« Joanna Lumley, campaigning for Gurkhas, says she is "ashamed" of Labour | Main | The steady rise of Philip Hammond »


Boris' outspoken remarks on grammar schools and 45p imply he does want to jab Cameron a bit but I can't believe he "despises" Cameron.

I thought McBride had left. Well no, I always knew he would still be laundering Brown's bidding. This is a desperate bid to cause dissent in The Party. With luck it will be like p****ing in the wind and soak Labour even more than the saturation they find themselves in.

oldrightie @ 23.19 I hope you are right, but if you are, I don't think much of the Timesonline for swilling in the muck.

I've been critical of Cameron in a big way, though I'm glad to say that it seems the infuriating froth has almost disappeared (apart from his Green lunacy) and he appears to be rising to the dreadful occasion he finds himself faced with.

Boris holds, however, a major post and is a very amiable person but - oh so lightweight. They're not in the same league.

So I hope this is the Times making it up (and if its newLabour Webster or even Riddle I wouldn't put it past them) . Just checked the link - It IS Webster who is a prize NewLabour s**t, and I've had some dealings with him. It therefore is not true.

We know that there are historic tensions between Dave and Boris but it's early enough for them to sort it.

Egos would be better harnessed to exposing and removing this dreadful government rather than towards internal point scoring.

Leave that to Labour. Thats all their good at.

I don't think Boris even Cabinet material never mind Party leader - and certainly would not support him under the sort of coup-like scenario envisaged here.

I hope it's all rot spun for a headline. As a Londoner I'd prefer Boris to get his head down on his job here than this pie-in-the-sky about "not ruling out" taking on the job of PM as if it were some favour to us.

I agree with everything Tim said in this post. Boris is a good Mayor (and I agree is not PM material) but unfortunately seems to be a destabilising influence at present, with all the speculation about higher ambitions etc. This must stop, and he must get on with doing the good job he is doing as Mayor, and not give the media a chance to exaggerate a disagreement into something like a TB/GB war.

And who is the bearer of these revelations?
Philip Webster, Alistair Campbell's copy taker. (See Campbell's diaries).
Re "three men at the heart of the Tory project": Boris is a joke. He's no more than a Bisto Kid looking on as Cameron does the business at Westminster.
Every time Boris opens his gob, he reminds us that he couldn't possibly cope with the pressures of Party Leader. Can you imagine him at PMQs?
God help us.

Let's avoid using this thread to bash Boris or dish Dave and simply hope that any differences between the two men - small or large - are resolved before they become a running media story. That is clearly what Labour would want.

Seems completely overblown to me. Yes, Boris is probably slightly jealous of Cameron. I bet many Conservative politicians are. Live with it!! He's the boss, if you're a really good Conservative politician and work really hard to help save the country then maybe just maybe one day..(not very soon)..
Meanwhile the old story lives on, Blair is said to be dismayed about the 50% rate. Sorry, I really don't want to hear anymore of that story either. I suffered too much of the Blair/Brown story for too long.

Boris has the mayor's job, That entitles him to speak on what he thinks would be best for Londoners. He is not obliged to worry about what is best in Fife or in Peterborough.

He is also not a member of the parliamentary Conservative Party and so is not obliged to follow any line set out by Cameron.

Having said that, the story is tripe fed to eager journalists by whoever heads up Downing Street spin this week - Mandelson? Whelan?

PS I'm interviewing Boris at 5.20pm tmrw (Saturday). I look forward to blogging what I'm sure will be a colourful denial of The Times' story...


Patsy Sergeant......... I don't think much of the Timesonline for swilling in the muck.

Andrew Neil suggested The Times is about to back Cameron. Though I would love a great victory without that Bilderberger's support it also would mean that this outlet for Brown's spinspeak machine has little time left to do "McBride" business.

This is total rot - and if it's not, what if it? I can't say Blair and Livingstone seemed to be damaged by their mutual loathing. In fact, quite the opposite.

I wasn't an orginal fan of Cameron, but I do think he has grown into the role of party leader. If he treats the country when elected, as he has tried to treat the party with centre down control, we will struggle.

"Mr Cameron is said to think that Mr Johnson is "lacking the necessary moral cut-out or alarm system to be a serious politician." " - It is hard to disagree what with his flag waving at the Olympics which just reminded me of another Boris, Boris Yeltsin.

Is it a problem if there is some truth to this? Why should senior members of the same party like each other personally?

Animosity won't stop Boris in his tracks in London, and I can't imagine that the Mayor's approval will have too significant an impact in Number 10 if Cameron moves in.

There might well be a bunfight to succeed David Cameron in the future, but I am always reassured by the fact that political proximity and personal taste aren't too closely linked. They don't need to be friends, they need to occasionally work together, and not undermine each other.

That seems to be working at present, and I've seen no indication it will change.

I disagree with the 43% of Tories who can't see him as PM one day. I'm not a Conservative, and maybe there are dog0whistle policy issues I'm missing, but there is clearly a capability there that makes him a candidate. Dismissing him just seems silly.

Five years ago, the idea that he would be Mayor of London would have been literally laughable. Predict something will never happen, and you're asking to be proven wrong.

I'm not blown over by Boris' mayoralty, but I'm more impressed than I expected to be, and for that he deserves some credit.

The media found endless easy copy in the Blair/Brown feuding, and it's eager for a repeat.

I will be extremely disappointed in both men if they go down the ruinous path of Blair/Brown, and to give them their due I think this article is light on substance and heavy on hopeful speculation.

Stop being so London-centric: Boris is not at the heart of the Tory project as you put it - he's Mayor of London. That's makes him important in London, but not on the national stage.

Times = Total rubbish!!!

I'm all for some tasty gossip but this appears to be a soggy turkey twizzler of a story.

My favourite bit of "evidence" is that they were "regarded as rivals" in school. What does that even mean??

British journalism is far too complex.

If they do end this feud, the media will be frustrated and move on. There is ALWAYS going to be another story simmering in the background. If the Conservative government is going along too merilly, they will pounce.

The media elite probably have horrific stories (for all three parties) lurking about, waiting to be blown up when the time is right, they hardly ever just 'break' as instant news. Take expenses. Been going on for years.

Eever major paper will have a few leads on stories beyond our imaginations, that exist now, it's all about timing.

Japan: Appropriate responses , no fixed answers. As the situation changes, so do the questions and the answers and the people who are best equipped to deal with them.
Cameron and Boris will have different strengths and weaknesses, and as packages are suited to different questions.
What is the national question? Who is better suited? The national question I think is totally screwed finances. The answer is not an optimist but a realist , and on this basis Cameron is better, he is better seasoned to empathise. He will resonate better, at this time , across a wider spectrum of people.
Boris as the optimist, and the apologiser to Liverpool, will have to work harder to reach the same level of appeal, at this moment. At this time , the hearty calls to strive on a national level will not resonate, after the recession they may. But in a London context the hearty calls may get the impetus in to drive the city forward.
I like Boris. What may surprise, is that liking is based on the willingness of his sister to bash Piers Morgan on Question Time, even though you could see professional restraint in action . To get that respect of siblings indicates a healthy reality, However to others, it may indicate an excluding closeness. What do we know of Cameron? Not a lot. But professional he is. Professionalism that excludes nobody runs countries, personal touches a la Boris always do exclude even though there is no malice in it. It is a hard lesson.

This story is just a typically smelly Labour plant, right?

And yet TM doesn't even suggest in passing that that might be the case.

If it's true then it's damn disappointing - and a little bit worrying.

If it's not, then it should just be ignored shouldn't it? failing that it should be squashed immediately by the two men concerned.

Let's hope that Boris' denial tomorrow is forthcoming and positively keleidascopic with colour.

This is rubbish. Full stop.

This story is probably true, but does it really even matter?

Barrack Obama and Hilary Clinton also despise eachother and they seem to be working well together.

(Or even 'kaleidoscopic'!)

This is utter nonsense.

Has The Times forgotten that Boris Johnson was championing David Cameron for the leadership of the Party before anyone had even heard the name 'Cameron'? He was a relatively unheard-of shadow education secretary, and was not remotely expected to win. The Spectator was effusive in its salesmanship , week after week, while the rest of the media was focused on the Davies/Clarke likelihood. If one reads some of those Speccie articles, penned quite voluntarily by Boris while he was editor, there is not a hint of his despising David Cameron.

This is similar to the 'Obama said Cameron is a lightweight' smear. Just another dodgy non-story put out there by Labour's toadies. Even if they did personally despise each other, they don't come across as men who would let that get in the way of doing a great job.

“I’ve always been very fond of David Cameron and held him in extremely high regard,” he said. “I was one of the first people to urge him to stand for the party leadership. I regard him as a friend. He will be an excellent prime minister and any suggestion otherwise is tripe.” - Boris

Looks like a non-story set up to sell some guy's new book.

Pathetic. Shame on The Times for printing this kind of tittle-tattle!

Blown out of all proportion. Total nonsense!

Great...The country is falling apart at the seams. People will be so poor they won't be able to afford to buy a newspaper, and all the Times can write about is utter fiction and a smear campaign against Boris.
Boris has spent the last year dealing with the total damage to London's infrastructure by Red Ken.
If anything I would expect Boris has a lot of sympathy and admiration for DC for agreeing to take on the monumental task of dealing with the damage to the entire country's infrastructure. I seriously doubt that he has the time for these silly musings by the Times?

Boris and Cameron are clearly very different types of politician, and different sorts of people. Note that the general public knows one by his surname and the other by his christian name. I think it is inevitable that the media will find differences of approach and (probably) of policy if they are determined to look for them. No doubt Labour will help and encourage them to do so. These inbuilt differences make it all the more important that, as you say, two men find a way to get on and work together. Both men have an enormous amount to offer the country.

It is important to keep in mind that these are media-played accusations, and while probably not completely unfounded as to their origin they are not actual current crises. Somebody somewhere is desperately fishing out for a good diversion and another smear and it is best not to play in their hands.

I have never been convinced by Boris Johnson. He really is too much of a clown to be Prime Minister or occupy one of the great offices of state. Why would Boris still be miffed over a junior shadow cabinet position when it was that junior position which enabled him to run for Mayor and now occupy an elected office of a major city rather than wait a few years in the shadow cabinet for a general election? But if Boris in any way starts running an offence against Cameron then Boris should be cut loose by the party and that goes for anyone else as well. The problem isn't that the papers write about personalities rubbing each other the wrong way like Blair/Brown, it's that keeping them in the cabinet destroys the ability of the cabinet to function properly. Blair should have shown Brown the door early on when it was clear he was briefing against the Prime Minister. I'm not talking about creating a cult of personal loyalty to Cameron but anyone who doesn't get on with Cameron and wants a cabinet job has to bury their feelings and defer to the occupant of the office of Prime Minister. Is Boris such an idiotic clown than he doesn't understand the importance of unity?

" He really is too much of a clown to be Prime Minister or occupy one of the great offices of state."

Well, Doug, as a Londoner I'm pretty impressed at how well our "Clown" has done as Mayor of this fine City! Presumably you are not keen on those holding high office demonstrating wit and a sense of humour?
Perhaps you prefer the Prime Minister who sulks and throws office equipment at his minions!

I'd be more concerned if there was no tension, as it would suggest lack of ambition and competition for the top role.

Boris doesn't owe the Red Tory Roons any favours, he was elected Mayor as Boris, not as the 'David Cameron's Red Tory Keep Your Head Down And Say Nothing Unpopular Conservatives' candidate.

Cameron hasn't been elected yet, Boris has.

I think the roons need to show a little more respect to Boris as when Osborne falls flat on his face and drags Cameron down, Boris will be there to keep Labour out of office.

Let's remember who that pitiful little New Labour puppet Philip Webster, who relayed this drivel at the behest of his political masters, is best friends with - Ed Balls! As Guinevere says above, somebody somewhere is desperately fishing out for a good diversion and another smear. Now I wonder who it could be?!

I think this story is just more wicked nonsense. This is very much the kind of thing that we can expect to see more of in the coming months. Its true that Boris can be a little OTT at times and maybe Dave is a little over cautious, but to paint these men as disliking each other is utter nonsense. To me this is yet another example of why our press is in need of reform. It is very sad to see the Times being brought down to the level of the National enquirer.

"Whatever the differences of the past it's vital that the three men at the heart of the Tory project - David Cameron, George Osborne and Boris Johnson - work out a way of getting along. "

There is no evidence that they do not get along Tim. In addition we must not loose site of the importance of W.H. who makes up the other Third of the Westminster team. We all love Boris and admire what he is doing for London, but when push comes to shove D.C. is our Leader and I am certain that Boris will knuckle under just like the rest of us.

The Labour 'spin machine' is going mad. They will do and say ANYTHING to stay in power. I am thinking about putting a bet on there being a General Election BEFORE 2010. Good luck to Cameron and his team.

It's quite possible that Boris does despise David Cameron, but so what? Providing Boris doesn't put his personal feelings before the country and his party then his private thoughts are not an issue.

In public I think Boris will give Dave his full support and that's what really matters.

Anyway, is this really the best Labour can come up with? I remember all those Brown hates Tony rumours, they didn't matter then and this doesn't matter now.

"Let's remember who that pitiful little New Labour puppet Philip Webster, who relayed this drivel at the behest of his political masters, is best friends with - Ed Balls! As Guinevere says above, somebody somewhere is desperately fishing out for a good diversion and another smear. Now I wonder who it could be?!" - RW.

So this article isn't Werbster's - it's Balls'!

There is a large ideological gap between Boris and Cameron. Boris is at heart and libertarian but can be inconsistent on some issues. Cameron is an authoritarian centralist who wants to impose his will, e.g. on the environment and obesity, through legislation (including EU laws) and tax.

This split is typical of the debate on the Tory benches. For now, it is hidden in the smoke-banned rooms of the Commons. Getting rid of Brown is the current priority. Once Labour is out, however, there will be a massive ideological battle for the heart and soul of the Conservative government.

Cameron will lead the wets but who will lead the drys in uncertain. Davis? Redwood? Hannan? That, along with the EU, is a proverbial elephant in the Conservative room.

Happiness is intrinsic, it's an internal thing

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker