« David Cameron refuses to rule out scrapping/ delaying replacement for Trident | Main | David Cameron has succeeded in broadening the party donor base (to a point) »

Comments

All good.

All OK. Except perhaps no.2 - these are the groups that are may be behind so much of Labour's curtailing of freedom of speech, religion and conscience, freedoms we've opposed the fascists and communists to defend. Louder some minority interests shout and greater the difficulty they threaten if they don't get their way, the more we surrender to their demands, regardless of right and wrong. We've seen it also with the caving into supporting Labour over excluding Mr Wilders. Shouldn't the Conservatives defend freedom?

That's nice. So Dave and George have decided what we will be doing. Great. Everyone can follow now, can't they? Perhaps party members might like to take leadership elections more seriously next time...

All good, but be wary of being reactionary to prove something if the press makes something up - there's a danger that 1 and 2 can be that and 3 is falling for a trap calling it an environmental measure.

I'm fairly annoyed about number 4. The recent promises to leave the bloated NHS budget in tact and to not cut International development funding either is worrying. These are two of the first areas I would expect any government to turn to and to cut spending. Although defending frontline staff in the NHS and in schools should be a priority, no area of government should be off limits to cuts.

Im worried Cameron wont do enough to get down spending fast enough and even if he does cut it back significantly he wont take the opportunity to cut back on the roll of the state. Now is the chance to fundamentally alter to roll of government and make sure we really limit the scope of its economic activity. Mr Cameron should not miss this chance

This is embarrassing. The nation's finances are going down the gurgler and Cameron is going on gay pride marches. What a joke!

Two other prongs...

6. No return to Europhobia

7. No nasty Punch & Judy attacks

I am not a homophobe and indeed I have a lot of very close gay friends and love them dearly.
However I think it is unfair to equate the gender discrimination problem with the sexual orientation discrimination problem.
After all more than 50% of the population is made up of Women (Since women live longer than men), while the percentage of Gay people in the population is not event in the same scale.
Given the above, I don't believe that Sexual orientation should have anything to do with political selection just as I don't believe that religious beliefs should. These are personal and private preferences.

All bad!

David Cameron's strategy is certainly doing its best to but roadblocks in the way of core Tory voters like me from voting for him.

Fair enough, with the terrible government we have now he probably can't lose the next election anyway. But just remeber that in the hard years to come he will quickly lose the support of the Guardianistas and the politically correct brigade. He will have to fall back on people like us real, loyal Conservatives for the party to survive.

...and he may just find that we're not there!

Oh dear.

1a) If you promote women on gender rather than ability you end up with a front bench like labours...

1b) 'Ethnic Minority' - aren't we past this nonsense? If an ethnic group is still a distinct ethnic group after a few generations then something is probably wrong in the country... Either we are being 'racist' by keeping them out or 'they' are being racist by keeping away...

2) Why does the (soon to be) government have any interest in what consenting adults do with their private parts? Will Cameron be 'celebrating' with groups of swingers and others based on their sexual preference?

3) If Greg Clark can make such a promise what is he doing as an MP rather than being the greatest industrialist of the next decade? Isn't he just hoping that the private sector will deliver this for him to take the credit?

4) NHS? get politics out of healthcare delivery. International Development - how about some local and national development first to pay for it?

5) IDS - what ever he says, as long as it doesn't involve making me pay for anything...

Again I wonder if I am a tory at all...

Am I on the correct site? Is this Labour Home?

What is the date? April 1st?

Give me a break!!!

Leave this BBC lefty clap trap for the socialists. The country doesn't have the stomach for it.

We've had 12 years of countless initiatives and endless legislation on equal rights for pink whales. And saving the world by knitting free range yoghurt and erecting pointless wind turbines. ENOUGH.

That's one of the reasons we are in the mess we are in. Hasn't anyone ever heard of the Lotus Eaters?

What is needed is more of a return to re-establishing our liberties, promoting personal responsibility and competing in the global economy. So please, no more do gooder state sponsored 'nanny knows best' policies.

It's late. Perhaps I fell asleep in front of Taggart and this 'New Labour' sorry 'New Toryism' was just a nightmare (a one that has been recurring since 1997).

"...He will have to fall back on people like us real, loyal Conservatives for the party to survive.

...and he may just find that we're not there!..."

Well then you're hardly a "loyal Conservative" in that case, are you?

Even I can see that and I'm a floating voter. LOL

Frankly, if that's your attitude Shaun, I think David Cameron is right to ditch people like you who harp back to the bad old days of the 'Nasty Party' - the 'greed is good' party. You know? the sort of thing that nearly destroyed the Tories in 1997.

Wouldn't you be happier voting for UKIP or the BNP?

I rather like the direction that 'Dave' is traveling at the moment - who knows? I might even vote for him - but to make sure that my awful Labour MP, Ann McGuire is removed; I will have to vote SNP.

I think you will find that the coming General Election will see a lot of tactical voting, where both the LibDems and the Tories will benefit at Labours expense.
I would love to see Labour beaten into third party status if only for the laugh of seeing Brown have to stand up at PMQ's without the aid of a despatch box to lean on.

DC must be off his trolley if this is what he's proposing (save re 5 re IDS) - does he really think these things are what has led to the big lead in the polls? There is absolutely no need for this.

The grass roots will start thinking where is Boris...

I simply do not "get" the support for international development particularly as there is little or no evidence to demonstrate its effectiveness.

While it may be possible to support the NHS pledge it will not be if the present bloated management structure is kept in place. A transfer of resources to clinical services and ecellence therein would be welcome.

In my view the single most important pledge is to restore a sound economy.

Dave can do the side issues 'til the cows come home, it's the big issues that he runs a mile from.

I can see David Cameron snatching defeat from the jaws of victory if this little bag of sh*t is unleashed. With the exception of the NHS being give priority on spending the rest is Social Labour with a Blue-Rinse and as for Number 2, YEUCH!!!

I bet UKIP and the BNP are jumping for joy at this asinine stupidity.

It fills me with inexpressible joy that the prospective Tory administration – sorry, that’s “New Tory Carers & Counsellors for the Nation” – will emphasise outreach to gay rights groups (whatever that means) and that the NHS and international development are the top two Tory spending priorities. I mean, what else is life all about?

I am fed up to my back teeth with the bogeyman of the "Nasty Party" being wheeled out to defend the destruction of all that the Tory Party once stood for, especially Family Values and our Judeo Christian Ethics .

Let us look at the man who is often blamed for being the Father of the Nasty Party, Michael Howard. Far from being a failure he got the Conservative Party the best General Election result since 1992, we could NOT have won in 2005, and after two drubbings under Major and Hague, Duncan-Smith being such a dead loss that he wasn't even allowed to lead the Party at a General Election! As for those policies that are often held out as being "Nasty" the majority of ordinary voters would probably welcome them with open arms, e.g. the return of Grammar Schools with pupils selected on ability, hard sentences which really punish the criminal, upholding the Traditional Nuclear Family and all that goes with it as the core of our Society, etc.

The real "Nasty Party" consists of those economic elements who worship the Market at all costs, and who feel nothing about throwing masses of good workers on the dole, and the extreme Libertarians to whom "anything goes".

Up until now the Conservative Party has been poised to win the next General Election, only the size majority was the question. If this nonsense is published then I can see those floating voters who are inclined to come back to voting Tory deserting instead to UKIP or even the BNP. It would be a tragedy were we to fall at the last fence when the winning post was in our sight.

After 12 years of Labour PC fascism, the Tories just want to promise more of the same??? You are quite mad.

Look, we need to sort out our economy, encourage business and entrepreneurship, have an energy strategy, restore personal responsibility, educate our children for the 21st century, integrate immigrants, tackle terrorism, re-establish trust in the police, clean our hospitals, tackle the huge deficit in pensions, get rid of all the foreign undesireables, sort out the population issues, restore our freedoms, tackle the EU problem, tackle the West Lothian problem etc, etc, etc.

How does recruiting people on gender and ethnicity help - what we need is talent the best people available, what they look like doesn't matter.

Outreach to gay rights groups?????? How about outreach to English people, especially those who want to work hard, play hard, bring up their families and be left in peace - the most discriminated against group in this country!!!!

The Saudi Arabia of renewable energy - are we putting burkas over the windmills now? To hide their disfigurement of our green and pleasant land as they produce less than 1% of our energy needs - and that's not counting electric cars !!! Ah yes, Saudi Arabia - women don't drive do they - less energy needed!!!!

We have got the biggest budget deficit ever, many of us will be lucky if it is cleared before we die - probably in poverty as our pensions have been stolen - and the Tories want to throw more money to African despots - wonderful!!

Just clean the hospitals of MRSA, useless management, and targets - does that take more money????

More IDS I'll go for - that could be useful.

I'm all for social conservatism, but this list is the most depressing thing I've seen all week - and looking at Brown that really says something!!!!!!

Welcome to ConservativeHome: where the last dregs of the 19th century still remain!

Come gawp at their backwards views!

Be amazed at how they berate Muslims and yet hold views which wouldn't be out of place in the Islamic Republic of Iran!

Gather round and read all the mid-life crisis white men from the Moan Counties whinge about the world around them and their own life failures!

All fascinating stuff, better than Eastenders.

If David Cameron wants to show that he is seeking to promote equality, all he needs to do is further Nadine's career. She has an increasingly high profile in the media, gets loads of positive comments on her blog, and is going for McBride in the courts. It's hard to see how he can avoid giving her a front line job after the election, so why not do it now? A popular move, methinks.

NorthernMonkey: that really is the best you can do, isn't it.

Prepare for opposition. And know you deserve it.

This week canvassed another 100+ voters. Not one mentioned lack of women candidates.. Am I missing something?

Should all white males now forget about trying to be an MP? (Unless you went to Eton/Oxford/Cambridge/Barrister/CCHQ hack that is?

We cannot reasonably claim to be a party of non-sexism and non-racism if we got ahead with point 1.

The others are great.

Conservative and independent English voters will vote for whichever party takes on these issues: immigration, energy (nuclear that is), big government, law & order, Islamic Extremism, Europe and tax. If the Tories campaign on these issues they'll win - all that 'New Tory' modernising shit is for the birds.

So if I were to become a lesbian Islamic nurse who's had things a little bit tough in the past and is obsessed with 'global warming' then I could have a seat in the cabinet? But then I wouldn't have time to complain about not being given special treatment and badger people about how their rights to free speech should be supressed to avoid hurting my feelings.

WE ARE BRITISH!

We are supposed to be understated. We do not march. None of my gay friends would be seen dead at a pride parade. They consider it an embarrassment and I don't blame them.

@NorthernMonkey

Whats it like knowing that even your own voters don't agree with you?

Is this Labourhome site or am I missing something here ?

Immigration by Third World Invaders ? The Third Reich ? ( sorry The EU , crime, the falling apart of our schooling system ?....

And Cameron witters on about ' International Development ' and just about every other leftist cause. Jesus, this country is truely done for. Nu Labour, Blu Labour... can anyone tell them apart ?

A few points.

First of all, as a gay person I wouldn't be seen dead at a gay pride march. I think at this point it is harming our cause and the community. I disagree with Cameron doing that.

Secondly, as a Conservative, I would never support legislation that would outlaw 'hate speech' or force equality. The gender equalities bill and any legislation like that for gay people. I would simply like the freedom to private sexual relations and to have my relationship recognised by the law as a union.

No social engineering, no 'forced equality', no bullying people, I'd just like my freedom please.

Please do not assume that all gay people are of the same political persuasion. I sometimes cringe when I see what is proposed in the name of gay equality.

"Further promotion of women and ethnic minority Conservatives."

equals positive discrimination

As someone trying to campaign in a Northern seat with some large working class areas, our commitment to overseas aid is a vote loser.

Someone struggling on a low-middle income in my constituency doesn't want his pocket picking to spend overseas when he's worried about his own job and his kids.

Promising to give more to banana republics and obsessing about promoting people based on their race is an open goal for the BNP. Our party should know better than to pander like this.

If I wanted all this weird obsessive lefty rubbish to be Britain's priority I would vote Liberal Democrat and buy the Guardian newspaper every day.

1. What matters is what they believe and their ability, not their colour or gender.
2. Gay rights groups represent gay rights groups' obsessions only. Be fair to homosexuals, but don't pander to the weirdos who rise to the top of these self-important organisations. We should bypass weird organisations and go direct to the people every time.
3. Great, let's make our country clean. Make some policies to clean the streets, our litter problem is hardly mentioned these days but it's still there.
4a. The NHS's problem is how the money is spent and how the hospitals are run, not how much money is going in. The obsession should be with making hospitals run properly and clean, not spending more money.
4b. International Development spending priority is a purely bizarre attempt to pander to Guardian readers, and it's morally wrong for our rich Eton/Oxbridge rulers to take our money in a financial crisis and give it to other countries. Weird, out of touch decision that only a financially comfortable person could make.
5. Iain Duncan Smith is a great man but the phrase "social justice" should go the way of the dodo because it has been a lame excuse for a stream of pointless, stupid policies. End the silly lefty language and bring in common sense plain English on each issue.

I vote Conservative because of Daniel Hannan, Boris Johnson, Iain Duncan Smith, and David Davis, not because of any of this pandering to the BBC and Guardian newspaper rubbish.

Looks more like "New Tokenism" to me.

And how exactly is any of this five pronged affirmation going to be joyously welcomed by the silent majority more anxious to hear how they are going to be rescued from 12 years of being overtaxed, overregulated, overgoverned, badly governed and governed by unelected foreigners? Can it be taken as read that these more pressing matters of concern already have clear and coherent remedies all set for launch, which can be left as a lower communication priority?

I despair.

Thank god I resigned from the Conservative party in 2007 when I thought they were failing to deal with the most important issues, like the economy, whilst peddling far too much of this 'progressive' crap. Every that has subsequently happened has confirmed that my resignation was the correct move.

But I thank Dave and his 'luvie' agenda for resolving any debate I was having in where I should place my EU vote, the toss up was between trying to give the Conservatives momentum in order to get rid of Brown, or to vote for policies that represent my views. Thanks Dave, job done, its the latter!

Seems to be a lot of negativity here.... but without real details it could go either way.
We know what these plans mean if it was labour and it would be awful, ie. 1 and 2 would be solely limted to going on the march and then making a unworkable law to discriminate against white straight men.
International Development would mean just throwing money at bad countries governments whilst people here suffer.
Renewable energy would just mean you're getting windmills whether you like it or not because of carbon or you'll die, you're told.

BUT ensuring no discrimination, investing in other countries and finding other energy sources (whilst still making nuclear plants and investing in fission) are still good things and tories shouldn't be put off doing something about that just because labour have tried and fuppedup, or other groups have 'claimed' the issue.

This is the sort of claptrap we expect from Labour and the LibDems.

As for "outreaching to gay rights groups", whatever that means - embracing, perhaps? I am not anti homosexuals, think `there but the grace if God go I` but there were few problems until they demanded and got rights. Now they are allowed to flaunt their beliefs openly in parades in the hope of attracting youngsters to their way of life.

The Conservative party sounds more and more like Blue Labour.


PS What about our contributions to the EU? Never given even a mention.

I am afraid I agree with the critical comments here. It is clear that it is not just Labour who are completely out of touch with electors' real concerns.

What a joke! I mean to say what a total load of tosh.

All Cameron should have done was to state that the Conservative Party believes in meritocracy and then gone out of its way to prove it, i.e. a selection system that obviously shows that it selects talented people only no matter what their gender etc.

All this sucking up to individual groups only serves to keep them in their boxes and not to mix with the rest of society. Why do we need gay pride marches in the first place, or special groups for women and ethnic minority people? Do gay people have different views on tax to straight people? Do women need a different transport policy to men? Do ethnic minorities need a separate policy on Europe to white people? Of course not, we are all UK Subjects and we should be treated equally!

I'm very surprised at the negative reaction on this thread.

None of the list of five is new to those of us who are regular students of the Cameron project. The only thing that is new is that the leadership is determined to show that the modernisation of the first three years has not been jettisoned for the times of thrift/ austerity. The message is, I think, that the party is going to take tough decisions on public finances but that does not mean that the changes made by David Cameron are over. They are not and they take five main forms.

Tim, I was just about to post along exactly the same lines - you have beaten me to it and put it probably more effectively than I would have done!
This is mainstream Cameron Conservatism - for those who have started reading this thread thinking that we have all suddenly turned into Labour-lite - Move Along, Nothing to See Here!

"I'm very surprised at the negative reaction on this thread."

Should you be? We have an economic melt down and Dave is going to march with Gays. Great, that will sort the budget deficit out! In a months time there is going to be the EU elections, and Conservative EU policy is what exactly? And Dave witters on about equality, yet ignores the biggest discrimination in the UK, the constitutional discrimination against English people, and Dave is going to do nothing about it!

OH yes and one further thing, everytime the Conservatives get their noses 10 or more points ahead of Labour, Dave drags out his progressive claptrap and blows his electoral advantage on it, instead of developing Conservtive policy agendas!

@Iain,

Have you heard about walking and chewing gum at the same time?!

I want David Cameron to be very tough on public spending (I await his plans on that front) but it's possible for much of the modernisation agenda to thrive alongside that austerity.

Tim,

There is nothing caring or modern about positive discrimination.

The wording and gay parade photo opp look like nothing but cheap tokenism, not a genuine attempt to deliver equality by smashing down the walls of prejudice.

@ToryBlog.com,

I agree with you on positive discrimination. I don't like what I see of gay pride marches. I don't think we should exclude the NHS from the austerity era. Nonetheless I recognise where Cameron stands on these issues and am reporting that a shadow cabinet minister is insisting that these themes persist and that the leadership is making an effort to demonstrate that. The reaction of CCHQ to The Times' attack on Cameron's promotion of females is testimony to this.

I have sympathy with the aspiration to promote women (although not the means), to end the once common view that Conservatives don't like gay people, to promote sensible conservationism, to invest in effective global poverty-fighting projects and, most of all, to accelerate IDS' social justice agenda.

"Have you heard about walking and chewing gum at the same time?!"

Well that will be a useful skill for Dave to have while on his Gay pride march.

Tim, Sally.

We don't want to be told down the line "but you didn't say anything at the time".

Cameron will become PM based on some personal support, some tory tribal support, some anyone but brown support etc...

So it is still the conservative party, not the cameron party!!

Until the party starts selecting leaders with red and white smoke, it is reasonable for people to point him in the right direction.

After all did his views appear spontaneously in his head? or does he form and modify his views in the light of external input?

As Richard @9:04 says - merit is the key. How you ensure merit is rewarded (and never overlooked) is an implementation detail, not a policy.

I think the many people who 'despair' are missing the point.

The Conservatives have been unfairly labelled as the 'nasty' party. It wasn't true, it was clever spin and media labelling. But it stuck and its horribly toxic.

David Cameron is in the processing of a mass detox and its ongoing and vital.

We cannot make the arguments we want to make (and i'm with you all on most of them) while we are just viewed in the way the NorthernMonkey so eloquently spews forth.

In every instance listed here, David Cameron is taking the areas we are traditionally considered weak and strengthening them. I suspect the logic is that he is more likely to gain back the lost votes than to lose the solid ones.

Clearly, from the grass roots comments here this is a delicate balancing act. But please understand : We Cannot Afford To Lose the next election. I honestly believe a fourth Labour term, or even a hung parliament, would mean the end of Britain as we know it.

I'm not saying that Cameron is 'lying'. What i'm saying is what most of us already know. We are not a 'nasty' party. We don't hate gays, or ethnic minorities. We don't want to take money from the poor and give it to the rich. This is Labour spin. But they are so **very good** at the spin. We have to remove the easy targets.

That's what Cameron is doing and I applaud it. Let's get elected first, then get on repairing the damage Labour have done as only Conservatives can. Until then, bite your tongues, deliver your leaflets, and let's make genuine intelligent arguments to win our cases on policies once we are in power.

"but it's possible for much of the modernisation agenda to thrive alongside that austerity."

That depends on whether this 'modernisation' is modernisations, or if the 'modernisation' Cameron is pursuing is in fact a discredited policy that has seen its day.

They actually think that's why people are changing to the Conservatives? Hahaha.

My family is Labour, but modernisation is not what turned me. I'm voting Conservative despite the modernisation agenda.

I'm voting for the party of Daniel Hannan, Boris Johnson, Iain Duncan Smith, and David Davis.

I support David Cameron because he is clever and ruthless in crushing Gordon Brown into the ground. We need a strong Prime Minster like that to ensure we are a strong country.

When they get in the Guardian should have ZERO influence.

Sally, I know you are David Cameron's Parrot but I don't think anyone thinks he has "suddenly" become New Labour-lite. He has been the "Heir to Blair" for three years.
A Cameron Government is very likely to know-tow to the BBC/Guardian world view.

I will believe his talk about the age of austerity when I see it. It will be austerity for us, the voters, while Westminster insiders no doubt continue to do what they do best: lying, blaming others for their mistakes and wasting taxpyers' money.

"Should you be? We have an economic melt down and Dave is going to march with Gays."

....sneers Iain!

Iain - "Gays" - both gay men and lesbians are people and voters too and, dislike it as you may, they make up a large number of the population. The only difference between them and ourselves is that they fall in love with and enjoy sexual relationships with those of the same gender as themselves rather than the opposite as we do. By the way your remark about David Cameron chewing gum was both rude and silly!

As for Michael McGowan - well I am flattered you describe me as a parrot. They are noted for their brightly coloured plumage, their articulacy and their longevity. My goodness, I think I should just re-name myself "Sally Roberts - The Human Zoo"!!

Talking of austerity...

How will MPs show they are sharing the pain (that they are responsible for having led us in to!) ?

How about no foreign holidays for MPs 'till the books balance? Cut their C02, boost UK tourist industry, doesn't impact their work as MPs, a *real* personal sacrifice for many...

Steve Tierney - "please understand : We Cannot Afford To Lose the next election. I honestly believe a fourth Labour term, or even a hung parliament, would mean the end of Britain as we know it. "

The problem is Steve that this sort of lefty gibberish does little to persuade some of us that Britain will be any more secure under the Cameroons. One can only hope for the best, but I remain unconvinced.

""Gays" - both gay men and lesbians are people and voters too and, dislike it as you may, they make up a large number of the population."

Never said they weren't, but I would suggest to you its not me that seeks to single them out as a special separate group, its Cameron who is going to march with the extremists of that particular sexual orientation. And that is what really irks me about this, for Cameron rather than treating all people as individuals has bought into this Cultural Marxist claptrap, where unless you have had the 'privilege ' of being nominated as a 'special' minority interest group, then the Westminster village doesn’t want to know about you.

I'm suprised at this. For most people these are very much sideshow issues even no.5 which I think is incredibly important.
I wonder how 'in the loop' this Shadow Cabinet Minister actually is?

Sally, why don't you just save yourself a lot of work when you e-mail by just posting the link to www.conservatives.com?

pp, MPs of all parties (on the whole, the Tories are no different) take the same view of voters as Leona Helmsley - only little people pay taxes.

Yes, Michael McGowan - very amusing isn't it to mock the fact that I belong to and am active in a Party whose views I support! There are many others just like me.

As for Edward Huxley - the mere fact you describe them as "these people" says it all! Are you sure you and others don't protest too much?

Sally, I'm mocking your uncritical adulation....If Cameron advocated the slaughter of the first born (white and male of course), I'm sure you would find extenuating circumstances. Sorry to have spoiled your day by exercising a bit of independent judgment.

Just when I thought that the Cameroons were waking up to the real world this utter drivel comes along. They've learned nothing and a`re stuck in a neo-Blairite time warp.

1. promote SOLELY on merit. If people are good be gender and race blind. We want the best not tokenism.
2. Gay Rights - forget it. It should be all-inclusive. People demanding 'rights" are a menace
3. Forget this 'green'-sprung-from-global-warming] nonsense. Renewab;e energy by all means IF IT IS COST-EFFECTIVE which none of it is yet
4. NHS has arguably got enough MONEY already. What it needs is compassion and discipline and cleanliness. And what's this passion for giving money we haven't got in aid to people murdering one another ?
5. IDS OK but this is pure waffle!

As long as this lot are in Downing Street you'll get my unenthusiastic vote. EXCEPT - If he goes on a Gay Pride march I'll sit at home. This policy is so feeble it makes me feel queasy and if there was an alternative I'd take it.

Depressing and dreadful . It seems many of us agree!

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! It's not just right-wing Conservatives who despair at this kind of rubbish. Have you read the left-wing blogs lately? They, too, are crying out for firm leadership where it matters, not this nonsense.
I take a grain of comfort in the fact that this is not yet declared Conservative policy (is it?), but the opinion of some shadow(y) minister.

I am in favour of demonstrating that the party is taking seriously issues such as international development, human rights, social issues such as drugs and domestic violence, the environment and renewable energy, so I think the intention here is a good one. But the actual list provided by your anonymous shadow cabinet member shows a sad lack of depth, and a capitulation to the leftist approach that the solution is either to throw yet more money at the issue (NHS and internatonal development) or go along with the divisive rhetoric of 'minority rights' and 'affirmative action', which is more likely to divide society and alienate opinion than benefit those who it is intended to help. I am all for showing that we are a broader party, with genuine concern for issues which have previously been dominated by the left, but we should do so in a distinctively Conservative way.

Oh good
The economy's in free fall. The public services are unsustainable. The state education system is useless. 75% of our laws are written by foreigners. 10% of our population are foreigners and half of those are only here for the free money and housing.

And DC is going to buddy up with the gay rights movement.

Well I hope they reciprocate his love.

Country Mouse,

The modernisation agenda was ingrained in David Cameron's leadership bid. It's well documented on this website, read the archives from the days of the party leadership election. It's interesting.

Labour must regret the mistake of not having had a leadership battle, but we should also regret what was set in stone during Cameron's rise. We traded 100% common sense for winning the election.

Utter drivel.If this is conservatism God help us.

" It's not just right-wing Conservatives who despair at this kind of rubbish. Have you read the left-wing blogs lately? "

No I hadn’t, but if so I wonder if we are being fed this rubbish instead of real political policies because our politicians, having sold out most of our sovereignty, are reduced to pushing this politically correct claptrap as this is the only independent policy area left to Westminster.

And they wonder why we are dragging them over the coals on their expenses, if they need a hint its because A/ they aren't sovereign in their own house of Commons. B/ They have become no more than glorified social workers. C/ The only policy area left is the PC rubbish!

Give us some true political policy and we will get off your expenses case, deal?

"I'm very surprised at the negative reaction on this thread."

Point 1 (with the A-list debate, etc) and perhaps point 2 are not usually very popular on this website, and people probably have less time than they did pre-credit crunch for 3 and 4.

"Sally, I'm mocking your uncritical adulation"

I criticise, Michael McGowan, when I believe there is something to be critical about. That is why I tell you that you are a nasty, nasty man - particularly with your remark about the slaughter of the first born which is simply unpleasant and in poor taste.

David Cameron's strategy is certainly doing its best to but roadblocks in the way of core Tory voters like me from voting for him.

So, Shaun, you "core Tory voters" believe in:

1. Women getting back into the kitchen to make your dinner and ethnic minorities limiting themselves to selling your morning newspapers?

2. Gays pretending to be straight and having sex in the woods.

3. Forget future generations and just guzzle your way through the world's remaining oil/turn the planet into a greenhouse.

4. Commit the Conservatives to privatising the NHS and cutting taxes instead, ignoring those who don't earn enough to have insurance.

5. Promote an "I'm alright, Jack" society where you don't care about anyone other than yourself.

Sorry, but you can go join UKIP or the BNP if you want that sort of society. Those additions are good ones.

I know a lot would love to see the word 'Tory' revered once again, but it really is toxic waste, not least because there are too many Tories in the house screwing the public even now, reminding them of the 'bad old days'. That said, this list was about about as 'unTory' as I can imagine, but it still doesn't make it right.

Most people would list their items in order of priority, so why is social justice No.5?! Only fixing the economy is more important and even it must be done within a socially just framework. You can start behaving in accordance with Social justice right now (expenses anyone?) so it's my No.1.

Green stuff, OK, but creating a dynamic and diverse economy for the 21st century has to be No.2 and only because we can't start before we get in. We need balance for finance and it has to be about producing stuff.

Where's democracy? With Europe running a muck and parliament held in complete contempt by the public, I think restoring faith in politics and establishing honest, transparent government has to be No.3. Again a lot can be planned now.

Health and Education can be equal forth, again because we can't do anything until we get in. They will also rise to No.2 behind the economy once social justice and democracy are on a firm footing once again.

No.5 can be green stuff because it is important I believe.

Oh dear, that means that women's and gay rights don't feature. Why? Well first of all I want good people first and I don't consider sex, sexual orientation or ethnicity. Root out prejudice by all means but this is supposed to be in the party DNA. If it isn't then it should be fixed quickly and quietly. Why brag about doing something that most decent people take fro granted? Secondly, if you make politics more caring and fair (social justice and democracy) you might get more women thinking it was a worthy endeavour.

So New Toryism? I'll give you 2/10, 1 for Green and social justice, but no marks for getting the priorities wrong. Still, better than 1/10 for Labour who recognise that the economy is important but don't have a clue what to do about it. Safe chaps, you should still win, that is all that's important isn't it?

”I'm very surprised at the negative reaction on this thread.” Surely your tongue is firmly in your cheek! You must have posted this in anticipation of exactly this reception.
As for,
”I have sympathy with the aspiration to promote women (although not the means), to end the once common view that Conservatives don't like gay people, to promote sensible conservationism, to invest in effective global poverty-fighting projects and, most of all, to accelerate IDS' social justice agenda,”
I’m puzzled: whether Conservatives like or dislike gay people is surely neither here nor there, and the other stuff too, since they are simply not the business of government. “Modernisation” is a word that can sensibly be applied to e.g. our country’s armed forces, or a railway network, but in terms of social agendas? No, come off it! People will modernise their thinking (whatever that means) or not if they want to, and it’s certainly nothing to do with the government.

Sorry, should have been 3/10 for New Toryism - I forgot the NHS. In fact, maybe even 4/10 since you got the priority (No.4) right. Shame in your version it has to be behind womens/gay rights and green stuff.

I find the negative reaction here very amusing, and it serves as a reminder as to why Conservativehome is regarded as not being in the centre of the party - even if some of its authors try to go there.

For those with brains the size of peas, or prejudices the size of 4x4s, I'll give you another reading of the list.

1. Further promotion of women and ethnic minority Conservatives.

Why do you assume this means the worst candidates will be prioritised over even the best white male? I can promote a candidate without forcing him/her on everyone else.

Furthermore it's a complete lie that the current system is all about merit. It isn't, it's also largely about networking and money. Not in terms of bribes but the cost of shmoosing, campaigning and the rest.

2. Outreach to gay rights groups

Oh no, those horrible people! Of course all gay attitudes are wrong and they need to be sent off to be "cured" with drugs and shock therapy.....

The party has been considered homophobic for too long. It's a good thing to reach out to people you've had trouble with in the past to show you've changed.

3. More emphasis on environmental policies

The environment doesn't stop at global warming. It's also about pollution and ensuring we have enough energy. Even nuclear power won't last forever, though the Conservatives are (I believe) supportive of new power stations.

4. Loud trumpeting of the fact that the NHS and international development are the top two Tory spending priorities

They are, aren't they? What, you want Cameron to promise to make them the lowest spending priority? Are people here so small-minded they can't realise that you can prioritise a service even if you make overall cuts?!

5. More initiatives on social justice with a greater role for Iain Duncan Smith

Oh, I'm so wrong. Social justice is bad, we need a me-first society!

Are you kidding? Social justice is what this country needs. Or did you think you could fix our broken society with batons and tear gas?

Raj, you're attacking straw men.

Are you kidding? Social justice is what this country needs. Or did you think you could fix our broken society with batons and tear gas?

Posted by: Raj | May 01, 2009 at 11:37

Raj: What is your definition of Social justice and how is it to be implemented? Talk is cheap.

Raj pontificates:
"For those with brains the size of peas, or prejudices the size of 4x4s..." [etc]
Sheesh! Some have accused me on occasion (mistakenly, and causing me grievous hurt) of being arrogant, overbearing and rude, but I take my hat off to you, Sir! You are El Supremo in the rude big-headed stakes. But maybe your rudeness and conceit are based on your having misunderstood: AFAICS most people here aren't the sort of Neanderthal hang 'em/flog 'em stereotypes pictured in your lurid imaginings - they simply have a sense of priorities. And all that gay-outreach, NHS (yawn...) claptrap is just wildly irrelevant.
No you can go back to sipping your latte as you nod earnestly at The Guardian's editorial...

Oh dear, oh dear, am I on the RIGHT website or has it been infiltrated by ZanuLabour who have been busy ruining this country along Marxist/Trotskyist lines for the last 12 years?

To stand any chance of saving this country from further ruin it will require the services of the most able people in the land, irrespective of their class / wealth / religion / ethnicity / gender / orientation.

What about the really big issues that confront our nation?

Financial Crisis, EUSSR / Sovereignty, Immigration, Over Population, Education, NHS, Transport, Defence, Border Controls, Collapse of Industry, Terrorism, Crime, ID Cards, Surveillance, Police State, &c, &c.

This nation has had more than enough of political correctness, persecution, social engineering and imposed equality and we don’t want anymore of it thank you. The bottom line is that Britons want their freedom back.

Please tell me this isn't true! What planet are these people on? Do they really think this half-baked list of second-hand liberal-left tripe is what the electorate is looking for? Get real. Or at least get out more to speak to some real people outside the metropolitan elites.

"Financial Crisis, EUSSR / Sovereignty, Immigration, Over Population, Education, NHS, Transport, Defence, Border Controls, Collapse of Industry, Terrorism, Crime, ID Cards, Surveillance, Police State, &c, &c."

John Bright, I'll vote for that!

As long as the Conservative party court the anti-marriage, anti-freedom, anti-family, anti-Christian homosexualist agenda, I can never, as a conservative concerned with the future of our society, ever vote for them.

I also would call into question their principles and judgement, and whether or not they can be genuinely called "conservatives" any more.

A sad day for democracy, I feel, when on the key issues facing society one cannot slip a cigarette paper between the major parties.

Malcom blithers

Sheesh! Some have accused me on occasion (mistakenly, and causing me grievous hurt) of being arrogant, overbearing and rude, but I take my hat off to you, Sir! You are El Supremo in the rude big-headed stakes.

What, by pointing out that some people here are so stupid that they can only see one way of reading things?

My apologies, clearly there is only one way to read it and that the hysteria here is well justified.

No you can go back to sipping your latte as you nod earnestly at The Guardian's editorial...

Sorry, I don't drink coffee or read the Guardian. You'd seem to know more about that sort of lifestyle than I do.

I like this actually. However liking it and taking it seriously are two different things. I will give it a bit more time when 'Cameron' says sorry on behalf of his party for the abhorrent clause 28.

Don't be an idiot Raj.

As the editor points out, disagreeing with the approach does not imply disagreement with the aims.

Hats off to Cameron and mine suitably doffed.

Clearly he wishes not just to crush Labour but to abolish even the concept of Labour by re-branding with all of the opposition's USPs.

Labour = Electoral annihilation. Bring it on but.

When the velvet glove comes off post No.10 occupation we had better see the iron fist beneath.

"When the velvet glove comes off post No.10 occupation we had better see the iron fist beneath."

Unwise, for even when we have had promises from the Westminster politicians in black and white they have had problems honouring them, if not reneging on them. We are still waiting for Cameron to honour his promise on the EPP

Don't be an idiot Raj.

As the editor points out, disagreeing with the approach does not imply disagreement with the aims.

Toryblog, I think you're the idiot not me. It IS a list of aims, not approaches.

Reading the reactions of the "Polly Toynbee" Guardian types on here I fear that we could well be in for another Labour Government at the next Gen Election, perhaps with only a small majority, think Wilson in 1964, Attlee in 1951, as people think, "What's the point? We may as well stick with what we have got, there is no appreciable difference so better the devil we know". This could be even more the case if Labour ditch Brown as could well happen and chose someone nice and clean cut like Purnell as their new leader and thus PM.

I feel that the County Elections and the Euros may be an unpleasant wake up call to many Tories as the results will not be the cake walk many had expected. Watch out for defections by Tory voters to UKIP and BNP as core supporters reject all this "Big Tent, Rainbow and Eco-fetishist" nonsense.

All of this is based on the delusion that the Tories lost the last three elections becuase they were perceived as the nasty party. Analysing those defeats would take a bit of space, but 'it's the economy stupid' sums it up mostly.

This sort of fluff and nonsense did DC and the party no good during his first 2 years of leadership and once it is clear that it is doing him no good in the polls now it will once again be put on the back burner. What is a little worrying is that he hasn't learnt from the previous experience.

"When the velvet glove comes off post No.10 occupation we had better see the iron fist beneath."

I am reasonably confident we will, Englandism!

As for Raj - don't be deflected by some of the idiotic comments here. I agree with what you say 100% so we can go off together with all the other hundreds of loyal Conservatives (and no that doesn't mean UNTHINKING loyal Conservatives...) and spread the message whilst the homophobic, bitter few can rant here amongst themselves to their heart's content!

Sally, you are sounding hectoring and self-righteous. Maybe you should apply for Polly Toynbee's job?

@Hugh Oxford at 12:15
>>As long as the Conservative party court the anti-marriage, anti-freedom, anti-family, anti-Christian homosexualist agenda, I can never, as a conservative concerned with the future of our society, ever vote for them.<<

I have no time whatsoever for somebody who ties all those 'antis' in with homosexuality like they are the same thing.

Perhaps I misunderstood your comment, but it certainly came across as pure small-mindedness. I hope that was a mistake in my reading of it.

I've met gay libertarians, gay conservatives, gay Christians and gays who love the concept of 'family' every bit as much as you and I. Some of them post on here regularly and eloquently.

I just think you can be pro-marriage, pro-freedom, pro-family, pro-Christian and still be relaxed about people's right to have whatever the hell partner they want in life as per their personal choice and sexual preference within the law.

And just for the record before you try and paint me with an agenda.: I'm straight, happily-married and Christian.

"It IS a list of aims, not approaches"

Hi Raj, I just checked back, and it does seem to appear, after objective analysis, and independent scrutiny of the analysis, that you are the idiot! ;-)

Seriously though, the *aim* is equality, the removal of prejudice, it is not the promotion of one particular group.

The *approach* that Cameron has adopted to achieve this aim of equality has been positive discrimination, i.e offering ladders of preference to selected few instead of breaking down the walls of prejudice for everyone.

Positive discrimation is simply discrimination. It helps no-one in the long run (accepting that in the short term those who benefit from the discrimination may initially see it as a good thing).

As always, the approach should be 'No Preference, No Prejudice'.

Thank you for the advice, Michael - I'd certainly like to earn her money!!

"..I don't drink coffee or read the Guardian. You'd seem to know more about that sort of lifestyle than I do."
Not sure it amounts to a lifestyle, exactly, unless one has depressingly narrow horizons, but I'm very concerned that you don't drink coffee. Come to think of it, Dave hasn't said anything about protecting the rights of us coffee drinkers - maybe I should worry about potential discrimination from the tea brigade. I mean, this is every bit as vital and relevant - and caring - as the other stuff...

On Point 4 - more money for international aid.

I really hope the Conservative Government will have the intellectual courage to question whether what we're doing in Africa is actually working.

Aid keeps going up but the Continent gets poorer.

Aid is giving African leaders power without responsibility - the opposite of what is needed to fight corruption and national mismanagement.

Dambisa Moyo's Dead Aid should be essential holiday reading for every Shadow Cabinet member this summer.

Sally

A least two people here have said that they are gay and dislike the association with the 'pride' movement.

You really shouldn't stereotype people - not all homosexuals are tattooed, wear leather or have multiple piercings (although a lot do seem to - I cant imagine what the connection is).

I think all 'festivals' are a good thing - any excuse will do. However giving them political relevance is very dubious.

Baroness Warsi got a great reception on question time the other week just for saying that it was wrong for the government to address people through self appointed organisations instead of directly... (she was talking about the muslim council of great britain, but the same applies).


On another point, I find it a little unsettling that this 5 pronged statement focuses on women, the gay community and ethnic minorities whilst other minorities are just completely unreferenced.

Like those with physical or mental disabilities.

Were do they fit into New Toryism?

Or is it that some minorities are just more sexy and media-friendly than others?

"You really shouldn't stereotype people - not all homosexuals are tattooed, wear leather or have multiple piercings (although a lot do seem to - I cant imagine what the connection is)."

I don't - I have a number of gay friends myself and not one of them (to my knowledge at least!) has multiple piercings, is tattooed or wears leather all the time (though they may well wear it sometimes - as I do myself).

There are 3 things that can conceivably stop a Conservative victory:
(1) Labour jettisons Brown and someone else makes them look temporarily palatable.
(2) The traditional right wingers get so fed up that they stay at home or vote UKIP/BNP
(3) There is a popular movement leading to a seismic political event of the kind that wiped out the Liberals as a potential party of government - ie the emergence of a real Conservative party free from all the Con-lite stuff, to which all disgruntled Conservative supporters, UKIP voters and non-voters since the days of Major could flock.

Given how things are at the moment, why on earth would Cameron et al risk either (1) or (2)? Utterly crazy.

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

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:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker