Cameron calls for "discipline, passion and hunger"

Speaking before the House of Commons goes into recess tomorrow, David Cameron told Conservative MPs that there would be no change of direction.  He called for "discipline, passion and hunger" from the whole parliamentary party and for internal debates and arguments to be kept out of the newspapers.

The Press Association reports that he told MPs that now was not the time to change strategy but that it was "the time to reaffirm our strategy."  He promised that there would be as much emphasis on issues like crime as on quality of life issues.  Speaking again as a political strategist he said: "Remember that elections are always won on the centre ground."

Mr Cameron promised MPs that Conservatives would be active throughout the summer months.  Voters would be warned that they had the choice to be "stuck with Labour or get on with the Conservatives".

He claimed that Gordon Brown's decision to establish a Border Force - a long-standing Tory idea - was another sign that the Conservatives were setting the agenda.

Comments

[Umbrella man]

Mr Cameron needs to change bicycle gears or we're in big trouble.

[Cleo]

You want another 31% election total then? Give the current leader a chance to attract new voters and be in contention to win what will be a close election.

[dr m]

Yes, elections are always won on the centre ground. Thatcher,bush sr,bush jr,raegan,howard,putin,harper,sarkozy,wilson, ariel sharon, mugabe, hitler and mussolini were all on the centre ground.

[dr m]

'You want another 31% election total then? Give the current leader a chance to attract new voters and be in contention to win what will be a close election'

thats what the opinion polls have got us on now.

Please don't insult our intelligence by saying that browns honeymoon wont last, tony blair's did, as did david cameron's for 18 months.

[Tony Makara]

Good clarion call from David Cameron. Especially the part about 'Hunger' The question is how much do we want to see Labour out? Everything should be focused towards that goal. Towards change. Perpetual opposition is not helping our country which is being ruined by Labours ill-conceived policies. Ask yourself whether you want Labour out? Have you had enough? If so then get behind David Cameron and let's get the job done.

[Andrew Woodman]

Time to get behind Cameron (And not to stab him in the back), otherwise it's another term in the wilderness.

[dr m]

'Time to get behind Cameron (And not to stab him in the back), otherwise it's another term in the wilderness.'

perhaps the front then?

[Kris]

Good for Cameron! No more airing our dirty linen in public. Lets have internal discussion but not the public back stabbing that has been going on. Only Labour benefits from that kind of behavior. After ten years of labours spin and neglect, we should be hungry for a Conservative government, so lets show a united front in the face of overwhealming media bias.

As for the comment 'Mr Cameron needs to change bicycle gears or we're in big trouble.' I would reply.. Ask not what your party can do for you, ask what can you do for your party?

[Cleo]

Right-wing manifestos failed in 1997, 2001 and 2005, why will it work this time? Labour realised that left-wing manifestos did not work in the 1980s/1990s. After 10 years of centre ground Labour Conservatives have to show how they will make things better.

[olivepeel]

DC is a class act. Impressed by his grasp of detail at PMQ after a flight from Africa.
Those on the Heffer fringe have no alternative political strategy, no alternative leader and no where else to go.

[Tory T]

Glad to see DC saying this. Crime and quality of life.

BTW, posters baying for "full policies now" should look at pmqs today and realise why some of us have been more cautious.

[james]

'Quality of life'?

??

Someone will have to tap this guy on the shoulder and tell him to quietly go ...

The Conservative Party is not the Papal Office with its attendant Infallability Doctrine. From Mr Cameron came not a sliver of a scintilla of doubt, let alone an admission of an error !

Contrast this shivery lack of contriteness with Mr Blair's marvellously earnest entreaties to everyone in Britain to just forgive, hold strong and believe ... oh, how he could act !

Mr Cameron's acting mentor, Tony Blair, had the decency, at least, to apologise where necessary, publicly and, well, convincingly too (damn it) - with one glaring omission.

Is there now a fear within Tory ranks of criticizing this dilettante, David Cameron?

The real fear is that those (blasted) polls, the great British public, and finally PM Gordon Brown will have the final say.

That'll really be real

[Richard Carey]

Matthew D’Ancona quoted an interesting phrase in his Sunday Telegraph article at the weekend, about “pushing into the dip”. DC was exactly right in the ’22, we certainly don’t need to sit back and sulk – instead we need to go further, faster. We need to do something bold and unexpected that goes right over the heads of our internal critics. “You think I’m a different kind of Conservative? You haven’t seen anything yet….!”

At the same time, we do need to keep our activists on board. I know this is going to be a huge generalisation, but some Association organisations could perhaps do more to brief activists on policy changes, sell them to them and keep them up to speed – they are our salesmen on the ground after all and maybe we need to bring them inside more. Not everyone is going to speak to DC, but we’re all in contact with our local colleagues. I know that advance briefings are probably impractical (ever tried to leak-proof an organisation as large and diverse as the Conservative Party?!), but we all have a role in selling our wares during a summer of policy announcements.

We need to make sure that our local organisation doesn’t shut down for a couple of months now. Keep those seatbelts fastened and put that deckchair away (presuming it’s not below water), we could make this a really interesting political ride this summer.

[steve garner]

Well said Tony Makara.

Cameron is the only show in town, and unless we prefer years of more Brown government and more lenthy periods of navel gazing in opposition we should get behind the leader and concentrate on attacking Labour and winning the next election.

Sometimes I despair of our Party. For the first time for years we have a leader who is listened to and actually has a platform from which we can win the next election but panic sets in at the first sign of a bad poll. Did we not learn anything from Micheal Foot's party in opposition and then New Labour in opposition?

Discipline and unity convince the voters and win elections. Brown is too much of a fraud for his honeymoon to last long. Blair's honeymoon may have lasted ages but that was after 18 years in opposition.

We've got the best chance for years to stuff New Labour. Let's get stuck in behind DC and take it.

[eugene]

Well that is a start from DC. It is welcome.

Now let's mention taxes (not cuts necessarily). An acknowledgement that Labour is wasting our money and there is a chance of a tax cut from good government.

Maybe a hard policy that Labour could not steal. I fail to understand why we cannot have a health policy as such:
If you can afford private, get out of the NHS and allow those waiting to get in.
Incentive- it will no longer be taken off your pay cheque because you do not use it.
Functionality- an NHS doctor cannot do private- he is either private or NHS-not both.
One must prove that you have an insurance company loking after all your health to opt out of the NHS.

There are NO losers here.

Everybody has access to health care.

Those that cannot afford healthcare now get better care because many of those that can have gone private.

The insurance companies will have more busines and can use the premiums to build new shopping centres.

Those that can aford private care are no longer a slave to the state (just like those that cannot afford it will now get better service as strain is taken off the NHS)

Labour will never steal this policy. It is very un- German Democratic Republic...Labour's guiding light.

[eugene]

Spelling again- I always get into a rage when thinking about NuLabour and type far too fast. Apologies.

[Michael Davidson]

So despite everything that has happened, Cameron's still not willing to even contemplate changing his ways?

Well that's just being arrogant. Well fine, on his own head be it.

But if he does lose the next general election, then he should admit he got it wrong, apologise to the party then leave.

[John Leonard]

Eugene,

On your NHS proposals. Just a few questions I suspect critics would ask.

How much must someone earn in your world to afford comprehensive medical insurance?

How do you ensure that Insurance companies do not inhibit your freedom by dictatorial demands on how you behave?

How many people will be made to opt out and how much will that reduce the revenue from national insurance?

How would you ensure that medical professionals remained with the National Health Service?

How will you ensure that there is not a shortfall in the NHS Budget?

[Edison Smith]

- "We've got the best chance for years to stuff New Labour. Let's get stuck in behind DC and take it."

Excellent post Steve Garner, I second everything within it. As Conservatives we should understand better than many that - like a good family - we air our dirty linen in private.

- "Mr Cameron promised MPs that Conservatives would be active throughout the summer months."

This is very important. No Conservative strategist, MP or Shadow Cabinet member should be booking long holidays in August. It should be business as usual so come the autumn the party can hit the ground running.

[Icarus]

But you are crap. Didn't any one go to Ealing Southall?

This was a Cameron love in and it failed.

Cameron isn't the answer for Tories.

Many thanks from Lib Dems and Labour.

[Tapestry]

Interesting thread on www.politicalbetting.com having a reassessment of the by-elections. They were actually not bad for Cameron, and they were bad for Labour.

With all the media razzmatazz it's taken Mike Smithson five days to realise, but at least the thinkers are starting to see through the media narrative. Needless to say I saw the trend differently at the time.
www.the-tap.blogspot.com
Sedgefield Has Changed The Electoral Arithmetic

Now the whole by-election thing is calming down. have a rethink.

[Tory Lady]

I understand Nelson Mandela has been asked to stand on the Banks of our flooding Rivers and lead prayers for the English Refugees.

[Michael Davidson]

Tapestry - how much is CCHQ paying you?

You're kidding no-one.

[ALDO.]

The Conservative Party is stuck with David Cameron now.But surely it is time for the wet,vacuous and image obsessed tosh-which passes for conservative thought these days-to stop.

[Editor]

Michael Davidson: please do not make allegations about other commenters that you cannot possibly know are true. Let's deal with people's arguments rather than trashing each other. Play the ball - not the man! Thanks.

[John Leonard]

Michael Davidson:

Read it here:

http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2007/07/25/is-labour-being-complacent-about-the-by-elections/

And you might as well read this as well.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/william_rees_mogg/article2120680.ece

[Stephen Tolkinghorne]

Michael Davidson, you're right. As usual there's the clique of CCHQ desperadoes desperately spinning for Dave.

The fact is that DC's going down faster than the Lusitania, and he's taking the Tory Party with him.

He'd better start plugging some holes with serious and strong policy and rhetoric - actually attacking the Government - or he's history. By the end of December he should be gone - just enough to make it another two wasted years for the Tories - leaving the Tories in a far worse state than the healthy one he inherited from Michael Howard.

[james]

You are on the money about the need for a smart summer campaign drive:

such a strategy was a key driver for current Canadian Prime Minister Mr Stephen Harper's Conservative Party's surprise win over then-incumbent Liberal Party Prime Minister Paul Martin in January 2006.

It shocked a nation.

The Canadian Liberals were arrogant, lazy, but always in power, it seemed. (young Liberals were intolerable !) Granted, there was a major political financial scandal 'The Gomery Inquiry' implicating Government, and a hapless PM Martin, but there also existed a very serious, disciplined, still young, and very much misunderstood economist and Leader of the Tory Opposition who ached for the Canada's top job. . . . and Mr Stephen Harper was successful at the next national poll. (Those Tories were so prepared !) How?

The previous summer and fall, Canadian Liberals dozed on beautiful Canadian lakes in favourite old touring canoes , or ambled on ancient forest pathways and all of them agreed they were The Natural Party of Government - while the Tories campaigned feverishly the old-fashioned way: door-to-door etc (the media never paid much notice)- it paid off big-time, it caught a nation by surprise, and its media in particular (go read about it)

A summer and Autumn repeat of that campaign in Britain will ensure a closely fought contest. Guaranteed....(But how hungry and disciplined are Britain's Tories, and are Labour so so detested? (no substantive errors/scandal yet, a new non-Blair PM etc)

HQ know all this anyway.

[Tapestry]

nothing..michael.

it's all done for fun and love of my leader.

See www.order-order.com right now as well if you are interested. Guido is starting to realise that ICM Guardian need interpreting very carefully. (posh language for 'shifty little shits')

Or if you really have enough energy, look at www.the-tap.blogspot.com and you will find that some of us have been onto ICM Guardian polling before even the great Mike Smithson started to rethink.

[Stephen Tolkinghorne]

"Or if you really have enough energy, look at www.the-tap.blogspot.com and you will find that some of us have been onto ICM Guardian polling before even the great Mike Smithson started to rethink."

H'mmm, this really is beginning to look like CCHQ are degenerating into conspiracy theories and episodes of delerium. Isn't that what Dave accuses others of indulging in when they talk about their desire to bring back Grammar schools, etc. ?

[Richard Carey]

As usual there's the clique of CCHQ desperadoes desperately spinning for Dave.

Not a very insightful or adult comment, Stephen. I'm not sure who you think are "CCHQ desperadoes" on this thread, but I'm just a volunteer activist who doesn't take kindly to supposed "colleagues" trying to destabilise our own party while I'm trying to win votes for it. Now there's a complex conspiracy theory for you...

[Man of Kent]

About a year ago I was a regular critic of Cameron on these boards, but I decided to keep silent on two grounds:

1. Cameron had won the leadership campaign by a substantial margin and deserved a chance, and
2. I was prepared to accept a change of emphasis following a third election defeat.

My views of Boy Wonder have not changed - in fact, the grudging respect I had 12 months ago has been replaced by amused contempt. However, he is still the leader, and the only one we have.

The conservative majority in the Party (and on these boards) need to accept there is not going to be a change of leader. The well is now so poisoned that no-one in their right mind would wish to take over at this stage in the parliamentary cycle.

I believe that Cameron is our Kinnock and the next election will be our own 1992. In fact, I am increasingly of the view that the long term conservative agenda would be better served by the defeat of David Cameron's Conservatives.

Dave has made his bed and he must now lie in it - his agenda, his policies.

Should he win a majority, then he will deserve his victory and the winner takes it all. However, should he lose (which I now suspect is highly probable) we must not allow him and Hilton to point the finger at the Right for splitting the party and dividing our base.

David Cameron is a flakey. There is no substance - he is a transient figure who just happened to be in the right place at the right time. The real battle for the soul of the Conservative Party will come after he has left the scene. We must be ready to regroup and pick up the pieces, and to do so we must now allow ourselves to be blamed for the defeat which so many of us now fear is inevitable.

[TomTom]

You want another 31% election total then? Give the current leader a chance to attract new voters and be in contention to win what will be a close election.

Posted by: Cleo | July 25, 2007 at 20:31

Why do you think it will be a close election ?

I don't think there are many new voters to be attracted...after 19 months opinions are formed. Abstentions are likely to rise - they were 57-58% in Sedgfield and Ealing - and 59.5% in Bromley.

Funny how Conservatives in Bromley could not be enthused by the Conservative Party......and don't forget Cleo that 31% at 60% turnout = 18.6% votes = 12.4% with 60% Abstentions

There is no sign that the Conservative Party is bringing voters to the poll...and that is the real danger for a party which does not have any real presence outside Southern England

[TomTom]

The Canadian Liberals were arrogant, lazy, but always in power, it seemed.

A Party aided by Paul Desmerais who seemed to employ a lot of Liberal politicians and made Martin a millionaire with the steamship company he provided...and the UN officials he sponsored

[Tapestry]

Stephen. Don't take my word for it. Go to www.order-order.com right now and see how ICM Guardian have clumsily tried to rig an anti-Cameron poll. It's so blinking obvious, it's a joke.

Tom Tom, what is just beginning to dawn on folk is that Labour lost a far bigger chunk at Sedgefiled than they should have done. Unlike Bromley our vote did appear in roughly the right proportion there and at ES, slightly increased.

(Mind you at Bromley, we fielded a known europhile in Bob the Blob to replace one of the party's best known eurosceptics in Eric Forth.)

[Tapestry]

Man Of Kent, Cameron and Kinnock? No. Cameron and Churchill.

[TomTom]

Tom Tom, what is just beginning to dawn on folk is that Labour lost a far bigger chunk at Sedgefiled than they should have done.

So Labour lost Sedgfield... that is good news !

[eugene]

Thanks John Leonard. I am not a policy maker and obviously what you ask will take months of research. However, I can give what I imagine are reasonable answers to your important questions. I have cut and pasted your post to answer.

On your NHS proposals. Just a few questions I suspect critics would ask.
How much must someone earn in your world to afford comprehensive medical insurance?

I am not in insurance. To give it a guess however-considering an average house cost £200 000 and we pay about £300 a year on the insurance, I would imagine 8 times that will be an insurance risk on health- £2400 a year as a payment. Take away what the state charges us anyway, probably one is looking at about £2000 a year. A bit higher than a council tax bill. Probably everyone on above average wage could manage it. It would be by choice however, except for the ones on well above average salaries-say £50 000 plus ( and they will probably be relieved). Of course, one would expect no claims and loyalty bonuses from insurance companies and they will find bright ways to cut costs such as sending one to India to have a hip replacement. That is the beauty of private enterprise. They think. They save. If they are rubbish, they go bust.

How do you ensure that Insurance companies do not inhibit your freedom by dictatorial demands on how you behave?

The law instructs how insurance companies behave would be my answer to that. In any event, there is talk of the NHS refusing treatment to heavy drinkers and smokers. Indeed, they let a mother of a friend die because they said she will just ruin a new liver through drink- it is just not right.

How many people will be made to opt out and how much will that reduce the revenue from national insurance?

No one but well above average earners are made to opt out- it is a choice (and high earners can turn up at the NHS but of course, a cheque would be required at commercial rates, since they do not pay into the state NHS monthly ). The NHS must never have a revenue shortfall- the government must write the deficit cheque. State businesses should not face money shortages but at the same time, most business should have nothing to do with the state. State businesses are always run badly. However, vital services such as medicine, the police and the army should remain with the state. I am looking for choice for those that can escape the state and allowing those that opt to remain, a better service.

How would you ensure that medical professionals remained with the National Health Service?

If they are well qualified and experienced, good salaries. It would be good if they have less people to see each day, thereby taking better care of them and take home a pay cheque in line with their qualifications and stress levels.

How will you ensure that there is not a shortfall in the NHS Budget?

The government writes the cheque.

At the moment, you can only get private insurance for very serious stuff, your private doctor is your NHS doctor , your doctor is well stressed, there are waiting lists , care is poor in many cases, doctor morale is low and many elements of the NHS are bankrupt.
In America, they live longer than us, eat far less healthy and no-one is left on the street when ill. I have seen an ill vagrant in Las Vegas picked up and taken to hospital- I know this.They do not have an NHS. Very few countries do and it is not to their cost. The NHS should not be seen as a sacred cow.

[Tapestry]

Tom Tom. Read the evidence and the informed commentary coming out now after a week of reflection, rather than reacting to the media narrative in the Gordian.

[Stephen Tolkinghorne]

"Not a very insightful or adult comment, Stephen."

No, you - and they - makes yourselves only too obvious, so no great insight needed.

It must be very difficult for activists trying to sell the Tory party to the voters, when it clearly stands for nothing other than a leader's ego.

Perhaps you should get Kilroy-Silk to lead the Tories, as at least he's got some charisma - as well as massive amounts of ego.

[TomTom]

Tapestry you have told me Labour did not win Sedgfield and it was a Conservative triumph you are the one peddling counterfactual analysis. There is currently no prospect of a Conservative majority in any General Election and no analysis predicts one.

Wrap yourself in your comfort blanket. The only issue is how badly the Conservatives lose - how badly they fail in Northern England - and how disillusioned cheerleaders like yourself are after failing because of feeble efforts at street-level to rebuild moribund constituency associations.

[Michael Davidson]

Tapestry, are you seriously comparing David Cameron with Winston Churchill?

I'm sorry but you're being absolutely ridiculous. I may not know for sure whether you are from CCHQ or not, but that's the kind of propaganda rhetoric I'd expect from the former Soviet Union.

We all know Dave's still going to be leader at the GE - but as I said, if he screws it up and we lose a 4th one in a row - then he's gone.

[Tapestry]

Yes.

To me he is the country's only hope at this its moment of greatest danger. I can see that my viewpoint is far removed from yours and that you see it as ridiculous. I used to slag Cameron off as I was a supporter of Fox. But I gradually came to trust him, helped by actually meeting him. My views are genuine.

Follow my thought processes in my blog if you like.

CCHQ would not want me on the staff. My past is far too interesting!

[ToMTom]

How much must someone earn in your world to afford comprehensive medical insurance?

I am not in insurance. To give it a guess however-considering an average house cost £200 000 and we pay about £300 a year on the insurance, I would imagine 8 times that will be an insurance risk on health- £2400 a year as a payment.

£200/month - you are way out at sea !

A woman costs a lot to insure since women use medical services far more than men; in fact they are the main cost-driver in the NHS. German insurance would see a woman costing maybe £300-400/month with an employer paying the same....a man would cost less say £250/month and each child probably £150/month.

this month it says
freiwillig KV-AG Anteil 250,00 (250 euros given to me ArbeitGeber anteil)
freiwillig KV abgeführt 500,00- (deducted 500 euros for the krankenkasse)

So take this example - the employer transfers his £175 share of the £350 monthly health premium to the employee in his pay and it is from this that the employee has it debited from his bank account.....so instead of having it deducted at source - the employee simply makes the employee liable by paying his share directly to the employee and letting him take care of administration....makes it dangerous if you live in overdraft as you would have no health insurance

The Arbeitsamt pay the equivalent of the employer's contribution up to the "Bemessungsgrenze", this worked out to not quite half in my case. If you can't afford to pay the remaining 200 - 300€, that's your problem! It's no accident that the number of people in Germany having no health insurance at all is in the millions and rising steadily.

http://www.toytowngermany.com/lofi/index.php/t39437-0.html

With public insurance, you are probably better off when:

You become unemployed.
You decide to start a family.

With private insurance you are phucked when either of the above happens. Two colleagues of mine who are privately insured now have the pleasure of forking out premiums for themselves, their wives, and each individual child they have (one has two children, the other has three). If they were to suddenly become unemployed... ouch that will be a very hard to cure pain. With public insurance, the whole family is covered on your single payment. Relieves the pressure somewhat when there is suddenly only one breadwinner in the family. Unemployment? Then your insurance will be covered for you and the family by the government.

Also - with private insurance when you choose one, you are more or less stuck with them for life. I know you can freely change sides whenever you want, but the older you get... the higher the quotations from the other companies ohmy.gif This can be harsh, especially if your insurance company decides to impose a hefty increase in monthly premiums.

Private insurance is great, if you get into it young (20 - early 30), but becomes increasingly more expensive the older you get.

Public health care is fairly expensive now I pay at least 500 per month (in my 40s) and have a dependant (hubby). The company pays the same - so this costs us about 1000 all told.

Private, so I am told is more expensive than public (at my age) should I go into now.

We were unemployed and they (public) charged us (in 2001) 250 Euros per month! (charge you half)

[Tapestry]

Tom Tom. You are wrong. There are people who predict a Conservative victory at the next election.

[Ellesmere Dragge]

I see that William Hill has opened a book on Cameron's successor. Place your bets now: Hague 9/4; Davis 5/1; Osborne at 10/1.

Boris a 50/1 outsider.

Full list of runners and riders at http://politicalbetting.com/

Ask not for whom the last lap bell tolls, it tolls for DC.

[Afleitch]

I have a feeling the bell will ultimately be tolling for those who have tried to knife him in the back....

[Tapestry]

yesterday's news, dragge.

today's is far more encouraging. labour are worried about the loss of votes to their equivalent of UKIP.

UKIP pulled 2% away from us in 2005 but are fading. BNP pulls more like 6% out of Labour and they are building. It could be critical to the outcome of an election.

[TomTom]

Tom Tom. You are wrong. There are people who predict a Conservative victory at the next election.

Posted by: Tapestry | July 25, 2007 at 23:00

Probably after visiting Roswell....

Let's look shall we:

Cameron is weak up North and with men compared to women. He needs to broaden the Party's public image away from Public School and South East accents. Female and black candidates is all good and fine, especially if they are the best ones. Women voters are better at looking at the person they will vote for. Men are tribal.

The Francis Maude Chairmanship seems to be all about creating a clique and a style which will not resonate with male voters. Cameron must bust the Party open to a broader respresentation at the top. Blair and Prescott knew what they were doing in terms of electoral appeal, mixing up the classes.

The modernisers are a clique in the end of the day, and should be mixed in with others.

[TomTom]

BNP pulls more like 6% out of Labour and they are building. It could be critical to the outcome of an election.

Your facination with the BNP is consistent..you have tried UKIP...and obviously find the BNP exciting.....it does however cost Conservatives votes and permit LibDem victories....but at Westminster level it is not significant - Abstention is much more significant as it is the biggest single voting bloc....39% in 2005...if it reaches 45% in the next General Election....

[Tapestry]

july 25th 2006?

[Edison Smith]

"Ask not for whom the last lap bell tolls, it tolls for DC."

The comment threads on this site just get further and further removed from reality.

Bizarre.

[Tapestry]

Tom Tom - having a good go here.

trying to keep the emotive stuff to one side. 35% of Labour voters put the BNP as the party they are next most likely to vote for. they pose a real threat to gordon brown. he happy, Tom Tom.

We suffer ukip erosion, but bnp pulls far more from the leftwards side. their economic politics are a bit barking for most conservatives.

My loyalty to Conservatives has been consistent since IDS in 2001. Cameron is the best leader we could have. Nothing complicated about it.

[Ellesmere Dragge]

Tapestry at 23:06:

Ahem, do you wish to rephrase that one?

A clubby bunch of eye-swivelling incompetents are the "equivalent" of a gang of thugs, criminals and fascists?

Pass the sick bag, Alice.

[Tapestry]

On that happy note, good night all.

[Alex Swanson]

Ask yourself whether you want Labour out? Have you had enough?

Yes. But Cameron et al have clearly no intention of offering anything significantly different. Just look at Jeremy Hunt's arrogant, complacent, patronising answer to my interview question. Not only is the policy for intents and purposes identical to Labour's, he clearly couldn't care less about the people affected by it, tens of thousands of people who twenty years ago would almost all have voted Tory wthout a second thought, but next time will equally solidly sit on their hands. Cameron clearly thinks he can make up this sort of loss by recruiting Independent readers and BBC journalists. Perhaps he can. But then what?

Anyway I'm getting to the point where I don't care any more. I've got my Australian work visa. This time next year I'll be packing. If the rest of you want to campaign for socialism-lite you can. I don't think you'll win, but if you do I hope you like it. Like I say, many ex-Tory voters won't but if your glorious leader doesn't care about us, why should you.

[Paul Oakley]

As an unashamed right-winger and no CCHQ plant, I have to agree that DC is the only game in town.

And think of it this way: IDS' report; no to ID Cards; yes to referendum. All good.

The core of the discontent seems to be the A-List, grammar schools and the EPP promise. Dave has ditched the first of these although he needs to discard all of its vestiges as the Tony Lit affair showed. As for the other two issues, which are small in the overall package of policies, the answer is for him to listen to the members.

Hey Presto! the scratches are healed.

[TomTom]

35% of Labour voters put the BNP as the party they are next most likely to vote for. they pose a real threat to gordon brown. he happy, Tom Tom.

You are a slave to polls...must be living out in The Philippines that means you are detached....in other words you say Labour voters would rather vote BNP than Tory....but that poses no threat to Gordon Brown.

The fact is Abstention is all that matters - TURNOUT is king - if you can't turn out the vote you are not in the game and Bromley showed turnout can collapse in safe Conservative seats.

You clearly don't live in the same country - I think if you asked the right question you could get a poll making Adolf Hitler an answer designed to annoy pollsters. Polls are a waste of time - Turnout is reality

[Scotty]

"Anyway I'm getting to the point where I don't care any more. I've got my Australian work visa."
Oh dear, you just might be in time to welcome a Labour government in Australia. But never mind with the internet you can still come on here and whinge about David Cameron and blame him for that misfortune too!

[Bloody Minded]

Oh dear. more bad news for the boy wonder.

More than half of voters do not believe that Tory leader David Cameron is in control of his party, a new poll has found.

The survey of 1,877 people, conducted by YouGov for Channel 4 News at Noon, revealed voters consider the Conservative Party to be well to the right of its leaders in terms of politics.

Just 22 per cent of those questioned said Mr Cameron was in control of the Tories, compared to 52 per cent who said he was not.

In stark contrast, Gordon Brown was viewed by 62 per cent of voters as being in control of the Labour Party, while just 16 per cent said he was not.

It doesn't matter how loud the CCHQ trolls shout, he won't recover from this.

But I have come to the conclusion it's best to let Cameron limp on to the next election. After that we can dispatch him and his entire PC agenda, which can be written off as a comprehensive failure.

We wouldn't want the clones claiming that he would have triumphed if he hadn't been stabbed in the back by the right.

And why is he waffling on about "hunger"? Looks like he's got his African "Make poverty history" agenda mixed up with the domestic BS.

[Andy]

I'm going to give up my weekend to help our party in a council by-election. A month ago, I gave up most of my spare time to do the same in another council by-election. In May, I gave up a huge amount of my time in the local elections elsewhere, despite the fact that my local council was not holding elections. So I work very hard, and care very much for our party, and I cannot adequately articulate how infuriating it is to read the bitter snipings of our party's malcontents, which do so much to undermine the work that people in Associations up and down the country do to elect Conservatives.

I have not heard a single convincing explanation as to how a shift onto traditional Tory issues will help us achieve a stunning election victory. I for one would be delighted if someone would care to make that case, but I suspect the results would be no different from last time if we did repeat that strategy.

Similarly, I've not heard a single convincing attempt to explain how a shift onto traditional Tory issues prior to Brown's becoming PM would have arrested Labour's bounce in the polls.

Sometimes, I wonder whether those who argue for a shift onto traditional Tory territory have experienced the same 10 years of British politics under Labour as I have. Perhaps though, they've been living in an alternative realm, in which the strategy for which they argue has for the last 10 years delivered Conservative landslides against a tired looking Opposition leader in the form of Tony Blair - landslides that only came to an end when Cameron took over.

Incredible stuff.

[Thatcherite Councillor]

When Cameron became leader in December 2005, I took the view that he won, not because he is the best choice for the Conservative Party, but because too many in his party believe that he was the closest thing they have to a Blair figure.

The problem, of course, is that now Blair has stepped down and the electorate realises how much they have come to dislike and distrust him, the Conservative Party finds itself saddled with a Tony clone, accompanied by copycat policies based on instant response rather than long-term conviction.

Since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister, opinion polls have detected a greater than expected "bounce" in favour of the Labour Party. Each new leader of a political party enjoys a honeymoon period but Brown has exceeded expectations.

Not bad for someone who is a notoriously dull speaker and who has clearly been bested at Prime Minister's Question Time. He comes to Number 10 with an awful lot of political baggage, but all of the early evidence suggests that the electorate actually seems to like him. Unlike Cameron, who, even before Blair stepped down, was beginning to flag in the poll ratings.

The problem is that we thought we had a winner and we've got a loser

[Graham D'Amiral]

When we had polls telling us good news like we had an 8 point lead the cynics said they didn't trust the accuracy of the pollsters, yet as soon as a coupleput us 6 points behind the very same people say it proves we can't win the general election.

The truth is this is the first time in a long time that we've been behind in the polls, under Hague, IDS and Howard we spent most of our time behind. So rather than giving way to panic because Brown is enjoying an expected bounce, Conservatives should hold our nerve and realize winning a general election requires the endurance of a marathon runner not the speed out of the blocks of a sprinter.

[Al Hamilton]

"When we had polls telling us good news like we had an 8 point lead the cynics said they didn't trust the accuracy of the pollsters,"

I wouldn't should too loudly about that, Mr D'Amiral. Your buddies are now making exactly the same argument in reverse.

And it's only the Cameroons who are panicking. I was drinking last night with two former Tory PPCs who were very upbeat about the situation.

In many party circles Cameron has already become a figure of fun with his pushbike and windmill. We're looking to a post-election, post-Cameron future, and all the signs are auspicious.

[Bill]

Thatcherite Councillor hits it on the nail. It was and continues to be a huge and ignorant strategic mistake to think the electorate wanted an heir to Blair. After all neither Major or Blair were perceived as heirs to Thatcher.

[Simon Denis]

Funny how shameless the modernisers are. Here we are again at thirty two percent in the polls, two by-elections down in third place - THIRD place - and Cameron's cronies say he's the only show in town. Well I can only say it must be a very small town. Up the smoke he'd be getting the bird. We'll have to stick with him for now, but come the fairly inevitable fourth defeat the poor, ordinary tory voter will know whom to blame. The handful of obscure right wing commentators on this web site? Or the people with actual operational responsibility for tory campaigning? Modernisers, you have been warned.

[Bloody Minded]

Yes we have to put up with him until the election because a contest now would do his successor no good.

But that doesn't stop us working now to ensure that he stands down ASAP after losing the election.

We need to organise. To join like-minded people in a right-wing presure that will fight Cameron.

For my money there is only one show in town and Cameron and his cronies have no control over it at all. It is The Freedom Association.

We need to organise countrywide to prepare for the big heave.

[james]

Thatcherite Councillor:

You have nailed the immediate problem.

TB is regarded as yesterday's folly: score of - 2.0 ; GB now scores + 1.5 (he is in fact an anti - TB); DC by slavishly imitating the original TB, 10 years later, is today scoring - 1.5.

Its obvious, right?

Stategically, Mr Cameron is an error.

I feel sorry for the Tory party's impending internicine war. It deserves better.

Oh, the Tory Party may feel it must get behind DC, fine; but Britain hasn't, and won't.

Further, Britain actually likes and trusts the current Prime Minister.

[TD]

Bloody Minded you quite clearly want to spend more time trying to keep Gordon Brown in charge than getting a Conservative government.

Why not go the whole hog and join Labour?

Utlimately whether you like or dislike Cameron he is the party's leader and the choice is whether you want to work to get a Conservative government or a Labour government.

And by deciding you're best spending your time organising a campaign for what happens after the next election, you've choosing a Labour government.

A Labour government that's wasted billions upon billions on tax credits that don't work. A Labour government that is leaving our armed forces unequipped in the battlefield. And a Labour government that is working to take more and more of your freedom away through its ID cards system. And that's just a small selection of its endless failures.

If you want to keep that government in place, you're definitely doing the right thing. But you won't be working for any strand of the Conservative Party - you'll be working for Gordon Brown.

[Gary Farrimond]

Reading some of the recent postings makes me despair

I was a Conservative Party member for many years and an activist but became disillusioned, the talent the party has for feuding and attacking the leader or the collective parliamentary party navel gazing and waiting for the electorate to come to its senses and start voting for us again, that needs a lot of damn hard work first fellas and committment from you MP's to show you are ready for government, you lot get on the ball then I will do my bit knocking on doors and delievering leaflets

I didn't care for David Cameron initially and felt we would be nothing more than the Conservative version of New Labour under his leadership, yet family & friends persuaded me to give the man a chance I have to say he has got things wrong but has also get things right, the past month or so hasn't been brillant but whilst we might have lost a battle why are so many people ready to concede we have lost the war?

All this sniping and plotting is ensuring Labour are voted back in! or perhaps that is what some malcontents really want

David Cameron has on past form delievered and there is no reason to suspect he won't do this again. hats been done once can be done again

GB is riding high at present and will only continue to do so whilst he is given a free ride. In my view GB has announced changes that are popular with the electorate, yet he appeared to support the measures he is now anxious to change when Blair was in power, this is not the action of a man of principle. If these policies are deemed as wrong now then they were wrong then, this together with some of the rotten things he did as Chancellor need to be highlighted with vigour

DC appears to have seen the change in society and is trying to position the party to offer ideas that will attract the younger generations whilst defending the best principles that those of us over 40 hold dear responsibility, hard work, thrift, support for families and respect for all sections of the community. Yet these values alone will not win the next election as they didn't in 97, 01 & 05 why some individuals believe old core values win elections alone is beyiond me, yes they have a big role to play but they are only part of the picture and in order to change societies ills we need to get in power and need to present a broad package with the broadest appeal to attract voters that we are anxious to be responsible for

We need to get behind him, the Parliamentary Party need to get some fire in their belly and drive, passion and do some graft and take the attack to Labour and the Liberal Democrats and get out of this negative reverie and actually behave and look as though we want to govern it will have to be earnt it won't just be handed to us. DC to this end has to take the blinkers off and stop relying on a tight knit band of advisors, the majority of the real world live outside the M25 and have to manage on average salaries or fixed incomes & rely on public services & have common sense ideas that are perhaps beyond the wit and wisdom of an advisor without the experience of life as lived in countless towns by ordinary people doing ordinary jobs and getting on with life

The Party Membership needs to work as one unit and that small band of bloody minded individuals that foretell doom and oblivion in the face of a differcult situation need to either get a grip and realise their actions will help to keep Labour in power a prospect to ensure we all have a lie down with a cold flannel & a bottle of Bells or get out of the party

Society has changed and not all for the better but if we are to be elected we have to evolve and look at new ideas to make us a credible alternative to the wider electorate that don't engage on sites like this & just get on with their lives. They want policies that will deliver security and stability. The old bread and butter issues will always be the same but we have to accept that new ideas have a place in Conservative thinking if the party is to go on

I have seen my pension plundered, my mother waited 6 years for knee surgery and then sadly contracted an MRSA related infection afterwards, my family had Tax Credits awarded then had them overpaid which adds to the burden of managing a home the Tax Credit system to me at any rate is shambolic, the list goes on and on, the ammunination is there the talent to deliver it is there but where is the will?

Its up to all Conservatives from DC to supporters whom engage in politics whether through sites like this on the ground.
The electrorate don't like divided parties calling for a replacement of leader is short sighted, an act of utter folly and only helps our enermies. Labour under Blair or Brown will continue to damage society or come up with ideas that are either half baked or downright dangerous whilst we continue to bicker

Do you really want another Labour term if so carry on as you are and the electorate will not give its trust to us and Labour continue unabashed and largely unchecked and carry on with the utter shambles, storing problems for the future, Pensions (the Labour Party have wrecked these and the message of the party of the workiing person is work till you drop!), Care of the Elderly, Flood Defences (GB cut back on those), an NHS that is contemplating job cuts, an education services that achieves record exam results in tandem with record levels of illiteracy! this list could go on

Stop this bloody bickering, bitching and back stabbing and lets try and work as one unit taking the fight to our opponents and if you do happane to read this DC recognise the fight on the domestic front has to be won first and that listening to the concerns of the home electorate would in no small measure pay didvidends

Perhaps I'll rejoin again to make my local association a little more representative of the community, thanks for listening to the rant of an overweight 40 something dyslexic gay male!

Enjoy the weekend

Gary