« Gold, silver and bronze: Who deserves the credit for the Tory comeback? | Main | A day in the life of David Cameron »


Cameron's Conservatives stand for ending Labour misrule.

The Cameron-led Tories want to be more like Europe with the same levels of tax, public spending, inadequate defence spending and fashionable posing on the environment.

Cameron's Conservatives are very change to win.

They stand for mending Britain's broken society by rebuilding the family, help voluntary organisations and rehabilitating people with drug problems.

Cameron's Tories are offering to paper over the widening cracks of the big government status quo with a thin veneer of change.

"If you give people more power and control over their lives, they become stronger, and society becomes stronger as well."

A strong, free and dynamic nation-state of individuals that form a civil society, who value liberty, cherish aspiration and protect the most vulnerable in society; where the state is harnessed out of need, not want.

Blair won.

Compassionate, optimistic, 21st century sensibility; timeless Tory principles.

Cameron's Conservatives stand for empowering individuals and communities.

"We wont let it rest there"

Oligarchy and wind turbines.

Like Blair, with lower taxes and no Gordon.

Weren't they the ones who said something about "sharing the proceeds of growth" -i.e. we'll let you have back some of your money when we get round to it?

Small Government

We are the heirs to Blair.

The politics of pragmatism.

Strengthening families, neighbourhoods and public services by controlling less and trusting more.

LoL. Oh come off it Guido, I'll happily bet you £100 that Cameron does not deliver a Tax Freedom day below 31st May whilst in office.

Freedom from - hardship, crime & state dependence; Freedom to - spend your own money, live your own life.

Letting sunshine win the day.

In 1979 we mended a broken economy, now we need to mend a broken society.

More nurses and policeman but no more soldiers and no new taxes.

Conservatives - Simple.

(I.e., simpler tax systems, return to focuses on simple social structures like marriage, simpler dealing with criminals (I.e., prison), making that simple walk to the shops safe, removing bureaucracy from police/doctors/teachers etc. In everything we do, our aim is to make life simpler and to rebuild trust and cohesion.

No one held back, no one left behind

Adam: "No one held back, no one left behind"

(C) IDS 2003

"small government, small taxes, freedom to choose, freedom to fail"

What we should be: "The champions of the individual and the underdog"

What we are: "The compassion of the fortunate for the betterment of the many"

Cameron's Conservatives (we are not Tories) stand up for those who help themselves and their families, and the most vulnerable in society.

A society where individuals can control their own lives and make the most of their talents, yet still support those who cannot help themselves.

"Not much."

We won't promise you quick solutions but over time we'll fix Britain by cutting waste, punishing criminals, rebuilding the family and putting meaning back into educational qualifications.

"Sharing the proceedes of growth".

"Conservatives - Simple" (9.28)

I understand the intention but this might not be such a good idea.......

I am always sceptical when commentators criticise David Cameron for not proposing a unifying theme for the Conservative Party that can be summed up in a single word, sentence, or paragraph. Can any political party claim to do so, seriously? When the Conservative Party sets out its aims and values in ordinary language, as it did in Built to Last, it is criticised for lacking in clarity, precision, and rigor. But when it attempts to do so in technical language that makes use of theoretical concepts, as Oliver Letwin has done, it is accused of being deliberately obscure. There seems to be a double bind at work here.

Giving us hope, dignity and the chance to mend our broken society.

Cameron's conservatives - we restored the market to it's rightful place, now we will restore civil society to its rightful place.

Inclusion, instead of division; equality of opportunity instead of equality of outcome.

Social responsibility, sharing the proceeds of growth and trusting people more and the state less.

"Before us, eleven years of socialist wreckage - trust us to rebuild and we will leave no stone unturned."

(Rather than rain on a happy parade as some have done above, I am proposing this out of hope that our aims do in fact go well beyond simply aspiring to manage the wreckage better than the wreckers.)

Conservatives-Put yourself in control

Mending our broken society.

"Setting People Free Without Setting Them Adrift".

Power to the People!

with apologies to Wolfie Smith.

"Politically correct right-wing socialism."

Deborah @ 9:51

Good point! - so 'making life simpler' then... :)

"Minimal government, minimal state interference, a minimal EU and minimal tax".

Well, I can dream, can't I? :-)

Compassionate Conservatism that takes power away from the center and passes it down to the people.

We will fight for an inclusive society in which ALL residents of Notting Hill have the right to achieve personal goals.

The freedom to live independently through the family and civil society (rather than a monolithic state); trusting individuals and groups to do the right thing for themselves, their neighbours and their country; allowing more choice, flexibility and opportunity for all.

Cameron's Conservatives - One Nation Toryism which embraces the need for social and environmental justice whilst allowing a sustainable economy to flourish.

Cameron's Conservatives. Opportunism for all.

The thread above says it all.

The honest answer to the question"Can anyone sum up in one memorable sentence what the Cameron-led Tories stand for?" is


See Trevor Kavanagh the best political commentator in the business in The Sun and Janet Daly in the Telegraph.

I'd like it to be "SET THE PEOPLE FREE" but that's too advanced for Cameron .

Shameless opportunist seeks politically flexible recruits to complete the Blairite agenda.

"There is such a thing as society, it's just not the same thing as the state"

This does two things: it deals head on with the negative spin on Thatcherism and it divorces public service policy from monopoly state provision. In otherwords, it deals with the past and offers a prospect for the future. No doubt in my mind that a Cameron government will want to be remembered as socially revolutionary in the same way as Thatcher´s was economically revolutionary. Privatisation is no longer the only solution. But opening up the public services to the private and voluntary sector whilst empowering the consumers of those services to exercise greater local control is the way society gets a ´stake´ in reforming the state. That´s why it is the pithiest summing up of Cameronism.

David Cameron's Conservativism brings value's and standard's to government.


"Still larger public sector salaries for Dave, George, Andy, Steve, Michael, Dougie etc ad. inf."


"Sustainable Development in all areas."

(with reference to the stupidity and spendthrift profligacy of the present awful government)

Editor, I suggest a parallel thread "Brown’s socialists" so we can have some real fun.

Christina, "empowering individuals and communities" is the theme that clearly stands out here. I think that’s a good thing.

VAT on newspapers to fund taxcuts for the lowest paid. Suck on that Trev.

Cameron led-tories STAND for the Political Alternative in not being the FALL GUYS for Brown-led new labour.

DAVID CAMERON, new man - young man - a Conservative with a purpose - to mend our broken society and encourage some HOPE FOR THE FUTURE!

"I don't believe in a government that protects us from ourselves."

Cameron's Conservatives stand for the triumph of marketing over principles.

We're the Cam-Cons! Cam today - Con tomorrow!

Commie Ron is living proof that a blancmange can be a Prime Minister.

Marriage maketh man

Cameron's Conservatives stand for getting themselves elected to power and absolutely nothing else.

Cameron's Conservatives - Modern, Compassionate and Successful.

Conservatives believe is helping those that would help themselves, whilst protecting that which makes Britain great.

Dave's Conservatives: In It To Win It.

LOLOL @ Passing Leftie ("Opportunism for all").

The hypocrisy of the labour Party calling the Cons opportunistic... it's odd that when they were ahead in the polls and the 10p tax measure was announced, there was barely a whimper from the Labour benches. Now that they are languishing 18% behind in the polls, NOW they find their principles... lololol... and they say WE'RE opportunistic.


I like this as a rallying cry:-
"Mending Britain's (England's?) broken society"

I like this as a promise:-
"Setting People Free Without Setting Them Adrift".

I hate this, it's socialism:-
"Sharing the proceeds of growth".

But I fear this is how you are seen still:-
"Heirs to Blair."

Make a promise, make it different, and keep it!!

Spin over substance, nepotism over meritocracy, expediency over justice

The evolution of the political insider.

Free Trade, increased defence spending, lower taxes, personal liberty, repatriation of Albanian gangsters and Rumanian gypsies, a huge nuclear power programme, small government, school vouchers, scrapping the NHS and giving me my money to spend on my own health provision.......

oh, sorry! You said Cameron's Conservatives, I thought you said....

What the Conservatives should be:

Levying tax to provide essential services (and not non-essential ones);

Allowing people to live in freedom;

Against the backdrop of Judaeo-Christian values.


Miranda @ 13.19

I don't think that sharing the proceeds of growth is socialism, as it's not referring to 'sharing' in a redistribution of wealth sense - it's talking about sharing the proceeds of growth between government and the people... i.e. rather than government taking more in taxes, it leaves people with money in their pockets.

This is a classic Conservative principle...?!

StevenAdams | April 28, 2008 at 13:57

However, Steven, no message sits outside its context, and people are so used to a Government who steals the money we make through our own efforts, to give it to the feckless, that this is not a message I would personally favour at the moment. It strikes too much of socialism.

I think sharing the proceeds of growth between the social good and individuals is better summed up by "Setting People Free Without Setting Them Adrift".

I see what you're getting at, but I disagree.

The Cons have struggled for some years to remind the public the 'tax cut' does not equal 'service cut'; a piece of propaganda successfully peddled by messrs. Blair and Brown.

Ironically, Hague, IDS and Howard couldn't assure the public that they would reduce the tax burden, as B&B would accuse us of plotting to cut nurses and policemen. It's not easy to sell the message of a dynamic economy that grows under tax-cutting regimes, growing the public purse's revenue.

'Sharing the proceeds of growth' was a canny move, as reassured the public that Cons would continue to invest in their services, whilst always preserving the principle of low taxation.

StevenAdams | April 28, 2008 at 14:20

Steven, I also understand what you are saying. I'd love the message to be about growth and entrepreneurship and building up a dynamic economy, which benefits everyone - not least because they are encouraged to be part of it. Maybe that is a stage 2 message.

But at the moment sharing the proceeds of growth (in conjunction with heir to Blair, and no tax cust) says you are going to carry on stealing my money to pour into jobs for 'Heads of Diversity' and 'Bike-It Managers', whilst paying to keep Sharon Matthews and her ilk in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

I'm only saying as a small c conservative, it just does not work for me. So how is an ex Labour voter going to view it? Or a floating voter, sick to the back teeth with high prices and taxes? In fact, there is so much to do to restore a broken infrastructure and eradicate ourselves from the EU's economic chains - where is real growth even going to come from at the moment???

Value for money!

I agree - it's not a hugely ambitious statement. Ambitious would be: "We'll cut taxes, and cut public spending. Short term pain (such as likely public sector job losses) will benefit the UK in the long term as our economy prospers and out accelerates our peers - the track the Cons put the UK on in the build up to 1997, ironically."

However, that is the message Thatcher sold and delivered in '79 - '83. She DID deliver, and we can be thankful for it. However, we're also hated by many for it, and our electoral fortunes over the past decade have been woeful as a result.

ne thing that B&B did teach us in 1997 is that you can have the flimsiest and most insubstantial manifesto in electoral history and still be voted in with a stomping majority.

I say, why box ourselves into a corner by making hugely ambitious promises that would force us to endure enormous amounts of political pain once elected?? Rather, why not keep with a promise of a 'direction of travel - as the UK can afford it', and take the UK back down the tracks of smaller govt and taxation, but in a more gradual and manageable manner.

This is a mirror image of NuLabour - in reverse. They scrapped their commitment to 'big govt', but over 10 years, that's what they've delivered. I don't believe our electors have a philosophical commitment to small govt, like us, but over 10 years once it was being realised I believe it's benefits can be felt, but without the pain of the early '80's.

Forward looking conservative values for the modern world.


Empower the people, not government

"A party that cares more about fake ideology and less about power ends up with neither."

If the tories were more radical and focused less on easy centrist, they would have far more people vote for them.

For the Union @ 15.31

"If the tories were more radical and focused less on easy centrist, they would have far more people vote for them."

I disagree wholeheartedly. That sentence flies in the face of the overwhelming evidence of the past 10 years!

Mark Fulford @1131 :"Christina, "empowering individuals and communities" is the theme that clearly stands out here. I think that’s a good thing."

Fine idea - does it cover the whole ethos and 'dream' of the party today, though?

"Power back to the People" ???
I also like Miranda's @1315 ""Mending Britain's broken society"

All the other long philosophical sentences miss the essential point. There must be a genuine, rooted-in-policy slogan which will make people get to their feet with a shout of "YES! " because it inspires them.

Labour cared nothing for ideology in 1997 and won power because people were just fed up with Major et al.

The tories need to show people what they will do with society if power is theirs. What will happen to benefit scroungers? Mothers who have 6 children under 16....society makes that pay at the moment and i see nothing from the tories that makes me think they deserve my vote.

"Caring for the poor." - is that really what most of you believe? Sounds like big government faux socialism to me and we already have that.

Sadly, as far as I can see it's, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss".

Nothing the Conservatives have said or done give me any hope.

For the Union @ 15.54:

'Caring for the poor' is not anti-conservative! No where in conservative ideology does it suggest the cons don't care for the poor!

Socialism believes that by redistributing wealth to the poor, it will help the poor. Conservatism says by creating wealth, opportunity and ambition, it will help the poor. To suggest that caring for the poor is somehow socialist in and of itself is, frankly, ridiculous.

It's exactly that assertion that has kept this party in the doldrums for the past 20 years (10 of which on the opposition benches).

Like Labour, but with blue rosettes.

But you sound like labour! and if people are really fed up with it....why emulate it?

Caring for the "deserving poor" would have been far more appealing.

Cameron's Tories stand for healing a fractured society with social cohesion based on honesty and respect.

In touch with the concerns of all Britons, whether in Notting Hill, Chelsea or Hampstead.

It is difficult to even engage with those who talk about the'poor'when what they mean is those who have 'low declared taxable incomes'. Until you define what you are discussing you will getnowhere.
The best way to help those people is by increasing their wage s and the best way to do that is to reduce the supply of the unskilled,at present that means reducing immigration and encouraging those immigrants here to go away.
Otherwise you are simply pushing water uphill.

I agree with much of what Anthony Scholefield says - reduce the supply of unskilled labour and their wages naturally rise: market principles.

I agree that immigration, as it currently stands needs a total overhaul, and that caps/limits etc are all valid methods.

But - and I'm wryly grinning at how many of you will yell something like 'Labour stooge' or 'Tory whet' at me now - another way to reduce the supply of unskilled labour is through education, education, education.

David Cameron's Conservatism: a few more steps down the road to serfdom.

The challenge was for something memorable. Miranda at 1315 is almost there.

How about "Fixing our broken society, together", "Fixing broken Britain together" or "Putting Britain back together again"?

The idea being to combine healing the damage of social breakdown & restoring comeptence in broken public services, with the shared responsibility approach.

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