« ITV News films Cameron, the family man | Main | Cameron and family: The video »


I'm curious. When reference is made to "members", is that just those who explicitly described themselves as members (as opposed to, say, supporters)? And if so, what were the results for the other categories?

Cracking stuff Tim.

81% of Conservatives and 61% of England (BBC Newsnight)

England expects that every man will do his duty.


Brilliant Tim and Sam.

There was once a time when all we grassroots were good for was to sit in a hall and clap.

Thanks to this site our views are now out there for all to see.


Whoops, I got the email link to the survey through but have only just responded to it, then visited here to realise it was closed. My bad. Apologies for the spam Editor...

Come on Tim; tell us how many responded to the ConHome questions you put up. How many? If Iain Dale can cite numbers for his surveys so can you.

A mention on the Today programme! Says it all.

1,376 members it says at the top of the survey results, Bill...

Slightly detracting from the survey results, Osborne didnt do too badly yesterday, though he seemed very nervous delivering the speech and it showed quite clearly. His put downs were quite nice. Funny how Michael Martin got Chris Grayling and George Osborne mixed up though...

A very interesting set of results. Cameron shouldn't front all the campaigns, though. The public must see his Shadow Cabinet as the government-in-waiting but focussing too much on Cameron could deflect their attention from the rest of the team.

If you read the graphic Bill you'll see how many members filled it in.

If you or Alex want a defence of the survey please see this link.

81% did not say they supported English votes on English Laws. The question was "a promise to give the voters of England a fairer deal. This should include an end to the subsidy of Scotland and stopping Scottish and Welsh MPs from voting on laws that only affect people living in England"
It did not ask if you supported EVOEL.
EVOEL does not answer the west lothian question MK11.Why should an un-elected non English peer in the Lords scrutinise English affairs?

My only reservation about this survey is that it contains internal contradictions. Well over 70% of respondents felt that the Party should be campaigning on all of: broken society; anti-politician; English votes (or whatever you want to call it); tax cuts; a Lisbon referendum; crime, immigration and the NHS. That looks like about 8 messages to me.

72% then went on to say that we should be "communicating one big theme rather than lots of messages"!

The party cannot effectively play the anti-political card when its selection process is creating the conditions that will breed the next generation of grubbing career-politicians. Especially if the party wins power.

It would be tragic if future Conservative governments were made up of 'Caroline Flint' types. It is people like the narcistic and publicity courting Caroline Flint who are destroying what should be an honourable profession dedicated to public service. The party needs to send out a message that it isn't interested in shallow, superficial, servile career-politicians whose entire image is based on image, but rather is dedicated to the ethic of public service.

We don't want any bubble headed Caroline Flint types in the Conservative party. We want proper politicians not conceited courtesans.

The Dim-Libs want the no. of MPs cut, because they know, as rabid europhiles, that all the important stuff is dome in Brussels...

I agree with Tony Makara. The changes to the MEP selection process this time around are hardly a great advert for the Party's 'anti-politician' agenda!

Come on tories wake up and smell the ENGLISH ROSE

There should be an

English Conservative Party

to be set up immediately and to take its place alongside the Scottish and Welsh Conservative Parties as a member of the family of Conservative Parties of Great Britain .

if you or Alex want a defence of the survey

I'm not attacking the survey, I'm just curious to know whether your quoted results include all respondents regardless of whether they claim actual membership or not, or whether you weed out those (like myself) who don't. Just interested is all.

Tony Makara is right, although I sincerely hope that Brown keeps her in the cabinet - because it gives the voters a reason to turf out NuLab.
On the anti-politician line, I once again echo Makara in stressing the noble nature of an MPs job. Gold plated pensions and tax free severance packages should go because these are the perks which attract career politicians and they have quickly debased politics in Britain. Look at Livingstone and his cronies or the likes of Blunkett, Flint and other long list of NuLab MPs who have not had a proper job before becoming MPs.
If the Mayor loses the election, he goes, no need for any severance pay and ditto in he case of an MP.
I am all in favour of jettisioning the spending pledge because we cannot afford it.

"There should be an English Conservative Party "

I agree, after all there's a Scottish and Welsh Conservative party branches, so why not an English Conservative party branch? For there is after all very specific policy issues relating to England, yet no forum dedicated to English peoples issues. In doing that it also may help the Scottish and Welsh branches, for they could point to the differences in what are their Welsh Scottish issues English issues and British issues in which they would participate.

Gordon Brown's cabinet- this rotten, smug, chippy lot.We should have made far more of Ed Balls' "so what" gaffe this week. Another example of a gaping open goal that was missed. Where was Party Chairman Spelman on the media over this?, can you imagine Tebbit's reaction as Chairman 20 years ago? A few of our frontbench should have a read of Richard Littlejohn's column in the Mail today, and HQ should coordinate an attack on Labour around the same message.
This Labour Cabinet is stuffed full of geeks and policy wonks with very little link to the real world. Mr and Mrs Ed Balls take over half a million pounds out of the public purse every year in the name of 'public service' [in reality, partisan Labour effrontery], yet have the cheek to tell business and ordinary people, with ordinary jobs, how to live. Neither of the bizarre Milibands has ever held a 'real job' either , yet both were given safe seats in traditional working class areas in Doncaster and South Shields for gods sake. Conversations at their constituency surgeries must be a joy to behold. I cannot see why 'classism' should not be treated as the same under the law as other 'isms' which people cannot help being born into.
Then, the next time chippy class warriors like Public Money Supplicant Balls and Mrs Public Money Supplicant Cooper make a jibe abot Dave's class, they can be prosecuted for inciting hatred. Then they could get Harriet Harperson QC to defend them. Harriet's husband is 58 and Labour Party treasurer by the way. He himself is actively being parachuted into a safe Labour seat, a task that is proving slightly more difficult after his accounting triumphs in recent months !
I predict a Labour non entity called Ken Purchase MP will soon be Lord Purchase of Wolverhampton, to make way for Mrs Harperspon.

In Gordon Brown's Labour Party its truly a great life for those lucky enough to be on the inside.

"Mr Clegg said the political system needed to be "reconstructed from the bottom to the top" and called for a programme of electoral reform to stop a few thousand voters deciding the outcome of general elections. He lambasted what he called the "elitist, establishment" view of the two main political parties. "

From a poor start Clegg is getting quite acute . Don't let him run with this one alone . Its the Labour party which is wedded and benefits from a big British parliament , not the Conservatives . Be radical . Out do Clegg and promise to reduce the British parliament down to 300 seats , even 250 , combined with the promise an English Parliament and English Government comparable with that of Scotland .

This is no time to be kind to the tired and increasingly discredited British parliament and government . It is time to be ruthless with the promise that radical change will produce dramatic results for the better .

With Darlings budget going to clobber 'Astra' man where his road tax is going up by over 100%, doubling it to £430, just £25 below a Rolls Royce driver, I should think the next thing the Conservatives should do his publicise this and shout it from the roof tops. For this hike in road tax has to be unsustainable, and looks as if there's going to be another Darling U turn in the near future. So the Conservatives might as well make Labour's life a misery in the meantime.

Lots of horribly negative things on this list. Hard to reconcile with the idea that we need to offer a positive vision of life under the Conservatives, don´t you think...?

Hear,hear Iain. I see Darling has taken a leaf out of Brown's book and has sought to bury bad news from his budget statement and wait until the Red Book was studied.
Brown used to earn one days good headlines before the media realised his dishonesty,poor Darling couldn't even manage that.
I feel sorry for Darling though, he's inherited a terrible legacy and his need to raise taxes is paramount.It's a shame that he's proving to be as thoroughly dishonest as his predecessor.

Reduce MP's by 150

It is unfortunate the Tories didn't beat Clegg to the punch on this one, it is well overdue.

Cameron and the Tories should back Clegg 100% on this one, perhaps 200 less, and put Labour under pressure.

"Mending our broken society" is good enough as an overarching theme; it shows where Labour has failed, resonates with IDS's very well received report and links with all the main key issues: the economy ("spending beyond our means"), education, multiculturalism, immigration, law and order, terrorism etc.

Cameron was excellent in his reply to the budget speech and Osborne pretty adequate but certain things need repeating ("so what?") to keep them fresh in the public's mind.

Some points need more explanation: c5.3M people will pay more tax at the end of April as a direct result of Brown's having ceased the 10p band and beer drinkers will pay 4p a pint more ("to reduce bingedrinking"). Your petrol, gas, electricity, food are much more expensive today than even a few weeks ago.

We want to come out as champions of all those earning under £25,000 a year; just think how many voters are in that category!

David Belchamber is absolutely right, it is vital that we give priority to those earning under £25000 p.a.
But we must reduce the Benefits system alongside any actions we take.

David Belchamber is correct. Poverty has increased under Labour and now is set to deepen due to this punitive 'anti-poor' budget. Labour, for all their claims of being the champion of the poorest sections of our society has stamped all over the most vulnerable. David Cameron needs to make statements to the effect that the Conservative party will support those on a low income and allow them to keep the little that they earn.

David Belchamber - I think 'Mending our broken society', is a very good phrase to start off with. It is simple and obvious, and it covers a much wider field than the sanctimonious 'eradicating child poverty'. Eradicating child poverty as a phrase is emotive (as it is intended to be), but also so general as to be practically meaningless, apart from as an aspiration ONLY. It is particularly meaningless in the hands of this government, who have been in power now for over ten years, during which time 'child poverty' or deprivation has increased NOT decreased. So it is rich that they bring out that phrase at this late date, to try and produce more votes!

'Mending our broken society' can apply to a wider collection of problems within society, and is therefore a much more pragmatic aspiration!

We don't need to reduce the number of MPs, we need to increase them. More MPs means smaller constituencies, hence better contact with voters; also more chance of independent-minded mavericks.

"But we must reduce the Benefits system alongside any actions we take.

Posted by: Richard Calhoun | March 14, 2008 at 17:53"

Absolutely correct, Richard.

The instruction to the tories must be: "Go out and simplify".

It was encouraging to see that the matter of our relationship with the EU is, slowly but surely, beginning to climb in the policy priority ratings. However, this should, in fact, be at the very top of this list, since vitrually all the other policy aspirations and priorities are now, or shortly will be, governed, controlled or restricted by of the subordination of our own Government's legislative and administrative powers to those of the EU, regardless of the party in power.

It is therefore both dishonest and contemptible for any party to campaign upon
the promises of policies, which it knows are beyond its legal competence to enact or enforce.

This is even less excusable for the Conservative party, upon whose behalf Cameron claims to be eurosceptic, but has deliberately and consistently, avoided, downplayed or obfuscated the critical importance of the EU issue as "Banging on about Europe".

The one reason that our EU relationship does not rate at the top of voter's agendas, is that that the importance of this issue and its effects upon everyone's daily lives, have been deliberately ignored, suppressed, or misrepresented by the three major parties, dutifully copied by the majority of the main stream media.

I know that some people will disagree, but I personally welcome Simon Heffer's article in yesterday's Telegraph ("At last! David Cameron says something I can agree with"). We should welcome as many people into the fold as possible - that way you win elections!
Basically Heffer applauded David Cameron's response to the Budget, as we all do. It was right on the button.
However, Heffer disagreed entirely with Cameron on the mantra "sharing the proceeds of growth", which he described as "claptrap".
If Cameron were to promise to "share the proceeds eliminating waste", who could argue with him?
As Heffer very succinctly put it:

"We are living beyond our means. We are spending too much. We are borrowing too much. We are taxing too much".

That is the state of the nation after 11 years of Nulab.

First we have to get rid of Nulab before they do any further damage.

Cameron was good with the "We have paid the tax: where are the extra police/nurses/teachers etc?" line.

I want to reach those voters (including millions of pensioners and the c5.3 whose tax goes up in April) who do not receive more than £25,000 a year from all sources.

Strapline: How has Labour failed YOU?
i. do you live on the state pension?
ii. do you earn less than £15,000 and have to pay Brown's extra tax in April?
iii. will you be able to pay the higher fuel costs/gas/electricity bills?

Any additional suggestions?

I am intrigued that members want to spend double attacking Lib Dems than Labour - do we see them as harder to beat and if so why?

The Lib Dems are not in government and not tainted by its failings. They are also more effective at campaigning, especially at lying, e.g. claiming to be Eurosceptic in the South West. The Yellow Peril are therefore more difficult to beat.

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