Steve Hilton, David Cameron's Director of Strategy, is subject to a strong attack in the latest edition of Standpoint magazine. The attack contains at least two inaccuracies in the first paragraph. It overstates his salary (although it is still very considerable) and suggests that he campaigned for Michael Portillo (not true).
But I don't want to get into a line-by-line examination of the piece. Steve Hilton brings two big advantages to the Cameron project:
- First, he guards and promotes its big idea - that the long-term health of our country depends upon a revitalisation of everything that lies between the individual and the state. Within the Cameron circle he defends and promotes the idea constantly. It's an idea I share. It's the big idea at the heart of Iain Duncan Smith's Centre for Social Justice. David Willetts called it civic conservatism. Oliver Letwin called it the neighbourly society. Chris Patten talked of bigger citizens and a smaller state. It's the conservatism of Burkean small platoons. The Berger-Neuhaus vision of people-sized institutions. Helping individuals off welfare; giving local people control of policing; strengthening genuinely local schools; helping families to stick together; a bigger role for voluntary organisations. The state has become so big in Britain because society is weak. As it has got bigger society has become weaker in a vicious cycle. There'll be neither social justice nor a smaller state if we can't find ways of making society stronger. That's the Hilton vision and its's fundamentally conservative.
- Second, he's more strategic than tactical. It's true he has constant brainwaves that flame brightly for a short period, that he wants implemented immediately and then often burn out. But many work and his overall disposition is to keep the Conservative Party committed to the long haul task of focusing on social renewal. David Cameron - like most party leaders - is surrounded by many tacticians. Hilton's big picture focus is rare and precious.
It's probably true that 'Early Cameron' relied too much on Steve Hilton. It's good that the Tory leader is now surrounded by a broader group of advisers, not least Andy Coulson who has led the evolution to a 'pub ready' operation. As 'Team Cameron' has become more balanced so, too, has the message broadened.
Steve has been in California for much of the last few months. He's in London for a week every month and will be here all through May for the European and local elections. His time abroad ends in July when he returns to Britain for good.
Tim Montgomerie
12.45pm: Robert Halfon's view
Tim, is there any truth to the whispering of replacing Steve with yourself?
Posted by: Oberon Houston | January 30, 2009 at 09:20
None whatsoever Oberon :-)
Posted by: Tim Montgomerie | January 30, 2009 at 09:36
Well I suppose he had to have one friend.
He has consistently missed the larger picture in favour of his "big idea". Tim has always supported the politics of And. Hilton has not. He has bent over backwards to dismiss and belittle the party's right wing and long term members in favour of parvenus like himself. It is his fault that CCHQ's appreciation of our disastrous economic situation has been so little and so late and that Brown has been given until relatively recently such an easy ride. Hilton filleted the fight out of the Conservative party. He has also been the leading opponent of any new or rigorous thinking on issues outside of his big idea and has ignored and dismissed anyone with ideas which he considers too "right wing".
It is tough to be on the wrong side of history. The economic blast has reduced his big idea to a sideshow - actually I agree with every part of it; its just not central to 2009.
However, with his salary we might have expected to have bought a bit more prescience. He's the merchant banker of politics.
Posted by: Opinicus | January 30, 2009 at 09:38
Only thing I found very strange about Steve was that he once voted Green. Now for a conservative to be green is good, but the Green Party set their stall out as environmentally friendly socialists. Very strange. Is he still in California? Whats going on at the moment with Steve? Rational answers only please....
Posted by: Oberon Houston | January 30, 2009 at 09:48
What is far harder to justify is the return on investment for what he does and has done.
Could we have spent the best part of a million pounds better elsewhere?
In my view, absolutely yes.
Where you ask?
Well what about a mailshot to pledges to get postal votes. Something that was recently scrapped through lack of funds.
If Hilton and Cameron did not fight the '92 General Election under Patten in CCO, then fall into the same clique of Notting Hill Conservatives he would not have the job that he's got.
Why should Conservative Associations kick up £5 a member to CCHQ if a big chunk of it could end up in Steve Hilton's pocket?
Hilton is massively overpaid for the most questionable of reasons. As such he is far more of a monetary hinderance to the party than he is a political asset.
Posted by: Old Hack | January 30, 2009 at 09:52
PS: If it comes to spending a couple of hundred thousand on Hilton or fixing Merlin, I vote Merlin.
Anyone prepared to vote for Hilton?
Didn't think so.
Posted by: Old Hack | January 30, 2009 at 09:54
I'm not sure if any of you have noticed that we're 11 points ahead in the yougov poll today, and who is the director of the strategy that has got us here? you guessed it... Steve Hilton. I'd say someone who has helped to wake the party up and put it in a place from which it could win an election is worth every penny.
Posted by: grammarian | January 30, 2009 at 10:04
If Hilton was replaced by Montgomerie that would really show Cameron in his true light.
Posted by: Jack Stone | January 30, 2009 at 10:09
Steve Hilton doesn't need defending.
The blokes a legend.
Posted by: The Rifle | January 30, 2009 at 10:39
If Hilton was replaced by Montgomerie that would really show Cameron in his true light.
Posted by: Jack Stone | January 30, 2009 at 10:09
What, do you mean as a... um... Conservative Jack? I'm reliably informed that they both are you know.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | January 30, 2009 at 10:58
Steve Hilton has helped to drag the Conservative Party kicking and screaming into the 21st Century. We need him. End of!
Posted by: Sally Roberts | January 30, 2009 at 11:20
old Hack's right, Merlin needs fixing - URGENTLY.
Posted by: HF | January 30, 2009 at 11:22
"Only thing I found very strange about Steve was that he once voted Green. Now for a conservative to be green is good, but the Green Party set their stall out as environmentally friendly socialists. Very strange. Is he still in California? Whats going on at the moment with Steve? Rational answers only please...."
There has always been a so called "dark Green" wing of the Green party, which some have described incorrectly as being National Socialist in terms of its agenda. Of course this is an exaggeration put about by the pinko's in the Green fold to discredit those of us who hold more right wing views, regardless of caring about the environment.
In the 80's I was a member for some time of Green CND and knew a number of fellow activists who held views that many would describe as right wing. Much as people drift from the SWP into Labour proper it is not surprising to me that some ex-greens would see the Conservative party as their more natural home. Once (of course) they have matured politically. I still hold some views that mark me out as a Green-Tory and I have no problem with that or Steve's previous flirtation with the party.
Posted by: The Bishop Swine | January 30, 2009 at 11:30
Conservatives can debate whether it is 'fundamentally conservative' to hold the kind of views Hilton is supposed to be promoting: a bigger role for civil society, more volunteering, accountability over public services, and so on. But this kind of politics cannot be seen as uniquely Conservative. British socialism has a strong strand of this kind of politics: self-help, DIY, local, co-operative and bottom-up. It has sometimes been smothered by big statists, especially after 1945, but the echoes of William Morris, GDH Cole, and the municipalists can still be heard. The minister I work for Hazel Blears stands in this tradition. So do other colleagues in the Government. So if you want a debate about which party can best revive civil society, devolve power to citizens and communities, and create more of the 'little platoons' that make up a thriving society, let it begin. I have never posted on Conservative Home before (hardly surprising for a Labour special adviser), and it will be interesting for me to see the ratio of abuse to constructive debate.
Posted by: Paul Richards | January 30, 2009 at 11:45
"I'm not sure if any of you have noticed that we're 11 points ahead in the yougov poll today, and who is the director of the strategy that has got us here? you guessed it... Steve Hilton"
I think you'll find that has more to do with an emerging recognition of New Labour's ineptitude amongst the public than any current Tory strategy.
Posted by: David Fulton | January 30, 2009 at 11:52
Interesting, thanks for that "Bishop". I'd always thought that the Greens were SWP without the factories.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | January 30, 2009 at 11:58
" think you'll find that has more to do with an emerging recognition of New Labour's ineptitude amongst the public than any current Tory strategy."
I tend to believe that the current Tory party needs very much to take on some "new" ideas and get better at putting them across. It further annoys me no end that we have many MP's who have little time for getting the message across because they are working on outside interests. I am of course very aware that Tim Montgomerie is a truly exceptional member and one who should be promoted for the sake of the Nation.
Far to many of the current leadership crop have left absolutely no impression on me. For the sake of this Great Britian we need to wake up and smell the roses, and take account of those who's self-election is a reflection of a valid anointing.
Posted by: The Bishop Swine | January 30, 2009 at 12:14
"The state has become so big in Britain because society is weak." Nope. The state has become so big THAT IT HAS WEAKENED SOCIETY. The Big State is the cause of a weak society. The Big State is the problem not the solution.
Posted by: Lola | January 30, 2009 at 12:25
Steve's very good but those talking about the marketing automation are also right - the Party's direct marketing is a joke and really does need fixing (I'd offer to help out). But that's nothing to do with whether we need a director of strategy as good as Steve Hilton.
Posted by: Simon Magus | January 30, 2009 at 12:32
Grammarian: "I'm not sure if any of you have noticed that we're 11 points ahead in the yougov poll today, and who is the director of the strategy that has got us here? you guessed it... Steve Hilton."
That's exactly right. Hilton is worth every penny. It has been nothing less than genius the way in which, from California, he master-minded (a) a world recession; (b) Gordon Brown's personality defects; (c) arranged for the Lib Dem leader to make a complete prat of himself. If only we paid him another hundred thousand we might even have some coherent economic policies.
Posted by: Clausewitz | January 30, 2009 at 12:42
""The state has become so big in Britain because society is weak." Nope. The state has become so big THAT IT HAS WEAKENED SOCIETY. The Big State is the cause of a weak society. The Big State is the problem not the solution."
Lola..... that is spot on.
Posted by: David Fulton | January 30, 2009 at 12:50
I'm surprised that Standpoint would print an article anonymously. If it ever gets out who wrote it........ Risky strategy!
Posted by: Oberon Houston | January 30, 2009 at 13:15
The person responsible for the Tory lead in the opinion polls is........GORDON BROWN.
Nobody else seems to have spotted this.
Posted by: Edward Huxley | January 30, 2009 at 13:35
Hilton is not worth the money. Had he been any good we would not have dipped in the autumn and be only 11 % ahead now. Nor are some of the other overpaid wonks in the shadows.
Posted by: John Prendergast | January 30, 2009 at 13:40
Steve Hilton is clever and well paid; unfortunately these two things predispose many people who are less able or paid less to have a crack at him.
let's pull together.
regardless of what you think of his direction, the guy has views and is able to communicate them. It's a miracle the party can attract a guy of his calibre when he cld earn maybe 10 times, certainly 5 times more in the private corporate sector....
Posted by: support the strivers | January 30, 2009 at 13:45
I confess I don't know a lot about Steve Hilton, but it seems bizarre to place so much emphasis on one 'guru'. It makes him some sort of Messiah figure.
Nor does it say much for the rest of the Shadow Cabinet.
If he's that good, Cameron should move over & SH bcome the leader, assuming he can get himself elected.
Posted by: Gizmo | January 30, 2009 at 15:16
He's certainly well-paid but is he really that smart....or is this yet another case of the Modernisers hyping the less-than-obvious talents of one of their own??
Posted by: Michael McGowan | January 30, 2009 at 15:46
Interesting points from Bishop Swine. I am quite heavily green, & I also have views that could be described as conservative. Much of my approach, such as my opposition to immigration, is informed by environmental concerns & is an area in which I agree with Tories.
Again, organisations such as CPRE, the National Trust & the Woodland Trust have always struck me as being compatible with conservative thought, much more so than rampant neoliberalism. How many people at farmers' markets vote Labour?
You'll have to excuse my scepticism about Cameron, but "vote blue, go green" would have gone down well amongst all sorts of people. You don't have to fully sign up to AGW (though I do) in order to, for example, take your stand against Heathrow expansion, for more sensible & cheaper household running, & for cleaning up the waterways & encouraging ancient woodland.
I think a lot of greens are a bit hectoring, but the blue-green alliance is certainly feasbile. It makes more sense to me than allying with socialists ever did, especially given Brown's woeful record.
You may wish to read "Real England" by Paul Kingsnorth. I disagree with his English nationalism as I am a unionist, but he has much to say that may interest a lot of commentators here.
It's not all about eating beards & knitting your own lentils. (Though I am a vegetarian myself).
Posted by: asquith | January 30, 2009 at 16:06
Steve Hilton is a big asset for us, but Gordon Brown is an even bigger one.
It is clear that if we don't win this election BIG against 'Mr World Wide Downturn', we should all pack up and go home !
Posted by: London Tory | January 30, 2009 at 16:06
Tim or anyone else, I wrote a very lengthly comment which has disappeared. Is it lurking around in the ether or have I got to try & think it all up again? :(
Posted by: asquith | January 30, 2009 at 16:08
I see it now. For some reason there is a bit of a time lag before comments are visible, at least on this machine.
Posted by: asquith | January 30, 2009 at 16:09
Can anyone fill in the background on when and why Jack Stone flipped from being a Dave cheerleader, to being opposed to him?
Returning to this site after a break I'm baffled.
Posted by: help me please | January 30, 2009 at 16:30
asquith It is a fact that many of the most militant students drift through a number of political systems before finding that they are in fact in agreement with Conservative ideals.
" How many people at farmers' markets vote Labour?"
Exactly and whats more most of the farm labouring class used to vote Tory as well, or if they felt disaffected maybe Liberal.
Its even true that many Libertarians respect the old aristocratic class because they managed the land so well, without destroying the environment.It's a weird thought but progress in the 21st Century may be about finding out how to manage the land as well as the old landed class did. I believe that being both Green and Conservative is by far the most rational political creed there can be. I also believe (much like the Trots) that continuous revolution is the normal political state.
Posted by: The Bishop Swine | January 30, 2009 at 16:39
The acid test is whether Steve Hilton is a match for Peter Mandelson.
Posted by: Phil Greatorex | January 30, 2009 at 16:55
The entire well-meaning project is a complete waste of time. The only big ideas that any genuinely Conservative, or conservative for that matter, government needs are: cut tax, cut expenditure, cut the numbers on welfare, sack state employees, abolish quangos, assemblies, councils etc, accept that the facts of life are conservative and national independence.
Posted by: Otto | January 30, 2009 at 21:21
Otto
I love your recipe for economic collapse!
Perhaps a better name would be OTT.
Posted by: The Bishop's sexy and Humane wife | January 30, 2009 at 21:26
The reason for the opinion poll bounce is the mini-reshuffle and cuddly Ken on the telly. It will slide again if Ken doesn't toe party line.
Posted by: RightsMatter | January 31, 2009 at 00:10
@The Rifle
Steve Hilton doesn't need defending.
The blokes a legend.
His reported skills are certainly mythical
or did you mean in the MI6 sense
Posted by: Opinicus | January 31, 2009 at 18:46
Another classic pontification thread from Tory experts who've probably a) never met Hilton b) have any idea what he does c) almost certainly not seen him at work or alongside Dave.
Posted by: Patrick Benson | February 01, 2009 at 22:12
Another classic pontification thread from Tory experts who've probably a) never met Hilton b) have any idea what he does c) almost certainly not seen him at work or alongside Dave.
No need.
See Dave see Hilton see LibDems/Greens.
Not edifying.
Posted by: Geoff Middleton | February 19, 2009 at 18:19
When someone earns Hiltons salary and spends three weeks per month in California, of course someone is going to write an article criticising him. I'm surprised there haven't been more for goodness sake. It shows just how lenient the media are being with us right now. However, Hilton has been the right man for opposition. Montgomerie would be the right man for No 10, especially with his Bank of England background.
Posted by: labradoodledoo | February 19, 2009 at 20:08
"Again, organisations such as CPRE, the National Trust & the Woodland Trust have always struck me as being compatible with conservative thought"
You must be mad with regard to the National Trust. In my area, there is a 'public ownership is best' element at work. It wants to buy up and junglefy thousands of acres of fine food-producing Fen land that is presently in private hands. Go to -
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/SaveOurFens/
Posted by: Geoffrey Woollard | April 11, 2009 at 19:32
WELL, STEVE HILTON MAY HAVE REMONSTRATED WITH STAFF AT BIRMINGHAM NEW STREET STATION. THE STAFF AT THIS STATION ARE BY AND LARGE THE RUDEST I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED, SOME SEEN TOTALLY UNFIT FOR THEIR POSITION I SUGGEST. ITS NOT AT ALL UNCOMMON TO ASK STAFF AT THAT STATION A REASONABLE QUESTION AND YOU MAY GET YOUR HEAD BITTEN OFF. BET STEVE WAS'NT TO BLAME ENTIRELY.
DAVID STAMPS. BIRMINGHAM.
Posted by: David Stamps | January 08, 2010 at 12:55