« Project Cameron's key achievements: Unity amongst the true 'Top Tories' | Main | Project Cameron's key achievements: Governing by proxy »


Karma Karma Karma Karma Karma Chameleon


I'm not sure that citing the London Olympics logo was an entirely helpful thing to do....

From the Daily Mail article

"The tree logo cost £40,000 to design and is meant to show the Conservatives as modern and free-thinking. It replaced the old "torch of freedom" logo which the modernisers felt looked too Stalinist."

So Hilton thought that "Torch of Freedom" was Stalinst? You couldn't make it up!

Oaks of green, oaks of blue,
oaks of any rainbow hue.
Howe’er you lean, whate’er your view,
the Tories have a tint for you.

Cheers William

Vote blue, get blue?

Can we not just scrap this cheap version of a Party Logo.Let's go back to the 'Torch'. At least it did attempt to indentify our core values. Mind you in this day and age can someone tell me if any of our values have changed. I could go on and list them if anyone needs clarification. I would be grateful for any responses as I might be advised of some new values. This must not be seen in any way a critism of David Cameron. We have had more than enough of that in here and it is doing us no good in the polls. However.my main point remains on this subject.

How much is this going to cost?

The whole point of an effective logo is that it doesn't change because it is such a strong and instantly recognisable image that is creates instant association with the organisation it represents. I wear my "Tree Logo" badge a lot of the time and sadly so far nobody seems to know what it is.

Sometimes the party really is very stupid. It was so predictable that changing the logo would provoke a round of the-party-is-unclear-about-its-identity stories.

The logo, especially the green "classic" version, always looked to me like a turkey pecking the ground. It symbolises for me the turkeys that are Hilton and Dave.
We should go back to the fern. That stood for Freedom, Enterprise, Responsibility and Nationhood. The real meaning of Conservatism not this liberal dross that we are bogged down with.

We want blue policies, not a blue tree.

Maybe blue trees is a new policy?! "Vote green go blue"?

So Hilton thought that "Torch of Freedom" was Stalinst?

That's a valid point Hungarians do have bad recollections of Stalinism so Hilton might have a thing about it

I'd like to see a verion with a tartan infill please

as a graphic designer, i can say that having a changable logo is a great thing to have, the 'torch of freedom' is dated and tacky.

I have to admit over time the tree has actually grown on me. I think the green-blue colour scheme is quite nice; it works well on the website and on policy documents and stuff. It's also softer than the bold blue.

That said, I did always like the torch. Is it a tad too libertarian, though?

Peter Coe: 'Maybe blue trees is a new policy?! "Vote green go blue"?'

LOL! But more likely: you think you will get blue, but we will give you green.

The tree and lighter colours have grown on me. As long as they stay away from red and yellow I see no real problems with changing colours now and then. Can put baubles on it at Christmas.

Blue Trees! Last time I saw them was in the Beatles film - Yellow Submarine. They were chemically induced. Might bring questions about certain peoples former "musical" preferences?

I agree with Andrew about the tree and lighter colours, don't think the darker colours work so well. But maybe they are intended to contrast a positive message from the Conservative party but a more negative one on Labour's record.

Aaaargh,another thread about logos!!! Completely meaningless in my humble opinion.

It's a good idea. Changing the logo for different seasons/occasions (like Google's logo sometimes does) will attract peoples' attention and help reinforce that we're in-touch with the present.

The whole tree thing has grown on me as well. I still like the torch and hopefully it will stay as a symbol of the Conservative grassroots and ideology- much like the hammer and sickle is for most Labour activists......

Sort of proves to the public you don't know what your doing, or which way to turn. By the way had baked spuds just now.. yummy.

"I wear my "Tree Logo" badge a lot of the time and sadly so far nobody seems to know what it is."

That proves that the new logo is poor and a waste of money, just like Hilton's mega salary!

I like both new logos, and if people don't know what it is, that's their ignorance!

The blue tree shown above looks pretty good.

A party official confirmed that the colour of the logo would indeed be changing from time to time
If it's changed to yellow it could end up looking like a mushroom cloud!

The tree logo cost £40,000 to design and is meant to show the Conservatives as modern and free-thinking. It replaced the old "torch of freedom" logo which the modernisers felt looked too Stalinist.
Surely, and I'm sure this must have been the idea at the time, it's more reminiscent of the torch on the Statue of Liberty rather than a Hammer and Sickle.

Don't believe everything you read in the papers. It's the silly season after all.

If you're going to use different colours, shouldn't there be a linking theme? How about
"Tie a bright blue ribbon round the old oak tree"!!

Dismal logo and a total waste of money!

I like the flexible nature of the logo (even if the design for the Oak could be better) and the new sky background looks much neater than the standard logo design. However as others have said a slight logo change isn't what people want, people want real leadership and good policies coupled to a vision that shows us as better to govern than Labour.

OK, so the Tory Party cannot even tell the truth about the colour of its logo!

Your Party Official source says that the logo was designed to be used in a range of colours but they are either lying or haven't read the logo usage rules document (still online - copy archived for when they sneakily change it later) which forbids the use of tints or colours not details in the doc.

And guess what? Yes, this gradient blue isn't an option. In fact the document very clearly states:
"Don't create new colour logo versions!" (page 8)

Why can't you just stop lying even over something so minor?

Perhaps by the time autumn comes we will get a brown one?

Hey, nobody commented on my baked spud. TUT

Conservative Home has really outdone itself today. Has the editor gone on holiday?

First, we have Peter Franklin's contradictory befuddled piece which, in telling the 'right-wing' some home truths, admits that the left of the party has been guilty of the most serious disloyalty (but that's OK!).

Second, we have the Top Tories Unity thread in which Ken Clarke is included as a 'loyal Top Tory'. A man who has belittled his leader by publicly calling his proposals on a bill of rights, 'xenophobic' and repeatedly publicly ridiculing the party's stance on an EU Referendum. Can anyone other than Quentin Davies claim to beat that in the disloyalty stakes?

And now we have the most critical thread of the year! Oh My God! The Evening standard (the newspaper with a political identity crisis) have written a non story about the fact that the Conservatives have changed the colour of the leaves on the tree logo.

Are you a blue or a green?

Shock Horror! That is it! A split is inevitable! The Conservative Party shall never recover from this earth shattering event!

Really............who cares?

Todays inane efforts make even Platform 10 look relevant (am I really saying this?). Silly season is truly here!

I'm off to a serious political blog......

I must admit this site is beginning to look silly. A typical thread has a small number of people trying to debate rationally and giving in due to a number of people drowning the thread with repeated negative messages. Then there are a few mystified by the nonsense and a few who appear to pop in from ga-ga land. A little while back it was suggested there was some form of pre-registration to remove anonyminity and/or colour labelling so we can see which commentators are actually party members and which are not. To have rational debate (as in parliament or a council chamber) you need rules (were bloody Conservatives for Gods sake) and this site needs to get a grip or it will not be a positive influence on democracy. I'm sure Labour are laughing their heads off at all this!


"It is a very flexible design which, like the London Olympics logo..."

Dear, dear. What on earth has happened to this party? Where we once had a strong torch of liberty, we've now got the ever-changing, ever-expensive scribble that's supposed to look like a tree. Not quite sure I've seen many blue trees. And comapring it to that Olympic mess which cost a small fortune is just idiotic.

Who are these people who come up with these ridiculous ideas about changing logos repeatedly and coming out with stupid statements like that? If this party actually had a spine these days, people like that would be booted out of the higher echelons of the party ASAP.

Has the change in party logo really had that much impact? I know we now supposedly live in an age of spin and image but I suspect that most people really couldn't care less. The sort of people who are easily led by such superficial things probably don't vote anyway.

Time for a coup.

The Cameroons are driving us backwards.

Who would even bet on us matching let alone bettering our 2005 popular vote win over Labour in England?

More English voted for us and the Cameroons insult us and call us delusional dinosaurs.

The results will tell us all we need to know, and still they will blame it on us.

We must take action to save the Conservative Party from death by Cameroon.


Can’t you boys stop changing the colours? I’ve only just got some of these bl***y conservatives used to the fact I might put a bit of green on their leaflets!


The style guide that the anonymong referred to above is intended to be useful to constituencies and activists in formatting their local literature – certainly saved me from searching randomly for the Pantone colours and fonts that matched the basic logo.

The logo being “scratched into” a background was always intended, and works on to a blue background on a riso print. Interestingly, the “clouds” background was I think used by Sky at the weekend as their backdrop to a story, and seemed to work well on TV.

I think the main point is that the primary branding can be used in different settings and in different ways, and is still recognisable. The fact that the media chose to make a thing out of it is more symbolic of the difficulties we have in pushing our messages through at the moment – the people carping here would do well to concentrate on helping with that, rather than asking for a backwards move (bring back the torch – waaah, mommy, I want my grammar schools!) - that is not going to happen, is it?

A point I was discussing with a colleague last night was the amount of material bearing previous brandings (yes, more than one) that we as associations have hanging around that might well get wheeled out in case of a snap election – some of us have to look at the need to have a clear-out!

Can’t you boys stop changing the colours? I’ve only just got some of these bl***y conservatives used to the fact I might put a bit of green on their leaflets!
Maybe the tree could be done in multiple colours next to each other like Andy Warhol's picture of Marilyn Monroe!


I know the Cameroons primary tactic is now to insult everyone in the party who does not agree with them, but is it really necessary to use a term like 'anonymong' that is akin to calling someone a spastic?

I would have expected better than such insulting gutter language from a party activist like yourself Richard.

is it really necessary to use a term like 'anonymong' that is akin to calling someone a spastic?


I sincerely apologise if that was offensive to you. It was intended as slang, but perhaps it was unwittingly ill-judged. I should have restricted myself to "Anonymous Troll".

On the other hand, I don't feel the need to show too much respect to anonymous posters who accuse us of lying.

I must stop reading Guido's blog, really...


Thank you, it was unnecesary. Leave the gutter to Labour and the LibDems.

May I take you to task over another point you made? What is 'taking powers back from the EU' if not backward looking?

Are you opposed to taking powers back from the EU as that clearly seeks to restore us to a situation we had previously?

I love the tree logo. It reminds me of a walk through a forest on a bright sunny summer day. I have never noticed blue bark but my eyes may need testing. I've got the Horlicks ready so night night friends and colleagues.

Thanks, Bill - I do try to make my comments considered here.

I'm hesitant to make this another EU thread, we seem to have a lot of those, and we're getting a little off-topic by going there - but I hope other posters indulge me in making this a one-off response to your question.

I don't think that EU reform needs to be backwards-looking at all. We are looking at an enlarged EU, with all the inherent difficulties in decision-making that brings.

I have always firmly believed that a modern, more flexible EU should be more focused on doing less things better, more focused on working on those cross-border issues where inter-governmental co-operation between member nation states helps get things done.

I don't think it should be about taking us to where we were previously, but should be argued in terms of where we need to be to go forward.

Dave has a different face for every week, so why NOT the logo, even if it is illegal under copyright laws.

M. davidson....simple the leader has NO backbone to get rid of them.... luv yer xxx

Dave has a different face for every week, so why NOT the logo, even if it is illegal under copyright laws.

Would you like to explain the legal basis for your accusation, "Miss Tooty"?

The Conservative Party has always had the problem of the Individual versus the Collective, or the Collective versus the Individual, ever since Nov 12th 1867 when we formed. The only way to resolve this defect in our genes, is to have the Collective "discussing" stuff with the individual, and vice versa. Would not be so damaging to the future of the party.
Incidentely, welcome to Annabelle T. I am glad you spell your name the french way, or life could get confusing for the editors if they wanted to administer a tap on the wrist to either of us!! Annabel H!!!

I wasn't at all sure about the little tree at first but it's really grown on me!! (Oh dear!)

I'm actually quite fond of it now and think it's rather cute!

If we are supposed to be relentlessly positive, why are there clouds?

...why are there clouds?

Fair-weather clouds!

I like the new logo and its flexibility.

1. Copyright law! LOL.

2. Usage rules. Those are the rules laid down by the creators to retain control of the design -- to stop logo-users creating versions willy-nilly. Of course the creators can create new versions.

Editor, I suggest that you have new posting rule: the editor can delete any anonymous post that adds nothing to the debate.

God might object to the new logo... Did we consult the Big G during the development of this or was he asking for too much money for it?

I thought it was supposed to represent the mighty Oak!! The logo looks like a flimsy sapling which would blow over in the first puff of wind. A total waste of money. At least the torch looked strong and meant something.

why are there clouds?

Is the light to the left (of course to the left!) a sun?

If I had been asked (honestly, I wasn't!), I would have warned that some people may read it as: Cameron is standing still like an animal blinded by Labours headlights, his mind hopelessly clouded.

In England , the logo should be red and white .

Wishy-washy rubbish - lets get back to policy. And for goodness sake lets get our teeth into that chump Brown.

Foot & Mouth and slipping our great nation into a European State by the back door...

Let us show the nation what the party is made of...bloody blue or green trees, I despair!

I think we should go back to the Torch but we could have a green handle and a blue flame

Everyone is forgetting the real issue here which is, of course, that I still haven't been paid my £50,000 for having the idea to hold a CH competition for a new logo (which, you'll remember, was won by an oak tree). This is another pretty damning indication that David Cameron has betrayed all that I hold dear, eats babies, etc etc.

It is a wonderful logo. ToryHome today has the exclusive on the new official variation that has been created for our MEP's. It combines the dark blue to please the dinosaurs with our modern, Cameroon aim for the EU.

Dave and the amazing technicolour oak tree! Felicity and I think it's FAB! We shall be wearing our logos with pride at the annual chameleon fanciers convention in Manchester this year.

The picture of William Hague in front of the blue tree, it does look a bit like someone had just scribbled on the wall.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker