« Have your say in the latest ConservativeHome survey | Main | Russia's neighbours cannot rely on the EU, says Hague »


I think Nelson is correct. Whatever my profound misgivings on Osborne, he is certainly a well-educated, intelligent man (albeit with zero experience of the real world). However, he is being pulled in too many directions to be effective in any of them. This is most evident in the Shadow Chancellorship, where to say that he is weak is being polite.

I do not remotely buy into the Cameroonisation of the Conservative Party, but we do not an effective opposition with a clear, well-articulated economic critique of the present Government. Recent events have shown the Conservatives to be miles away from that and they are materially losing electoral ground as a consequence.

The only thing that's really trivial is what he wore when he was younger. There's a pretty classic one of me aged 7 with a Planet of the Apes t-shirt on. I am not sure it disqualifies me from working in the City.

This, if true is not good for the party, let alone for the country. David cameron must be very careful when it comes to appointments to the shadow cabinet (future cabinet) and policy teams bceause too much power in the hands of a very small cabal will be detrimental in every sense.

It is one thing that you tend to listen and promote people whom you trust but one should recognise that there are scores of MPs with much wider and specialist experience within the parliamentary party.

My worry is that Gideon will become the Brown of any future conservative government. The immediate worry is that this may impede our path to power because of internal squabbles and power struggles.

David Cameron must act fast to win the trust of his parliamentary colleagues.

Fraser Nelson doesn't know what he's saying. Osborne's office is hardly 'elite'. It's basically a chimp's tea party.Yes, they are involved with every area of policy, but has anyone ever heard of them doing anything well?

These aren't complaints about having to check things by them, nor their right to refuse - the complaint is they're not up to the task. Everyone has a 'Hancock' or 'Silva' story where they have failed to grasp a simple idea, or have proposed something stoopid.

Over here, there is nothing but complete disdain for them. I would bet that if Silva came on the market - no-one else in the party would hire him. Just try to find one person in the professional party with a high opinion of these clowns.

The conventional wisdom is that George will have a shot at being a good shad chancellor if he gets rid of them.

The battle right now is on the economy. The party is losing ground as Brown makes all the running and is on TV every day being seen as proactive. Finally yesterday Osborne came up with a half-way good piece in the Telegraph - totally ignored by the blog ???

In a crisis like this he should be up there and leading the way day-in, day-out. If - as Nelson suggests he could that standing on his head maybe that is why he so rarely gets on his feet.

Nigel Lawson's piece today on interest rates and/or tax cuts is the kind of grey area that needs clarification. We should be debating it here too.

But if he is doing 2 other jobs as well he is not doing any of them properly.

And might we be told who these "best and brightest" are? I personally have never heard of them!!! Have they ever done anything in the real world? Any experience of running things or making things or selling things or curing things or are they, as I fear to hear, recently graduated bright young things?????

Brown-Darling-Mandelson are making mincemeat out of team Cameron. The leader should sort it out -quick!

hilarious sound of axes being ground by CCHQ insider. if the performance of the rest of the shad cab is anything to go by I'd say Osborne's team look pretty good

Why, oh why, do these people make the Lib Dems look clever?

After nigh on three years there should be a mastery of the political agenda that appears wholly absent.

If there is one key point to extract from what Fraser Nelson writes, it is this: the Cameroons are making it up as they go along.

It may not matter now, when Labour is so unpopular that no-one with an iota of common sense would vote for them, but if the same approach is taken in Government we'll be out on our ears in four years.

The Conservative Party runs the risk of appearing to be governed by a group who look like braying extras from Brideshead Revisited.

David Cameron can mitigate against this perception by promoting a more *balanced* public face of the Conservative Party. We need to see a little less of the Osbornes, Grieves, Goves and Vaizeys, and a bit more from the likes of Ken Clarke and Eric Pickles, to name but two.

As Mrs Thatcher once said of Ken Clarke [of whom she had ideological reservations];

"I made him Minister for the Inner Cities because he looked like he lived in one".

Not at all helpful from Fraser Nelson. However if true,changes need to be made fast. The party and the country should have a Shadow Chancellor who is 100% full time. No ifs or buts about that.
My own view is that George should focus 100% on his other roles which is where I think he's best. Bringing Ken Clarke back as Shadow Chancellor for a couple of years would solve our credibility proplem.
I really don't like Fraser's allegations about George's idea of recycling policy announcements. That was one of the worst traits of the Blair government, it damaged trust in politics and should have no part in our thinking.
If 'CCHQ insider' really does work there how bloody sad! I thought the days of CCHQ being a den of vipers where everyone fights with each other were over. For the sake of our country, grow up!

Osborne is really most comfortable as a political aide. These are jobs too far for him.

Mr Clarke is a bit busy looking after his hedge fund. Shouldn't imagine he's got much time left for his day job.

Do I remember, incidentally, the odd jibe or two about "two jobs Des" - the part-time defence secretary? And, BTW, could we have a full-time shadow foreign secretary?

My axe to grind is with Fraser Nelson. He has - again - written an 'insidery' account which is entirely unrecognisable. It's as though he's exclusively revealing that everyone in the Party is as enthused about Pickles as they are on here... I suspect his sources are all out of the loop backbenchers.

Next time you meet someone who works in Tory policy who is willing to be frank, ask them about it.

Ps 'For the sake of our country'!!?

"— an elite squad including Matt Hancock, Eleanor Shawcross, Rohan Silva and Rupert Harrison — "

I can only echo Christina Speight. What have these people ever done? Have they started thriving SME's, run large commercial projects, commanded soldiers in Afghanistan, worked as doctors in A&E or anything else which most of us in the real world would recognise as work?

If, as I suspect, their backgrounds are similar to George Osborne (public school, PPE or similar at Oxbridge and then straight into Tory HQ), their views on life are totally uninformed by experience.

The Tory Party, which should be the government in waiting, is making close to zero impact in this major economic crisis because it is run by immature boys and girls rather than by grown men and women.

I think it was Ian McLeod who said “The facts of life are Conservative”. The people currently at the centre of the Tory Party have not yet even learnt what the facts of life are!

The electorate`s perception of the political climate is almost certainly dictated by the information that is gleaned from the media. Where do we obtain most of our information otherwise?
The media loved Blair until they found out that he had feet of clay. They never really warmed to the graceless, charmless bullying Brown because he adopted an intellectually superior stance which made him unresponsive to their approaches. They were all too willing to do him down when the opportunity arose.
Now, for whatever reason, they appear to have decided that Brown is to be supported. However there seems little doubt that the pendulum will swing again, once they discover that his handling of the present crisis will prove as damaging as the years he spent as Chancellor of the Exchequer.
While all this has been going on the Conservative Party has been trying to re-invent itself. Whatever the anti-Cameron faction might say, he has done an effective job which has changed public perception of the Party, aided by much (but not all) of the media who wanted someone to support other than Brown. We should be grateful that in the meantime, the Liberal Democrats have gone in for a bout of self-destruction that has left them marginalised and outside the current battle for ideas.
Cameron has initiated a series of policy studies that are intended to form the basis of operation for the next Conservative government. It is as yet unclear whether we know the full extent of what these policies contain. All we have seen so far appears to be of relatively marginal significance althought it is beginning to add up to a coherent pattern. However it must continue to evolve and its coordination is of the greatest importance. It might well be that it is asking too much of George Osborne that he should be expected to carry out the task of policy coordination as well as that of Shadow Chancellor. This is one of the big decisions that Cameron must face and if he decides (as possibly he now should) that a change in responsibility is necessary, he will have to make it. He is Party Leader because the Party thought he was up to making decisions of this sort. The problem he faces is that it will be politically adverse to appear to be offering Osborne`s scalp to Labour if the latter stands down as Shadow Chancellor (but how much more will they be hoping for his divorce from policy coordination?). Also, it will perhaps be far from easy to find a replacement Shadow Chancellor to follow the policies that are already agreed as the way in which Cameron wants to move. Redwood? I wonder.
What is now needed is a clear look at the demands of policy coordination, presentation and the electoral implications with a speedy resolution of these often conflicting requirements. What is clear is that it will be risky to continue to give Brown carte blanche in the field of political initiative and merely hope he will come to grief. Life ain`t like that.

For some months I have posted on here about my concern about the lack of focus of George Osborne (and others).

The Fraser Nelson article will thankfully have limited readership but on the key point about Osborne's lack of focus on his main responsibility it is sadly very accurate.

Lack of focus is the main cause of failure of people in all walks of life. The tardy performance of the shadow treasury team is a reflection of Osborne's lack of focus.

There is time to change, but he and David Cameron need to make the change. Either he is the full time shadow Chancellor or he must be assigned something else. If Osborne is really smart he will take the lesson on board and the party will be better for it.

Finally about Oliver Letwin. If the CCHQ leak about Letwin's "complication" is true then DC must simply fire him. The policy matters last summer were shambolic and Letwin comes across as having a cluttered mind.

Cameroons should be seconded to business for six months to get experience and then come back well in time for the election.

As if ordinary hard working people can relate to Osborne , thats a joke!

If he is coordinating the next general election campaign , we are doomed , doomed , doomed !

Cameron should get rid but he hasn't got the guts to get rid of his Bullingdon buddy. Bring back people who know what they are talking about and who can relate to ordinary voters.

"If he is coordinating the next general election campaign , we are doomed , doomed , doomed !"

These unconstructive anti-Osborne comments are really beginning to grate on me. Who was it whose inheritance tax announcements brought an end to the Brown Bounce last year? Stop underestimating the party leadership or go back to how things were for us before David Cameron was leader.

Osborne is clearly more comfortable with a policy role rather than his Treasury brief. Dave should move him to Letwin's role appoint a new Shadow Chancellor.

I met Matt Hancock at a think tank event and he dissed the Taxpayers Alliance as extreme. It is significant that one of the leading monetarist economists, Professor Tim Congdon, is now advising UKIP.

The Conservative Party is run by a powerful clique in the offices of Cameron and Osborne. Shadow Cabinet members have little or no power. Backbenchers are fed up at being ignored. It is time for change - attitude, policies and how the party is run.

My preferred notion would be make Ken Clarke Shadow Chancellor & John Redwood Shadow Chief Secretary. They would vastly boost our credibility on economic policy as two chaps who come over well on TV as well as having the experience of both having worked in private business and having dealt with economic matters when in government. If they could have worked together in 1997 - they can team up together now. That would be a very strong Tory Treasury team that Mr Darling & Miss Cooper would be torn to bits by - Brown's two talent free stooges would hate facing those two. Bring it on !
As Euro entry is unlikely Europe need not be a problem !

"Who was it whose inheritance tax announcements brought an end to the Brown Bounce last year?"

To summarise Osborne's performance over the past 12 months in football parlance, he scored a great goal to send the match into extra-time but then let the opposing side get back in the game by missing a hatful of open goals and then capped it off by putting one passed his own keeper.

It is easy to call for change when you are a man of the world, Libertarian. I think you will find that snootiness is a fear reaction to inexperience. They can't change and they certainly can't open the circle to outsiders within the parliamentary party.

Who's going to defer to them close up? They're not stupid, they know that, like royalty, they have to maintain the mystique.

Osborne is politically toxic at the moment - the hack haven't finished feasting on him yet..3 direct hits today...
1. This piece, 2. Vitriolic bile from McKenzie in the comic 3. A worrying piece in the Times about an massive financial hole in an NHS policy that George signed off..

He needs a spell out of the political glare to recoup - something you can't afford as Shadow Chancellor when the country is in the worst financial crisis for 70+ years.

Notice on the shots of PMQ's on the BBC last night you can see Cameron, Hague and May...George is tucked out of shot...

I think this negative approach probably isn't going to get us anywhere, because he won't be moved, so it'll only compound the problem by undermining him.
We should do our best to make it work.

But if I had a choice, I would like to see Osborne replaced by someone with more experience.

Limited readership yes, potential to be taken up by the media, YES.

I would say this is a dangerous article to have written at this point as it only increases disloyalty, not decreases it.

With just 18 months to go, the crowd are getting restless. Osborne's errors have let the Reds back into the game and the crowd know that a surprise late goal from the Reds could send them crashing to defeat that would have seemed inconceivable in the first half.

The Crowd roars as Cameron sends Clarkey and Hague down the touchline to warm-up.

Cameron gets to his feet, narrowly avoiding what looks like a chocolate orange thrown from the crowd. He looks towards the ref. Is this the moment the crowd have been waiting for?

John Parkes at 1117 "Also, it will perhaps be far from easy to find a replacement Shadow Chancellor to follow the policies that are already agreed as the way in which Cameron wants to move"

Do these finance/economic policies actually exist ? If so why doesn't someone tell the rest of us?

Matthew Reynolds at 12:23 has got the idea. Cameron has these big beasts of Clarke and Redwood who - unlike Osborne - actually know what they are talking about and wsould play havoc with the government front bench. Clarke? while I am as eurosceptic as anyone you could find I feel that this would not be an issue in the immediate future. If, however, he has financial worries of his own right now and can't do it, then John Redwood would be brilliant. He has the instincts of a terrier which is what we need.

I notice that though I asked 3 hours ago for someone to tell me " who these "best and brightest" are? I personally have never heard of them!!! Have they ever done anything in the real world? " nobody seems to be able to put any CV to any of the 4 names.

Makes you wonder!

People notice, you know. This from EUReferendum blog - -"Meanwhile, the Conservative Party is tearing itself apart over at Tory Diary, completely missing the point about why its own efforts are such a failure. "

George has just had his profile raised significantly - everyone now knows who he is!

He handled that storm perfectly.

When I can find what he says it reads well.

The only issue I have is he needs to be heard more on what gordon has done wrong (and is doing wrong).

Could start by adopting gordons now abadoned 'golden' rules (they were quite sensible) - and higlighting how Gordon spent all his time manipulating things so there was only the /appearance/ of them being met - directly leading to the /poor/ position we are now in to face the financial turmoil.

Louise at 1255 - Perhaps this argument could have been carried out when Osborne's article appeared in the Telegraph. Then we could have debated policies. But the blog didn't mention the article yesterday [whatever you say to the contrary, Louise) . Lawson rightly gets a mention today but why undermine Osborne when it could have helpful.

Brown-Darling are running circles round Cameron-Osborne when the latter have an open goal.

Not ready for prime time. That simple.

I wouldn't worry any longer. The Party has completely, totally and utterly lost the plot.

It is beyond salvation.

Oh be fair Richard. At least they didn't get distracted by more trivial issues like the level of repossessions etc.

Russell Brand really damaged his reputation when he claimed to have slept with someone as ugly as Sachs's granddaughter. Has he no quality control?

Great story in your link Mr North. As the commenter at the bottom says: Comedy gold.

I am afraid that the party lost the plot on going into the ERM. All that remains is to take the p*ss out of the careerists that remain.

There is an element of sadness to it - the tax demands made on the poor and on middle class salaried workers by the Brownian/Cameroonian state. If they paid for their policies out of their own pocket no-one would object.

I never thought that the country's unpayable debts and absurd entanglements in wars against Islam would bring the Bullingdon to the fore as a farcical 7th Cavalry, but it's a funny old world - black swans and all that. Comedy gold indeed.

Now, who's going to be in the Shad Cab after the next reshuffle chaps?

Should George focus on being Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer or on co-ordinating policy for the government-in-waiting?

O tempora! O mores!

Christina - try here http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/10/george-osborn-2.html. I didn't find it until late on, but I'm surprised you haven't read that article yet.

I don't need to undermine Osborne. He is doing a good job of that himself.

Reading this, all I can say is, thank goodness this shower isn't running the country! They can't even organise an office.

Theresa May, it’s a shame that you can't keep your stupidity as well hidden as your talents hidden. In the current economic climate, could you not think of anything more pressing for Business Questions? You've blown it - and should follow Brand’s example in resigning for poor judgement.

The comments on The Times piece are interesting. A very significant number complain that Parliament has much more important things to concern itself with ... as indeed it has.

That Mrs May raised it in Business Questions - calling for a debate, when major questions are left hanging, undebated (Brown's bank rescue package for instance) - stands as testimony to colossally flawed judgement.

In a way, this is classic "Westminster bubble", the politicians taking their cue from the media estimation of what is important, rather than the real world.

When my own newsagent – and Indian - complains bitterly about the amount of media coverage given to this affair, and then we get senior Tory MPs go overboard, it really is time to ask what on earth is going on.

I know at time I sound like "Mr Angry" at times but this is getting serious. Unless MPs - top to bottom - wake up to the mood of the country, they are going to take a real caning.

We really, really have had enough of this pratting about.

Why is David Cameron, not reigning in our Tory controlled councils.They are making announcements about extra taxe on wheelie bins, and fortnightly collections, and extra road charges.Why are we paying council tax and road tax.Council Tax is going the way of our pensions,to overpay so called CEO's etc of councils.Most of them if not employed by a Council,would be hard put to get office juniors jobs.I suppose I am being unfair to office juniors.Why is it being proposed to charge us extra for driving, when only 2.5% of our road tax is used for the roads.David Cameron keeps banging on about telling us the truth,WHEN??
I am 65 years old and have always voted Tory and stayed loyal.I never trusted Blair/Brown,and still don't.As a fellow Scot, Brown does nothing for me except to make my skin crawl, every time he opens his mouth,even without speaking.David and his team, need to take stock, and stop excepting freebies!! It is us,The "Voters",who must be looked after.We are all fed up being USED.We need to be given back our hard won freedoms,and not to be controlled by The Nanny State(Which is an undercover version of what the old Labourites wanted)and is basically called Communism!!!

Louise You really aren't much help - your link produced (copying it in - NOT retyping) :---
"The requested URL /torydiary/2008/10/george-osborn-2.html. was not found on this server.

Just say which thread on Tory Diary and I;ll go look myself and then I can tell you accurately.

I read the ARTICLE in the paper and was complaining that despite requests it was not put up here so that we could have had a constructive and sensible debate on party policy on the subject. Instead we get a hatchet job sparked by some rubbish from a third party!

Louise - Finally found it. If you had just said it's on Tory Diary under "George Osborne defines his anti-recession policy in 78 words" I could have gone straight there.

The correct link was

Apologies to Tim & co for not spotting it.

Louise You really aren't much help

Christina, you play the cantankerous old bat with great aplomb. It’s a comic delight for us. Thank you!

For what it's worth, Louise's link was correct. Most likely your error was to copy the full stop at the end of the sentence.

How about George making some sensible announcements about what he would do to help the housing market back onto its feet - that is where the downturn started.

For starters, stamp duty needs overhauling. The current system where you pay a higher rate about particular prices on the WHOLE amount of the purchase is an obvious nonsense. Secondly, cutting the rates would make sense (and cost little or nothing as houses aren't being sold anyway).

Let's hear it for Keynesian economics! Chaps go out, dressed up in appropriaet attire, have a jolly good meal and plenty to drink at some oik's establishment, and then, whatoh!, smash the place up.

Then of course one simply whips out one's cheque book and writes orf the damage. That way the wealth gets spread around.

The housing market will not return until sellers are prepared to accept less for their houses. Around 35% less than the 2007 peak is my guess. And there is the problem: guess work. Uncertainty kills markets. Time, and only time, will restore the equilibrium between buyers, sellers and confidence. Politicians are powerless in this matter, although they and we don’t like to admit it.

Speaking as a non Conservative I really do hope George is kept in post as Shadow Chancellor. Hague would be most feared by Labour who will be delighted for 'Boy George' to remain.

Sir Piers -Didn;t know Mr Morgan had been knighted!

Not that it matters NOW, but you'll find that Louise left off ---" l#comments " --- from the end of her link which invalidated it. You'd have seen that before you leapt in to criticise me if you'd checked. SQUELCH A bit cantankerous because I don 't like inefficiency in government or opposition - wastes time and effort. .


This afternoon in the HoC at Treasury questions
- - - - - - - -
"Mr Osborne argued that the government’s “irresponsible nonsense about borrowing without limit” was preventing the Bank of England from cutting interest rates.
“Surely the thing that would most help small businesses however - and this is a simple statement of fact - is a sustained reduction of interest rates,” he said.
He added: “The government should do nothing that gets in the way of that, so will we have an end to the irresponsible spinning about Keynesian spending splurges, all this irresponsible nonsense about borrowing without limit that has spooked the international markets”.
Mr Osborne also criticised the increasing budget deficit, saying the government lacked a “clear plan” to deal with the problem.
“Can we instead have from the chancellor a clear plan to get the public finances back inder control?
“Isn’t it the case that on the current path this Labour government is set to leave behind the biggest budget deficit of any Labour government in the entire history of this country, and once again it will be the Conservatives who have to clear up the mess?” he said

From this post, it would appear that Osborne's tumour-like tendrils are so deeply embedded in the Body Tory that any surgery might kill the patient.

Cutting interest rates is only a short-term fix. We must increase interest rates significantly to stimulate debt repayment and promote increased savings. Those who have borrowed irresponsibly should not be bailed out by the thrifty and prudent.

At the same time, government must slash spending to fund large tax cuts to stimulate small businesses and give relief to householders who will face higher mortgage bills.

"That Mrs May raised it in Business Questions - calling for a debate, when major questions are left hanging, undebated (Brown's bank rescue package for instance) - stands as testimony to colossally flawed judgement."

Richard North, agreed, I thought politicians were wasting their time insisting to have their two penny worth on the issue over the airwaves , for the Conservatives to want to waste debating time on the subject is major miscalculation. With Parliament spending most of their time on holiday, and next year only sitting for 120 days, for Politicians to want to waste valuable time debating some shock jocks bad behaviour makes you want to weep, but I suppose as this is one area they haven’t handed over to the EU to rule on its something they can busy themselves doing.

Too many people on this thread have forgotten that George Osborne's inheritance tax pledge from last October caused us to rocket up the polls.

What happened to Gideon's pledge to renationaliwise the railways?

Did his IHT plege cause some important changes in his twustfund status?

Mummy and daddy, I thwink we should be told!

See my post @ 12:25.

Those who keep harking on about Osborne's IHT cut proposal from over a year ago should consider the similarities to Russell Brand's comment about Bob Geldof along the lines of
"No wonder he knows so much about famine, he has been dining on 'I don't like Mondays' for 30 years."

It is the curse of sitting next to Cameron at PMQ's. Now May is completely off the topic of the day, week & year...and looking stupid in the media

Repeat after me..."economy, economy, economy"....

Dear, oh dear....whacking the BBC won't protect jobs, homes and futures

IHT wouldn't have caused the bounce alone, nor will repeating the same thing help now. If it were that simple we could say something else and watch the polls spring up again.

I think we actually need to do something to get them responding again.

DC has been a good leader and has set about changing the party in the right way. Paradoxically what has happened is that people have generally responded well to this and therefore wanted more. Conservatives have to move up a gear in response as people now see the party as potentially a Govt in waiting. Expectations are much higher and performance must be upped to meet this. The issue of whether and want to reveal policy wise needs to be resolved. Its not possible, not to reveal anything because Labour might nick it, because then people will lose interest and/or think there is no substance. Also time is becoming of the essence as at the maximum we are 18 months away from an election. As Crosby said you can't fatten a pig on market day. As Labour start their last significant cycle of legislation soon, it seems the point will then be on us for Conservatives to set out their stall properly and have time to get this in the minds of the electorate. This was true even ignoring the economic position and Browns response which has added more weight to these points and the timing of the Conservative fight. In addition to this a balanced team is needed that brings in some heavyweights and some Northern grit.

To drop a shadow chancellor at this point in the economic cycle (meltdown) would indicate massive incompetence in the selection of the shadow team.

Will Georges detractors come clean and state that they think Cameron is incompetent - futher that tory polices are not to their taste and finally that they are in-fact socialists and mainly interested in preventing democratic representation in paliament?

It would appear that many contributions on this thread are suffering from a pathetic 'doom syndrome', a psychological confusion engendered by Brown's incompetent handling of the credit crisis. Brown's propaganda has succeeded in confusing the electorate by spreading despondency, hence the negative responses.

It is difficult in opposition to get the media to carefully listen and correctly analyse the arguments and policies. However, G.O and his team are well capable of developing sound strategies that will promote strong ideas for policy.

Also remember if these proposed policies are revealed too soon, they will be adopted by Labour as their own. They are the 'magpie' party defunct and bankrupt of ideas.

If Osborne wishes to be Chancellor its important right now that he does everything possible to do that. He needs to shed his non-Treasury roles in order to concentrate. Perhaps the Party Chairman should take up the Policy Chief role and Letwin to do the Campaign Chief.

The Campaign Chief needs to be just that and not a tag onto a senior Cabinet job.

George did OK.


Could have handled the 'fuel escalator' thing better though.

Simple question - would it fuel be more expensive now?

I assume the answer is NO.

The tax rate (as prices came down) would return to its current level, having been *decreased* earlier as the prices went up.

But he clearly has what it takes, just needs more practice/experience of putting it across - which time will deliver.

Hope these roles don't lead him to miss Mandlesons new open goal...

Mandleson is citing public anger as a reason for banks to pass on interest rate custs.

It's funny because Mandleson doesn't seem too worried about public anger when it comes to witholding details of his dealings with foreign ogliarchs...

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