ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Tory lead down to 4% in latest Populus poll for The Times

A Populus poll for tomorrow's Times has a Tory lead of 4%, down from a lead of 6% in the same poll last month.

The figures are summarised below:

It is the narrowest lead for the party in a Populus poll since March.

The fieldwork for this survey was done between Friday and Sunday.

Conservative Research Department unaffected by recent economies

Last week ConHome broke the news that 16 to 24 people were sadly losing their jobs at CCHQ. Yesterday I noted the self-inflicted wounds that were exacerbating the effects of the credit crunch.

Some blogosphere chat has suggested that the Conservative Research Department has been affected by the economies. That isn't true. It may even be possible that some refugees from the 'crunched' External Relations Department will join CRD and result in it being strengthened somewhat.

The Telegraph's Iain Martin has picked up the story btw and his recommendation that one person be put in charge of CCHQ is absolutely on the money.  We've been worried about there being Three Chairmen for some time.  With Andrew Feldman's appointment there are at least four cooks endangering the broth.

Tim Montgomerie

Michael Gove attacks proposed changes to primary curriculum

Sir Jim Rose has caused quite a stir this morning with his report - highlighted as the splash in this morning's Times - calling for sweeping reforms to the curriculum in primary schools.

According to the Times' report, he is proposing that:

"Traditional subjects such as history, geography and religious studies will be removed from the primary school curriculum and merged into a “human, social and environmental” learning programme as part of a series of radical education reforms."

Michael Gove, the shadow schools secretary, has just issued the following statement condemning the proposals:

“The Government’s changes to the primary curriculum will lead to children learning less not more. The move away from traditional subject areas will lead to a further erosion of standards.

“Schools in the top-performing countries in the world and the top independent schools in this country teach children hard subject knowledge not soft “topics”. In adopting this throwback to the 1960s, the Government is denying the highest quality of education to children in the state sector.

“The experiment with this kind of ideology – moving away from facts, knowledge and rigour – failed forty years ago and will fail again. This is not a step forward, it is a blast from the past."

Is it time for another Tory Speaker?

There are two myths propagated about the Speakership of the House of Commons.

One is that there is a convention that it alternates between Conservative and Labour MPs. This is patently not correct, since there were in fact four Conservative MP in a row who served as Speaker between 1928 and 1965.

Secondly, there are those who say that convention states that the Speaker always comes from the benches of the governing party. This was the case for several hundred years - until 1992 when the convention was broken on the election of Labour's Betty Boothroyd.

By modern standards, Speaker Martin has already had a good innings after eight years in the post; the last of his predecessors to serve more than a decade was Edward Fitzroy, who died in office during World War II.

So after a weekend of further speculation about the future of the post's current incumbent - including a BBC survey in which a significant proportion of MPs questioned declared themselves to have lost confidence in Michael Martin - thoughts are turning to the identity of the person who should succeed him, whenever that may be.

On the timing front, I would venture that the sooner a new Speaker can be chosen, the better. By its very nature, the role is supposed to be held by a unifying figure who can command respect across the chamber - this is clearly no longer the case with MPs of all political hues now questioning Speaker Martin's judgements.

So who should take over? From the Labour side, names being talked about include Wales Secretary, Paul Murphy, and one of the current Deputy Speakers, Sylvia Heal. Then there are those who favour ex-Lib Dem leader, Sir Menzies Campbell.

But there is also a wealth of potential candidates from the Conservative benches. Several knights of the shires have long fancied the role, including Sir George Young, Sir Patrick Cormack and Sir Nicholas Winterton.

There are of course also two Conservative Deputy Speakers in Sir Alan Haslehurst and Sir Michael Lord, of whom the former won many plaudits when he temporarily deputised for Speaker Martin on a full-time basis during a bout of ill health.

And the other Tory name increasingly being talked about on all sides of the House is John Bercow, the MP for Buckingham. Whilst his political journey may have lost him some friends on the Tory benches, it has also gained him widespread respect across the Commons and would in my mind be the ideal choice.

Jonathan Isaby

Waste, over-spending and poor revenue strategies contribute to CCHQ's deteriorating financial position

Earlier this week ConservativeHome revealed the sad news of job losses at CCHQ, combined with a pay and hiring freeze.  Over recent days we have learnt that the financial situation facing the party is worsening.

To paraphrase George Osborne (and Fraser Nelson in the News of the World) the Tory leadership did not fix the party's finances during the good economic times and are now facing very difficult decisions as a consequence.

Fraser suggests that overall income is down by 10%, that the number of £50,000 donors may have halved and that David Cameron has personally authorised up to £2m of extra expenditures, none included in the budget for the year.

The credit crunch is obviously not Conservative Party's fault but the effect would have been more limited if there were better financial controls and a more strategic view at CCHQ.  Here are some of the issues:

• £500,000 was spent on newspaper and internet adverts earlier this year to launch a 'Friends of the Conservatives' scheme.  Few Friends have been recruited and many believe that that money could have been much better spent.  There are many other harder-to-cost examples of controversial, big ticket expenditures.
• Very high-paying positions at CCHQ continue to be filled by closed process of appointment rather than via open selection.
• Almost nothing has been done to raise money via the internet.  More than £250,000 spent on the recent revamp of conservatives.com did nothing to change that.
• CCHQ are repressing the publication of membership data but it is feared that numbers have fallen by at least 17,000.  Although members can receive some financial benefits through an affinity scheme there are no other benefits from the centre from being a Tory member.
• Job cuts are falling disproportionately on the external relations department, responsible for long-term relationship-building with women, ethnic minorities, business and other third parties.  This department, if well-run, could be the source - not only of vital third party endorsements and policy intelligence - but also a generation of new supporters and donors.

I know there will be some readers who think that these issues shouldn't be discussed but the culture of secrecy at CCHQ - and the consequent lack of accountability - explain, in part, why these mistakes have been repeated again and again over recent years.

Tim Montgomerie

Noon: Fraser Nelson has more at Coffee House.

Three years of David Cameron's leadership

David Cameron was elected three years ago today, winning 67.6% of party members' votes.

He marks the anniversary by addressing a Conference of the Ulster Unionists.  The Tory-UUP deal, overseen by Owen Paterson, is one of the high points of his leadership.  Mr Cameron has consistently refused to take risks with the Union and has consistently declined to encourage the anti-Scottish sentiment that is too evident on ConservativeHome threads.

The ConservativeHome poll of polls puts the Tories 7.4% ahead on this anniversary weekend.  That's not quite enough for a working majority but I've never been more sure that David Cameron will be Britain's next Prime Minister.  For the reasons set out earlier this week, the economic situation will deservedly end Labour rule.

Labour remain clueless as to how to attack David Cameron.  That much was evident last week when I sat on a panel with Hazel Blears.  Hazel was absolutely charming but her critique of David Cameron as an Etonian flip-flopper won't go anywhere.  The class war nonsense failed Labour in Crewe and Nantwich and David Cameron's leadership has actually been characterised by considerable consistency.  I think of championing a more diverse slate of parliamentary candidates; opposition to new grammar schools; ending the patient passport and all that it meant; opposition to "unfunded" tax cuts; abandoning sympathy for ID cards and championing civil liberties; not "obsessing" about Europe; and taking green positions on, for example, a third runway for Heathrow and expanding rail travel.  Today's is not the same Conservative Party that Mr Cameron inherited.

Some of the changes have, of course, depressed grassroots Conservatives and David Cameron still struggles to enthuse.  I have always been a supporter of Mr Cameron and his social reform agenda - the biggest idea on the centre right today; an idea that owes so much to Iain Ducan Smith's Centre for Social Justice.

The greatest mistake of the Cameron period was the tactic of economic disarmament; most characterised by the now abandoned decision to match Labour's spending plans.  That shift completes the rebalancing that took place in the summer of 2007.

The greatest remaining weakness is a tendency to be too political.  Eight-times-out-of-ten when I ask a frontbencher why x or y policy cannot be enacted I get a political answer; We can't do that because focus groups tell us that it would unpopular or because we'd upset The Sun.  Rarely am I given practical reasons why a policy might be unworkable.  I don't hear enough passion and belief from Team Cameron although this year's Party Conference speech was a notable exception.

In the time before the election my big hopes are for

1. Francis Maude's Implementation Office; can it do the hard work of turning policy ideas into transformational programmes for government?
2. For a strengthening of the government-in-waiting team, including more full-time frontbenchers;
3. A serious commitment to reform of the bloated, inefficient state that the Brown-Blair years have spawned;
4. The development of a foreign and security policy that is equal to the challenges of our time. 

Tim Montgomerie

George Osborne says recession would be worse if Britain was in eurozone

As reported in this morning's Sun and in a number of other newspapers, George Osborne has reiterated William Hague's pledge that the Tories will not join the euro.  The Shadow Chancellor, speaking to business leaders, explained why (1) the boom would have been bigger if we had been in the eurozone and (2) the route out of recovery would be steeper...

Why the euro would have made Britain less prepared for recession: "The mess that our economy is in is the result of a debt-fuelled boom that Gordon Brown allowed to build up over the last ten years. It was domestic policy failure that gave us those 125% mortgages and more personal debt than any other economy in the history of the world. But monetary policy in the euro area has been ever looser than here in Britain so if we had joined the euro, credit conditions would have been even looser and the bubble could have been even bigger.'

Why the euro would make recovery harder: "Yesterday the Bank of England delivered the kind of rate cut that Conservatives have been urging and that our economy needs. The result is that interest rates in the euro area are now 0.5% higher than they are here, and they have fallen far more slowly. So, if we had joined the euro, rates would be higher now than they need to be to stimulate demand in the British economy. If the last decade has taught Gordon Brown anything it should be that you have to keep control of interest rates and monetary policy."

In conclusion, George Osborne made the political case against eurozone membership:

"The euro has never been primarily an economic project, it’s a political one. Once you share a currency and a central bank the pressures for closer political union become ever more powerful. We’ve seen those pressures operating over the last few weeks with the concerted attempt to deliver a euro-area spending splurge. Given that we are already borrowing more than any major euro area economy, that would be the wrong solution for Britain. Some euro area politicians have stood up to the pressure – the German finance minister said he wouldn’t join the other “lemmings”. But monetary union will only increase the pressure for closer political union. That’s not what the British people want, and under a Conservative Government they can be confident that it’s not what they’ll get. We fought against joining the euro in the past and we will not join the euro - in the present or the future."

George Osborne says bank rescue package "is not working"

Speaking on Radio 4 at lunchtime, shadow chancellor George Osborne has declared the Government's bank rescue package to have failed due to the continued lack of lending and credit.

"A, the credit is not flowing and many small businesses and medium businesses are struggling...and B, the rate cuts are not being passed on in full. The Government needs to swallow its pride and accept that its bank rescue package is not working as intended."

He added that the bank bailout needed to be renegotiated:

"It's all very well for Gordon Brown, on a regular basis now, to get on a soap box and shout at the banks but it's not having the intended effect, it's not getting credit flowing again. We need to look again at the terms of the recapitalisation, accept that it isn't working and fix it so it does.We need a national loan guarantee scheme, so that the government is underwriting lending, this kind of radical monetary policy is what is needed to pull this economy out of a recession that many say will now be the deepest in the world."

(Quotes courtesy of PoliticsHome.com)

Have the Conservatives had a "Clause Four" moment?

Nick Bourne, the Conservative leader in the Welsh Assembly is today reported as saying that accepting devolution was a "Clause Four" moment for the party.

He was, of course, making the comparison with Tony Blair's abolition of the long-standing Clause Four of the Labour Party constitution which had committed his party to nationalisation - a defining moment in the creation of New Labour which saw past dogma rejected in the face of a new political environment.

But aren't there other candidates for the Tories Clause Four moment?

What about the party's commitment not to abolish the minimum wage?

Or its acceptance that it would not reintroduce Section 28?

Are any of these genuinely comparable with Labour's abolition of Clause Four?

Or does the Conservative Party's historic lack of codified ideology render the comparison tenuous?

Jonathan Isaby

John Major, the movie

You can't lift yourselves out of recession with short term stimuli or with high taxes.

That was one of the messages that John Major communicated in this nine minute broadcast from 1992 (when Britain was last in recession).  We see the former Tory leader (now enjoying a measure of rehabilitation) tour Brixton - where he grew up - and he talks about his love of the House of Commons, about multiracial Britain, his Citizen's Charter, the NHS and schooling.

As with 1992's tax bombshell PPB, we are grateful to the Conservative Party's Archive for allowing us to republish this broadcast.

After eight minutes the video climaxes with some memorable blasts of Purcell.

Tim Montgomerie

New Party Political Broadcast focuses on the economy

Following the Queen’s speech, the Conservative has produced a Party Political Broadcast which will be broadcast tonight on BBC2 at 5.55pm, on BBC1 and ITV1 at 6.55pm, but which you can watch right now through PlayPolitical.com.

In the broadcast, David Cameron looks at the problems facing people as a result of the economic downturn and focuses on the situation of the owner of a building company in Southport and his staff.

David Cameron concludes the film by summing up what the Conservative would be doing differently on the economy, namely:

• cutting corporation and payroll taxes;
• allowing firms to delay paying their VAT bills;
• a council tax freeze; and
• tax breaks for companies who create jobs.

How many people will gain from the Government's mortgage support scheme?

Doubts are already being raised about how effective the mortgage support scheme unveiled by Gordon Brown yesterday will be.

It was revealed during the debate on the Queen's Speech that homeowners would be able to take a two-year mortgage holiday if one adult in the household lost their job and that eight banks had already apparently signed up to the agreement.

Margaret Beckett, the housing minister, is being reported as having said that only 9,000 people were likely to benefit.

Dizzy has taken the Government to task on the issue this morning, whilst George Osborne is also far from emphatic in his support.

The shadow chancellor has told us:

"Yesterday, we discovered that 75,000 people are forecast to have their homes repossessed this year, near the peak of the last recession, so of course we need to do everything possible to keep people in their homes. We've been calling for action on repossessions for a year.

"As ever with Gordon Brown's announcements we'll need to look at the small print to make sure this doesn't fall apart under scrutiny.

"Where we really need radical action is to keep people in their jobs, so we're disappointed that the Government didn't take up our proposal to get to the heart of the credit crisis and underwrite lending to businesses."

Jonathan Isaby

Interest rate decision

The Bank of England has just cut interest rates by 1% to 2%.

This puts them at their lowest level since September 1939, according to Sky News or 1951, according to the BBC.

It follows last month's cut of 1.5%.

12.30pm Ian McCafferty, the CBI Chief Economic Adviser gave his reaction as follows:

“The economy needs a significant monetary stimulus and the Bank has clearly decided this will be best achieved by another big cut in interest rates. What is critical for business and consumers alike is that this reduction is passed on. The economy is stalling, inflation is expected to undershoot the Bank’s own target and the headline RPI rate of inflation is likely to turn negative for at least a few months in 2009. We need to see lending improve and to keep business working.”

12.45pm Reaction from George Osborne:

”We have called for active monetary policy to tackle the recession so I welcome this bold move by the Bank of England. Sadly there couldn't be a clearer sign of just how sick the British economy is under Labour's recession. Gordon Brown's claim just a few weeks ago that Britain was well prepared now lies in tatters. It's essential not only that the rate cut is passed on by the banks, but that the government also takes action to get lending flowing to businesses. That's why we proposed the National Loan Guarantee Scheme to keep thousands of people in work."

Government accused of dithering over Heathrow

The Department for Transport has let it be know this morning that it is delaying the announcement on the future expansion (or not) of Heathrow Airport until the New Year (see BBC report here).

This has prompted shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers to accuse the Government of "dithering" in the following statement, which she has just issued:

"Gordon Brown is dithering on the future of Heathrow. He’s been saying for months that the Government would make a decision on Heathrow this year. First it was the Summer, then December, now it's slipped again. They are in disarray on this issue, with over 50 Labour backbenchers backing a Commons motion opposing Government policy.

"Opposition to a third runway is gathering momentum every day. I suspect this postponement is an indication that Gordon Brown is finally starting to realise that he is on the wrong side of the debate on Heathrow. We need to make Heathrow better not bigger and the best way to do that is to provide a high speed rail alternative to thousands of short haul flights now contributing to the overcrowding problems at the airport."

The decision from the Government is all the more remarkable since Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon declared in the Commons as recently as 25th November that an announcement would be made "before Christmas".

The original tax bombshell broadcast

John Major's 1992 tax bombshell broadcast was one of the most successful of modern times and helped propel the Conservatives to an unexpected victory over Neil Kinnock. Most political enthusiasts still remember the 'bombshell' part of this broadcast but most of the five minutes was taken up by a look at the implications for homemakers and workers of Labour's '£1,000 tax bombshell'.

Watching it again I am struck by just how accurate the video has turned out to be.

I am very grateful to the Conservative Party Archive for allowing us to publish this broadcast which hasn't been on YouTube until today.

Tomorrow we'll be publishing the famous 'John Major, the movie' broadcast from the same year.

Tim Montgomerie

Did Obama really brand David Cameron "a lightweight"?

Today's New Statesman contain an article (not yet online) in which it is suggested that after meeting David Cameron in London in July, the now President-elect described the Tory leader as "a lightweight".

Its author James McIntyre suggests:

"On meeting Cameron, Obama was, according to diplomatic sources, “distinctly unimpressed”, contrary to some reports (excitedly spun by the Conservatives) which suggested that the two men had formed an instant “bond”. Instead, I have been told, Obama exclaimed of Cameron after their meeting: “What a lightweight!” He apparently also asked officials about Tory Euroscepticism. Soon, word about the rather awkward encounter between the two self-professed candidates of change made its way quietly round the upper echelons of Whitehall."

If this is true, I find it astounding that it has taken nearly six months to reach the public domain. Furthermore, the video footage of the two men at that meeting suggested to me that the pair were not only very comfortable in each other's company (unlike the Brown/Obama encounter) but, dare I say it, that they could do business in the (now highly likely) event of them both leading their respective countries in the not too distant future.

Do you think the New Statesman account rings true?

Jonathan Isaby

Government and banks agree up-to-two-year mortgage holiday if you lose your job

The FT has more.  Reaction to follow.

10.15am Thursday: Dizzy examines the positive publicity that has greeted Brown's proposal but doubts whether it is quite as Brown has presented it.

Highlights of David Cameron's response to Queen's speech

Not verbatim:

Despite the best efforts of the Government Damian Green MP is here in the Commons today.

We have a right to know that the Home Office is riddled with illegal immigrants and that the Home Office - not the Government Whip's Office - is studying the voting behaviour of Labour MPs.

If the approach taken against Damian Green was pursued when the Prime Minister was in opposition he'd have spent a lot of time in prison.  He received leak after leak.  What the people want to know is if the Prime Minister has the courage to defend the integrity of the Commons and the right to question Government.  It's time for him to come off the fence.

Ten minutes after getting up to speak Mr Cameron turns to the issues raised in the Queen's Speech.

Mr Cameron says any increase in UK troops in Afghanistan must be accompanied by a much greater commitment from other NATO nations.

We welcome the NHS Constitution, the independent exam regulator, more security for ports and airports and greater police accountability - all Conservative ideas.  The PM says we have no substance.  Without Tory substance there'd be nothing worth having in this Queen's Speech.

More maintenance grants for students, EcoTowns and more powers for parliament to question the executive - again and again the Prime Minister promises things but doesn't deliver them.

There is no social reform or public service reform in this Queen's Speech.

And let's look at Labour's economic record. No prudence - we have the largest deficit in the developed world. No stability - with unemployment rising. No end to boom and bust - but the biggest bust because we had a debt-fuelled boom.

The real division between the parties is not, as the Prime Minister likes to pretend, between action and inaction but between the right action and the wrong action.  The right action includes the kind of insurance for bank lending that Conservatives announced last week.  We need a long-term plan to bring the public finances under control and reduce the long-term demands on government.

The Prime Minister constantly assumes that the British people are stupid; that they won't realise that large tax rises are going to be necessary to fill the black hole in the public finances or that every economic problem in Britain is all America's fault.  As long as he treats them as fools they'll never accept him as their Prime Minister.

The Sergeant-at-Arms can't have ever watched Juliet Bravo

Anyone who has ever watched a TV cops drama knows that you ask the police for a warrant when they turn up to search your premises.  It is totally unacceptable for the Sergeant-at-Arms not to have asked that basic question.

Michael Martin: Police entered Commons without warrant, Sergeant-at-Arms rather than Speaker consented to search

Highlights, not verbatim:

2.30pm: I did not want to make comment about "grave" matters surrounding arrest of the Member for Ashford, Damian Green to anyone other than the House.

Today I do not intend to comment on the allegations facing Mr Green.

Parliamentary privilege has never prevented the operation of the criminal law.

The precincts of the House cannot and should not be a haven from the law.

The Metropolitan Police informed the Sergeant-at-Arms that an arrest of a Damian Green was possible last week.

I was not told that the police did not have a warrant.  The police did not tell the Sergeant that there was a right to object.

I regret that a consent form was then signed by the Sergeant without alerting the Clerk.

I never personally authorised the search of the office.

In future a warrant will always be required for a search and my personal approval will be required.

A new protocol will be released formalising this.

I am establishing a committee of seven senior MPs to investigate this matter and there will be a debate in the Commons next Monday.

2.40pm: Michael Howard rises to make a point of order - calling the arrest of Damian Green an "attack" on parliament - and calls for freedom in next Monday's debate to question Government Ministers and House authorities.

2.42pm: Ming Campbell rises to ask if the new Speaker's committee will examine the behaviour of the police as well as the House authorities.

2.45pm: John Reid rises to say that the Speaker's inquiry must also ensure that MPs are not protected from proper police enquiries.

2.46pm: Damian Green rises to say that an MP who exposes government failings should not be treated the same as an MP who endangers national security.

2.47pm: Iain Duncan Smith expresses concerns that the Government should not be able to draft a motion next Monday that prejudices the terms of the debate.

2.50pm: Douglas Hogg says it is a "scandal" and "deplorable" that Commons authorities had a right to refuse request to search Commons office.

5.30pm VIDEO of Michael Martin's statement.

"The first thing I want to talk to you about today is the Queen's Speech. I've read it, but I can't tell you what's in it - as I would be arrested."

So an "upbeat" David Cameron joked at a meeting of Tory MPs ahead of today's debate on the Queen's speech and, more newsworthily, the Speaker's statement on the police raid on Damian Green's Commons office.  Dizzy may not be impressed; he's already worried that last night's Tory video is in danger of belittling the seriousness of the Green affair.

Benedict Brogan blogs that the Tory whips are determined to stop "hotheads" from getting too excited today:

"Various big beasts gathered with David Cameron last night to discuss tactics for today, and agreed that the hotheads should be locked up and kept out of sight, leaving the way clear for calmer heads to take the lead this afternoon."

It is widely reported that two of those calmer heads will be Michael Howard and Ken Clarke.  They are expected to lead questioning of Michael Martin when he makes his 2.30pm statement should Mr Speaker not provide a satisfactory explanation and announce a debate on what happened.  The latest buzz is that he'll find time for a debate tomorrow.

Meanwhile The Times' Sam Coates suggests that The Speaker had no powers to prevent the police from entering the parliamentary estate.

And from the red corner Lord Mandelson is leading a Labour fightback, more-or-less accusing the Conservatives of a conspiracy to break the law.  Iain Dale has the story.

ConservativeHome will be liveblogging the Speaker's statement at 2.30pm and, later in the afternoon, David Cameron's response to the Queen's Speech.  Stay tuned!

Credit crunch hits CCHQ

No organisation is immune from the recession and ConservativeHome has learnt that 16 to 24 jobs are likely to be lost at CCHQ in coming weeks.  Staff were informed yesterday.

The difficult financial climate - and recent (probably temporary) slippage in the polls - has hit fundraising and forced CCHQ to take a close look at how it uses all resources.

In addition to the redundancies we also understand that there will be a pay and hiring freeze across CCHQ.

A spokesman told ConservativeHome that there is never an ideal time to tell people that they will be losing their jobs and before Christmas is a particularly difficult time but the decision was taken to inform people now rather than later.

We wish all those losing their jobs the very best in finding new employment.

Thursday, 5pm: The Guardian now has more on the scale of the financial retrenchment at CCHQ.

Will an economic recovery produce a political recovery for Labour?

In short, no.

YouGov's Peter Kellner noted (at a Conference I attended on Saturday) that Labour hopes that its political fortunes will start to recover late next year as the economy recovers.  There are four main reasons why I don't expect that to happen (or why it won't matter):

• The recession - or at least very tough economic times - are still likely to be evident at the end of 2009.  Hat-tip to Andrew Lilico.
• It's far from clear that Labour will get any kudos for recovery.  International factors and Bank of England interest rate cuts are just as likely to be credited.
• Even if the recovery is underway we'll still have Labour's huge borrowing and the beginning of the tax rises that Labour have pre-announced.
• Labour will - by the end of 2009 - be in a much worse electoral position than now.  We'll have had twelve months of job losses and repossessions. The PBR was Brown's last, best chance and he blew it. The Tory lead in the ConHome poll of polls is currently 7.4%.  It will be a lot larger by this time next year.

These - and Brown's mishandling of issues like Baby P and Damian Green's arrest - are why I am more sure than ever that the Conservatives will win the next General Election.

Tim Montgomerie

There is no 'Letwin waste review'

Questioned on Friday by ConservativeHome, David Cameron dismissed The Sunday Telegraph's recent suggestion that Oliver Letwin was conducting a new review into public sector waste.  I often read stories that have a detached relationship to reality, was the Tory leader's response to our question.

ConservativeHome was encouraged by the news at the time but the Shadow Chancellor's office assured us yesterday that there remained a strong commitment to find economies in the public sector.  We were told that the situation remains as set out by David Cameron in May.  George Osborne remains in charge of attempts to bring spending under control but works closely with relevant colleagues including Oliver Letwin, who oversees the overall policy process.  The Tories are looking to reduce the size of government in three main ways:

1. Eliminating waste and unnecessary programmes;
2. Getting better value for money via public sector reform (an issue addressed on CentreRight yesterday by Professor Nick Bosanquet).
3. A reduction in the long-term demands on the taxpayer by undertaking thorough social reform - including strengthening families, cutting welfare dependency and defeating drug addiction.

We were told that a 'big bang' announcement of public sector savings was unlikely.  More likely would be a continuation of one-off announcements where tax reforms would be presented alongside the savings to pay for them.

Speaking at a seminar hosted by the Reform think tank, Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Philip Hammond dampened hopes that actual cuts in overall public spending were possible.  A cut in the overall level of public spending would be “politically extremely difficult".  "I don’t think it’s ever been done for a sustained period,” he continued.

ConservativeHome's view: "The Conservative leadership needs to understand that higher taxes to pay for an unreformed state will also be politically extremely difficult.  Although the scale of Labour's borrowing means that tax rises cannot be ruled out, it is certainly not the case that Britain is under-taxed.  Before we're willing to accept tax rises from an incoming Tory government we need to be convinced that everything possible has been done to end the misspending of this incompetent Labour government.  [That's our answer to your reasonable question, Danny Finkelstein]. Again and again the Tory frontbench have talked about "unfunded tax cuts" but everything is unfunded until you choose priorities.  The problem - until recently - has been the Tory leadership's inclination to prioritise unfunded public spending before unfunded tax cuts.  Surrounded by spokesmen for high spending ministries that's always where the political pressure is greatest and why the work of The TaxPayers' Alliance could not be more important."

Good council tenants should be helped to own their homes, recommends IDS

A wide-ranging report from Iain Duncan Smith's Centre for Social Justice think tank warns today that many social housing estates have degenerated into often violent and dysfunctional "ghettoes" and calls for urgent remedial action.  IDS writes of estates "where worklessness, dependency, family breakdown and addiction are endemic".

Central to the CSJ's action plan are rewards for tenants that are socially constructive.  Here is the key section of the report:

"We encourage an incoming government to look at releasing some of the value in social housing to sitting tenants who pay their own rent and make a contribution to the community. This could take the form of a  discount on the purchase price for those moving to outright or shared ownership.

However, the most radical approach is also the most important. We recommend that economic analysis be  commissioned into the rewarding of constructive behaviour in the community, including, but not limited to, a  genuine effort on the part of a social housing tenant to find work, by giving social housing tenants increasingly larger equity stakes in the home.

Having a stake in a home is both a privilege and a responsibility. It would inculculate the values of constructive social behaviour and create, from the vicious cycle, a virtuous cycle, that encourages social housing tenants to improve their own family’s future."

As Harry Phibbs has already noted, the report seeks to end the “stifling requirement” that social housing tenancy be secure for life.  Instead local authorities should be freed up to adapt tenure agreements to meet the needs and aspirations of clients.

> Download PDF summarising recommendations of report