"A party within a party"?

The Mail on Sunday's Simon McGee reveals a new dining club within the parliamentary Conservative Party; The Green Chip Club.

The by-invitation Club - focused on the 2005 intake - was formed at the start of the summer by frontbenchers Michael Gove and Greg Barker in order to bring together some of parliamentary party's leading supporters of Project Cameron.

Backbench dining clubs are not unusual but many MPs will still feel excluded from a club that appears to be a new favoured circle of David Cameron's Preatorian Guard.  Given the involvement of George Osborne, Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton, it is clearly a club that enjoys the full blessing of the leadership.

The MoS notes that William Hague and David Davis are excluded.  There's probably not too much to be read into that.  Other key members of the Cameron inner team aren't part of this dining club either.  Oliver Letwin for example.  It is nonetheless an unwelcome development.  The revelation that there is a group of MPs with privileged access to Team Cameron will not be welcomed by those in the parliamentary party already unhappy at the ability to influence the direction of the party.

Listed below are the Club's thirty members.

1. Adam Afriyie 42, Shadow Innovation, Universities and SkillsMinister, elected 2005
2. Greg Barker 42, Shadow Environment Minister, elected 2001
3. Richard Benyon 47, Whip, elected 2005
4. Greg Clark 40, Shadow Cabinet Office Minister, elected 2005
5. James Duddridge 36, Whip, elected 2005
6. Tobias Ellwood 41, Shadow Culture Minister, elected 2005
7. Michael Gove 40, Shadow Children, Schools and Families Secretary, elected 2005
8. Justine Greening 38, Shadow Treasury Minister, elected 2005
9. Nick Herbert 44, Shadow Justice Secretary, elected 2005
10. Adam Holloway 42,backbencher, elected 2005
11. Jeremy Hunt 41, Shadow Culture Secretary, elected 2005
12. Nick Hurd 45, Whip, elected 2005
13. Stewart Jackson 42, Shadow Local Government Minister, elected 2005
14. Boris Johnson 43, candidate for Mayor of London, elected 2001
15. Mark Lancaster 37, Shadow International Development Minister, elected 2005
16. Maria Miller 43, Shadow Children, Schools and Families Minister, elected 2005
17. Anne Milton 52, Shadow Tourism Minister, elected 2005
18. George Osborne 36, Shadow Chancellor, elected 2001
19. John Penrose 43, backbencher, elected 2005
20. Mark Prisk 45, Shadow Business Minister, elected 2001
21. Hugh Robertson 45, Shadow  Culture Minister, elected 2001
22. Grant Shapps 39, Shadow Housing Minister, elected 2005
23. Mark Simmonds 43, Shadow Health Minister, elected 2001
24. Graham Stuart 45, backbencher and party board member, elected 2005
25. Hugo Swire 48, backbencher  and former Shadow Culture Secretary, elected 2001
26. Ed Vaizey 39, Shadow Arts Minister, elected 2005
27. Shailesh Vara 47, Shadow Deputy Leader of the Commons, elected 2005
28. Theresa Villiers 40, Shadow Transport Secretary, elected 2005
29. Rob Wilson 43, Shadow Higher Education Minister, elected 2005
30. Jeremy Wright 35, Whip, elected 2005

Comments

[R.Baker.]

What a shame, Cameron has made another poorish decision by doing this at a time when we need "togetherness".He has time to scrap the idea but I doubt he will do so.One or two o0f his dinner group are well past their sell by dates as well.Silly ideas get noticed by the media and thrown in your face by opponents at every chance.When will we learn?

[Hardcore Conservative]

Are they left-wing and PC in their views by any chance?

Let’s hope not - that is the last thing we or the country need. It does not make for very comfortable reading though.

I am also beginning to wonder what the Daily Mail is up to – it seems to be giving the same kind of support to the Tories as Mr Hitchens. Are they beginning to doubt Mr Cameron’s judgement and would rather see him lose and be replaced with a more “traditional Tory” in the long run?

[asquith]

Looking forward to the generic Simon Heffer-style comments from disgruntled ConHomies.

[Alan S]

Do you think this is a sensible move then asquith?

[Alan S]

I've just been to your blog asquith and read that you cannot envisage voting Conservative. Good to judge your comments in that context.

[michael mcgough]

Divide and rule.Ageism is now a major plank of cameronism along with postive discrimination.I presume the only one over 50 is there by her sex.

[asquith]

Yes, I've never claimed to be anything other than a LibDem.

[Jonathan]

Doesn't look much like a backbench dining club to me. Only 5 are actually backbenchers and one of them is hoping to be Mayor of London.

Most back bench dining clubs grumble and plot against the Leader. I supsect this one is going to grumble and plot about the backbenchers and the Party!

[Branch Tory Fish & Chips club]

A quasi-formal group like this is a mistake.
We have to focus on bringing everybody in the party along.

[James]

The problem with this is the access to Cameron. But other than that, no one thinks that any of the rightwing factions in the party are somehow sinister or secretive. What, in the end, is objectionable or even strange about freshmen MPs who are politically aligned talking about policies? No one thinks Cornerstone should be broken up.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

I am concerned about the diversity of opinion in this "Inner Circle".
Are there any Thatcherites represented there, or is there only One-Nation Conservarives?
I respect and appreciate the One-Nation Conservatives of our party, but our Thatcherite legacy needs to be represented as well.

[Sammy Finn]

Dining clubs are a great Commons/ party tradition but a club of chosen ones sanctioned by the leadership can only be divisive.

[David]

"Backbench dining clubs are not unusual but..."

...this is one whose views I don't like, therefore shouldn't be allowed......

[michael mcgough]

Will they have a uniform like the Bullingdon Club had,such as tails with green facings or green towels for wetness?

[Exasperated]

What exactly is your point here, Tim and/or Sam?

Westminster is full of dining clubs roughly distinguished by age and ideological persuasion.

I don't see you condemning Cornerstone, No Turning Back or Conservative Mainstream for their dinners.

Is it just Cameroonies you think shouldn't be allowed to associate with one another?

I love this site, but sometimes I wish you guys would just sit down and THINK for a moment before committing your less edifying thoughts to the blogosphere.

[michael mcgough]

Don't blame Tim or Sam,it is in the Dail Mail.It is one thing to have various dining groups but it is divisive if only one has direct access to the top table which from recent pronouncements seems to get further and further from the people it hopes to represent.

[Sally Roberts]

"I don't see you condemning Cornerstone, No Turning Back or Conservative Mainstream for their dinners."

Exactly, Exasperated! I totally agree. I don't understand why we are getting so excited that there is yet another dining club - unless of course it is because this one is composed of David Cameron supporters?!

It might even be thought that Conservative Home is becoming a Dining Club (without the dinners of course!) for those of the BOO/TFA/Cornerstone Persuasion?

[Oddball]

I do hope that The Green Chip Club does not charge a subscription and is not being used to raise funds!

[ak23566]

I am as crusty and right wing as they come, but I really cannot see anything sinister about this whatsoever. Back in the halcyon days of the 1980's the "right" has Nick's Diner. In the 1990's we had The Blue Chips and now this.

It is human nature to bond, socialise and network with those who share your views and prejudices.

[James Maskell]

Weve known of this sort of thing in Cameron's Tories for some time with his dining groups. I recall he had his Leader Breakfasts or something like that where if you pay a certain number of zeros to the Party, you can have breakfast with Cameron. Its the Tory version of Brown allowing Branson to fly with him recently in the shadow of the Northern Rock crisis. Cameron has his preferred advisors as any leader would.

Doesnt make it right, but this list of names is unsuprizing.

[Annabel Herriott]

Whats the fuss? Its only the new MPs on the block having a supper club innit??
Human nature to form groups. Likeminded. New Tory MPs coming on stream are inclined to be more "normal" if you like than the Bufton Tuftons of old. So they get together! Why not??

[ChrisD]

"Whats the fuss? Its only the new MPs on the block having a supper club innit??"
Agree with you on this Annabel, especially in light of groupings such as Cornerstone attracting like minded individuals.

This all seems a bit childish to be honest, oh look, this lot might get more time and attention from teacher!

[Mr Angry]

A small group of MPs representing a relatively even smaller group within the wider party and yet they are claimed to have considerable influence over the "top team". Kind of encapsulates what is currently wrong with us and why we aren't further ahead in the polls and steaming towards a solid GE victory really.

When will the Cameroons learn that it is ability that counts and not age, ethnicity or gender? Their discrimination is just as bad as the kind that they so willingly condemn in order to please Polly Toynbee et al.

[Editor]

There's nothing wrong with dining clubs and people of like mind coming together. A dining club of enthusiasts for change would be perfectly natural. What is crass is the leadership sponsoring such a club and then inviting a select group to be its members. The leadership should be bringing the whole party together rather than creating a favoured group.

[Hardcore Conservative]

“The leadership should be bringing the whole party together rather than creating a favoured group”.

Here, here.

What we end having is a group that represents “right-wing” views talking among themselves, a group that represents more “left-wing” views talking among themselves and so it goes on. It wouldn’t be so bad if these groups then talked to each other but they probably don’t and all we end with is a party composed of various factions. The Conservative Party is supposed to be a “broad church” but I wonder how many ordinary conservatives still feel completely alienated from the party? I suspect a quite a number and if that is the case so are the voters.

Not hard to see why is it? I am afraid it is not just labour politicians that appear out of step and out of touch.

[Umbrella man]

It really is pathetic that some people on this blog cannot see how Osborne-Hilton-Coulson sponsoring such a group can only harm the parliamentary party's sense of 'we're all in this together'.

[Northernhousewife]

Is the 'dining club' divisive, or the Mail?
What is the real basis for this story?
So secret noone knows about it, except the Mail? Yeah, right!
We all know how they like to cause trouble for DC.
This is one of those occasions when a pinch of salt good for your health.

[Yet Another Anon]

Most people prefer their chips the normal colour that chips are when they come out of the fryer.

"Green Chip Dinner Club" indeed, whatever next?

[David]

"the parliamentary party's sense of 'we're all in this together'."

what, you mean like dividing the party into 'wets' and 'drys', that sort of thing?

[Malcolm Dunn]

Not sure if this is much of a story.Dining clubs have existed in the Conservative Party forever and it is quite natural for MPs to gravitate towards their political and social soulmates. I'm more worried about the attitude of Associated Newspapers which in recent months has been increasingly unhelpful toward the Conservative Party. Why I wonder?

[David]

Paul Dacre likes Gordon Brown, basically. Brown's kept him sweet, they both share the same harsh moralistic outlook, that sort of thing.

[James]

"What a shame, Cameron has made another poorish decision by doing this at a time when we need "togetherness""

"A quasi-formal group like this is a mistake"

"a club of chosen ones sanctioned by the leadership can only be divisive"

"What is crass is the leadership sponsoring such a club...The leadership should be bringing the whole party together rather than creating a favoured group"

Sorry if I've missed something, but where is the evidence that this club has anything to do with the leadership? It has not been 'set up by Cameron', and I'm not sure there is any evidence that it has any sort of special access to him.

There is some vague suggestion that the club is endorsed or somesuch by Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton because they have attended one or more of the dinners. And George Osborne is a member. But even the Mail admits that Cameron is not a member and hasn;t attended any dinners (he apparently will be "...in the next few months".

So it's a dining club to discuss modernising the Party - and the members are...young and modernisers. Sounds very similar to all the other Tory dining clubs in Westminster, each of which has a philosophy, or reason for being, and is made up of people who share that philosphy.

No story I'm afraid.

[Paul]

Where is Philip Davies MP (Shipley) who was elected in 2005?

[Mark Fulford]

Editor, less than a week ago you wrote:

"Nick Herbert and Michael Gove are star performers in the shadow cabinet team. David Cameron was astute to promote them both so quickly."

yet you complain about this dining club. How on earth can Cameron recognise the talent (i.e. be "astute") on the limited contact he'd normally have with the new intake MPs? What chance do those MPs have to become known? It seems to me that this dining club is an excellent way for the leadership to get to know their newer MPs.

[Oberon Houston]

Like a few posters above I'm wondering what the point is here. I don't see this dining club as anything unusual, except if one worries about conspiracy where there is none.

I have a huge amount of time for this site, but there is also a lingering feeling that ConHome is a (very effective) voice of the right within the party. Which is fine, but that's a section not adverse to clubby behavior themselves, so please don't react badly to modernisers getting together for goats cheese on a bed of spinach with small business; followed by pasta and public services. We are not the enemy here.

[Editor]

You'd be right Mark if the group was an open group but its members have been pre-selected.

[Chad Noble]

I'm not a Cameron fan as you know, but I'm struggling to see any problem with this.

You could just as easily call it a club to identify the stars of the future, as why invite the more experienced ones that you already know what they can do etc?

[Matt Wright]

Bit of a non-story really.

[Adam in London]

It's quite amusing to see how the likes of Nick Herbert, Michael Gove, Stewart Jackson, Adam Afriyie, Maria Miller, and Tobias Ellwood are suddenly labelled left-wing to suit an anti-Cameron argument. Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant eh?

[john]

The only worrying thing here is that so many ConHome readers are so susceptible to negative stories about Cameron.
How many right wing groups are there in the party - official or otherwise? And who cares?

[Branch Tory Fish & Chips club]

James | March 09, 2008 at 19:13

'even the Mail admits that Cameron is not a member and hasn't attended any dinners'

OK you got me. It seems entirely innocent.

[Roger Helmer]

I have nothing against dining clubs. My problem here is with the name: Green Chip Club. These diners choose to identify themselves primarily, not with conservative values, but with one new, trendy and rather controversial policy.

[Sally Roberts]

Mr Helmer I know it is the start of another busy week but I do hope you are not suffering a sense of humour failure - it is nothing more than a witty "take" on the name "Blue Chip" which, if you remember, was a dining club in the 90s!

[One of Us]

"What is crass is the leadership sponsoring such a club and then inviting a select group to be its members."

Hang on, you said that Michael Gove and Greg Barker were in charge -- are they the leadership? I don't think so.

Perhaps you post of a list of all MPs who are too close to the leadership to be allowed to have dinner in Westminister.

Or perhaps you could admit that it is you being crass.

[Alan S]

One of Us gives me an idea.

Rather than the Green Chip Club it could be called the One of Us Club.

It could be the formal name for those favoured by the Cameroons.

[Graeme Archer]

Presumably we're going to see a host of stories on Con Home deploring the existence of Cornerstone, a self-selecting group of Tories which at intervals releases press briefings that are both unhelpful to Cameron as well as being electorally toxic? Or is it only if the people who decide to dine with one another - I mean, eating together - it's like a chapter from The 39 Steps, not - are pro-leadership that there's a problem?

I worry that running this sort of story is grist to those conspiracists who see ConHome as some sort of retro-fitting project (I don't believe this but I have heard it from some activists). The story *could* be about the continuing hatred of the Daily Mail for the modern Conservatives (thank God). It *could* be about "oh look, a group of new Tory MPs are having dinner and talking politics" - ie gossip. But it seems framed here as "Who do these MPs think they are, deciding for themselves with whom they wish to eat dinner?". I don't get it.

Why don't you run articles about the shedloads of activists out here who never get invited to bloody anything? Other than another chance to get wet sticking leaflets through doors? The last time I went leafleting even the bloody candidate didn't turn up as he had to go for some drink thing at CCHQ. Thanks a lot buster.

Bah humbug.

Yours faithfully
Graeme Archer
Hon Sec, The Billy Nae-Mates Club.
Club Motto: Always free for dinner

[Sally Roberts]

You can have dinner with me any time, Graeme! ;-)

[Sean Fear]

"Why don't you run articles about the shedloads of activists out here who never get invited to bloody anything?"

Much to my surprise, I did get an invitation to a very nice private dinner with candidates at the Reform Club before the last election, although I think that's the only perk I've ever got.

Maybe we should have a ConHome dinner?

[Editor]

Very funny Graeme!

I'm going to give up now but let me repeat one last time...

I have no objection to Commons dining clubs whether of the right - Cornerstone - or the left - Nick's Diner.

My objection to the Green Chip Club is that the leadership instigated a club of its own - favouring some MPs over others. Not the biggest deal in the world but certainly divisive. And I do know 100% that this club was launched by the leader's office.

[David]

Divisive = I wasn't invited.

This is the party of wets and drys, yet only this is supposed to be divisive? Give me a break.

[Graeme Archer]

Maybe we should have a ConHome dinner?

Posted by: Sean Fear | March 10, 2008 at 11:18

That's a *great* idea.

Conservatives Not At Home - catchy.

[ChrisD]

Blue chip vs Green chip, will this new dinning club emit recycled air rather than just plain hot air?
Or maybe it would help if we did not rush to suck on the soor plums dished out by the Daily mail?

[One of Us]

"My objection to the Green Chip Club is that the leadership instigated a club of its own - favouring some MPs over others. Not the biggest deal in the world but certainly divisive. And I do know 100% that this club was launched by the leader's office."

No, the initial membership was based on those younger MPs who campaigned for David Cameron in the leadership campaign. It was therefore self-selecting.

Subsequently, these founding members then invited likeminded MPs to join -- just like any other dining club. Just because the Cameron campaign got the thing going in the first place it doesn't mean that the Leader's Office has been busying itself with who is and isn't invited to each dinner.

[Sally Roberts]

"I'm going to give up now but let me repeat one last time..."

As Churchill said, "Never Never Never give up"! I know you won't Editor!

I never give up... though much good it does me....

I think a CH dinner would be a great idea!

[Editor]

I know your explanation of the Club's origins to be inaccurate, One of Us.

[Goldie]

Very, very disappointing that this dining club doesn't consist for at least one-third of women. They're not with the times, obviously

[Sally Roberts]

That is actually a good point, Goldie! It's possible though that the women have set up their own dining club?