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

Comments

[Icarus]

Wonder if Cameron will say anything about Shane Prescott? Three years and he cant ask basic questions about people featured in his PPB. Not very impressive.

[Westminster Wolf]

Cameron is mainly the beneficiary of disappointment with Labour.

I have never met one person who is excited at the prospect of him being Prime Minister.

That does not mean he won't be a good occupier of No.10 but the Hiltonistas should not overstate their success.

[David Galea]

He'll start off as popular as end of career Blair and end as popular as start of career Blair.

[Raj]

I have never met one person who is excited at the prospect of him being Prime Minister.

I have, and I'm not talking about non-Tory members too.

[Raj]

Ugh, I meant "and I'm not talking about Tory members".

[Edward Huxley]

He failed to carry out the promise wnich helped his election to the leadership that Tory MEPs would leave the federalist EPP and refuses to say that a future Tory government would give us a referendum on the Constitution/Treaty whether or not it has been ratified.

Nuff said,I think.

[Votedave]

I don't buy this argument that the Conservatives have only done well in recent years because of Labour's failures - because otherwise the LibDems would also be benefitting - polling consistently between 20-25%.

As some of you will have gathered from my posts here, Webcameron and elsewhere, I have strongly supported David Cameron since the day he became Leader. He has been a superb leader of our party and I am also confident he will be a great Prime Minister. He has been able to achieve more for us than any of his three predeceasors by taking us to the centre ground.

He has been able to get us our best opinion poll leads for 40 years, greatly strengthen our representation in local government and help oust Ken Livingstone to make Boris Johnson elected Mayor of London. Whatever the polls have said over the past month, Brown Bounces don't last forever and we're still maintaining the lead Margaret Thatcher was not always able to do when she was Opposition Leader in 1977/1978 (and she still went on to become PM, of course).

David Cameron deserves our strong support and is the only man who can defeat Gordon Brown and save us from ID cards, broken promises on referendums, reckless borrowing, targeting and health and safety red tape.

My message - get your shoulders behind the wheels and support David Cameron - or be faced with yet another 5 years of Labour government.

[Tina Charles]

Lets be real, the reason we are ahead in the polls is the dissapointment with Labour. This is now disolving as the voters are now deciding to stick with the devil they know, see the fall in our lead, because we are offering them nothing real to be enthusiatic to vote for us and his refusal to move Osbourne will be very costly. Im very afraid Labour are going to win next time out of default, that we are offering the electorate nothing at a time when the media has yet again turned on Brown.

Then again if we were to get in that would also be default as you can see by the questions in the polls they are not enthusiastic about us.Even though we are in a recession they still trust Brown/Darling above Cameron and Osbourne, what does that tell you about our performance recently.

You have to be real here, Cameron has blew our chance of a landslide, even worse he may have handed it back to Labour.

This pains me to say, but Brown might actually win next time due to our timidity.

[Andy]

"He failed to carry out the promise wnich helped his election to the leadership that Tory MEPs would leave the federalist EPP and refuses to say that a future Tory government would give us a referendum on the Constitution/Treaty whether or not it has been ratified.

Nuff said,I think."

Posted by: Edward Huxley | December 06, 2008 at 12:33

Fascinating. So what you're saying, is that his entire leadership period should be judged on the basis of one relatively trivial, internal party matter? Hardly the big picture, is it?

[Geoff Middleton]

I think of championing a more diverse slate of parliamentary candidates

By positive discrimination - let's have the best candidate for the job irrespective of
gender or race, eh?

opposition to new grammar schools

Thereby ensuring that social mobility is ended. Grammar schools are best at facilitating that.

ending the patient passport and all that it meant

It meant that money that would otherwise have been spent on operations would now go to be swallowed up in full measure by the great bureaucracy of the NHS.

opposition to "unfunded" tax cuts

Opposition to trimming the vast wastage in public expenditure, you mean.

abandoning sympathy for ID cards and championing civil liberties

We'll see about that one, I'm not convinced.

not "obsessing" about Europe

You mean not uttering a squeak about the EU (not Europe) which now runs (ruins) our lives, and not promising a referendum on the Lisbon Constitution?

and taking green positions on, for example, a third runway for Heathrow and
expanding rail travel

And supporting the hoax of AGW, and installing a windmill on his house (has anyone enquired just how much electricity his windmill produces?), and hugging huskies etc.
All vacuous, yet dangerous, and vote-losing, nonsense. Wonder what type of focus group he asked before embarking on all this green wingnuttery?
Friends of the Earth? Greenpeace?
There was also the abject failure to censure his friend Zac Goldsmith for his endorsing of the law-breaking Greenpeace goons.

Overall Cameron has been a huge disappointment, failing to land any knockout blows on Brown, and only benefitting from Brown's incredible unpopularity.

[Ian Bennett]

Tina

I have to agree.

In 1996 Bliar was regularly leading the Laour Party to Poll Ratings in excess of 60% against Major's Tory Party.

I dont believe Major was any more popular than Brown is - what I do believe is that Cameron has never connected with Middle England and the North Of England in the same was as Blair did with the Nation.

Our Poll ratings are basically stagnant around 42-43% - the wings recently between a 1% and a 10% lead are more to do with fluctuations in Labours vote than anything we have done.

Camerom is seen by too many people outside of the South South/East as aloof,arrogant and NOT in tune with their world.It is NOT his fault where and how he was brought - up - however imho he has exacerbated the issue by surrounding himself with the Bullingson set - this is further amplified whenever they see Boris -

I genuinely believe we are in trouble in the next election until or unless Cameron bites the bullet and brings EXPERIENCE in to his Shadow Cabinet - we need DD,Clarke,Redwood,Howard,ID-S fighting from WITHIN Cabinet as full time Shadow Ministers - not on the fringes on committees who 2 years on have still to actually prodiuce much other than sound-bite politics.

DC has got to remove the deadwood to move to the next and crucial phase of the plan i.e winning the election - Spelman,Osborne,Lansley,Letwin and Hague(unless he can commit FULL-TIME) ARE SIMPLY NOT PERFORMING OR BEING OUT-PERFORMED - at a time when we should be moulding,shaping,forming and leading the political debate and be well over 50% in the Polls.

My fear is that having skipped a generation we may have a young Leader with his best days behind him - shades I'm afraid of William Hague!

[Gareth]

In my view the three low points were:
-'grammargate' (summer 2007) which led to a sudden plummet in party morale just as Brown came to office, almost leading to a General Election
-the A list (spring 2006) which, together with other attempts at changing the candidate selection process led to significant disquiet among the grassroots and has led to man very able members to question if their gender and skin colour and not their ability will prevent them from having a political career
-the anti-travel policies (summer 2008 to present) espoused by the Shadow Transport team which seems to be to object to absolutely every proposal made, refuse to oppose a 112.5% tax hike on travel and has forced the creation of a new grassroots lobby group that campaigns on something the party has always supported for years

The three high points have been:
-the transition towards governance and the way the party is acting like an alternative government. for too long opposition parties have merely tried to offend as few people as possible and hope they get elected, whereas Cameron has put himself in the position of being able to actually deal with the tiresome and largely unappreciated task of actually running the country
-the honest approach. while spin, control and treating people like fools is still present within a minority in the party, the leadership has been noticably more relaxed about internal party debate which has in turn nurtured ideas. Cameron gives the impression of welcoming those who disagree with him (as evidenced by his apparant support of platforms such as conservativehome.com) - this is a huge change from the Blair doctrine
-huge electoral successes. the conservatives dominate in numbers if not in policy (thanks to an in-built lefty bias and the tendancy of many of our own people to go native) the actions of many town halls, the GLA and the victories in by-elections

My top 3 hopes for the next year:
-a thorough clearing out of the weak members of the shadow front bench. some need to be re-shuffled but a few need to be shuffled out completely. the front bench needs to be ready to go head to head with an army of Labour-dominated civil servants upon taking power and manage huge government departments. there are some PPCs who would be stronger than some current front benchers as government ministers despite the lack of parliamentary experience - this does not bode well for a government in waiting
-the thorough clearing out of some of the weaker parliamentary candidates who are likely to get elected next time. the next parliamentary party has to be as strong as possible, and carrying dozens of people purely because at the time of selection, in some cases two and a half years ago, they were inoffensive and uncontroversial, will not make for a good parliamentary party in 3 years time
-a thorough, objective look at party policy in light of the economic circumstances. many of the committments we have made before do not necessarily apply today and we should be willing to re-consider some of these things, as we did with the committment to match Labour spending. the party needs to ensure that simplification of pretty much everything the government does is at the heart of policy, and grasp every opportunity to build for the future so that when the economy starts to recover, the UK is best placed to capitalise on that. this may mean flatter, massively flattened taxes, it may mean approving private infrastructure projects and 'getting on with it' for once - but there has never been a better time to re-consider the policies we have already revealed to ensure that they meet the world as it is today

[Peter Buss]

VoteDave in my view is entirely right. With all other Leaders post 1997 the voters dissatisfied with Labour have always moved to the Lib/Dems.The geat achievment of Cameron is to have stopped that trend by occupying the Centre Right ground.

It seems to me that what some want him to do is to abandon that ground and luch to the Right - sheer stupidity as we would then drop back to 33% in the Polls.

It is crucial that Cameon in these harsh economic times shows that whilsst sticking to Conservative principles our vision does actually include caring about people and not just standing oon the sidelines and let everything happen.

[Sally Roberts]

"Nuff said,I think."

Quite agree Edward! Now haven't you got a mountain to go and climb along with David_at_Home? :-)

[Sally Roberts]

Andy you are quite correct - it IS only one little part of the big picture and the big picture is that David Cameron has changed the face of Conservativism and modernised the Party. New people are being attracted all the time; people who would never have voted Conservative. It is wrong to say that people are not excited at the prospect of a David Cameron Government. I have come across many extremely enthusiastic people and as someone else has already said - not necessarily members of the Conservative Party! I would include members of my own family and non-political friends.

[Sally Roberts]

ugh! Conservatism, not "Conservativism"!!! I think I need a large drink....

[Edward Huxley]

Andy, if you think the points I mentioned are just minor internal matters - two not one incidentally, many will disagree. He made a clear declaration about the EPP and like Hague, dodges the referendum question. We are fed up with hearing "We will not leave it there". Nice chap I`m sure and his Eton background doesn`t worry me in the slightest, but Prime Minister material? Afraid not.

[Sally Roberts]

Edward....one more question before you head off up the mountain.... Who WOULD you like to see as Prime Minister? Please don't say Mr Farage...please!

[Mark Hudson]

I saw an old friend of mine for lunch on Wednesday. Like me he is in his late 30s and has been an activist and member at all levels of the Party for nearly 20 years , but - unlike me - remains a member of the Party and on the Candidates' List. It was fascinating to hear someone even on the inside who fails to be enthused by the Cameron project. Particularly how weak the Conservatives now are on economic and financial matters with their woeful response to current events.

For myself, I have always somewhat understood what Dave has been doing at a tactical rather than ideological level, although it's simply just never been for me. The fact that Blair managed to turn the Conservative Party into a Social Democratic, rather than Thatcherite one was probably his most lasting achievement. Cameron is simply operationalising that change.

Whilst the likelihood of a Conservative Government is still moderately high (although a great deal less than it was 6m ago), I think the lack of enthusiasm and regionality of the Party's support is quite striking as the continuing collapse of the Party's associations even in safe seats shows. We live in interesting and very fluid political times.

[Ian Bennett]

Sally

simple answer - David Davis!

A man of principle,of backbone,of political experience,a man who CAN connect with Britain - rather than just parts of it.

I fundamentally disagree that DC has enthused Britain - he CANT enthuse the Conservative Party.

Membership in my local area is DOWN 40% in the 3 years since he became Leader - evidenced by nationally 350,000 members fully paid up under ID-S now just under 200,000....

Michael Ashcroft aside the Party is almost penniless...no wonder with 150,000 x annual subs and 150,000 x fundraisers having been LOST under DC....

I fear I genuinely fear we are like a shiny veneered table with woodworm endemic in the legs...

Things on the inside,amongst the core support is NOT good.....

This could be the LOST OPPORTUNITY not just for a decade but for a generation....or worse...

5 more years of Brown,5 more years of declining membership....5 more years of age on our core membership...does NOT BODE WELL!

[Edward Huxley]

Surprise Sally. Not Mr.Farage as Prime Minister, though he might make a good Foreign Minister under a real Conservative P.M. Just waiting for one to turn up.
Any suggestions?

[meli]

I have never met one person who is excited at the prospect of him being Prime Minister.

I am not a member of the Conservative party. As I mentioned elsewhere I have always considered myself/been accused of being quite liberal. Yet I am eager for Cameron to be Prime Minister.

[Sally Roberts]

"Any suggestions?"

David Cameron! Just a thought...

[Mark Hudson]

David Cameron is a Social Democrat, not a Conservative.

[Richard North]

"Who WOULD you like to see as Prime Minister?"

Possibly, many might answer to that: "none of the above". There is a distinct lack of enthusiasm for politics and politicians in general and an extremely common refrain is that "they're all the same".

Part of that is the intuitive understanding that (British) politicians make very little difference to our lives.

And although many people do not fully understand the reasons why, the great invisible elephant of the EU is always looming in the background. Because it isn't talked about in "polite company" doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Another major issue is the political consensus on "global warming" - which, of course, has major EU links. The "street" reaction to this issue is more likely to be raucous laughter than anything else and there is huge resentment at the green taxes and top-loading of costs involved.

There is as much resentment that there is no political choice in this matter - all we are offered is different shades of green.

Altogether, therefore, the divide between "us and them" is as great as it has ever been – if not more so. This leaves the political classes largely talking to themselves, hearing the messages they want to hear, quite unaware of how detested they are.

I tried to get something of this feeling over in this piece, where I found it quite remarkable that someone like Anthony King should write: "Our scepticism about politicians has morphed into contempt".

You get a similar refrain from Charles Moore in his op-ed today in The Daily Telegraph, which again is surprising … that he of all people should have noticed.

What you don't get from the political classes, however, is any understanding that they, as a breed, are held in such contempt and, thus, no attempt whatsoever to deal with that problem.

This transcends party politics and is a malaise of the whole system. Until it is addressed, you will see nothing but increased detachment from the political process, and the concomitant build-up of resentment.

[Alan S]

David Cameron may have stopped obsessing about Europe but the folk on this thread haven't.

[Richard North]

And there speaks the "political class".

The European Union is part of our government ... in the areas of its "competences" it is our supreme government, with the government in London as a subordinate entity.

Thus to discuss our government is hardly obsessive. Not to discuss it at all (and to accuse those who do as "obsessing") speaks for itself.

[David Parker]

Alan S

Meaning that you don't think that being
ruled by Brussels rather than Westminster should be one of the most important issues for a Conservative Prime Minister ?

[Western Star]

Mr North, please would you define "the political classes".

[Patsy Sergeant]

I agree with Sally @ 13.44.

Richard North @ 14.15 - While a lot of what you say in your comment may well be true of quite a few of the general public, it doesn't help them at all, as what it appears to be advocating is no government at all, or PR which even it worked would take some time - in a practical sense, to set up. Your comment:-

'Part of that is the intuitive understanding the (British) politicians make very little difference to our lives.'

Firstly, are you suggesting that non-British - Foreign politicians WOULD make a difference to our lives, Mr. Brown and Mr. Mandelson would, no doubt thank you for that!
Secondly, if you really think that policians have made very little difference to our lives over the last ten years, then you might not mind Brown getting in for another term, and I don't really believe that you would agree with that. For a start if he does, EVERYBODY will notice a far from pleasant change in their lives!

[David (One of many)]

Congratulations. Here's to many more.

I have my quibbles, like many other people. But the negativity about Cameron sometimes baffles me. I don't buy all this stuff about him not being a 'proper' Conservative at all; in fact, it seems clear to me that said values are at his heart. You only need to look at the conference speech this year to see that. There's a long way to go until and election, and we need work in some significant policy areas, but I'd be very, very happy with Cameron as PM.

[Mark Hudson]

I think for me as an ex Perty member: the high was the announcement on inheritance tax and the real low was using his children's education for political purposes. I have never trusted him seince.

[David Belchamber]

After David Cameron's response on Wednesday to the Queen's speech, I can certainly see him as the PM and he possibly has it in him to become a very good one with experience of the job.

However, he cannot succeed on his own and, as others have suggested, he needs a much more heavyweight cabinet to support him, especially on the economic front. That is where the next election is going to be won and lost.

He also needs some more policies (the EU is one glaring lacuna at the moment) - they need to be bold (especially on the economy) and have the long-term interests of the country in mind, not just designed to win the election.

[Sally Roberts]

"the real low was using his children's education for political purposes."

What a cheap comment, with all due respect! Don't tell me that you have never used any aspect of your life to make a political point. After all politics is about life and life experiences.

[Mark Hudson]

Sally, your comment is daft. Here's a man who is a multi-millionaire with an heiress for a wife who is sending his children to state schools to make a political point, rather than providing them with the best platform in life from which to start. Do you they will thank him for it in years to come?

And as for using my own life experiences for political purposes, the answer is no. I send my daughter to public school beause I want her to have a decent education. The politics of it does not enter my head. I went against my Association's Management Team when they sacked our Agent who was dying of cancer and she took them to an employment tribunal (and won) because it was the right thing to do.

How about having politicians who have some principles and integrity for once? Sorry, Dave does not remotely pass that test.

[NW Tory]

Ian Bennett wrote - "Membership in my local area is DOWN 40% in the 3 years since he became Leader - evidenced by nationally 350,000 members fully paid up under ID-S now just under 200,000...."

It is the same in my area. That's why we have so many young and inexperienced councillors and PPCs who could not run a party in a brewery. They have no idea how to improve efficiency, slash socialist spending and cut taxes.

Most of my colleagues with maturity and experience have left (to UKIP in many cases) in disgust or been forced out. The price of these lost members will be more job cuts, especially at local level, and marginal seats.

[m dowding]

Mark Hudson.

Loyalty to one's beliefs transcends, or should, personalities. An ex-member forfeits the right to pontificate. Quentin Davies and Shaun Woodward are good examples of disloyal, self-seeking individuals. I suggest you, Mr Hudson, are of a similar ilk. A true and intellectual political supporter does not change well thought out belief and creed because times get tough.
I work to promote my Conservative understanding of how a country should be and I care passionately about social justice and the disadvantaged, even underclass parts of our society. IDS has worked tirelessly in this field and this research has been an expensive contribution to our understanding of the awful nature some of our people are placed in. The Labour 11 years of "power" first, the Nation a poor second, has led to an abysmal level of education, a mass immigration failed policy, to the detriment of already overcrowded ghettos and a depression that will make the poor even worse off. 11 years and the mess makes the 1950s seem like nirvana. David Cameron and The Conservative Party offer the last chance to rescue this country from a slum of totalitarian despair and third world, poverty stricken debt. God only help us if a Cameron Premiership does not come to pass.

[I Albion]

Have just listened to Camerons speech in N Ireland, I was waiting for "I don't want to be just PM of England"but he managed not to say it.
Perhaps he realises if anyone is going to save him it will be the English voters
But then again perhaps they wont.

[Patsy Sergeant]

Mark Hudson @ 17.42 - So! He's a multi-millionaire - so he fails - in your eyes, he sends his children to a state school, so it must be for political reasons, of course if he sent them to a PRIVATE junior school, THAT would be wrong too - Oh you WOULD find a reason!

'Principles' and 'integrity', Mr. Brown definitely thinks that he has both principles AND integrity, only OTHER people have different ideas.

Unfortunately there isn't a golden scale of fixed principles and integrity, what someone believes in, somebody else thinks is crap.

Of course there is good and evil, and stealing and not stealing, but you know perfectly well it doesn't work like that in politics like last weekend! And no matter how much you idealism drives you to feel that the politics has to be perfect to your formula or it doesn't work at all!

Perhaps whast you want to believe in is somebody that WINS, like the rest of us!

[Malcolm Dunn]

The best leader by far since Margaret Thatcher. The more people see of Cameron the more ,generally, they like him.
It hasn't all been plain sailing, the A list has failed absolutely to broaden the base of Conservative candidates and I thought he handled the Grammar school issue badly but the positives far, far outweigh the negatives .

[Mark Fulford]

Hazel was absolutely charming...

I can only imagine that you'd had eight pints.

[Yet Another Anon]

because otherwise the LibDems would also be benefitting
The Liberal Democrats were lost after the General Election, they fell off the wave they had been cruising on the Iraq War, they finally realised that Charles Kennedy wasn't much good as a leader and forced him out, Menzies Campbell took over at a difficult time when the party was in decline and after years of illness he is way past his best, then he was ditched, the following leadership election was rather tweedledum and tweedledee, it has to be the said that the more lifeless one won it because of a vague hope of a clone of Cameron, Nick Clegg is hardly a very inspiring or imaginative person - Charles Kennedy drunk is probably not as bad as Nick Clegg sober. So the fact is that it is amazing that the Liberal Democrats aren't doing much worse given their total failure to get their act together.

[pp]

I don't think Cameron is perfect - far from it - however he is easily more than good enough.

My main significant comment is that I would prefer a much clearer explaination of how each decision has been/is influenced by tory principals.

A pledge-card kind of think establishing his overriding principals would be good. (who cares what Mandleson says -- it rarely reveals what he thinks).

Go Dave! - Great work, great team.

(but dont forget to pull out of the EPP, be dryer, cut taxes etc etc)

[Sally Roberts]

"Oh you WOULD find a reason!"

Yes, Patsy I am afraid he would!

Oh and incidentally, St Mary Abbots School in Kensington where David Cameron's daughter goes is not just any old state school but an extremely good one.

It is not always necessary to spend thousands of pounds to get a good education. It just so happens that the Camerons are fortunate enough to live in a good Conservative borough where schools are good.

[Mark Hudson]

Well, where do I start?

M Dowding. I remained in the party for 20 years, even through the Major premiership (strong candidate for worst PM of modern times) and many dark days from 1997 to 2005. I left because the Conservative Party changed, not me. And also when a few vindictive people in my Conservative Association hounded out the Agent whilst she was dying of cancer - nice people, eh? How's that for your idea of social justice?

In addition, I can hardly be accused of being self-seeking, since I have absolutely no desire whatsoever to seek public office. I would, though, like to see my country well and effectively governed - which it is most certainly not at the moment. No-one would be more thrilled than I if Dave and Gideon offered a serious, intellectually robust right wing alternative, as opposed to a Social Democratic one.

To Mesdames Roberts and Sergeant, you can't seriously believe that Dave is sending his children to a state school to save a few pennies? To do so would mean you are clearly rather stupid and gullible, and your many contributions suggest that you are neither. My point is more that if he's willing to sacrifice his children's education for his political future that hardly augurs well for other decisions were he to occupy No.10.

[Matt Wright]

The big problem that we had as a party some years back was that too many people didn't think we cared about them or public services. We tended to come across as knowing the cost of everything but the value of nothing. We also looked old as a party and obsessed with limited issues. It was almost as if we wanted to go backwards and we didn't talk positively about the future. Cameron brought in changes that made us look more modern, more caring, broader and more appealing to floating voters who had broader interests and were worried about hospitals and schools as well as other issues.

We tend to forget just how far we have come. There is no doubt that we have benefited from Labour becoming more unpopular but the many floating voters that came to us in polls, by-elections and council elections, would not have done so if we hadn't changed and didn't have a charismatic, forward looking leader like Cameron. He has bought us the right to be heard.

In a strange way we have been victims of our own success, by this summer we were well ahead in the polls and people saw us as the Govt in waiting. They tended therefore to have high expectations of us releasing policies and addressing issues that are hard to act upon when you are in opposition.

That said we have been at our most effective when we have had a good run of focused activity centred on issues people care about - eg police, hospitals, taxes etc. When we have also explained the theme that holds them together this has helped enormously eg social responsibility (although those words are not the best). People then had some insight into what we stand for. Cameron has also looked most effective when he has been leading and assertive - eg taking on Brown over the cancelled election, taxes on the low paid, Baby P, tax bombshell etc.

I think some posters on this site are overly negative all the time. We are ahead in the polls and we are listened to. If the analogy was climbing we are about half way up the mountain with the steep section to the summit in front of us. Our opposition is now behind us but still in view. We need now to decide on the team who will make the final ascent, the process we will use and the key messages. We also need to show some grit as we make that final climb so we march away from the opposition and demonstrate to people that not only are we worth listening to but that we care passionately and want the best for the future.

[Dave J]

"I have never met one person who is excited at the prospect of him being Prime Minister."

The prospect of Browm NOT being PM should be enough to get anyone with half a brain excited. I supported Davis, but Cameron has pleasantly surprised me. I think he's grown a great deal in three years, and while I doubt he'll be a great PM, I do think he'll be a good one.

[Patsy Sergeant]

Matt Wright @ 20.30 - I would go for your last paragraph!

I suppose the phrase 'Everybody loves a winner' is a 'truism', and I suppose that a goodly number of people who comment on this website, long to be able to rally round a winner - if the truth were known!

Mark Hudson @ 20.02 - I did not say that I thought that Mr. Cameron was sending his child to a state school 'to save a few pennies' did I?? I did NOT make a judgement at all, since I did not wish to; Sally says it is a good state primary school, but you would probably even have a criticism of that as a reason. You have no proof that Cameron decided on this action solely for political purposes, and even if you did have - then what?? We are up against THE most corrupt government this country has ever had, who if they have their way, after the next election will certainly stifle any complaints about themselves.

But you prefer to talk-down Mr. Cameron, whom even the lefties would probably agree has achieved more than any other conservative politician in recent years. He may not be idealisticly perfect - who is, but he seems to instil loyalty, and people seem to like him very much. Even Blair couldn't character assassinate him, as he did other shadow Tory leaders. But DC has had to learn to withstand a vast amount of sh*t and poison, since being leader, I am sure it has made him stronger and more determined. AND he is learning on the job, he hasn't had TEN years 'next door' where he could have learned what the job required...........

[The Bishop Swine]

"I have never met one person who is excited at the prospect of him being Prime Minister.

I have, and I'm not talking about non-Tory members too."

We have already won the war of ideas it is now a case of having some! Really the slate is clean, Maggot is behind us and "DAVE" is still ahead of us. I think that we need to come up with micro-management style answers to policy, we will have to marry what is possible to what is expectable. I think we can truly trust that DC is up to the job.
We will of course have to cut like it was going out of fashion, and IT may have to be a tighter and slimmer work force to start the upswing. The Damage has been done the overspend was a gross out, Labour are in too much of a hurry, they are running away from a simple truth and that is the rub, you must live within your means

[Anthony Scholefield]

Amusingly Obama sends his daughters to one of the most exclusive private fee-paying schools in America without a peep from the Left.

[Henry Mayhew - ukipper]

I would like to see Nigel Farage become Prime Minister.

Great post by Geoff Middleton.

[liz kemp]

The main problem is that we the public only have a "potted " version of our political leaders seen through the eyes of the media. The editing of all reports has a powerful influence on our interpretation of events. This is Cameron`s greatest difficulty. I saw his response to the Queen`s speech and he showed complete command of the occasion and having very strong leadership qualities contrasting totally with the weak and feeble response of Brown. But was there any full coverage by our "public service "media.... BBC?? Not one clip. Cameron has huge potential to become a leader that this country so desperately needs. All this mess over the "Green "affair where no-one can be held responsible simply highlights this lack of leadership and control. We are running about like headless chickens and some of the petty comments above sadly demonstrate this very seriously
liz kemp

[anonymous coward]

Liz Kemp is right about the media. It is a big problem.

I was on holiday on the day of the State Opening of Parliament and I watched it all. Then I watched the edited bits on the news and I hardly recognised it.

Our media has an insidious left wing bias.

In my area I am doing some work on revealing the left wing bias in our local press by focusing on their reporting of specific incidents and after months of research it seems to be bearing fruit I think.

[Jack Stone]

David Cameron as in recent weeks been shown to have simply no backbone. When it was needed for him to keep his nerve and not take the party to the right he lost his nerve and did just that.
He has not got the courage to lead the country I am afraid.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Jack why are you a Conservative?

[Votedave]

I can say with confidence that Nigel Farage will never become Prime Minister.

I thank those who happen to have a more negative attitude to David Cameron than myself if they have been constructive in their criticism. Downright negativity should be posted on another website. There's little on which I disagree with him - although I think the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly should be abolished before they do any more damage to our Union and continue to give Labour disproportionate political powers.

[dcj]

Came to this fascinating thread late, but here goes:-

On the subject of leaders:

Major - the less said the better. A **huge** disappointment

William Hague was our best leader since MT. Blair was on the crest of a wave: his undoubted charisma still had too many people hooked and the economy (thanks to Ken Clarke's golden legacy) was very strong. He is criticised for the 2001 election but at points during that campaign we were heading for equality (or worse) in terms of seats with the Lib(un)Dems. By motivating our core vote Hague saved us. I am only sorry he stood down, but his time may come again.

IDS is a decent man who was betrayed by his party. Those now screaming "Betrayal" if there is one breath of criticism of Our Glorious Dave are often the same ones who briefed against IDS, plotted against him and in the end knifed him.

Michael Howard did brilliantly. He fought a superb campaign in 2005, reduced Blair's majority by nearly 2/3rds, and, given a bit better luck and only a slightly bigger swing would have forced a hung parliament. (Don't forget Blair was hoping for a majority of 180) His one failing was his deciding to leave the Leadership, compounded by what I believe to be his tactical decision to ensure Mr Cameron and not David Davies won the leadership election.

Which leads us to Mr C. Much as I dislike his manner, his relatively left-wing approach, his greenery and his falling for the Global Warming scam, we have to recognise that the electorate has changed. They have had (now) eleven years of being bombarded with left-wing propaganda through the BlairBrown Broadcasting Corporation, and new voters who are 18 this year have have been brainwashed through their entire school careers with the "Substainability" agenda which has been completely hi-jacked by the Left. So in order for us to even think about being able to win I have to accept (very reluctantly) that Mr C has been correct to try to address the concerns of these voters. We will have a major task once in power to remove the sources of left-wing propaganda presented as fact.

I think Cameron has made mistakes. I think if he does win and governs - as seems likely - from the centre-left of the Party he will make more dreadful mistakes and will hand the country back to Labour. BUT HE IS THE BEST LEADER WE HAVE. An earlier entry on this thread reads "David Cameron and The Conservative Party offer the last chance to rescue this country from a slum of totalitarian despair and third world, poverty stricken debt. God only help us if a Cameron Premiership does not come to pass". As someone who does not like, or agree with, Mr C and his apparent policies I have to concur with this totally. We have one task: to win the election and get rid of Brown and ZaNuLab while we have the chance. Time afterwards to review how a Cameron govt progresses. U-turns in Govt are not unknown!