reasons why. Can we look at the bigger picture please?

[Andrew]

What a total non-story. Cameron will build no new grammars, just as Major didn't and Thatcher didn't. He's not doing anything different.

[Alex Swanson]

Fact is, most people can't stand the fact Cameron is more popular than the party he leads.

Cameron may be more popular than his MPs. However, local election results both last year and this showed more support than was being registered in national opinion polls; this suggests that the electorate like local party activists more than they like the national leadership.

Futhermore, being more popular doesn't make him right, or constitute an argument for supporting him if he is wrong. Blair was more popular than the then Conservative leader many times during the last ten years; does that mean that Conservative Party activists should have gone out and campaigned for Labour?

[Struan Jamieson]

Calculus said, (22.40) “you forgot the attractions of having Selection by Ethnicity which is a vote winner in Northern cities......” Quite, I know several people who would want to send their children to all white school. The pre-1964 Mississippi model is not one I would prefer to follow.

Now it’s clear to me that Graham Brady’s mistake was citing statistics proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the arguments used by the Leader were flawed to the extent of being ridiculous. Never show up one’s Boss

It does leave one question unanswered, how many residents of Tatton Constituency (M.P George Osbourne -Conservative) send their children to Grammar Schools in the neighbouring Borough of Trafford - Altrincham and Sale Constituency (M.P. Graham Brady - real Conservative) and do they appreciate that in having a public school educated Southerner as their M.P., his statement of yesterday does seem to indicate he is somewhat detached from their views

[Giles Marshall]

Yet another plus point for Dominic Grieve, who already outperforms most of his frontbench colleagues, and a serious minus point for an emasculated Osborne.

This was a ridiculous row, and Willetts should carry the can. He didn't need to condemn grammar schools in his policy pronouncement, and the extended bad publicity culminating in a forced U-turn towards a more sensible policy has exposed the utter lack of tactical thinking behind his original speech. I was going to express the hope that David Cameron, who has in many ways done so much to make the Conservative Party electable once more, might think carefully about the sources of his strategic advice, and widen the circle a bit. Then I read that the 'Screws' editor who endorsed phone tapping is the new PR chief, and I despair. Not content with apeing Blair's policy, we're now trying to ape his personnel....Good Grief!

[Robert Winterton]

Blair was more popular than his party and looked what he has actually achieved over 10 years in office! John Major was popular and!!!! Politics is also about persuasion, sometimes of not popular policies, not just about semantics and focus group driven policies! Education is about opportunity which means selection. Everyone has some talent, but we are not all equal in either our skills or abilities, education is about identifying them and developing them. The world is an ever competitive place, our young people need to be prepared for this! Several successful (economically speaking) European countries have similar structures to Grammers within their education systems as has previously been pointed out. Choice and selection are not mutually exclusive!

[Robert Winterton]

Blair was more popular than his party and looked what he has actually achieved over 10 years in office! John Major was popular and!!!! Politics is also about persuasion, sometimes of not popular policies, not just about semantics and focus group driven policies! Education is about opportunity which means selection. Everyone has some talent, but we are not all equal in either our skills or abilities, education is about identifying them and developing them. The world is an ever competitive place, our young people need to be prepared for this! Several successful (economically speaking) European countries have similar structures to Grammers within their education systems as has previously been pointed out. Choice and selection are not mutually exclusive!

[Goldie]

This is really terrible.
I have disagreed with the course of cameron for a while now (although I was an enthusiastic early supporter, indeed a "May Cameroon", you know, back when Michael Howard's policy coordinator hadn't repudiated 50% of tory policies), but I always thought the Cameron people were at least competent politicians.

But the incompetence of how they handled this is really worrying. He simply doesn't look ready for prime time and Osborne, the supposed Chancellor in Waiting looked even worse.

A terrible shambles.

PS: @Traditional Tory. Actually I don't want Cameron to go at all. I want Cameron to change his mind about his stupid project. Being a pinko doesn't get you elected. Embracing The And Theory of Conservatism would. I still think there is time for Cameron to turn things around. But he needs to demote Osborne, sack Maude, stop listening to Letwin and emphasize right-wing issues such as tax cuts, immigration, Europe and selective education, crime fighting, defence IN ADDITION to environmentalism, care for the public sector, Africa, etc.

[Giles Marshall]

And while I missed the much commented on Willetts performance on Channel 4 News, I did see Roy Hattersley patronising all and sundry on Question Time. It only takes a few minutes of listening to Roy condemn grammar schools to feel comfortably confident that they are indeed the way forward! Shame on Willetts for being in the same camp as such a man!