87% of Conservatives members would like Dan Hannan to have prime speaking slot at Party Conference

To Eric Pickles MP, Conservative Party Chairman

Dear Eric,

Thanks for last night's drinks party and for the great crowd you gathered together.  As I was leaving I got caught up in the CS gas incident.  I couldn't quite identify the individual being pinned down by three policeman but did see at least ten police officers running down the corridor to the scene.  Something of an over-reaction?  A party to remember anyway!

But that's not the reason I'm writing to you.

We polled Tory members in our regular survey yesterday and 1,215 people have already voted.  Although the survey is still open, one result is so overwhelming I thought I'd share it with you now.

89% of those polled had watched Dan Hannan MEP's great speech attacking Gordon Brown's record.  87% agreed that Dan should get "a prime speaking slot at this autumn's Conservative Party Conference".

Members don't get much involvement in Party Conferences anymore and so close to a watershed General Election - as the next will be - the need for stage management is understandable but it would be a real treat for the grassroots to hear Dan speak from the main platform this year.  A barnstorming attack on Mr Brown from Dan - clearly a very gifted speaker - could be a great booster for the whole conference.

Could you and the Party Board make this happen?

Best wishes, Tim

Tim Montgomerie

The survey is still open on the Dan Hannan and other questions for those yet to have their say.

Comments

[Sally Roberts]

I believe we do not yet know enough about the drinks party incident!
Some possibilities arise:

1. The person arrested could have been drinking before they arrived at the party - indeed perhaps throughout the day!
2. They could have had an allergic reaction.
3. They could have been taking an illegal substance.
4. They could have been taking a prescription drug which reacted badly against alcohol.
5. They could have had their drink spiked.

Let's not criticise Eric for something which happened at his event before we know the true facts! The media appear to be acting as Judge, Jury and Executioner. Please don't add to it.

[London Tory]

Agreed that DH was impressive last week, but lets also be careful not to revert by default to our old Alan B'Stard image.

Michael White's trenchant piece on Mr Hannan in yesterday's Guardian warrants careful scrutiny. It is both balanced and fair, and gives a useful insight into the Left's possible line of attack against us should we rely too heavily on the Hannans of the party. They have their place, but I would gently suggest that anyone who has been an MEP since the age of 27 as well as being a leader writer for the Daily Telegraph is possibly not best placed to understand how the majority are feeling outside the ConHome bubble.

We need a balanced ticket.

[Gary]

We need Dan Hannan in Westminster.

Gary

[David Belchamber]

I haven't read Michael White's piece but Dan was magnificent. He articulated what so many of us really feel and if he was not correct in every detail he was largely correct.

The main thing is that he was so much better than the usual run of conservative spekesmen; he spoke with passion - anger even - and it is better that anger be confined to powerful oratory.

Yes, please let him have a prime slot at conference.

[Peter Buss]

Brilliant comments fom Sally and London Tory if I may say so.

Why is the fracas last night not being reported as "journalists in drunken brawl in Commons !!" Sorry Tim, but there really is a load of hypocrisy from the Press going on at the moment. If any other group of people had behaved like that last night they would have been absolutely excoriated by the Press. Talk about double standards.

As regards Dan Hannan, I wholly agree with London Tory's comments. The guy is clearly an articulate speaker and very bright as well. But I think we need to be vey cautious in thinking that somehow he will play well with the wider electorate. This is a man who believes that the Banks should not have been rescued (wholly ignoring the disastrous effects of letting Lehman Bros go bust)who ignored the Swedish example on how recapatilising Banks saved their economy, who on the TV last week was to say the least ambivalent about David Cameron, and whose brand of conservatism is in my view likely to scare whole tranches of voters away. I have also to say that having talked to people who are swing voters, Dan Hannan's speech has had a mixed reception to put it mildly. If we think he is our best weapon, I think we delude ouselves.

Sorry - I know what I';ve said goes right against the grain on this excellent Site, but its what I believe.

[Death or Tory]

@ London Tory

"We need a balanced ticket."

But isn't that the problem, LT?

We do not have a balanced ticket because too mant floating voters see us as 'Labour Lite' and even large swathes of our own Party are not sure what 'Conservative' means anymore.

The Party tends to 'put a sheet over' people like John Redwood (and, it would seem, David Davis) these days, in case they frighten the electorate too much. But a balanced ticket means just that - a mix of views.

Dan Hannan is an asset to the Party in Europe, but we don't need to 'import' him for the Conference - we already have our own DH's in Parliament right now - we're just afraid to let them speak...

[Sally Roberts]

Thank you for your kind comment, Peter. Don't worry about going against the grain - I do it all the time! :-)

[Robert Eve]

Why not ask Cameron to step aside and let Dan take over?

[R.Baker]

I am surprised,only 87% want him to speak.

I bet the figure would be 100% if the UKIP crew were asked if they wanted him on the top of the speakers list.
He will end up leaving us as well,maybe to become another independent MEP,or......?

[John Coles]

I think Dan Hannan's chances of being asked to speak are no better than evens - he's too analytical, objective and Conservative for the party's leadership, led as they are by feelings and an overwhelming desire to be seen as NICE.
Why on earth was this thread initially hijacked by fatuous speculation on last night's Commons brawl?

[EUispants]

Sally, I dont think anyone is criticising Eric for what happened at his party. Two journalists got drunk hand a fight and the Police got involved. It wasnt his fault.

It will be interesting to see if the press try and cover up the identities of the hacks and gloss over the incident. If it were MPs they wouldve been hounded mercilessly.

[Truest Blue]

Dan should have a prime spot . . . but

What happened in Birmingham when Dan (and Roger) were pulled from a debate with Farage at the last minute?

[David_at_Home]

"I bet the figure would be 100% if the UKIP crew were asked if they wanted him on the top of the speakers list."

As a Ukipper, I would vote for Mr Hannan as our leader after Farage but as a patriot I would rather Mr Hannan remained in the Tories and became your leader after Cameron.

[Henry Mayhew - Ukipper]

If Dan Hannan's comments on Gordon Brown's performance are considered too trenchant for the Conservative Party conference, that is all we need to know.

See what viewing figures you get if it is all the Change agenda. I agree that George Osborne can be extremely witty, nothing wrong with that, but traditional conservative political principle surely must have its place at conference too.

To the poster who criticised Mr Hannan's alleged view on bailing out the banks: Are your kids ready to pay for your opinions? Mine aren't. They look to me to pass on an even chance to them, which means reasonable taxes and an entrepreneurial environment.

Finally, on Dan Hannan leaving to join ukip or being an independent: If he had wanted to do this it would have happened by now and he could easily have continued to be an MEP without needing any help from the Conservative Party. The fact is that he is a Euro-realist who has chosen to stay within the party and work to change it. That is what we kippers are always told we should have done. It will be a real own-goal for the Tories if they do not allow this wildly popluar figure to speak. He has an international reputation as a man worth listening to.

[resident leftie]

I would certainly like to see him speak, particularly on Tory policy on Europe.

[Sally Roberts]

"Brilliant comments fom Sally and London Tory if I may say so."

From Peter Buss - an eminently sensible and consistently moderate poster.

"Why on earth was this thread initially hijacked by fatuous speculation on last night's Commons brawl?"

From John Coles - a poster who consistently loathes everything my comments stand for.

I am pleased that I must be doing something right!

[Peter Buss]

Henry - they are not "alleged views" of Hannan's on not bailing out the banks - you can see him utter them on his Fox News Interview. Neither is his highly equivocal support of Cameron - witness his interview on Newsnight last week discussing with a G20 protestor the reason for rage in the country.

Look I like the guy, he is talented, and I think he should have a slot at the Conference,I am just glad Cameron keeps him and his extreme views (for thats what they are )at arms length

[London Tory]

Lets get this clear, Farage is a political weirdo and all anecdotal evidence I have ever received on the doorstep is that he leaves any voter under the age of 80 stone cold.

I see Hannan having a role in motivating our core support nearer to polling day, but swaying floating voters in Cleethorpes, High Peak, Stirling and Cardiff South.....I don't think so.

[Marjorie Baylis]

To Truest Blue - Dan did not agree to speak in the first place - Farage just said that he had. I spoke to Dan immediately after I came out of the meeting, disgusted that such a meeting could take place at the Conservative Conference.

[Paul Oakley]

What happened in Birmingham when Dan (and Roger) were pulled from a debate with Farage at the last minute?

They weren't pulled. They hadn't been informed about Nigel Farage's involvement and decided it wouldn't be appropriate.

[Peter]

Can't see this happening - he might mention Europe.

[Michael McGowan]

I am sure Hannan will not be offered a worthwhile slot at the Tory Party conference. It would detract from the Apotheosis of Cameron. Besides, Ken Clarke would have a fit.

I cannot fathom the undoubtedly well-meaning Peter Buss. It appears that Peter voted New Labour in 1997 and now seems to be disappointed. To be fair to New Labour, they gave Peter everything they promised: tax, spend, waste and fail, with secular authoritarianism thrown in for good measure. In what sense do you feel cheated....you surely didn't take Tony Blair at face value? Or do you just not like Gordon Brown and want Cameron to pick up the Blair mantle?

I am sure Hannan is ambivalent about Cameron because Cameron is a 1950's throwback - a left-leaning Tory patrician which Hannan is not. Like Boris, Hannan would be well-advised to stay well away from Westminster and build an independent power base by appealing over the heads of the modernisers to real voters who are sick of the corrupt cartel politics of SW1A 0AA.

[OH]

London Tory is absolutely wrong. He is, himself, speaking from a Conservative bubble. That Hannon's video has been so popular speaks for itself. To cite the Guardian's comments as reason to be wary is exactly where politics goes wrong - by cowering in front of fellow politicos and commentators rather than embracing the needs and mores of the majority. If politicians were inspiring, vocal articulators of the views of the man and woman in the street, they simply wouldn't be held in almost universal derision as they are now. People like Dan Hannon (and indeed Boris, who you may remember, the leadership was initially extremely reticent about putting forward for Mayor) should be utterly embraced as people who have strong convictions and the ability to communicate these effectively to a politically soured populace. The clarion signals are there but the current grey, anodine Westminster bubble has a knack of reducing fine orators, clear thinkers and popular figures to a Third Way of eye wateringly dull consensus.

[David_at_Home]

" ....extreme views"

One of the things I find really distressing about the UK in 2009 is that anyone who departs from the cosy BBC and Metropolitan Chattering class view of life is branded as an “extremist” or “Daily Mail Reader”, thus closing down rational debate.

The economic crisis, which was brought about be excessive levels of debt, has yet to unfold but, rationally, it does not seem to be a particularly good idea to fight excess debt with yet more debt.

There are real problems with our membership of the EU. It costs us a fortune every year, even its supporters agree that there is a democratic deficit and free access is given to 450 million foreign nationals to come to our country.

For more than a decade we have had mass inward migration of largely uneducated unskilled people from all over the planet. This has put our society under immense strain.

We who are concerned about these issues should be able to raise them without being labelled as extremists, little Englanders or racists.

Until very recently, it was taboo to extol the virtues of marriage but, thanks to IDS, this issue has come out of the closet.

You Tories still have some good, well motivated and intelligent people in you party; you should be prepared to listen to them.

[Rupert Matthews]

Let's give Dan the chance. My bet is that he would say something very thoughtful and helpful to the Party as the general election approaches. It would add a welcome bit of variety at any rate.

[Ross Warren]

Dan is the Man:

I like Dan a great deal. However he may like Redwood, be just a little to clever for the vast majority of the public. He is of course a rising star within the party itself, and is beloved of Conservatives.The great danger of man like Dan is that he will say too much and put off those who might be thinking of switching their vote.

"Why not ask Cameron to step aside and let Dan take over?"

That may be exactly the sort of thinking that will ensure that Dan remains outside of the current "in" group.

" Dan Hannan's speech has had a mixed reception to put it mildly. If we think he is our best weapon, I think we delude ourselves."

I think he needs a bit more time to improve his grasp of what a top line politician can and cannot say. Going against the grain is a luxury that has kept many bright political thinkers on the side lines. For the moment Dan like Redwood is simply too "difficult" for the top table. They would be scared that he would overthrow them.

[Andrew Woodman]

London Tory, did you read the same Micheal White article that I did? The one I read was making insinuations about Dan being in the same market as the BNP for daring to attack our glorious leader, presumably as Sir Micheal elect takes one more step towards his knighthood.

Of course Dan should be allowed to speak from the podium. As people become more disengaged with the political process, he should be allowed to articulate his vision of localism to counter the feeling and achieve a bit of accountability.

[Sally Roberts]

I agree with Rupert Matthews. Dan will be very useful for motivating our core vote. He has a particular message and his attack on Brown the other day was masterly and forensic. I suggest that if people try to turn him into "St Dan" or some sort of Right Wing Che Guevara then it will backfire to the detriment of both the Party and Mr Hannan himself.

[Steve Foley]

We need Dan Hannan where it really matters, in the House of Commons. Now what to do? I have a win-win solution. There is a safe seat in Staffordshire South. Kick that pompous old gas-bag Patrick Cormack upstairs, he's love a Peerage, and parachute Dan into that seat.

[Michael McGowan]

Sally, why is Dan Hannan's effectiveness confined to motivating the core vote? I would have said that it extended much wider to the many disillusioned voters who know that they are being impoverished by Westminster. Unlike the leaders of the two main parties, both of whom are committed to Latin American economics for the foreseeable future, Hannan is telling it how it is: Mr Brown, you have run out of our money.

[Tommy]

Without wanting to be rude, I have to point out that some people that post on conhome seem to live on another planet. Daniel Hannan is EXACTLY the kind of person that we need to attract voters.

Yes he is probably a little bit too articulate for his own good. And yes I'm sure a significant minority would disagree with him on the issue of europe. But thinking this will 'turn off' voters is ridiculous. There are more important issues than europe.

If you read Daniel Hannan's blog, you will find that, despite being an MEP, most of his blogposts are about the way in which this country is run. He takes particular issue with centralization of power, and political sleaze. Both of which are very popular with the man on the doorstep.

Daniel Hannan(along with Douglas Carswell) has been leading from the front with his ideas on direct democracy, many of which have subsequently been adopted as party policy.

People really ought to put aside their own beliefs and prejudices on the issue of europe for 5 minutes and see the whole package, rather than declaring that a persons views on one subject are reason enough to believe that they have nothing worthwile to say on other issues.

Post Scriptum

Dan Hannans views are supported by a majority of the public, and when you call them extreme you insult the very people you wish to attract.

[Sally Roberts]

Michael McGowan, I can, in reply to your question, do no better than to quote Peter Buss:-

"But I think we need to be vey cautious in thinking that somehow he will play well with the wider electorate. This is a man who believes that the Banks should not have been rescued (wholly ignoring the disastrous effects of letting Lehman Bros go bust)who ignored the Swedish example on how recapatilising Banks saved their economy, who on the TV last week was to say the least ambivalent about David Cameron, and whose brand of conservatism is in my view likely to scare whole tranches of voters away. I have also to say that having talked to people who are swing voters, Dan Hannan's speech has had a mixed reception to put it mildly."

I agree with what Mr Buss says 100%. I do not expect you to do so.

As for Tommy's initial comment. Yes I could not agree more with you!

"some people that post on conhome seem to live on another planet."

[David_at_Home]

John Redwood may be clever but he gives the impression of having just stepped out of his flying saucer and would certainly not be the sort of chap you would invite for a pint in the pub. All this may be very unfair; in person, Mr Redwood may be very different but, like it or not, his voter appeal is never going to be high.

Dan Hannan comes across entirely differently; his manner of speaking is clear and direct and, in my opinion, is likely to appeal to a wide range of people.

PS: You Tories don’t seem to understand why you were perceived as “nasty”. It was due, not to your policies on immigration or the EU but because in the late 1990s too many Tory MPs seen as on the make and were caught (or through to be caught) with their hands in the till. This was compounded by programmes like the “New Statesman” and by the highly successful PR campaign by New Labour, falsely branding Lady T as a milk snatcher and as someone who was uninterested in society. Also there was the small matter of John Major’s transparent incompetence.

[Conand]

I totally agree with Peter Buss@09:48 !

"journalists in drunken brawl in Commons !!"

"Drunken Journalists disrupt Commons proceedings"

The way it's generally being reported is:

'Tories led by counter-revolutionary traitor Eric Pickles, deliberately caused a riot. This disrupted the workings of our wonderful government. Evil right-wing Tory Policemen then sprayed CS gas directly into the eyes of members of the Most Excellent Order of Journalists! How dare they?? Luckily the evil Tory journalists have been detained. All bad apples must be rooted out, to maintain the purity of the Most Excellent Order!'

[Raj]

That Hannon's video has been so popular speaks for itself.

That is a logical fallacy.

First, people watch something to see what all the fuss is about - they don't watch it already knowing they'll like it. Second, even if they liked that speech that doesn't mean they won't dislike other things he has to say.

You're reading far too much into the notoriety of one speech.

[Tommy]

"Michael White's trenchant piece on Mr Hannan in yesterday's Guardian warrants careful scrutiny. It is both balanced and fair, and gives a useful insight into the Left's possible line of attack against us should we rely too heavily on the Hannans of the party."

You mean the article that was met with universal condemnation, that one?

"We need a balanced ticket."

???????????

So we shouldn't let someone of a particular point of view speak? Yes, thats a very balanced ticket.

"TV last week was to say the least ambivalent about David Cameron,"

In what respect? I have never seen him say anything that could be considered 'disloyal', Dan Hannan has not always agreed with David Cameron, but on the rare occasions where they have disagreed, he has been polite and made it clear that David Cameron is the leader and therefore has his full support.

"and whose brand of conservatism is in my view likely to scare whole tranches of voters away."

Dan Hannan doesn't have a brand of conservatism. He rarely speaks about his own views on matters such as abortion or even taxes. He mainly only ever comments on the system of governance, as opposed to the policies.

"I have also to say that having talked to people who are swing voters, Dan Hannan's speech has had a mixed reception to put it mildly."

How many swing voters watch political speeches on youtube?

I find it very difficult to believe, from the comments on this website, other centre-right blogs, centre-left blogs, apolitical blogs, the times website, the telegraph website, comment is free, the independent website, the sun website, the bbc website and dan hannan's own blog, that the reaction was 'mixed'.

I think someone's telling porkies.

"If we think he is our best weapon, I think we delude ouselves."

Who suggested that?

[Tommy]

"First, people watch something to see what all the fuss is about - they don't watch it already knowing they'll like it. Second, even if they liked that speech that doesn't mean they won't dislike other things he has to say."

1)I'm still waiting for my apology.
2)The fact that it is so highly rated proves that you are once again completely wrong. Why don't you tell everybody that the public want ever higher taxes and ever higher spending again like you did a few weeks ago?

[Freddy]

You mean 87% of Conservative members who use this site! There is a difference.

I do think it was a good speech, and I suspect that we shall see Dan contesting a Westminster seat before too long. His advancement in the party depends, and should depend, on whether he is a team player.

This was all discussed on another thread last night. Quite frankly I was alarmed by some, but only by some, of the posts on that thread.

Dan has only made one outstanding speech, so he needs to obtain a Westminster seat and put in more time before he could even be considered for a very junior shadow role - so some on this site shouldn't start thinking that he is an alternative party leader! I don't think that the vast majority of the members of the Conservative party would like to rerun the leadership election. If you look at the last few opinion polls you'll see Cameron's ratings are very good. That is no accident. He is extremely self-disciplined, and he clearly weighs every word.

Anyway we don't need a ranter as party leader. Contrary to what some of you think, that would backfire on us, because the public would think that we were extreme and absurd.That is one reason why UKIP has made so little progress. I know some of you don't like it, but as a party we've got to seem moderate and well balanced if we are to obtain the voters' trust next time.

Bluntly, I'd rather be discussing ways to assist at the local and European elections!

[Tommy]

"Dan has only made one outstanding speech"

So what you are saying is that we should not judge him on one speech and yet you then go on to judge him on one speech.

People should read his books and his blog. He is not some kind of headbanging europhobe, he is certainly a eurosceptic, but he is well to the left of the party on other issues.

Dan Hannan is not interested in a westminster seat, nor is he interested in any kind of shadow ministerial role.

PS Didn't we let Shami Chakrabarti address the conference a year or two ago? It was a good idea then to listen to differing viewpoints, andit's still a good idea now.

[Conand]

It was a good speech. Dan however didn't point out the main weakness in Brown's call for anti-Protectionism: He's devalued our currency, that is an inately protectionist thing to do! And he's done it big!

[Freddy]

@Tommy

If Cameron thinks that it is OK for Dan to address the party conference, then it's OK by me.

You've got to remember that Brown's media choir are waiting to pounce - so no unguarded words!

PS I don't like the new style of politics anymore than you do.

[A Reformed Labour Voter]

The reason Daniel Hannan's speech became the feature that it did is because he powerfully articulated the truth. That is that as Chancellor for a decade, Gordon Brown is responsible for what has happened to our economy.

With the BBC's assistance, Brown has been able to suggest that it was a 'Global problem' that he could not have predicted nor prevented. Absolute tosh.

Eddie George had a screaming row and almost resigned when Brown set up the useless FSA. Peter Lilley warned about the dangers of losing the BoE's experience in overseeing the Banking sector. And look at Canada's Banking system - in good shape. Look at the Norwegian economy - again looking good. As Mr Hannan said, not every vessel is in the same dilapidated mess.

Mr Hannan has talent. Our country needs all the talent it can find to start the recovery. We need more from him. Give him a stage - more critique of Brown and the EU.
He'll be hard to ignore.

Then give him a seat in the Commons. I for one am a big fan!

[ToryBlog.com - Time for bankers to fight back against the green-eyed losers in this country]

I agree, Dan should be speaking at conference, but it should be as leader

[London Tory]

I would make two further observations.

Firstly, I agree that Mr Hannan seems to be of a calibre whereby efforts should be made to find him a seat. Woking or Skipton spring to mind. He articulates well and has passion, two attributes lacking in our PP.

Secondly, whatever his merits, he does seem to have led something of a cossetted, dare I say it unworldly existence. We are correctly quick to criticise the Milibands and Coopers, who move effortlessly from university to special adviser to safe seat to Cabinet without so much as a trip to Lidls in between...are we not in danger of creating a similar routeway?

[Freddy]

@Reformed Labour Voter

Care is required to see that our party does not appear extreme. We've got to be a lot more self-disciplined than in the past. Otherwise, horror of horrors, we'll get 5 more years of BROWN!

I'm sure that David Cameron will make the right decision on the advancement of Dan Hannan.

[Sally Roberts]

"I agree, Dan should be speaking at conference, but it should be as leader"

This is precisely the sort of thing I warn against! We have a first-class leader already in the shape of David Cameron and he is going to be our next Prime Minister.

If some neo-Jacobites try to set Dan up as "The King Over the Water" it will damage HIM and it will damage the Party (of course that latter aspect may not displease one or two of those commenting!)

[Malcolm Dunn]

I have to say I find some of the comments on this thread rather strange. I would expect that some of the UKIPPERs like Henry Mayhew to try to cause trouble within Conservative party ranks, that, is after all, what they do (not entirely successfully,the latest ComRes poll puts then on 1%, according to Mike Smithson only 3 people of the entire sample admitted to planning to vote UKIP). But from Peter Buss,Hannan is extreme?! Really? In what way?
And from several others the implication that Cameron is planning to silence Hannan? Well it seems odd then that Cameron highlighted Hannan's speech in his latest email to Conservative party members. Hardly the actions of someone who would rather Hannan's views didn't reach a wide audience.
I've seen Dan Hannan speak several times and he is out of the top drawer of Conservative party orators. This speech was one of many excellent speeches that Dan has made since he was elected.

[Andrew Smith]

Let's hope there are no Eurosceptics in the room otherwise his leader will have to bar him from attendance, like last time he had a prime spot reserved at a Conference event.

[Joe Fraud]

As a matter of interest I would like to know who picked the tab up after Mr Pickles little party for the press?

If its us the tax payer I would like to know the justification?

[ToryBlog.com - Time for bankers to fight back against the green-eyed losers in this country]

Well said Malcolm.
imho, considering all the momentum and positive press generated by Dan, for Cameron to merely praise him in an email to a closed audience of members allowed a lot of goodwill to evaporate.

If, for example, George Osborne had released a speech that had a similar response, you can bet Cameron would have not limited his praise to such a narrow audience.

But, either way, we are in agreement, this was not just one great speech by Dan as anyone who has seen him speaking or debating in the flesh will contend.

The only way Cameron can avoid factions from forming is to be more inclusive of talented non-Roons like Hannan and Carswell, and that will mean, being democratic and allowing BOO's onto the front bench.

[Sally Roberts]

Andrew Smith, read Paul Oakley's post at 10:36 *sigh*

[Tommy]

"Firstly, I agree that Mr Hannan seems to be of a calibre whereby efforts should be made to find him a seat."

He isn't interested.

I agree with Malcolm Dunn, I'm not exactly sure where the idea that David Cameron would prevent him from speaking is coming from. David Cameron has praised Daniel Hannan recently and has adopted much of what Dan suggested in 'Direct Democracy: An agenda for a new model party'. Several prominent members of the frontbench have supported Hannan's work, including Michael Gove and Theresa Villers.

In case people haven't already figured it out, I'm a bit of a fan of Mr Hannan. Not because of his views on the eu, although it's hard to disagree with him, but because of his views on democracy.

[Conand]

I'm a big Dan Fan but I agree with Sally@12:37

I'm also worried the GOP are going to want him at their conference. YIKES!!

[Jack Iddon]

Would london tory care to elucidate re Conservative voters over 80? What do you mean?

[Curly]

What's this Tim?

Has Letters from a Tory resigned his position?

[OH]

Raj - on the contrary, I am certainly not reading too much into one speech - check out Dan Hannon's other output: consistency is its hallmark.

[Jack Stone]

Politics is not all about bashing your opponent. Its about convincing people of the merits of your own policies. The tragedy is that the Conservative Party have to bash there opponents all the time because they simply have no policies to convince the public with.

[David Cooper]

Steve Foley @ 11.05: putting it at its most neutral, my MP Sir Patrick Cormack won the right to stand again in South Staffs at the next election a couple of years ago, despite an exec that was divided on the issue. As and when a vacancy does arise, I for one would look upon Daniel Hannan as a credit to the constituency if he was to be a candidate.

[Jack Iddon]

Thinking about it didn't Cameron get to be leader on the strength of one speech. Hannan would be setting no precedent. Who, outside of the Westminster Mafia knew anything about Cameron before that?

[Sally Roberts]

Oh Jack, just when I thought your grammar was improving....

"Its about convincing people"

should be it's....

"bash there opponents"

It's "their", Jack, "their"!

Must try harder.

[Robert Eve]

Here is an example of how much I like reading other peoples' posts.

'Hannan is too articulate for his own good'.

How can anyone be too articulate?

Or is this true in a dumb and dumber society?

[A Reformed Labour Voter]

Freddy

What I suggested, was to give Mr Hannan the chance to rip into New Labour and the EU. Detail the incompetence and waste. Explain with his eloquence the mistakes Brown has made and the systemic problems with the EU.

When you have a good hitter, let him hit.

Then leave the policy to David Cameron and the Shadow Cabinet.

[Edward Huxley]

If Daniel Hannan or Roger Helmer stood for our parliament they would not be opposed by UKIP - it`s party policy regarding anyone signing up to Better Off Out. Indeed, Ukippers would be working to get them elected.

However,both Hannan and Helmer are probably doing more good for the cause in Brussels than they would over here.

Mr.Cameron has made it clear that he intends to stay in the EU come what may, and there would be no point in either of these able people being stuck for ever on the back benches.

[Tommy]

"Here is an example of how much I like reading other peoples' posts.

'Hannan is too articulate for his own good'.

How can anyone be too articulate?

Or is this true in a dumb and dumber society?"

What I actually said was:

"Yes he is probably a little bit too articulate for his own good."

And your a fool if you think the people who sound the best educated are the ones who are successful in politics. Politicians always dumb-down, quite wrongly, to their voters.

Do you deny this? Do you think that David Cameron, George Osborne and co have lost their accents by accident?

[Tommy]

"Oh Jack, just when I thought your grammar was improving....

"Its about convincing people"

should be it's....

"bash there opponents"

It's "their", Jack, "their"!

Must try harder."

First of all Mrs Roberts, I'm the one who corrects Jack Stone's Grammar.

Secondly, what you have corrected is his spelling and punctuation, not grammar.

[Sally Roberts]

I am very sorry, Tommy and humbly apologise!

What I should have concentrated Jack's mind upon was this:-

"because they simply have no policies to convince the public with."

Note the hanging participle. He should have said "with which to convince the public"!

[Tommy]

"Note the hanging participle. He should have said "with which to convince the public"!"

I'm impressed.

[Freddy]

I just don't beleive some of the comments on this site!

Dan Hannan is promising, we all agree on that!

But there is more, much more, to being a good party politician, than speechifying. What about teamwork - you know all toeing the same line, or sticking by your colleagues when the media picks on them. Then there is managing other party colleagues, good administration etc.

Cameron had many years in the back office, followed by some years as an MP, followed by a short period in Michael Howard's shadow cabinet. When he put up for the leadership the right of the party said he didn't have much experience - that wing of the party are now saying that Dan should be leader! They just can't accept that Davis didn't win the leadership election, and they bitterly dislike Cameron.

I just don't beleive it! Don't they remember the mess we were in just after the 2005 election? The parliamentary party were in turmoil! I've just been looking at an editorial that I cut out from the Daily Mail during that period. It says that if the Conservative parliamentary party doesn't stop sniping at each other, the Tories have no future.

Bluntly, I'd much rather be discussing ways to help in the local and european elections!

As for UKIP, they are a small party with few peers, councillors, and members. They have one MP who was elected as a Conservative. Their MEPs record in the european parliament has, in my opinion, been undistinguished. Do you remember Mr Kilroy Silk? Do I really need to mention Veritas?

[Rayatcov]

They (the Tory party) will not let Dan speak for one good reason. He will tell the truth about the EU and we all now that our David doesn't want the EU mentioned. Why? because he is all for it, that's why.
If our, sorry your, David would take notice of many recent polls that state around 50/60 per cent of the people in this country want to leave the EU and around 70 percent want a referendum on the Lisbon/Constitutional Treaty, he would, in my humble opinion, get a landslide.
Still, that's water under the bridge isn't it.
The quiet revolution has started.

[Sally Roberts]

Thank you Tommy! I suspect our friend Jack will be rather less impressed.

I am wondering of course whether he has actually sloped off for a late lunch and left Fido to do the typing for him again......

[RichardJ]

"He is not some kind of headbanging europhobe, he is certainly a eurosceptic, but he is well to the left of the party on other issues."

Such as?

[Freddy]

PS I do enjoy the free grammar, spelling, and punctuation lessons. I've learnt quite a lot already!

[Lindsay Jenkins]

Dan's words have resonated here and across the Anglo-Saxon world. His speech attacking Brown has already attracted over 1.7 million hits on Youtube, and rising. He has appeared on Hannity and Fox in the US, watched by millions there and here.

That response should make the Conservative leadership sit up and ask themselves if they are resonating with the voters, and if not why not. Are they in a cosy bubble?

Dan is self deprecating almost to a fault and he has not sought any kind of political preferment. He is merely asking the electors of the SE to vote him back to the European Parliament. So talk of anything else is presumptious.

[London Tory]

@ Jack Iddon

Ok, let me spell it out a little clearer, although I am a member of the Tory Party, not UKIP.

Nigel Farage appeals to the baser elements of human nature. Namely 'lets keep that nasty Jonny Foreigner from serving us our lattes in Starbucks'. There is a generation- a noble generation- who fought wars to give people like Farage the opportunity to spout his drivel.

It is to this constituency that Farage appeals. Forget 'dog whistle politics', Farage is into 'hearing aid politics'.

Is that clear enough for you, I don't want to waste any more time on little UKIP and their odd womble of a leader.

[Freddy]

@Reformed Labour Voter

Not a bad idea! Got to be careful though or we'll get five more years of BROWN!

BROWN is the worst PM this country has ever had!!!!!

[Sally Roberts]

"Is that clear enough for you, I don't want to waste any more time on little UKIP and their odd womble of a leader."

London Tory, that really is a little unfair to wombles. After all, they do have their uses....

[Sally Roberts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ2mJPSccvo

[17 (jha]

London Tory is another who vents his spite against Nigel Farage and those who support him. I was in the Home Guard at 17, served as a pilot in the RAF and Fleet Air Arm. I survived. A lot of my chums didn`t. I wish bigots like him would shut up. That applies to Mr. Cameron and his fruitcakes and racists jibe as well. These people are just ignorant and ill mannered as well.

[Malcolm Stevas]

I dare say John Coles is right to say, ”Dan Hannan's chances of being asked to speak are no better than evens - he's too analytical, objective and Conservative for the party's leadership, led as they are by feelings and an overwhelming desire to be seen as NICE,” and it will be the Tories’ loss, because although as Ross Warren suggests, ”he may like Redwood, be just a little to clever for the vast majority of the public,” if this shallow criterion had applied in the 19thC we wouldn’t have had people such as Lord Salisbury and Benjamin Disraeli. I’m dismayed though not surprised that some here describe him as “extreme”, a dismissal that would be laughable were it not so tragically illustrative of the soggy meliorism into which Toryism has declined. If the Tories truly want to gain power, and have any scruples about how they do it, they will encourage the Hannans. As for that Guardian stuff, Michael White had nothing to say beyond snide personal attacks.

[London Tory]

@ 17(jha

I don't care whether you were in the SAS and personally overthrew Saddam, this is a site for Conservatives, and people like you should know better.

'fruitcackes' was charitable.

[Tommy]

"Such as?"

Section 28. Nuff said.

[Tommy]

"I don't care whether you were in the SAS and personally overthrew Saddam, this is a site for Conservatives, and people like you should know better."

This site should be for whoever wants to comment(within reason). Conservative Home is read by people of all political persuasians and many on the left, such as comstock and resident (nee passing) leftie, provide an excellent left of centre viewpoint. Is it really good for democracy to have only a bunch of sycophants commenting?

[London Tory]

Tommy

Have not noticed your comments before, and judging by the quality of your posts today, I have not missed much.

I have previously been critical of Cameron and aspects of his leadership, but first and foremost I take the view that a Conservative Govt headed up by anybody is preferable to another 10 mins of Labour.

[Freddy]

@London Tory

Hear! Hear! BROWN is the worst PM this country has ever had!

[Tommy]

"Have not noticed your comments before, and judging by the quality of your posts today, I have not missed much."

Spent all day thinking that line up?

"I have previously been critical of Cameron and aspects of his leadership"

I haven't.

"but first and foremost I take the view that a Conservative Govt headed up by anybody is preferable to another 10 mins of Labour."

Has anybody suggested otherwise?

I have merely praised Daniel Hannan, a man of principle who differs greatly from the traditional reactionary right-wingers that had come to dominate the conservative party a few years ago. Dan Hannan being good doesn't take anything away from David Cameron, it doesn't mean that David Cameron isn't also good.

Leaving aside the issue of the eu, Daniel Hannan and David Cameron have very similar politics.

If the conservative party really is a 'broad church' then Daniel Hannan is an atheist, just like me and the majority of the public. We view the conservative party as a means to an end, nothing more.

[A Reformed Labour Voter]

Freddy

I'd say that it's a tie between Brown and his predecessor.

Blair chose and kept Brown as Chancellor and abdicated responsibility of the domestic agenda to him. So on Blair's watch Brown was able to destroy our country and it's economy.
Blair also started the illegal and unnecessary Iraq War, Ecclestone, cash for Honours, signed away the EU rebate with nothing in return.

Brown continues to dictate policy to his 'Chancellor' and refuses to accept responsibility for what he has done. He is now printing money and building up the next financial disaster. Reneging on the EU Referendum etc

I just can't split them...

[Jack Stone]

Sally and tommy. Like the Conservative party who have no policies you both seem to have no views!!

[Tommy]

You missed two commas.

[Freddy]

@Reformed Labour Voter

I think you are right about BLAIR/BROWN - they're both dismal.

What I'm trying to get over here is that our first and only priority at the moment is the election of a Conservative government.

We shouldn't do, or say, anything that is going to postpone that happy day!

I'm looking forward to an election night where Labour and Lib Dem seats go down like ninepins.

[Lindsay Jenkins]

Here's an amusing thing - an American has created this website

http://www.danielhannanforcongress.com/

[Super Blue]

Tommy: "First of all Mrs Roberts, I'm the one who corrects Jack Stone's Grammar (sic)."

Get to the back of the queue!

[Jack Iddon]

London Tory,
They also faught that war to let you and your ilk spout ageist generaliseations.
Not everyone under 80 thinks as you or everyone over 80 unlike you!

[Ray Finch]

As a UKIP member and also on the UKIP SE MEP election list I would like to say that Mr. Hannan is by far the outstanding Tory politician I have heard and seen in 20 odd years. If you continue to sideline him to what is basically a useless, anti-democratic bin then the Conservative Party will be the losers. Labour have silenced the few of their elected members with talent and the ability to speak plainly and honestly to the electorate and been left with a bunch of incompetent, corrupt nodding dogs on their front bench. Do you really want to follow them, not just in policies but, assuming you win the next election, in having a front bench lacking in brains, talent and gumption? Mr. Hannan has all of these in abundance. Having debated with and dealt with other of your MEP candidates I would call those attributes rare and valuable.
Still, it is your party. Far be it from me to tell you not to wee on a live rail.

[Adrian Blake]

Will Cameron make the same mistake on Dan, as did 'Heath's treatment of Enoch Powell'

It is not about Party Politics....it is about Politicians speaking on behalf of the Electorate. Politicians, have been elected to serve the people, not the respective Parties. Country before Party is the motto of UKIP. It is a pity that a majority of Tories do not think that!

[Tommy]

"Tommy: "First of all Mrs Roberts, I'm the one who corrects Jack Stone's Grammar (sic)."

Get to the back of the queue!"

?????????

[Sally Roberts]

Jack should think himself honoured that he has so many teachers!

[Super Blue]

Tommy,

Lots of us correct "jackstone"'s grammar - it would be a full-time job for one person!

[Tommy]

"Lots of us correct "jackstone"'s grammar - it would be a full-time job for one person!"

It would, but what was wrong with my sentence? You wrote '(sic)'.

[resident leftie]

I think it's Hannan's prescience and vision which will enable him to shine at conference. Just take a look at this piece on Iceland:

"Blue-eyed sheikhs" Saturday, 9th October 2004

In the ten years that I have been travelling to Iceland, I have watched an economic miracle unfold there. When I first visited the island, it had just joined the European Economic Area. Eurocrats expected that this would simply be a transitional phase on the way to full EU membership, but Icelanders saw it differently. As far as they were concerned, the EEA gave them all the benefits of the single market with few of the associated costs. Iceland is covered by the EU’s so-called four freedoms — free movement, that is, of goods, services, people and capital — but retains control over its own agriculture, fisheries, foreign policy, social affairs and non-EU trade. And, unlike full members, Iceland makes only a token contribution to the Brussels budget, amounting last year to 0.07 per cent of its GDP.

Being outside the EU, Iceland has been able to cut taxes and regulation, and to open up its economy. For 70 years the Althing has been dominated by the splendidly named Independence party, which has pursued the kind of Thatcherite agenda that is off limits to EU members
...
Icelanders understand that there is a connection between living in an independent state and living independently from the state. They have no more desire to submit to international than to national regulation. That attitude has made them the happiest, freest and wealthiest people on earth.

Today, Icelanders are absolutely rolling in it.

Today, it seems, they are rolling in something else.

[Tommy]

"Today, it seems, they are rolling in something else."

And yet they still oppose EU membership!