Tories prepare 'Brown rescued the banks but not the real economy' message

Last night ConservativeHome received a briefing on Tory thinking on the current crisis and next steps.

The main message that the strategist wanted to communicate was that the Tory leadership was unfazed by recent events.  David Cameron's great quality is coolness under fire, we were told.  He didn't panic during Brown's 2007 honeymoon and there is no panic now.  Only resolution.

Team Cameron readily concede that Brown has enjoyed a good few days.  They expect the Conservatives' poll lead to drop into single figures in the next month or so.  They expect to lose the Conservative lead on economic competence but expect it to be restored by the new year.

The Tories are not worried about being largely out of the news.  They have decided it's largely impossible to compete for serious airtime with Government at this time.  They note that frenetic activity by Vince Cable is doing nothing to reverse the LibDems' slide in the polls.

The Tory leadership hopes and expects the recapitalisation package to succeed in stabilising the banking sector.  But the leadership does not expect that Brown will win any long-term credit for any of this.  Brown, we were told, will soon have seen to have saved the banks but not averted recession and there aren't many votes in that.  They are cataloguing evidences of Labour "triumphalism" at recent events for later use.

And this is the key: The Tories are going to present themselves as the people to rescue the "real economy".  They are convinced that Brown will not connect with voters who start losing their homes and jobs next year.  "He is incapable of empathy".

There is a debate as to how radical the Tories' "real economy plan" needs to be.  George Osborne yesterday wrote about "Conservative plans to freeze council tax, abandon the new car tax, keep businesses facing bankruptcy afloat and help low income families with heating bills could all be put in place in the coming months."  'Hares' around the Tory leadership believe that this list is far too modest for the severity of the looming recession.  They believe that the crisis gives the party complete freedom to revisit every aspect of Tory economic policy and they hope for much more radical action.  The 'tortoises' favour a wait-and-see approach.  They want to see how the economy is faring in 2009 and make a decision then about economic policies.  They don't want to be boxed in by "rash announcements" now.

Although the Conservatives are ready for a spring 2009 election they don't expect one.  Brown has an extraordinary faith in his abilities as Prime Minister.  The last fortnight has reinforced that belief.  He'll hold on to his office for as long as he can.

Comments

[Richard]

Let me get this right, the Conservative Party remains unfazed because they believe that a recession and the prospect of lots of people loosing their jobs and homes will save them? Is the Conservative Party seriously pinning all their hopes on a really bad recession? If so then this is terrible! We should be doing all we can to avoid a recession and coming up with our own economic policies to turn things round. The Conservative Party needs to start making a serious case for slashing taxes and public spending.

Lower taxes should not be seen as a desirable extra when times are good; they are a prerequisite for a sound economy. Low taxes encourage people to work, save and invest and if you keep tax rates down the economy grows more quickly. Low taxes also reduce both the opportunity and the incentive for tax avoidance so revenues increase. If people pay less tax, and keep more of their own money, they have more incentive to work and unemployment falls as new jobs are created. Low taxes also make the UK a more attractive country for inward investment which in turn generates jobs and income.

Come on Tories. Stop relying on events to win power and start fighting for it, afterall Gordon Brown certainly is!

[Henry Mayhew - ukipper]

Great article. I am looking forward with interest to Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne's next move. Fortunately they are experienced public relations executives so I think it is going to be good.

The ordinary people of this country deserve a Plan for Change. Let's go!

[Westminster Wolf]

This sounds very wise strategically.

[Freddie Fencepost]

Osborne must fall on his sword for this. He is out of his depth. Who in the hierachy will pay with their job for this fiasco.

We have the prospect of millions joining the dole queue in Britain yet no senior Tory will pay the price for this lamentable peformance.

The Notting Hill set needs to be broken up and our traditional amitie with the City must end!

If we continue our daliance with ...frankly ...a bunch of crooks... we will all be tarred with the same brush!

[Tony Makara]

The Conservative leadership must hammer Labour on the issue of rising unemployment, an area the party has been reluctant to score points because Labour dig up the figures from twenty-five years ago. However attacking the government will not be enough, the party must show how it will lead the way in creating the conditions for job-creation. To do this there must be a strategy to develop an internal market as the springboard out of recession, with each new business being exepted from taxation altogether until it has built up a job-creating infrastructure. Placing the emphasis on British business supplying British shops with British goods will also allow the party to present itself as being patriotic in difficult times, especially useful as there is growing disillusionment with globalization after the worldwide market crash.

[GB£.com]

Clearly people will be more worried about losing their jobs than reducing their personal tax bills right now as so long as they are in work, they can tick over.

The solution is to slash business tax rates. Not a minor tweak, but a pro-growth, huge reduction to help existing businesses and to encourage new ones to set up.

An inventive Tory party could even couple the huge business tax cut with an increase in the minimum wage well above any amount that Labour would introduce to show that they are both protecting jobs and ensuring that the saving makes it way down to those most in need.

Anything less will be pissing in the wind.

[Iain]

"This sounds very wise strategically."

But would have been wiser if the Conservatives had 'laser like' concentrated on the real economy years ago when the banking problems were building up.

[Norm Brainer]

Is that the 1st post from F.Fencepost (the fiver for them being d.draper has already been claimed hasn't it?) that doesn't say we're all socialists now *shock*.

The tortoises and hares in the post don't appear to contradict, I'm sure there are plenty that are wait and see, but if all goes as expected then they would want radical plans too - Which is why I think Osbourne is right at the moment to suggest some things, but until they know the extent of what is happening then can decide on how radical to be - leave the option for a low flat tax open.

[Richard]

"Great article. I am looking forward with interest to Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne's next move. Fortunately they are experienced public relations executives so I think it is going to be good.

The ordinary people of this country deserve a Plan for Change. Let's go!"

What the people of this country deserve is someone to stand up for them! Who is standing up for the taxpayer at the moment? Certainly not the Conservative Party. Did anyone see George Osborne on Channel 4 News last night? It was terrible.

What is so great about the article above? All it basically says is that things are going to get worse and once they do people will blame the Government and turn to the Opposition. In short the Tory Party has no real plan and are simply relying on things getting worse to turn things round for them.

What the Conservative Party should be doing is setting out a Conservative alternative to the so called Brown plan. David Cameron should have called together an economic "war cabinet" of his own, made up of: Norman Lamont, Ken Clark, Nigel Lawson, John Redwood, top business backers etc. This group of people would then have been able to work with the more inexperienced Cameron and Osborne to formulate an actaul Conservative economic policy that we could have gone out and sold to the country.

[RichardJ]

"We should be doing all we can to avoid a recession and coming up with our own economic policies to turn things round"

Recession is pretty much inevitable. Trying to solve it by blasting money into the system will just mean higher inflation. In fact, aren't we in a recession already?

"The Notting Hill set needs to be broken up and our traditional amitie with the City must end!"

Another predictable trolling post by Freddie.

"Placing the emphasis on British business supplying British shops with British goods will also allow the party to present itself as being patriotic in difficult times"

In difficult times consumers tend to prefer cheaper goods, many of which will come from abroad. Even a weaker pound won't stop goods produced in the third world from costing less than what we can produce here.

Meanwhile I see inflation is over 5%. Thanks Gordon, your low interest rates are shafting my savings. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7668608.stm

[sally Roberts]

Do you think that publishing a private briefing note on Conservative Home is really the most responsible thing to do?!

[Teck Khong]

@ 9:20: "...our traditional amitie with the City must end!"

Freddie, you mean enmity?

[GB£.com]

Your "war cabinet" plan makes complete sense Richard as this is clearly the time to draw on the experience of all senior Tories who have not only been in government, but in government during a tricky economic time.

Unfortunately, has Cameron tied his own hands with his anti-experience conference speech?

[johnC]

Why haven't we been hammering home the message that Brown is one of the chief culprits of the banking crisis with his reckless spending and borrowing, encouragement of the housing and debt boom, and architect of the failed banking regulatory system ? For him to take credit for the rescue package is like an arsonist taking credit for helping to put out his own fire.
In the 1720's there was a similar financial crisis - the South Sea Bubble - which included multiple bankruptcies and even short selling. There was public outrage, the government of the day was hounded out of office, and its chief ministers Stanhope and Sunderland disgraced. It brought Walpole to power for twenty years. Unfortunately Cameron and Osborne seem to lack any of Walpole's political nous.

[alan]

What kind of organisation reveals their thinking to the opposition? Are the conservatives really genuinely wanting government? This is quite surreal.

Plans should be kept secret. It is all very nice reading this but do not tell me the Labour crowd are not reading this as well. A double bluff? sorry, frankly that is a childish thought.

Seriously this is a stupid way to run a party!

[sally Roberts]

"Unfortunately, has Cameron tied his own hands with his anti-experience conference speech?"

I don't believe he has, GB£! The references in DC's Conference Speech to Jim Callaghan were intended to paint a picture in the minds of those hearing it between the useless incompetent Prime Minister then and.....Gordon Brown! I don't believe anyone expected him to categorically say that he would never draw on those in his own Party who could provide the benefit of their wisdom in the future!

[Teck Khong]

Reducing our balance of payments must be an imperative and we must stimulate indigenous home-grown industries and encourage a resurgent internal economy.

Start with food security, energy security, and so on.

[Felixstowe Fiddler]

George Osborne is a disaster as Tory economics spokesman. He looks what he is - a rich man with en even richer wife who has no idea about ordinary families having to make ends meet.
Replace him now so that when the euphoria over Brown in the media - notably the Daily Mail - ends, we have a competent, clear message to sell.
I've said all along that the next election will produce a hung parliament. Recent events confirm that. The Lib Dems could not go into coalition with a party which has presided over this economic mess and so Cameron will have to deal with the Cleggites. In a coalition, Clegg could expect to be handed one of the following: Treasury, Home Office, FCO.

[GB£.com]

"I don't believe he has, GB£!"

Good! Richard's plan makes enormous sense. It is time to draw on experience.

It is hard not to be cynical though, and to view the propaganda thread yesterday (Cameron 'foresaw' the liquidity crisis) and this as rushed releases from the headless chickens at CCHQ to fool people into thinking they have a plan.

[Sammy Finn]

I feared the 'Top Tories ' had gone A.W.O.L. so this is very encouraging.

[rugfish]

Let me have a bash at this game called "If I was Chancellor", and add a penneth or two to get the political ball rolling and people biting at the bit to vote Conservative.

If I was Chancellor I would :-

1 - Pledge to reduce or remove VAT from domestic fuel bills as I think this would have mass political appeal and show real concern for people experiencing fuel poverty. At the moment, many millions of people simply can't afford to put their central heating on.

2 - In tandem with the current fuel policy to keep petrol and diesel in line, I would twin car tax with motor insurance, and I'd pass the savings gained by this efficiency onto the motorist. The amount saved should also be publicised. i.e. Look what you would have been paying under this policy.

3 - Increase the thresholds on ISA's to £20,000.

4 - Dump Stamp Duty for purchasers and place the cost on to sellers in 5 year incremetal increases of 3% - 4% - 5%.

5 - Appear at the Ban Stanstead Airport rallies with aq banner saying Tories do not support the new airport and show physical evidence of care for the environmental disaster it will cause.

6 - Say you will hold a referendum to repeal the Lisbon Treaty and re-install our rebates and veto's, regardless of what Labour has decided because no government has a mandate to ignore the people and their sovereignty.

I'd vote for all of the above of course so you have at least one vote here unless you come up with anything better.

[London Tory]

Two lessons for us from the financial crisis. We need to learn from them, and quickly.

1. George Osborne is not up to the job. Rightly or wrongly, he does not look the part, and is costing us votes. Does David Cameron want to be a best- best mate to GO, or Prime Minister?. If it is the latter, some hard decisions have to be made.

2. Our Shadow Cabinet is an utter shambles.

Three more examples since I made this same point last week

WILLIAM HAGUE- enjoyng a freebie on Lake Como with Barclays. Utterly ill judged and stupid. Allowed The Sun editorial to trash us. Votes lost.

OLIVER LETWIN on Any Questions last week, and his total failure to pin any blame on Labour, or even to counter Harman's sarcastic comments about his own 'second job' with a merchant back [why is he allowed to do this ?]

And finally, we come to our Shadow Business Secretary ALAN DUNCAN, and his public pronouncements yesterday. On the day when this country's debt overtook its GDP, Mr Duncan appeared on stage with the BBCs Evan Davis, and asked him;

"Are you known as The Teddy Bear because you like to be thrown around by boys?".

Our Shadow Cabinet are just not serious people, and will deserve all they get at the ballot box, unless Cameron makes drastic changes.

[David Belchamber]

Experience counts - as somebody pointed out recently and has then proved it. We have Ken Clarke, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont and Geoffrey Howe as past chancellors who, if they are all talking to each other, could form a very valuable policy group to help George Osborne focus on the big issues that are current.

Also of great importance was the post from 215cu at 15.39 yesterday. If you missed it, you should read it as it quotes from Hansard on 11 November 1997 para 732 when Peter Lilley as then shadow chancellor foresaw with great clarity the effect that Gordon Brown's regulatory changes could have.

215cu concluded: "The quote chills me to the bone, that is exactly what is happening. There is your smoking gun, Brown is a sitting duck - now use it!".

The briefing note is no doubt correct in forecasting that our lead will dip into single figures but the conservatives now have a lot of ground to make up to persuade the electorate to believe that Brown was anything but an excellent chancellor.

[john parkes]

There seems to be the widest range of possible actions/inactions outlined above from which Cameron and Osborne might choose. If nothing else, it appears to illustrate that the way forward is fraught with pitfalls of the `damned if they do...damned if they don`t` variety. On balance it seems as if an immediate list of measures by a Party not yet in govenment would be both unwise and offering hostages to fortune that will almost certainly rise up in due course and bite their buttocks with great ferocity.
The predictable whining about Osborne`s personal characteristics (usually complaining about the timbre of his voice, for heaven`s sake) and incapacity for the role of Chancellor of the Exchequer are taking on an air of fanaticism. This leads us back to the old definition of a fanatic as someone who can`t change his mind....and won`t change the subject.
If the Bank bail-out works, what can Cameron do but accept the fact. International support for the idea seems to suggest it will be made to, as far as governments are in control to any degree at all.
The scrutiny of the real economy is quite as important and the real key to future outcomes. Focusing on that will put Cameron and Osborne ahead of the game.

[Dorian Gray]

'the name Gordon Brown should go down in history as possibly saving the world from a total meltdown of the whole financial system.

Brown, the dark shadow who followed the golden Tony Blair for years has been a most unpopular British Prime Minister. And in all probability he will still get thrown out in the next election because the great British unwashed electorate won't appreciate what he has done.'

The future is Brown

By DAVID HARGREAVES - BusinessDay.co.nz | Tuesday, 14 October 2008

Just like Winston Churchill then. He delivered us from Evil and then was unceremoniously dumped. Once the bombs stopped falling and we saw what had been the human and economic cost of victory we wanted change, we demanded a better future. Out there in the real economy.

Brown is fighting a war and the consequence of that war is that the United Kingdom has all but bankrupted itself to ‘win’ just as in 1945. The economic misery will continue for years to come as it did for almost a decade after V.E. Day.

But. There is more than one fundamental difference between the current Prime Minister and Churchill beyond the patently obvious gulf in genuine gravitas and true genius. A critical difference.

Brown claims the Blitz spirit but he is directly complicit in the bombs falling in the first place. For the credit to crunch it had to be dangerously out of control in the first place and Brown built his deception of an economic miracle upon reckless credit risk compounded by dismantling our defences against the inevitable consequences.

The Blitz? The Credit Crunch bombs fell because Brown had ignored the radar, abandoned our defences and all but erected a bloody great big illuminated arrow saying 'London This Way'.

[resident leftie]

Posted by: sally Roberts | October 14, 2008 at 09:42

Do you think that publishing a private briefing note on Conservative Home is really the most responsible thing to do?!

Dear sally,

Your naivety is touching in this time of cynicism. Did you really think it was not intended for publication?

[resident leftie]

The tortoises are right.

The Brown Plan has just been adopted but and saved the world financial system, and it's upturned 30 years of the right-wing experiment in deregulation. A period of quiet Tory reflection is in order.

[Henry Crun]

I'm hoping that Mr Cameron is merely keeping his powder dry.

I urge him to review Brown's Mansion House speech from June of 2007 in which he praised the light touch regulation of financial services. Brown also gloated that he had resisted the implementation of a British Sarbanes-Oxley regime (accountants will know all about this).

Mr Cameron also has to take Brown to task on off-balance sheet items and the hypocrisy of criticising the banks for hiding debt off-balance sheet. If the Sarbanes Oxley regimen had been introduced, off-balance sheet recporting would have been prevented and the bank execs held to account for their actions - they would not be able to plead ignorance.

I'm hoping for an early fireworks display at PMQ tomorrow

[Raj]

John Parkes makes a good point. How can Cameron trash a rescue plan if it works? The markets are responding positively today. Other governments are following suit. Even the Economist has run articles supporting intervention.

Some of the reactions seem to be a case of sour grapes because people here can't stand the fact Brown was able to tie his own shoe laces. And that's exactly the story that will be run by the press (the government won't have to say anything) if Cameron now complains about the plan just as it's starting to work.

The election is still some way away and Cameron needs to play long-term. Criticise inflation that continues to rise, savers losing out, unemployment rising, etc. Saving the banks but not the economy is a good line to take. Don't blunder into the Labour trap of saying the bailout will solve everything or the bailout is wrong - it's nothing more than a smokescreen.

[Mr Dark]

Wise advice for the Tories to shut up at present, although they should also have done so during the Russia/Georgia conflict too. Many, many people are not going to vote Tory until the impression of a narrow leadership clique that flouts the laws of meritocracy disappears. More than a few token Yorkshiremen are required. In addition to Hague's freebie with Barclays, why is Letwin only doing his job part-time?

[christina Speight]

To release this briefing note shows that the top advisers to Cameron are gormless twits and completely out of touch as well.

To propose as a strategy to do absolutely nothing is ludicrous. This crisis is Gordon Brown's crisis and we ought to be pinning that label on him every day - not wait six months! . Several people above have got it right - as has incidentally the lead letter writer in today's Telegraph, David Spencer from Epsom , when he says - -

" Who was it that, as Chancellor, reigned over 10 years of unbridled boom? Who single-handedly ruined the British pension industry? Who flogged off half our gold reserves at a rock-bottom price? Who was it that relentlessly increased taxation and then squandered the proceeds? And who was it that ran up a massive Budget deficit?"

I could add to that but it's a better start than Cameron-Osborne are making. (Osborne MUST go. Every time he appears on TV the whole credibility of the Tory Party disappears)

The ordinary member of the party is despairing at the antics of their leaders. Like the British army in the First World War "They are lions, led by donkeys"

[The Bishop Swine]

If a week in politics is a long time then 18 months is an eternity. The Tory lead has been slashed and Gordon Brown’s reputation has been enhanced. Looking back just a few weeks it is has been a major turn around. The French have hailed Gordon as a genius,and lets be honest even the most skeptical of us are impressed by the backbone of the man.The biggest fear must be that Labour now starts to listen to the public and backs
off on some of its more unpopular policies. Recent events will have gone down really well with the left of the Labour party.It has be remembered that much of Labours recent weakness has been down to the left wing sitting on their hands and refusing to support the party, as well as a resurgent Tory party. Of course this crisis will soon be behind us, and the recession that is starting to bite will be difficult for the Government. If the Tories really want to be the next administration they will have to start outlining policies that are going to appeal to the general public. If Labour can show that the economy is turning the corner by the time of the next general election, the enhanced status of Gordon Brown is going to be a very difficult obstacle in the road to power.

[Alfred T Mahan]

This is just plain spineless. Imagine if the Labour Party were in opposition now - do you think they would be holding back like this? Of course they wouldn't. Tell the voters the truth - that the government is near as dammit bust, that spending must be cut,and that taxes may have to rise. They know already it already, anyway. Osborne and Cameron are looking like rabbits caught in the headlights and on this showing I wouldn't trust them with government. Why should anyone else?

[sally Roberts]

I see that I am not the only person to doubt the wisdom of bringing this note into the public domain - but if the result of it is to allow us to see that there is a plan in place then perhaps some good may have come of it!
Caution, however, is always a good thing!

[London Tory]

Its about time Con Home started to criticise the performance of the Shadow Cabinet in general, and the economic team in particular.

[Angelo Basu]

My understanding is that the aim of the bank nationalisations et al is to get them back into offering credit at reasonable rates having had the risks of their flakier investments mitigated. If the plan works, it should also prevent or at least soften recession in the wider economy. There would not really have been much point in doing it otherwise.

As Cameron rightly pointed out yesterday, it is not a time of triumph, even though (IMHO) Brown has taken the only good action which could have been done politically (even if as per Andrew Lilico there were less interventionist alternatives). The real issue is where we go next, even if the real economy is protected from the crash that would have been likely in the absence of any action to save the financial sector.

Many commentators (particularly on Comment is Free on the Guardian site) are coming out of the woodwork to urge further nationalisations and moving back to a Bennite control of the commanding heights. Whatever his manifest faults, I don't believe that Brown would want to do that, but if the temptation becomes too strong that has to be resisted and must be the clear blue water between us. The biggest political risk is if Brown changes his spots and starts to reduce public debt as this will then leave Osborne with nowhere to turn other than to weakly chime that he'd do more.

The detail of regulatory reform will be beyond comprehension by the electorate so any package that is introduced will have zero political value in being opposed by Osborne.

The memo shows a systemic weakness. We need to be able to demonstrate a need for a change even if Brown's record in the run up to the next election is OK. Even if they were caused by other unrelated factors, the mere fact of banking failures in other countries around the world will be enough to allow Brown to deflect criticism of his tenure as chancellor being a major contributing factor in the current crisis, at least in the eyes of the people who matter, the electorate.

While a recession in the real economy would provide political opportunity, the better scenario would be for Brown's measures to have worked and for the public to be voting on change anyway (as in 97 - the woes following ERM exit had been sorted and the economy was on the up, life was pretty good if dull compared to the "bright vision" offered by Blair, so much so that on many measures 2008 pre-crash is no better than or worse than 1997). Brown's ministerial team and "vision" apart from stewardship through the crisis will continue to be shaky and that's where the best chance of victory lies.

[Richard]

What David Cameron should do at the earliest opportunity is to form an economic "war cabinet" that will not only advise him during the current crisis but will be able to help formulate a long term Conservative economic policy to deal with the recession and the longer term economic problems. People in this cabinet should include:

Lord Howe (Chancellor - 1979 -83)
Lord Lawson (Chancellor - 1983 - 89)
Sir John Major (Chancellor - 1989 - 90 and Prime Minister 1990 - 1997)
Lord Lamont (Chancellor 1990 - 1993)
Kenneth Clark MP (Chancellor 1993 - 1997)
John Redwood MP (former director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.)

The cabinet should also include people like Dr Ruth Lea and a small number of other businessmen and women i.e. people who know what they are talking about.

This cabinet would work behind the scenes and report to the Shadow Treasury team. It would be show the public that we were serious, would receive praise from those in the know and could be sold to the public based on actual historic facts e.g. These people have been there before and these people have turned it round and got the country going again.

The Cabinet should be chaired by John Redwood who would then replace George Osborne as Shadow Chancellor in a wide ranging reshuffle at some point in the future.

[Ross warren]

" Osborne and Cameron are looking like rabbits caught in the headlights and on this showing I wouldn't trust them with government. Why should anyone else?"

The fact is their collective inexperience is utterly obvious at the moment
They had better hope that Obama is elected in the US, as it will prove that
Youth can win over experience. It was noticeable that everything was
going great until half way through the conference, Since then they
both appear to be dazed and wrong footed. In many ways a left wing
revolution has been forced on us disguised as necessity. Just a few
days ago Gordon Brown was fighting for his political life now frankly
the table has been turned. Do we really want this small out of touch
Eton clique running the country ? must be a question on many peoples minds right now.

[Alan Carcas]

What Brown has done is put the destructive trade unions right back at the centre of British politics and the British economy. When jobs start disappearing in the next few months the trade unions will turn round on Brown and say "you bailed out the banks, now bail out our jobs." Or else! And the "else" is cutting off Labour's own cash supply. The next step will then be state funds, taxpayers money, to run political parties. Twenty years of trying to bury Socialism ruined by the greed of people promoted beyond their intellectual capabilities. Well, at least a new generation will have to learn the hard way. Wish I was sure they were up to the challenge, as we proved to be.

All the allusions to Brown as Churchill show a remarkable lack of understanding about both characters. Churchill had an abiding love of the British people, Brown has an abiding love of dictatorial Socialism. It's Stalinism, not Churchillian.

[Westminster Wolf]

Tory MPs have been panicking at the back footed response of the frontbench to the crisis.
The leadership is communicating "we have a plan after all".

[London Tory]

Richard- excellent post.

Cameron is fiddling whilst Osborne burns our poll lead.

[JC]

Bishop

"If the Tories really want to be the next administration they will have to start outlining policies that are going to appeal to the general public"

And then Labour steals them and the Tories are left with nothing?

Why fall into the trap you've fallen into at every other election? Hard policies have to wait until the point of no return. Otherwise it will give a short-term poll boost, Labour will adapt it for their own use and then the boost will disappear with no ammo to fire at the election.

Geez, you would have thought after being stuffed at three consecutive elections you'd have learnt something....

[Ross Warren]

"What David Cameron should do at the earliest opportunity is to form an economic "war cabinet" that will not only advise him during the current crisis but will be able to help formulate a long term Conservative economic policy to deal with the recession"

In fact what the Nation needs right now is an economic war cabinet of "all of the talents" The British public will not forgive a party that is seen to be undermining the economy. Which is the reason that "Dave" has to be so very careful right now.
I would hope that Brown is as good as his word in this respect and is willing to take advice from some of the very real experience in the Tory Party. For the time being the
Country really has to come before the political ambitions of the various players.

[The Bishop Swine]

JC.

You mean your Grace (L.O.L)

I can understand what your saying and I do agree that there is a danger of good policy being adopted. However I don't know what the party really intends right now,and I am a political animal who reads extensively.I believe the general public is frustrated by this lack of clarity and is not as dummied down as the party in power might have hoped. In Short the Public needs to know what the clear blue water issues are. So far the only real Policy that most people seem to have picked up on is that the long term unemployed will be expected to work for their benefits. Not exactly well received on the estates or the Unemployment hot spots what they want is Jobs not sound bites. The fact is at the moment everything is so vague. We can expect no tax cuts in the short term. I would need a lot more information before casting my vote, I suspect even Joe six pack wants more clarity. (or was that claret ?)

[ACT]

Yah! Dave is unfazed! Double-super-duper-treble Yah! Our current feebleness is all part of a cunning plan! Dave won't bend (or do anything either)! Just like he didn't when Brown didn't call an election! When, er, he couldn't do anything material either way to affect whether or not there was an election! All PR lies are Good! Except Brown'! More spoon-feeding from CCO, please!

[London Tory]

Michael Fallon MP has hit more nails on the head in the Press today about the crash than our entire Shadow Cabinet has for weeks.

Can we have a thread on why isn't Fallon in the Shadow Cabinet ? Or Redwood, for that matter.

[christina Speight]

I hope the juvenile thinkers in CCHQ behind Cameron are reading this blog. Apart from one or two who don't seem to be able to make the distinction between attacking the rescue package and attacking Brown for causing the crisis, there is a fairly clear consensus that the party is losing the political battle and has certainly lost the initiative in it.

I too am impressed with Richard's contributions here and especially the one at 1104. Put Redwood in charge and you'd find the change noticeable almost at once.

[ACT]

London Tory, we could have such a thread, but then it could come up against the Great Problem. Which is that Dave is not any of the things his apologists habitually constantly claim for him. He is not 'strong' or 'determined', let alone 'ruthless', still less is he 'subtle' or 'strategic'. For if he was any of those things, let alone all of them, he wouldn't behave towards Osborne the utterly self-indulgent way he does. In truth, his muleish, matey determination to stick with Osborne, no matter how weakly he performs illustrates perfectly the full Cameron (and why he would be such an *awful* Prime Minister).

Moving Osborne to a post where he could better perform his lackey-like duties (eg as Party Chairman) would be logical - and honest - enough, but Dave of course won't do this. Partially because he's Majorishly* brittle, in the sense that he bridles at being second-guessed by either other politicians or the press. But chiefly because this is what it always has been: a clique. For while Osborne obviously and demonstrably fails as shadow chancellor to do the Party any political good, he does Dave personal good, and that's all that matters to Dave at the beginning, middle and end of the day. So get used to Osborne seeming ever shriller and out of touch with the economy, be it real, imaginary or derived from the additional costs allowance. Dave lacks completely the self-confidence and grit to own up to this particular mistake of placement.

*Weak and hyper-sensitive.

[GB£.com]

"And then Labour steals them and the Tories are left with nothing?"

"Hard policies have to wait until the point of no return."

Oh not this old chestnut again! Labour only steals the 'easter eggs', the cheap, welcome but fairly inconsequential headline grabbers.

I haven't see Labour proposing to ditch ID cards, or freeze council tax, or offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but those are hard Tory policies (well hard-ish re Lisbon).

The current crisis is enabling Labour to adopt the economic policies of the left.

What better time to present a real difference, by announcing a bold pro-growth (slash business tax rates) economic policy?

Remember, there is a real chance that Obama, the inexperienced voice of 'change' may have been voted into power in the USA and have been shown up for his inexperience by the time there is a GE in the UK.

Fluffy, obama-like 'change' could just as easily be an electoral hindrance as a help. The only option is to be bold, and offer the British people a real choice.

[JC]

Bish

"Not exactly well received on the estates or the Unemployment hot spots what they want is Jobs not sound bites."

And are you expecting the estates to vote Tory in significant numbers in 2010? For the unemployed, they want work so they don't care about having to work to receive benefits.

~~~~~~

"there is a fairly clear consensus that the party is losing the political battle and has certainly lost the initiative in it"

Christina, please don't appoint yourself the blog spokeswoman - it's a very Stalinist thing to do.

If anything it's a marval that Tory support has held up noticeably above 40% when they haven't been in the headlines and Brown has been "doing things" to "help" the economy. Labour has seen only very small changes. One can expect a lead of single digits for a while, but this is only a temporary reversal for them.

Tory HQ shouldn't be bounced into doing anything premature. Last year it was "panic stations" on ConHome again with Labour taking a lead, talk of a snap election and threats from people wanting Cameron's head on a plate. Remind me, did Cameron see Brown off then, or was there a general election that I somehow missed? So far Cameron has got it right every time. Why should he start listening to the panic brigade when they've got it wrong every time?

By the way, what's the obsession with Redwood? Is there new polling suggesting that the public likes him now, or is it a belief that they'll change their minds because if you like him then everyone should? I don't mind him myself but then I didn't mind Major either - look what happened to him.

[pp]

I dispair of the Tory front bench.

If they want to overcome the 'experience' argument using a 'judgement and values' argument - then they have to show some 'judgement and values' !!

At the moment it seems their judgement and values lead them to defer to browns experience!

What is really sickening, is that brown is wrong in what he is doing, and they are wrong not to challenge it.

Putting the 'welfare of the nation' above party politics is correct - but they are falling into the trap of seeing the 'nation' as some of its institutions (particularly the banking system), not seeing the nation as its people *especially the taxpayers* (those already born, and those yet to pick up the rest of the tab).

[geoff]

Look this is good insofar as it goes, but its a pretty limited political analysis. There are some further changed "truths" I would like to see Tory strategists recognising.

(1) In the mind of the public Brown is no longer the ditherer they thought he was - that argument is lost to us and we have to adjust.

(2) We can no longer complain about debt. We are backing this plan (if I hear Osborne right this morning) it will dramatically increase government debt. We cannot back the plan and rail against government debt without looking foolish and 2-faced, so that argument is lost to us as well

(3) The money for tax cuts in the next few years is gone. We have to deal with it. So too is the money for spending committments - it will be a competence election and we have to adjust strategy dramatically.

(4) The next election will be about who can drive economic recovery. This is solid ground for the tories but its not been the thrust of our thinking so far and we have to adjust

(5) Crises of whatever sort work for labour and not the tories. We need more gravitas in the shadow cabinet to show a depth of experience.

[GB£.com]

.and remember, the 'unfunded cuts' argument is now dead. Borrowing to solve a problem is the accepted state of play.

The rules have changed. If the government can spend billions to bail-out banks, why can't it spend money to promote growth?

[London Tory]

@ ACT

I broadly agree. I was sitting opposite two businesswomen on a train to Birmingham yesterday. Taking my ipod out for a moment, I was amazed to hear them having a very derogatory conversation about......George Osborne. Not Gordon Brown. Not Alisdair Darling. Not City Fat Cats. George Osborne. Their conversation included all kinds of facial expressions, voice intonations, and repeating of comments he has recently made.

I was both fascinated and appalled, but it did bring home just how badly G.O has bombed with the wider electorate in recent weeks.

The question is, when does the penny drop with Cameron ?

[Tony Makara]

Christina, yes, John Redwood would take the fight to Labour and pin the blame where it belongs, with the debt-ridden Labour government. You are right in saying that Labour now have the initiative, and Gordon Brown is using this crisis to boost his personal profile. Why was Brown, and the debt-culture he created, not attacked throughout this crisis? The problems have been global but Britain could have avoided these problems under the right sort of economic stewardship, instead Brown has made us depdendent on foreign money with dire consequences. This crisis was an opportunity to finish Brown and Labour for good, but instead he has emerged stronger, much stronger, while the Conservative position has weakened.

[JC]

I haven't see Labour proposing to ditch ID cards, or freeze council tax, or offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but those are hard Tory policies

That's because two are the exact opposite of current Labour policy and are more based on law/principle. A freeze on council tax is difficult to repeat because the government can't afford it.

What better time to present a real difference, by announcing a bold pro-growth (slash business tax rates) economic policy?

1. Where is the money going to come for that? We've already been told there's no money for big tax cuts. It might, repeat MIGHT, generate positive results but only after some time. But it might also produce results insufficient to make up the loss of revenue. How can the budget be balanced then? Just wait until the recovery and rack up the national debt even more in the meantime?

If it were a dead cert to work it would have been adopted already. Do you really think that all the parties miss obvious money-spinners?

2. Is rewarding big business when they're the boogeyman a good idea? It will just be portrayed as the Tories helping out their mates when they've been irresponsible.

[Saltmaker]

I'm struggling to understand the media cheer about "confidence returns". Today the FTSE is only back to where it was 6 days ago, i.e. 20% down on where it was a month ago and 33% down on a year ago.

When the FTSE100 returns to the 6,000s and the £ billions "investments" are recouped then, depending on how long it took, there may be some cause for "triumphalism". Until then, Gordon Brown can only take praise for digging a deep hole rather than a bottomless pit.

The passengers are applauding the pilot for pulling out of the nosedive. Soon they'll remember who stalled the plane in the first place.

[ACT]

JC: "Remind me, did Cameron see Brown off then, or was there a general election that I somehow missed? So far Cameron has got it right every time. Why should he start listening to the panic brigade when they've got it wrong every time?" How exactly did Cameron 'see Brown off'? Cameron didn't, because he couldn't, do anything either way to affect whether or not an election was called. The only man who made a mistake was Brown. Who from his own standpoint should of course have called an election. Which as Dave subsequently admitted - contrary to what he (rightly) publicly affected to think at the time - was a prospect he was in truth bricking himself over.

Dave's defenders can keep spinning the line that he's the far-sighted man of strength as much as they want, but whenever there's an acute political crisis, what does Dave really do? Freeze up, panic behind closed doors, shout at people close to him, then blindly hope that the threat will go away because he's damned if he's actually going to do anything about himself.

[christina Speight]

JC @1203 "Christina, please don't appoint yourself the blog spokeswoman - it's a very Stalinist thing to do."

Don't be a prat please. I can read and do simple arithmetic. There is enormous dissatisfaction with the leadership on this blog and it is clearly the majority view, If you don 't like that, solve the problem, don't shoot me - the messenger. And the postings since yours rather bear my judgment out don't they?

In fact this "leaking" by CCHQ of a proposal to do nothing seems to have backfired in a big way if it was a deliberate leak.

London Tory - I'm not surprised at the reaction of your two businesswomen to Osborne. I find him so off-putting, so indecisive, that I actually physically squirm when he speaks.

Oh yes London Tory. _you've sent me all over the web trying to find Mallon. Where is he please?

[Patsy Sergeant]

Alfred T. Mahan @ 10.46 - 'This is just plain spineless. Imagine if the Labour Party were in opposition now - do think they would be holding back like this?'

Actually Mr. Mahan, the BBC would be right in there doing all the work for them, as it does right now!!

[resident leftie]

Posted by: christina Speight | October 14, 2008 at 11:46

Put Redwood in charge and you'd find the change noticeable almost at once.

I can only nod emphatically in agreement with this. I'd be very happy to see his alien countenance startled in the media's headlights.

[GB£.com]

"We've already been told there's no money for big tax cuts"

And as Andrew Lilico pointed out, that was complete bollocks. How can there be 'no money' for tax cuts but a blank cheque for a bank bail-out?

[Jane Gould]

This sounds very wise strategically."

"But would have been wiser if the Conservatives had 'laser like' concentrated on the real economy years ago when the banking problems were building up."

well, yes - maybe; but would anyone have been prepared to listen?
Government spinners would have countered with "Tories try to talk down economy".

The public were quite happy with their rocketing property "values", holidays etc. on credit and trips to B & Q...
As our Regional Pensions Manager used to say - you can't shove beans up people's noses. Well, you can; but they'll fall out.
it's all a question of timing, and DC's team have repeatedly shown their skill in getting this right.

[London Tory]

Christina- check out today's Daily Mail.

Michael Fallon MP [Conservative, Sevenoaks]

"Competition law seems to have been completely abandoned. The results are likely to be fewer savings products, fewer mortgage products, and less choice all around for the consumer. Barclays thought that it could carry on without taxpayers money, so why could'nt Lloyds? We should have clear rules for how many banks we need and what share of the market they can have".

Talking about Gordon Brown's friendship with Lloyds Chairman Sir Victor Black, Fallon concludes;

"It just shows what can happen when you go to the right cocktail party".

George Osborne MP [National Consensus Party, Tatton]

"We stand ready to support a Labour Government [with a 60+ majority] with any emergency legislation *which will result in our national debt exceeeding our GDP for the first time".

*- ok, I made up this bit, but just compare and contrast these two responses.

[Peter Grimes]

Why are Cameron & Osbourne allowing Yvette Cooper to lie about having 'repaid debt'. Who is going to call her a liar publicly (please)?

The Al-BBC don't seem to want to beard her so Nuliebor are walking all over the Tory party currently

[Richard]

If we had an economic "war cabinet" made up of the people I mentioned earlier, and if this "war cabinet" was supported by a brilliant team of economic researchers then the Conservative Party would be able to produce top quality research to show that the mess we are in is all Brown's fault, that his solutions will not work and that the Conservatives have a much better alternative.

Yes the Government would attack us and say that we were trying to "talk down the economy" but we have plenty to counter this line of attack with. Maybe some countries may even adopt our plan? Afterall there would be nothing stopping David Cameron and representatives of his economic "war cabinet" going to America or talking to other Centre Right governments around the world.

As for people's comments about bringing back John Redwood. Why shouldn't he come back? He has worked in the City, he is respected in the City, he is a former Cabinet Minister and he has since the very begining of this crisis been coming up with Conservative alternatives. Did anyone hear him speak in the Freedom Zone at conference? I did and it was one of the better speeches I heard that week. If the Labour Party can bring back Mandleson, surely we can bring back Redwood!

[ACT]

" If the Labour Party can bring back Mandelson, surely we can bring back Redwood!" But that's the key difference: Brown, whatever his many other faults, had the courage to do just that. Dave simply isn't brave or tough enough to move Osborne.

[Iain]

" well, yes - maybe; but would anyone have been prepared to listen? "

But it would be paying massive dividends now!

[GB£.com]

"The public were quite happy with their rocketing property "values", holidays etc. on credit and trips to B & Q..."

So why did the Tories launch their 'tosser' campaign against credit card debt? Surely that 'shoved beans' up people's noses, calling them tossers?

But nothing on the biggest bubble, the housing price bubble (fuelled by too low rates and reckless lending criteria) except more schemes to get more people on 'the ladder'?

The simple fact that the Tories called the end of the 'econocentric paradigm' just a few weeks before the biggest economic crisis in 60 years began, to me, shows that they had no idea what was going on.

Even just a few weeks ago, at conference, Cameron was still repeating his 'I will be to social policy was Thatcher was to economic policy' line, showing that Team Cameron is struggling to change focus with dramatic world events.

If Cameron was the forward-thinking genius who understood the coming storm that his spinners claim, then why did he think that nationalising a bank was a 'monumental failure' just 10 months ago, but now openly supports such a policy?

[rugfish]

Labour would laugh their heads off to see yet another rubbishing within the party of its own leader when Brown has had support through thick and thin.

This is the biggest trap waiting to befall the party and the leader needs wholehearted and committed support in my view. However it is no good him sitting on a fence either when it comes to reckoning with Browns own performance and his liking of TAX and Spend.

There are a 101 issues to get stuck into and giving support on economic decisions followed by loud proclamations of "yes but we won't forget", is not really taking the political ball.

Promotion how the country will look under Conservatives in terms of Jobs, taxes, the economy, the consumer, the motorist and Europe with some hard hitting talk of RELIEF and policies to CHANGE the thing for the better is what's needed.

Recent decisions of Brown on the bail out should be let alone or we'll sound like we're harping on if we're not careful.

Get stuck into promoting policy to allow people to compare a future Britain to the one Brown has made for taxpayers, home buyers, motorists and businesses by injecting a bit of oomph in it with the likes of David Davis, John Redwood, Michael Fallon, Lord Strathclyde, Michael Howard and the like who can all talk the talk when it comes to laying out the real shambles Labour has created.

[ACT]

"Labour would laugh their heads off to see yet another rubbishing within the party of its own leader when Brown has had support through thick and thin". Um, Rugfish, 6 weeks ago, Labour, nodded on by the drones of the lobby, thought it was a matter of when, not if, as far as Brown being deposed went [sic].

In fact, so confident were they about this particular piece of futuring, media nonces like Nick Robinson had convinced themselves that the actual issue wasn't even when, it was how.

[Malcolm Dunn]

What a miserable thread. This is like last summer,a bunch of mostly anonymous whingers and people who dislike the Conservative Party.
Of all them ACT must take the biscuit for praising the return of the odious Peter Mandelson.

[IvyEileen]

Whatever the reasons for the recent financial mess (e.g. artificially low interest rates, "light" regulation, political pressure, low moral behaviour), the pressure came from a lack of confidence in (a) the banking system and (ii) the political "leaders"..... all whipped up by the media circus.

Nationalisation (or partial such) is actually a no-brainer - if all the major countries sign up to it. Don't see the originality of this "solution" at all. You consolidate the confidence problem into one problem.

The Market won't bet against the G7 countries putting their "full faith and credit" behind the system of promises to pay. However strong financially you are, you cannot wrest control from a unified political response - it's betting against the G7's national balance sheets (which is you and me, plus the means of production).

[Ivy Eileen]

Sorry, guys - it's (i) and (ii) or (a) and (b). Metal fatigue setting in.

[ACT]

That would be, Peter - so odious - Mandelson aka Gidder's ideal luncheon companion of choice when he wants to slag off poor little Liam (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/columnists/pandora/pandora-osborne-and-fox-feud-goes-back-years-955501.html), I assume Malcolm?

[Jonathan Gray]

My worry is that in six months time it will have entered the public psyche that 'City Bankers' caused the recession.

You can already see the Government pushing this line.

Because, by default, 'City Bankers' can be painted as natural allies of the Tory Party.

Sure, we need to carefully put forward our plans as to how we would get out of this recession, and have a sounder economy going forward. This thread has some sound suggestions for doing this.

But I belive that right now we need to be extremely careful in ensuring that the causes of this mess are properly exposed: the FSA were the regulator; Gordon Brown created the FSA and framed its remit. It failed in its duty as a regulator and in that vacuum, banks and other intitutions did act irresponsibly. Yet to date the FSA have come in for almost nil criticsm. I wonder why?

Let's not forget that John Major re-wrote modern political wisdom by winning an election coming out of a recession. If Gordon can blame 'the Tories friends' for causing this one, he has a lifeline....

[RichardJ]

"And as Andrew Lilico pointed out, that was complete bollocks. How can there be 'no money' for tax cuts but a blank cheque for a bank bail-out?"

The money for the bail-out is presumably coming from government borrowing. We should fund tax cuts by spending cuts, not ramping up the national debt.

[Old Hack]

Let's remember the nonchalant comment about the Conservative lead dropping to single digits. If in the future Labour draws level or creeps ahead then it will be clear that complacency is rife.

That aside, there is plenty of ready ammunition with which to work. Perhaps Mr Osbourne should read the Economist if he still doesn't 'get it'.

Compare what happened to Labour in this crisis with what happened to the Conservatives when Sterling was forced out of the ERM, both tipping points. Instead of being shredded for its gross incompetence this time the Labour government is coming out this pigs wallow of financial incompetence smelling of roses??

Cameron talked to CCHQ staffers about not being complacent prior to Conference. So now its time to walk the walk.

[Iain]

"Yet to date the FSA have come in for almost nil criticsm. I wonder why?"

Because the FSA went for a premptive stike and blamed it all on speculative short sellers ( a group that has a pretty poor public immage) when there was no evidence that they played any role in the banking problems what so ever.

[Iain]

"Instead of being shredded for its gross incompetence this time the Labour government is coming out this pigs wallow of financial incompetence smelling of roses"

Which is the most damming indictment of the effectiveness of the Shadow Treasury team, a once in a centaury banking meltdown and the opposition treasury team lose out to the Government which has presided over this debacle. If Osborne and company can't put one over on the Government is such circumstances then there is no hope for them, for it doesn't get any better than this for an opposition.

Does Osborne still have his two jobs?

[London Tory]

We need to see a return to partisan politics from D.Cameron in PMQs tomorrow, as well as planted questions from our back bench MPs on the Labour recession, Mandelson's return, and Darling's constituency links to HBOS.

I somehow doubt that Brown would have pressured Black to support HBOS jobs had they been located in Sir Bufton Tufton's constituency in the shires of southern England.

Cameron tried 'non partisan' at the height of the crash last week, and Brown and the Labour whips threw it back in his face.

Let the lesson be learned.

[ACT]

I wonder if those of us who basically think Osborne (and therefore Cameron) are ballsing up comprehensively the Tory response to the current situation, from a right wing viewpoint, could move over to agreement on, uh, a Lilicovian line? Which might roughly go: the 'crisis', such as it is, is a cyclical outworking of free-market enterprise; that there is no especial traction in Tory attempts to critique past governmental errors because our frontbench didn't, in the past, disagree with them; but that what is now, from a Tory standpoint, going so disastrously - and long term, possibly generationally - wrong is the particular statist response to the crisis?

That, in short, while the government isn't to blame for banks or private individuals privately making mistakes, it is massively to blame for now making those private mistakes public problems? And that this is where Osborne is so grievously at fault: because he fundamentally agrees with what the government is *now* doing, as opposed to what it may or may not have done in the past.

[christina Speight]

There are many here who need to read what's on offer even now. For instance there is Damian Reece in the Telegraph Business News today and yesterday there was Tim Congdon on World at One.
---- Thanks London Tory . The Mail's website doesn't make him easy to find., I'll try again!

In those two there is enough ammunition to sink Brown's reputation for good and sin k the 'consensus' today with it.

A bucket of cold water is thrown on the nervous acceptance of Brown’s socialisation of banks. Read and ponder!

[JC]

And as Andrew Lilico pointed out, that was complete bollocks. How can there be 'no money' for tax cuts but a blank cheque for a bank bail-out?

Because tax cuts are supposed to be permanent, not temporary. No one expects the banks to forever be given a blank cheque/never be made to repay the money they're lent.

Besides it is precisely because of the bailout that there is no money for tax cuts. Or do you want public spending to be funded out of the national debt?!

[JC]

Don't be a prat please.

Don't be so stuck up please.

There is enormous dissatisfaction with the leadership on this blog and it is clearly the majority view

I have seen a majority of views saying that there is plenty of ammo to throw at the government. I do not see a majority of people saying that the Shadow Cabinet is a shambles, etc. But even if that were the case it would not mean anything, given that as I've said in the past this blog has seen threads full of people demanding heads on plates for poll blips, rumours and predictions that have never come to pass.

Cameron has proved his critics wrong time and time again. He can make mistakes but so far his judgement has been sound. People like you don't even give him the chance to prove you wrong - you pass sentence before he even gets up to present his defence.

[GB£.com]

"Besides it is precisely because of the bailout that there is no money for tax cuts"

LoL, I was waiting for that one! Osborne said there was no money for tax cuts weeks before a bailout was devised.

"Or do you want public spending to be funded out of the national debt?!"

No, I want big public sector cuts to fund wealth generation. It is time to slash the size of government and to reduce business taxes to help all existing businesses keep their staff and grow, and to encourage more wealth generators to the UK.

It is not cute. It is not fluffy. But then, I have a feeling we may not be in a sociocentric paradigm right now...

[Mr Angry]

Let's hope that wait and see works because that's plainly what the Cameroons will choose to do. However fence sitting has paid off so far, more or less, and so it probably will again.

Ultimately so long as we do actually have sensible, principled, achievable, effective and properly costed economic plans in place then when they are announced makes less difference than what they are.

[JC]

Osborne said there was no money for tax cuts weeks before a bailout was devised.

Ok, there is even LESS room for tax cuts now that the bailout has arrived. Happy?

No, I want big public sector cuts to fund wealth generation.

Oh yes, get re-elected by promising cuts! Cuts to what? I presume you don't mean hospitals or schools, so perhaps you could tell us what should be cut. Because from the very first day I visited this blog I saw people going on about the size of the State - but not offering any insights as to where it could be cut without putting off the voters.

And when people are hurting, they may ask why business gets the money but not them.

[Gezmond007]

Oil prices going down, interest rates going down , poll lead going down, food prices will follow , Inflation according to all the financial experts has peaked and will go down.

Banks will be regulated. Gordo getting all the good press uk and internationally . People in general will be better off early next year.

Cameron and Osborne , doing and saying nothing, is it any wonder we are in a mess !

[ACT]

"And when people are hurting, they may ask why business gets the money but not them". Indeed, and not just people, Tories too might start asking, 'why exactly are mismanaged businesses getting public monies for their private errors?' Maybe Gidders will set it out for us in one of his flawlessly fluent expositions?

[ChrisD]

"Tory HQ shouldn't be bounced into doing anything premature. Last year it was "panic stations" on ConHome again with Labour taking a lead, talk of a snap election and threats from people wanting Cameron's head on a plate. Remind me, did Cameron see Brown off then, or was there a general election that I somehow missed? So far Cameron has got it right every time. Why should he start listening to the panic brigade when they've got it wrong every time?"

JC, my post of the day on here!
I thought about posting something similar yesterday, at every step of the way since 2005 we have the usual suspects and the astro turfers(names change but not the content), whinging loudly and criticising the Conservative party.
Now, I reckon that just all the regular critics on here are not even members of the Conservative party. In fact, at the moment I wuold say that we have the lowest ratio of actual members posting on the Diary Threads which might indicate why the readership of this part of the site is so low.

The bash Cameron and get rid of Osborne campaign on here is now getting beyond parody. Its become so boring its like watching paint dry. And most importantly the critics arguments don't even stand up to the smallest scrutiny.

We have enjoyed the longest spell of polling success for over 15 years under the stewardship of the Cameron/Osborne team. And those that think its all about the governments mistakes when we are doing well, and Cameron/Osbornes poor strategic skills when we are doing badly are thankfully not running our party.
Its incredible, that despite Gordon Brown's repeated mistakes because he relies on short term political tactics rather than longer term strategy, that these threads are also full of like minded individuals.

[M Dowding]

Tory HQ shouldn't be bounced into doing anything premature. Last year it was "panic stations" on ConHome again with Labour taking a lead, talk of a snap election and threats from people wanting Cameron's head on a plate. Remind me, did Cameron see Brown off then, or was there a general election that I somehow missed? So far Cameron has got it right every time. Why should he start listening to the panic brigade when they've got it wrong every time?

Nicely put JC. The large input by Draper/Campbell, quietly masterminded by the new Baron Sleazeball, is designed to de-stabalise and wrong foot Conservatives. Freddie Fencepost, Felixstowe Fiddler plus half the rag tag and bob tail veterans from that corporate owned LabourHome and the rather genteel, oh so terribly impatient lot here show signs of panic. If you feel really down, go back and read DC's speech from 2007. As for the attacks on Osborne, give him two years at The Treasury then take stock. Note how Campbell is trying to destabalise us by going after Osborne, slimy drunk!
I see the policy as that of extracitng all the victims from the wreckage of Labour's massive pile up, then decide which of them are worth saving. Not one labourite would be worth it.

[sally Roberts]

"What a miserable thread. This is like last summer,a bunch of mostly anonymous whingers and people who dislike the Conservative Party."

Hear Hear - couldn't agree with you more, Malcolm.

What a thoroughly unedifying discussion!

[M Dowding]

Nice one to ChrisD. From a fellow member and activist! Vote CONSERVATIVE to rescue the world long term!

[pp]

If the public are happy with the delusion that borrowing is a sensible way to fund their own spending (letting the lender decide if they can afford to pay it back or not) - and evidently a lot of the public are happy with this...

Then how can a political party convince them that the 'state' should not do the same? This HAS TO BE DONE.

For years the tories have stupidly let labour get away with the lie that much of their spending is 'investment'.

Labour are running rings around the tories - they have correctly identified immovable core tory principals and followed a plan that violates them -- so the tories cannot vocally support it, and leaving any tory alternative just an 'unprovable' proposal, leaving them as 'also rans'.

Meanwhile labour have no principals (the means is always justified in marxest thinking) - so are happy to steal any idea from anywhere - and change their spots "borrowing bad,service cuts bad" becomes "borrow, borrow, borrow - it ain't so bad after all".

The front bench need to get their act together and PROMOTE the PRINCIPALS they beleive in, and show how they can be APPLIED to current circumstances - else we can look forward to another term of being shafted by a labour far more dark than blairs labour, and another brick in the wall of socialism that will imprison the genereations that follow.

[ChrisD]

"Note how Campbell is trying to destabalise us by going after Osborne, slimy drunk!"

Noticed that all guns have been turned on Osborne by the Labour party in recent weeks, trying to play catch up and settle old scores with the strategic mastermind behind the decision to undermine Gordon Brown before he reached No10.

Little helpful briefings from the No10 bunker on friendly journalistic blogs being the most obvious sign of this tactic. But the usual suspects on here cannot seem to comprehend that Osborne is someone that this Labour government fear, because all Brown has left to cling too is his claim of economic competence, no matter how untrue that is in reality.

But never underestimate the ability of some on the right to shoot themselves in the foot and give the opposition a much needed boost.
Brown has bombed as a PM, and will end up with hindsight to have been a terrible Chancellor because he sought to make personal political gain out of short term tactics. But this will end up hurting the economy and the rest of us in the longer term.

[ACT]

The tactical political genius of Osborne (and Cameron) during the worst economic crisis of your lifetime is to: 1.) offer the government blank cheque support; 2.) argue that the government is at fault for the crisis; 3.) claim that they (Osborne and Cameron) are *not* engaging in 'petty politics'; 4.) lie back and pray that things improve of their own accord, just like they did when Brown was on the brink of epating them good and hard last Autumn. Because Osborne (and Cameron) have nothing distinctive to offer, as this crisis daily proves. And their latest absurd piece of spoonfed spin to CH is to claim that - their numb, stunned silence is still all of a piece with their cunning masterplan, inevitably taking us to general election victory. (But don't be so vulgar as to actually enquire after any specific details).

Britain's whole future is being damaged by Labour's mishandling of what has happened in the markets, and Osborne and Cameron are too frightened to offer any opposition. What worries some of us most isn't that the polls won't firm up back in our direction, whenever Gordon next louses something up, but that Osborne on an almost hourly basis demonstrates that he is unfit to be a special adviser, let alone Chancellor. With Dave being too frit to move him in favour of someone who could do the job.

[David Cooper]

From the Latest News & Blogs sidebar - DC quoted in a Radio 2 interview saying "when the house is on fire, it's all hands to the hose". Yes, but don't forget to ensure that the arsonist is taken into custody, charged and convicted as soon as possible afterwards, and is not allowed to mitigate his sentence by claiming a role in putting the fire out.

In passing, the Shadow Treasury Team apparently comprises George Osborne and Philip Hammond in the principle roles, Baroness Noakes in the Lords, and David Gauke, Justine Greening and Mark Hoban on the front bench, according to the party's site. Just in case anyone was unaware.

[M Dowding]

ACT, you are not welcome here but I must accept your right to free speech. Shame is you are so economical with the truth. Who says GO slagged of Liam Fox? Baron Sleaze? Ah, absolute fact then. You lot of Campbell morons are really into gear. Gloat away and call an election then.

[ACT]

And by far the best thing about this thread has been the demented 'Roon paranoia that the mighty Labour blog squad has sinisterly manipulated all this criticism of Osborne. For if there's one thing that's surely beyond doubt, it's that Gidders has put in a fantastic effort? Well, he certainly makes Dave look good by comparison.