« David Davis: Met Chief Blair's position "untenable" | Main | Andrew Lansley proposes an independent NHS for England »


I think that Sayeeda Warsi may have had a higher rating if she had actually been profilic in the news - the only thing I've seen of her over the past two weeks is her opposition to the IPPR report on identity, citizenship and community cohesion.

I'm confused. Why has Hague had such a good month? Did members like what he said about the EU Treaty or something??

I always think of William Hague as a parliamentarian from a by-gone era. That is a big part of William's appeal. He looks and sounds like a politician and that makes for a telling contrast with the ranks of awful career-politicians who populate the house. William Hague is a career-politician in the proper sense of the word. A man who believes in public-service not self-service. The fact that William does so much to chronicle the history of our democratic process shows that he has a real sense of propriety and reverence for those that have served our nation in the past. William Hague is a man our nation can be proud of.

I suspect, Lucy, that these latest results will have most reflected William Hague's party conference performances.

"William Hague is a career-politician in the proper sense of the word. A man who believes in public-service not self-service."

Rubbish. Hague puts his lucrative publishing deals and paid speeches first. He was too busy lining his pockets than to put in the necessary work to get us out of the EPP.

Then you missed Sayeeda in the Daily Mail defending Christmas against a Labour think tank that wants to downgrade it in our national life.

You could check the newslinks on the front page.

If we look at the bottom 4
David Willetts -1% | -14% | +3%
Francis Maude -10% | -16% | -2%
David Mundell -6% | -11% | -3%
Sayeeda Warsi -20% | -14% | -4%

Sayeeda Warsi is the one who I am sure who will rise up whereas the other 3 are clearly doing an abysmal job. Maude over stretches himself because of his outside interests, Mundell is leading the Scots Tories on a road to nowhere and Willetts is just gaffe prone.

Well I think Baroness Warsi has been doing a grand job. She makes such common sense interventions on cultural and race issues.

Well done Sayeeda, I hope my post here boosts your score next time around.

If you were referring to my comment, activist, the report I was referring to (an the Daily Mail article I linked to in reference) was the one you are referring to.

But other than that I am yet to see Sayeeda gain any kind of profile one would expect of a Shadow Cabinet member.

The fall in Caroline Spelman's rating is very interesting. If she can't hold her standing at such a good time for the party one has to believe that she's the wrong person for the job.

Then you haven't been paying attention, Alan Collins; you missed the part where Sayeeda said we ought not to demonise BNP voters, another bold move by her that got a lot of national attention.

I think if ConservativeHome had been running for a lot longer then these surveys would show that the party chairperson is a bed of nails and almost all inumbents would incurr members' wrath as some stage.

Hague is all showbiz and no delivery. He failed us on the EPP and now he's retreating from the referebdum pledge. I'm disappointed at this vote.

Davis' rating is VERY steady.

He'll be top again next month because of his handling of Ian Blair and Hague's EU equivocation.

Caroline Spelman is doing alright at CCHQ. She's not high profile, but she is putting the party back together again.

I'm sure she'll get credit over time and has avoided doing things that look like they pander to the "mincing metrosexual" school that caused so much upset and division under the ancien regime.

Which is more than can be said for Maude. As HF says, he's still a shocker! Many hope the day will soon come that he is finally able to devote all his energies to his outside interests. I for one would wish him all success and wealth in doing so.


Why don't you give each possible answer a value?

Very satisfied = 2
Fairly satisfied = 1
Fairly unsatisfied = -1
Very unsatisfied = -2

The total would provide a more accurate index and reveal the difference between, say, Hague and Davis.

I'm not surprised to see that being a women or being an ethnic minority gets someone lower down the league table. Why don't people grow up and rank people on their merits rather than because of prejudice?

For example, both Sayeeda Warsi and Pauline Neville-Jones made excellent speeches at conference and should be much higher up the league table. As should Caroline Spelman.

And, as for Gove, he is just carrying on Willetts' anti-Grammar Schools, anti-selection stance and does not merit being at number 5.

Not a bad idea, Mark. I'll do that for next month.

Apart from her not making Maude-sized gaffes, john, do you have any evidence for believing that Caroline Spelman is doing anything positive? We all know that Osborne + Ashcroft are the real movers at CCHQ.

Looks like everything is moving in the right direction as the Conservatives start to form a serious Opposition to the government and start to make their presence felt. Even the people at the bottom are generally improving, which shows how the momentum is filtering down.

I'm amazed that Hague gets even a positive rating, never mind being rated number one - ok, he's been involved in the ConTreaty referendum (but giving a rather muddled line on whether or not there'd be any attempt to amend it post-ratification) but as Head of the Northern Board he's quiet at best and, speaking as a Loiner now living in Bradford, as "Shadow Minister" for Leeds and Bradford he's been utterly anonymous since his appointment. If we're to recover in Leeds and Bradford (where there are 6 marginals we need to be winning next time, not to mention a number of other marginals in West Yorkshire) we need our "Shadow Minister" to provide a presence here

Mountjoy, Warsi's gaffes have shown her to be a loose cannon. Neville-Jones is simply unknown to activists and reports to Hague. Spelman is, as others have commented, chairman in name only. She was a token appointment to counter Harriet Harman as Deputy Leader of Labour.

There are several capable women on our frontbenches who have passed over in favour of Warsi. If they were in the shadow cabinet, their ratings would higher than Warsi and Neville-Jones.

Caroline Spelman is one of our best people, and has a lot of good ideas.

I had one reservation about her moving from her Environment post - and that was because she had worked out how to get homes built and altering the planning system, without damaging the Green Belt and green space, whilst balancing it against what local people and local authorities want.

She made a good speech at the Conference (I tuned into it), and is a "details" woman.

It is possible to get your case across without always making lots of noise, like a few of the trolls here (Lib Dems?)

Mountjoy: "I'm not surprised to see that being a women or being an ethnic minority gets someone lower down the league table. Why don't people grow up and rank people on their merits rather than because of prejudice?"

You've got it completely the wrong way round. They're not ranked low because they are women. They are in the shadow cabinet because they are women. Is Theresa Villiers a better communicator than Ed Vaizey? Is Pauline Neville-Jones cleverer than Dominic Grieve? Does Sayeeda Warsi have a better understanding of community issues than Paul Goodman? Is Caroline Spelman more likely to raise grassroots morale than Chris Grayling? Is Cheryl Gillan more Welsh than Stephen Crabb?

David Cameron has chosen to promote people on the basis of their gender. Don't be surprised if some of us rate them on more objective performance criteria.

Joe James Broughton: "It is possible to get your case across without always making lots of noise, like a few of the trolls here (Lib Dems?)"

Do you have any evidence for that JJB or have you resorted to that accusation instead of engaging with the facts of this survey? The same LibDems who rate Hague highly appear to be less keen on Spelman. C'mon. Be grown-up in your arguments. Acknowledge Spelman has yet to prove herself at CCHQ.

Interestingly enough, I had argued several times for Dominic Grieve to replace George Osborne, but things took a dramatic turn when our tax proposals were sharpened up - and I hope it lasts & I've been proved wrong.

Jennifer - there are some Lib Dem posters on this site [who post on other sites] who deliberately post negative comments, which then get gleefully reported as dissent, even in publications such as The Economist.
But I'm sorry you don't seem to rate Caroline Spelman's work on housing vs the Green Belt as very important - for many people it's the no.1 issue.

Aren't people (including readers of CH) fickle? I suppose the old cliche ,'Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan' is true.
For myself ,I had to score far too many of the Shadow Cabinet as 'don't knows' as I'm still fairly unaware of the work thy're doing. Even though as a party we've had much success in recent weeks many members still need to do (far) better.

Jennifer, the women you've listed all have considerable experience.

Theresa Villiers was our Deputy Leader in the European Parliament.

Sayeeda Warsi was a special adviser to Howard on community relations, and a Vice-Chairman of the party.

Pauline Neville-Jones was a career diplomat and former Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee.

Caroline Spelman has been in the Shadow Cabinet since 2001 (only leaving when Howard had his slimmed down cabinet of 12).

Cheryl Gillan has been an MP since 1992, and is one of a dwindling number of Conservative MPs with ministerial experience, and still young enough to have a ministerial career ahead of them.

To pretend that the only reason for their appointment is their gender is absurd.

Caroline Spelman is a safe pair of hands. Okay she may not be a rottweiler type person during a debate, but her disarming nature will be very useful in her relations with the voluntary party. Besides, she is not as gaffe prone as some of the previous occupants of the post.

I also agree with Tony Makara in that William Hague is an old fashioned (a kind of Patrician) politician, who respects the traditions and institutions that have evolved over the centuries.

One important point is that most of our frontline people do seem human and agreeable. I have to say that I haven't changed my mind about the tired old bunch of retreads that is Nulab's current front bench.
I can't think of anyone there that I would like to sit next to at a convivial dinner.

I also agree with Tony Makara in that William Hague is an old fashioned (a kind of Patrician) politician, who respects the traditions and institutions that have evolved over the centuries.

Posted by: Yogi | November 02, 2007 at 16:30

That is true of Hague and I think you will eventually find that it includes his respect for the traditions of the EU as well as Pitt the Younger.

Please can we be told how these surveys are handled?

At the end of each survey we are asked if we are (a) members; (b) supporters; or (c) .. er (something else)

When the results are reported do they cover the whole survey or just members. Since the "supporters" are the possible floaters their views - and the shifts in their views - are important.

Personal;ly I am utterly horrified and ashamed olf our present government and its completely incompetent prime minister. For that reason alone I will probably vote Tory but at present it would be with a heavy heart because on so many issues they fudge and dodge the issues. I live in hope.

Every survey I complete, most of the shadow cabinet get a bad rating from me. Not necessarily because I don't like them (although in some cases - DC for example - this may be true, but usually I have to ask myself who the heck they are.

If I, as a possible Conservative supporter the election after next, am unable to identify a particular member of the cabinet with either a position, an action, a statement, or even a picture, then they are not doing a good enough job and get marked down for it.

I won't give them a "Don't know" that really means that I'm not sure of the job they are doing. The fact I am relatively unaware of them and what they are doing to fulfil the obligations of the post means they aren't doing it very well.

With the possible exception of the lady in charge of shadow homeland security or whatever, who is so covert that I have forgotten her name already...... Excellent work, keep it up!

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