A year ago the Conservative Spring Forum was in Gateshead. I urged the Tory leader to give a speech that levelled with the British people:
From reports it appears that David Cameron will deliver something close to that speech today, in Cheltenham.
With the considerable exception of the party's opposition to Darling's autumn stimulus (although even that was backed by considerable private polling) the Tories have been very unwilling to get ahead of public opinion on the recession. And let's be clear: This tactic has been an enormous political success. A second YouGov poll put the Tories 18% ahead last night. The collapse of Labour means that it's as certain as anything in politics that David Cameron will be Prime Minister. Political success doesn't mean success for the country, of course. New Labour were an enormous political success but did not succeed as a government.
I have the same concern expressed by Fraser Nelson in today's News of the World. Does David Cameron have a plan to rescue Britain? Fraser writes:
Nigel Lawson writes for The Sunday Telegraph today and reminds us what every conservative knows: the 50p tax "will be economically damaging". The former Chancellor of the Exchequer continues:
Even now, with Labour collapsing, the Conservative leadership appears reluctant to really level with the British people. The 50p issue has become a symbol of this reluctance. Opposition to this sort of tax must feature in a credible Tory recovery plan. We must also become much more honest about public spending. Policy Exchange have calculated that public spending will rise to more than 50% of GDP next year. This, The Sunday Times tells us, "is higher than the 49.7% peak reached when Denis Healey had to turn to the IMF for help in 1976, and underlines the scale of the crisis in the public finances and the even deeper cuts in spending that will be needed after the election."
Perhaps the Tories have a secret plan to put Britain right and it will be unveiled shortly after election day when all the votes are safely gathered in? My fear is Fraser's fear. I fear that there is no secret plan. I fear that a Conservative government will do just enough to manage us away from the edge of the cliff but not enough to restore Britain as the enterprise capital of Europe. I'm desperately hoping to be proved wrong and I'm hoping for signs from David Cameron that I am wrong in Cheltenham later today.
Tim Montgomerie
Forgive me Tim, if I say that I am getting increasingly worried about this sort of obssessing with the 50% tax rate. This obssession with the problems of those best placed to weather the storm is held against the backdrop that the age of austerity will affect ordinary wage earners far more in proportionate terms.I don't like the 50% tax rate any more than you do, but forgive me if I don't believe that everyone by any means on that sort of salary is a wealth creator, for frankly they are not. Many,many of the entrepeneurs are raking in far less than £150,000 p.a.
Forgive me if I agree with Cameron that there are bigger priorities in tax reduction than reducing this tax.You talk Tim as though there is an infallible wisdom - almost a divine right - that the top rate HAS to be at 40%. Sorry but no - if it was so, then why did Maggie wait for 9 years before reducing it to that level.I'll tell you why, because like Cameron she was a realist and a practical politician. Sorry if I sound steamed up about this, but you are asking Cameron to do something that not even Maggie did - namely go to the electorate in the worst crisis since the 1930's and say the first thing we are going to do is to ease the burden on the better off, but by the way expect it to be really, really tough for the rest of you. It ain't on Tim - it really ain't
Posted by: Peter Buss | April 26, 2009 at 09:03
Very much sharing the concern. When war with Iraq II was looming we honestly believed that there were WMD out there and Bush et al were waiting the expose the true extent of the Iraqi threat once the weapon(s) had been neutralised. So we went along reluctantly with the invasion because we had faith that our great leaders would deliver some shocking truth.
But there was nothing. It was a lie or at best an elaborately embroidered half-truth.
'My fear is Fraser's fear. I fear that there is no secret plan. I fear that a Conservative government will do just enough to manage us away from the edge of the cliff but not enough to restore Britain as the enterprise capital of Europe again.'
We need to see evidence that our top team actually does have a solution. We need to know that when we assume power that we have a reason and a plan, a sense of purpose. Or to assume power is to make an ASS of U and ME as the saying goes.
Posted by: englandism.co.uk | April 26, 2009 at 09:19
Whatever he says or does now, Cameron is going to get the mother of all poisoned chalices from Brown. When he gets in, Dave will have nothing to offer but blood, sweat, toil and tears. In his quieter moments Cam may question whether the job of Prime Minister will be worth having by the time he gets it.
Posted by: Surreybill | April 26, 2009 at 09:19
I agree with Tim and Fraser. I see no sign that Cameron is serious about doing what is really necessary to sort Britain. Whoever wins the election I fear we are back to the management of decline.
Posted by: Phyllis Crash | April 26, 2009 at 09:21
Things are going to have to change, and change dramatically at that. One feels that Labour's excessive and unnecessary borrowing was deliberately aimed at pushing Conservatives into being seen as 'cutters' whenever there is talk of tackling government debt. However, that as it may be, the case has to be made for balancing the books.
I agree with the editor in that there appears to be no great plan other than a desire to tackle govt debt. This would be a mistake because the recession has given the Conservative party an opportunity to be more bold and to be ambitious. We should promise to build our economy through manufacturing, support for the greater development of an internal market, and removing the barriers to job-creation such as anti-merger legislation and red tape on 1001 issues such as working hours, wages, and unnecessary H&S or PC practices.
An ambitious plan would completely sink Labour's claims that the Conservatives would be a 'do nothing' government. There is so much room for change and if there is a huge Conservative government there will be a visible mandate for change.
Change ought to mean change and not more of the same only better managed.
Posted by: Tony Makara | April 26, 2009 at 09:23
Having a plan involves working out what needs doing then identifying the most experienced people to deliver that plan and putting them in place.
If Cameron did have a plan, Osborne would not be Shadow Chancellor.
Posted by: ToryBlog.com - A RON (Replace Osborne Now) not a Roon | April 26, 2009 at 09:39
" I fear that there is no secret plan. "
Yes, there doesn't seem to be any evidence of one for you would have thought tha, in light of the budgetary crisis we are facing, some of the thinking to confront it would be hinted at, for it will take wholesale changes to the services that state delivers and the means of delivery to get on top of the problem. Yet I see no evidence of the Conservatives doing any of the detailed planning. Look at tax credits, that is the state subsidising poor wages, so on that basis you might have thought the Conservatives would by opposed to the concept, let alone the fact that is nigh on impossible to administer without losing billions. Yet Osborne intends to keep it.
Posted by: Iain | April 26, 2009 at 09:45
First win the election! Our victory cannot be taken for granted until about 3am the day after polling day!
I am sure that Cameron does have a plan - I am not sure he'd want to share it. The more people know about something, the less likely it is to remain secret!
Posted by: Freddy | April 26, 2009 at 09:59
I suspect Tory MP's circa 1979 had the same concerns to be honest. I would like the 50% rate to be reversed, but i think it would make more electoral sense not to do it until something like year 2 of the administration.
Posted by: Voice from the South West | April 26, 2009 at 10:08
Iain, you are spot on over tax-credits. The entire tax-credits system is designed to keep working people dependent on the state, with a resulting influence on voting patterns. Are those receiving tax-credits likely to vote for a party proposing to scrap them? Therein lies the problem. The Conservative team must make the case for an alternative based on taking the lowest earners out of taxation altogether.
Posted by: Tony Makara | April 26, 2009 at 10:27
"The Conservative team must make the case for an alternative based on taking the lowest earners out of taxation altogether."
Yes that is the most efficient tax credit system of all, don't take the dammed tax in the first place. No administration costs, no need to try and claw overpayments back, no state dependency, and employers made to pay a living wage. This is the sort of efficiencies the Conservatives should be looking to impliment. Another is NI, its an an income tax, so make it a bloody income tax!
Posted by: Iain | April 26, 2009 at 11:02
"but i think it would make more electoral sense not to do it until something like year 2 of the administration.
Or you could simply ridicule Labour boldly by saying something like "to think that simplistic tax hikes to 50% will actually result in the govt successfully collecting 50% of existing people's incomes is as naive and dangerous as thinking that raising the tax rate to 100% will raise twice as much.
High tax rates actually result in a lower overall government revenues as high earners are the most mobile, and most likely to leave the UK, which at this time of record government debt is economic suicide.
It may be tempting to bash the rich but this small group of just x% actually contribute xx% of the total govt tax revenue, so scaring them off will actually lead to significantly higher taxes for everyone."
Posted by: ToryBlog.com - A RON (Replace Osborne Now) not a Roon | April 26, 2009 at 11:02
Places like this seem determined to do Brown's work for him! The 50p is a trap, clear and simple. Cameron's dealt with it brilliantly, answering that he is against it but moving the terms of debate onto NI rises for the lower paid, saying repealing that is a priority. Do what you suggest with 50p and Labour's general election campaign will have written itself.
Posted by: David | April 26, 2009 at 11:06
The Conservatives share the same problem as both Labour and the Lib-Dems in that they are all led by professional career politicians, who tend to see things from the same perspective. We may have some innovative and radical thinkers amongst the Tory MPs, but, with the possible exception of Micheal Gove, they do not feature in Cameron's shadow cabinet.
Cameron is certainly a skilful political operator, and will probably win the election, but that does not necessarily mean that he will make a good Prime Minister.
He will face a critical energy shortage, almost certainly during his first term of office, yet he has shown little awareness of the seriousness of this and is still wittering on about green energy and having to comply with the totally impractical and unachievable EU emissions targets.
Posted by: David Parker | April 26, 2009 at 11:12
Whatever we choose to do it will be a battle to gain acceptance.People posting on this site should keep in mind who the enemy really is.It is not George Osborne who has given this country a public debt which consumes 12% of GDP it is Gordon Brown.He and he alone pored millions into public services without insisting upon any reform.
It is absoluely imperative that we obliterate this Government and no other consideration comes close to this.Please temper your critiques with this simple fact in mind.We are on the brink of the opportunity to end Labour for good!!
Posted by: Winston C | April 26, 2009 at 11:12
"The 50p is a trap"
LOL. Of course it is, but leaving cheap politics out of it, it is actually much, much more than a political trap, it is a dangerous policy that will lower government revenue.
Cameron needs to be bold enough to step above political fighting and do what is right for Britain.
David @ 11:06,
Who's to say the taxodus of people will return after 2 terms of a Tory govt if they lower it in the future? Britain may be losing a permanent stream of revenue, and to let this happen for fear of standing up to political tricks displays a weakness that is not compatible with running Britain at this time of economic crisis and sterring it to recovery.
Posted by: ToryBlog.com - A RON (Replace Osborne Now) not a Roon | April 26, 2009 at 11:16
In September 2007, George Osborne pledged to match Labour's spending totals until 2010/11, committing a Conservative government to increase spending from £615 billion in 2008/09 to £674 billion in 2010/11.
In September 2007, David Cameron was still praising monetary authorities for delivering stability!
I think it is safe to say there is no secret plan.
Posted by: Tom H | April 26, 2009 at 11:18
I expect they're probably playing it safe for the time being, as every time they announce a policy, Labour steal it and claim it as their own!
Most recently, "Gordon Brown" announced a Community Service style arrangement for the under 19's. Sound familiar? You bet it does.
Posted by: Andrew S | April 26, 2009 at 11:40
The comments to this entry are closed.