« As the SNP schemes a way to independence, could scrapping the Barnett formula be George Osborne's next electrifying move? | Main | Tories maintain large lead in latest YouGov poll »


Who would ConHome like to see as shadow chancellor?

Should the Conservatives commit to matching Labour's plans for growth in public expenditure after 2011?

Should the Conservatives commit to having less growth in public expenditure after 2011 than Labour's plan?

(Obviously it would be possible to answer No to both of these questions - as I would.)

If the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, should the Conservatives commit to a post-ratification referendum?

Should the Conservatives seek to renegotiate the UK's position within the EU, on the basis of a mandate given by a General Election victory?

Should the Party commit to scrapping the Barnett Formula?

Do you believe that Britain could be justified to involve itself in invading a sovereign nation on the basis of human rights abuses, even where Britain had no strategic interest of its own?

Should future defence plans grant Britain scope to involve itself in future wars of liberation?

Should the Conservative Party have an official position (a) favouring liberal interventionism? (b) opposing liberal interventionism?

Should the UN be abolished and replaced with a new League of Liberal Democracies?

Just a few to get you going...

Is it now time to bring back the death penalty to save broken Britain.

It is increasingly obvious that Margaret Hemmings is a troll.


Clearly you don't watch the news. Have you not seen the verdicts in the latest shocking murder trial (Goth murder).

I think many people want a debate on the death penalty and this would be very popular amongst Conservatives.

CCHQ "Spy" or CCHQ "Plant" (on this blog) ?

Andrew Lilico covers most things though I would like to sharpen one up to ---"Should the party promise significant tax cuts as soon as the econ omy can be stabilised?"
[Sorry about the Darling word 'stabilised' but it might just HELP!]

On the EU perhaps sharpen to:- "renegotiate our relations with the EU to ensure the supremacy of parliament in foreign affairs, defence, immigration, tax, and above all the supremacy of Westminster laws"

Have any non-party-member Conservative supporters signed up to the new 'friends' programme?


Do you prefer either Hilary Clinton or Barack Obama as the Democrat nominee for US President?

Should David Cameron call for the number of EU migrant workers entering Britain to be index-linked to levels of unemployment?

The American elections are nothing to do with us much less to do with framing policy questions'

Dave B What IS this 'friends' programme.?

I'm still trying to decide whether or not to back the party. I'd like to but Cameron keeps reminding why so many cannot trust the Tories!!!

What is the point of the Conservative party?

Is it time to debate the reintroduction of corporal punishment into schools?

Would this party give parents and other adults in positions of authority their rights back to discipline (within reason)unruly children without the fear of being prosecuted?

@Christina Speight

The Conservatives.com website describes it as:

"Donate as much or as little as you like and help us campaign for the change people really want. You’ll receive a weekly newsletter, information about getting involved in the local community, and access to our new Affinity Programme."

Which sounds like they're trying to enlarge their activist base.

If we assume that it's modelled on USA equivalents, then Mark Shields' description of Mr Obama's campaign may be relevant:

"...it's not simply the passive act of making a contribution. You are then enfolded into a community. You're encouraged to go to meetings, to events.

You're regularly communicated with. You're urged to canvas, to make phone calls, to become part of an activist political company, if you would, of like-minded citizens. And that's what's been remarkable."

Do you think there should be electoral reform, and what do you think of Labour suggestions?

@Christina Speight

Also came across a short Webcameron vid of Mr Cameron introducing the Friends programme.

Euthanasia remark Tory suspended
Mar 27 2008
A councillor has been suspended from the Conservative Party after suggesting euthanasia as a means to cut the cost of caring for vulnerable children.
Hugh Jackson, councillor for Monkseaton North, is also being investigated by North Tyneside Council for the remark he made at a finance meeting.
Mr Jackson has apologised for the comment, which he made on March 19 as councillors discussed the provision of care for vulnerable children.
A statement from North Tyneside Conservatives said: "North Tyneside Conservatives have moved swiftly and decisively in response to comments made by Councillor Hugh Jackson.
"While Councillor Jackson has apologised for his comments, made recently at a Finance Sub-Committee, local Conservatives support the decision to report him to the Standards Board.
"Local Conservatives have branded Councillor Jackson's comments as totally unacceptable. They are out of line with the views of the party at large.
"As a result of his comments, The Conservative Party in North Tyneside has withdrawn the whip and suspended Councillor Jackson's membership of the Conservative Group and Party with immediate effect."
Jim Allan, deputy mayor of North Tyneside Council, called for Mr Jackson to resign. The Labour councillor said: "Had it been one of ours we would have dealt with him in 24 hours. In public life you can't make these statements."
He added: "Whether he says it was humour or whatever, it is something we cannot really, as a human being, tolerate."
Mr Jackson explained what happened in the Chronicle newspaper, but was later unavailable for comment. He said the remark was "misplaced humour" and that he had regretted it as soon as he said it.

Dave B @2011 - Thanks but it's obviously not for me.

I am utterly immersed in the party's policy and am a lifelong Tory but I'm semi-detached since Maastricht; so until I know whether or not Cameron is going to break another promise over the EU, and whether he can shake off the lefty advisers in CCHQ I'm not coming off the fence and certainly not giving any money. So my not inconsiderable contributions go to the DM, the BOO/IWAR campaigns etc, and I recommend the several hundreds on my lists to take the same stance. I wish I didn't have to, but there we are!

@Christina Speight

What is 'the DM'?

Margaret Hemming is right. We should use the Scavenger's Daughter aswell.

English Votes/English Grand Committee or a devolved English Parliament?

Tim & Sam

Go on, bite the bullet:

The State of the Union needs to be addressed.

'Should England be provided with the same rights and representation in the UK as the other three constituent parts?'



Second question.

If Margaret Hemmings lives under a bridge will she let the Billy Goats Gruff cross or will she continue with her poor impression of Colonel Bufton Tufton or just rubbish anagrams?

Christine. The one think you need to learn is that ordinary people couldn`t care less about the EU.
All there concerned with is rising prices, crime and the state of there local school or hospital.
They couldn`t give a toss about line 42 in chapter 80 of the latest treaty.
If the party leadership took notice of obsessives like you the party would never stand a chance of getting elected.

Jack Stone as usual treads the trollish path of not being a Conservative and therefore rubbishing any policies that are deeply Conservative in nature.

The surge in the polls is - of course - due to the collapse of the Brown model of economic governance but the canker in the whole of our body politic is that we argue and vote about Westminster when our real government is in Brussels and where we have negligible voting power. Simultaneously it costs us an arm and a leg for no discernible benefit.

Jack Stone - for his own reasons - wants us to continue to ignore the elephant in the room but until we lance this boil for good our country will continue to have failing policies in agriculture , health, fisheries, education, transport, law and order and the rest.

Anyway he doesn't convince me - I've read him here long enough to have rumbled him - nor the many who do think like me . In a close fought election we could be decisive

As Christina says the promise to hold a referendum on the constitreaty either pre or (if the Lords fail us) post ratification needs to be one of the questions as the surrender of governance to Brussels is fundamental.

The big question about taxation and benefits should be about abolishing tax credits, improving tax allowances and making work pay while allowing mothers to look after their young children. Nothing complicated there!

I also don't think that Jack Stone is right that 'ordinary people couldn't care less about the EU'. What is true is that 'ordinary people' don't understand FULLY what controls the EU imposes, the apparent long-term aims of the EU, the bias of the EU, and more than anything else, they donnot understand how much the EU COSTS us, because they do not realise that the EU sees us the UK as the money tree, and NOT the other way around!

The average person probably thinks - or hopes - that somebody somewhere, understands about the EU - in government here, so that they will 'take the side of the UK. They wish!!!!!

Patsy. What condesending rubbish. People understand about Europe they just think there are more important things. They worry about rising prices, they worry if they can afford there prescriptions if they become ill. They worry about there aged parents who when they need treatment can`t get it.
Lets concentrate on the things that are important to people not things that are not.

Jack Stone:

You also would seem to need a lesson in what is or isn't condescending (note the spelling).

Personally I don't pretend to know what people are thinking, let alone make grandiose sweeping statements one way or another.

Furthermore, I would not trivialise individuals in the way you do.

However, I do believe that politicians over decades have wrapped constitutional issues (such as the EU) up in incomprehensible legalise in order to deceive the public for their own gain and that is reprehensible.

The fact is constitutional issues are of the utmost importance to our way of life and our democratic rights are the essence of the way we are governed.

Whether people care or not is up to them but no one should not be so arrogant to presume that they have the right to pre-empt people's views on such matters as you do.

The reason why issues such as the EU have not gone away is simply because the people have not been consulted adequately for the last 30 years.

I therefore believe that all significant constitutional matters should be voted for directly by the electorate. They should have the choice to decide by right.

In that way those so egotistical as to project personal views to get their preferred personal answer would be thwarted and we would have a situation where the people, informed or not, would have had the opportunity to express their views. In short, a true democracy.

At the same time, the Government could get on with doing their job of delivfery services to the country (hopefully better than currently) rather than constantly wasting taxpayers money meddling in constitutional matters for their own benefit!

Entirely agree John Leonard. Now lets have the party campaign in favour of a referendum on Scottish Independence.

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