ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Caroline Spelman tipped to replace Francis Maude

Writing for The Telegraph this morning Iain Dale says that "the hot money" is on Caroline Spelman to replace Francis Maude as Tory Chairman.  I have heard the same from two independent sources this week. 

Editor's comment: "I sincerely hope that the speculation about Caroline Spelman becoming the new Chairman is wrong.  Caroline has many abilities but she would be the wrong choice for this job.  The five people I spoke to at CCHQ yesterday evening greeted the prospect with undisguised horror.  CCHQ needs someone who has the warmth to command loyalty and respect amongst staff at the Millbank HQ and to lift the grassroots when they are battle-weary.  David Cameron needs a Chairman who can go on to the television and speak with authority and a little humour.   He needs someone who has the tenacity to organise attacks on the Labour Party and, on appropriate occasions, to match Team Brown's ruthlessness.  If the top three shadow cabinet members - Davis, Hague and Osborne - are to stay in place, Mr Cameron's choice of Chairman will be his most important decision.  If Francis Maude is to move on, Chris Grayling would be a much wiser appointment.  It would also show that Mr Cameron understands the sort of things that will rebuild his relationship with grassroots Conservatives."

Also in The Telegraph there is speculation that Hugo Swire will be chopped for his role in the museums charging row and Oliver Letwin will go "because of accusations that the party has failed to come up with clear policies."  Such a verdict is premmature.  We will only know if the policy review has failed after the policy groups have reported.  Oliver deserves time to finish the review and then it will be time to take stock.  Sacking Hugo Swire would be a difficult decision for Mr Cameron.  Both Old Etonians, they are close friends but advisers may see his removal from shadow cabinet as proof that the Conservative leader has sufficient ruthlessness.

I am hearing that David Willetts may now survive the reshuffle.  The party leader is making a big speech on education next week and David Willetts has been at the heart of preparations for that speech.

Tory bicycles

The Party Chairman's Office have decided to stop paying for a dedicated driver as part of a shift in resources to more frontline political activity (two regional press officers could be hired with the money saved).

Francis Maude won't have to walk around Westminster, however, as CCHQ is going to buy several bikes for staff to nip to Parliament in. They will be customised with Conservative logos etc - very cool. Cycling is easily the best way to get around central London.

CCHQ will be announcing a summer membership recruitment drive later today.

Deputy Editor

New names of CCHQ rooms confirmed

As mentioned in the Pandora column recently, CCHQ is naming one of the few rooms it has in Millbank that isn't part of the open plan office after suffragette Emily Pankhurst. We can now reveal the names of the other Conservative social reformers honoured with room names: Churchill, Disraeli, Butler, Wilberforce, Thatcher and Shaftesbury.

A memo from Francis Maude describes the reasoning behind each one:

"Known for his war leadership, Churchill’s stoic defence of liberal democracy preserved the legacy of freedom we enjoy today. No Conservative HQ could be complete without a Churchill Room.

Disraeli was of course one of the Party’s defining Leaders. As Prime Minister from 1874 to 1880 he pushed through the largest tranche of social reform legislation in the nineteenth century.

Emmeline Pankhurst was both a pioneering suffragette and subsequently a Parliamentary Candidate for the Conservatives. Her role in securing women’s right to vote is genuinely historic.

Rab Butler ensured a secondary education for every British child, regardless of social class or ability to pay. The 1944 Act that bears his name was a defining moment in the twentieth century.

William Wilberforce was of course the man who ended the slave trade, and by involving black abolitionists in his campaign was instrumental in the earliest stages of a long process in which black people eventually achieved equal rights.

Margaret Thatcher gave the poorest in society a way to buy their own homes and an opportunity to own shares; her 1988 Royal Society Speech put environmentalism and global warming on the political agenda; and her Scarman Enquiry began to engage Britain’s disaffected inner city youth.

Lord Shaftesbury’s campaigns for legislative reform improved access to education, improved conditions in factories and restricted child labour."

A great blend of tradition and "modern compassionate conservatism".

Deputy Editor

Questions for Team Cameron over Greg Dyke

Samuel Coates and I are currently in the USA - discussing the next steps of our BritainAndAmerica project with Washington bloggers, politicians and thinkers.  Apologies for the reduced service this week - all will be back to normal very soon.  We have only been able to watch the Greg Dyke business from afar but it has been a pretty disappointing business...

Here are my questions from the affair:

• Why did Team Cameron think Greg Dyke would be a good candidate to represent London Tories and other Londoners who want control of council tax and crime?   Until falling out with Tony Blair over the Iraq war, Mr Dyke was a lifelong Labour supporter and major donor.  Yet David Cameron apparently regarded him as "an ideal candidate".
• What are we to make of the eagerness of David Cameron and Francis Maude to seek a joint candidate with the Liberal Democrats?  Mr Cameron's aides apparently saw it as an "experiment in new politics" (quoted in The Independent).  What other "experiments" are planned and are being hidden from MPs and members?  ConservativeHome has long suspected that much of Project Cameron is about positioning the party for a deal with the Liberal Democrats in the event of a hung parliament.  This hardly discourages us from that theory.
• Where does this leave the other would-be Tory candidates for London Mayor?  The messages being sent out by CCHQ with bungled operations like this - and last year's delayed contest - hardly help them to build credibility.  This is what Ken Livingstone's spokesman said yesterday: "What this shows is that whoever is eventually selected as Conservative party candidate for mayor has absolutely no confidence from the Tory leadership. When David Cameron says he has total confidence in them to run London it will be a total lie."
• Yesterday Greg Dyke appeared to distance himself from any possibility of standing as an independent.  “I won’t be standing. I was approached by one or two people, and we had chats... I have no intention of standing as an independent, because I’d lose. Ken Livingstone would be difficult to stop,” he told The Times.   If the party was going to propose a high-risk, joint candidacy arrangement with the LibDems, were they sufficiently sure of Mr Dyke's commitment to the idea?
• Was David Cameron willing to abandon the proposed primary process if the Dyke-deal had come off?  That is the suggestion in today's Times.

Very green... at least on the surface

Yesterday's Telegraph carried a report on the environmentally-friendly new Tory HQ.  ITN apparently did some filming, too.  ConservativeHome has been sent an email, however, that suggests that CCHQ staff needed a little reminding of their responsibilities to the planet before ITN's cameras arrived.  An email to all press and research staff gave the following advice:

"ITN is coming to do some filming at 15:30 on how green our new office is. We will also need to make the office look busy and tidy.  I will be getting them to only film the section of the office from the Macdonald/Fisher desk through to Meeting Room 4 - this means they can get the recycled wooden doors, the green recycling bin and the recycled flooring - please try to be at your desks.   Please also make sure your waste bins are not obviously full of paper - stick it in the recycling bins!!"

Emphasis added to "obviously."

10.30am update:

CCHQ has just emailed me with the following information about the green nature of the new headquarters:

• "The most energy efficient lighting possible using Passive Infrared (PIR) sensors which detect body movement and switch lights on and off as necessary.
• All timber used in the project is either from sustainable sources or is reclaimed.  The floorboards in reception and the break out area, for example, are reclaimed Victorian floor boards.
• The reception desk has been rebuilt rather than buying new.
• Almost all our furniture from Victoria Street has been reused.
• All paint used by JONAP throughout this project has been water based.
• All materials within the wall partitioning are from sustainable sources.
• All waste material from the site has been sent for recycling.
• The Millbank Centre itself takes part in a full recycling program with 80% of waste being recycled."

Michael Howard blamed for Tory debts

Andrew Pierce was a regular source of insider information about the Tory finances when he was at The Times.  He appears determined to add to that reputation from his new journalistic perch at The Telegraph.

Contrary to other reports - now attributed to briefings by outgoing Tory Treasurer Lord (Jonathan) Marland - the party's finances are not in good shape.  The party, writes Mr Pierce, will still have debts of £8m even after it has sold its Smith Square premises for more than £30m.  At the time Michael Howard announced the sale of Smith Square he had promised that much of the proceeds would pay for a long-term endowment for the Conservative Party.  It now looks as though all of the money will be needed to keep the current Conservative Party afloat.

The finances deteriorated sharply under Michael Howard's leadership for two main reasons:

1. The party left 32 Smith Square for its swish and unnecessarily large Victoria Street offices without a buyer in place.  Mr Pierce estimates the cost of that move at over £5m because of the delayed sale.
2. A "lavish" £18m General Election campaign.

Under David Cameron the party's fundraising operation has improved but not as much as some reports have suggested.  The Tory leader is now said to be concerned that reports of the party's financial recovery are undermining other fundraising efforts.

The squeeze is also on expenditure.  CCHQ staff will soon be moving to Millbank but they will be in two separate units in order to trim costs.  Some will be based in New Labour's old haunt - Millbank Tower - whilst others will be at 30 Millbank.  There are concerns at the effect of this set-up on internal communications.

Party Chairman Francis Maude's institution of tough new procurement procedures and renegotiation of the party conference contracts should put the party on a better long-term footing, however.

Memories of 32 Smith Square

The Telegraph's Jonathan Isaby broke the story of the longlist for Hampshire East two days ago and in this morning's Telegraph he (with Christopher Hope) has an exclusive on the sale of the old Conservative Central Office - at 32 Smith Square.

The sale for £30.5m (an estimated £15m profit) will almost bring the party back into the black.  The party is currently about £35m in the red.

Although Fraser Nelson's recent story about the Tory fundraising operation probably overstated the recovery in the party's bank balance, the Conservative election machine is in much better financial health than the trades union-dependent Labour Party.

What memories do ConservativeHome readers have of 32 Smith Square?  I remember Theresa May's office decorated with photographs of shoes.  'Borrowing' a bottle of red wine from William Hague's kitchen for a Holy Communion service that was held in the press conference room (the bottle was replaced!).  I remember smuggling in still-secret copies of the 2001 manifesto through a backdoor whilst the press gathered at the front.  Then there was the 2001 General Election campaign when the toilets overflowed and horrible smells plagued the office for 48 hours.  It was disgusting.  Most of all I remember the night when Iain Duncan Smith lost the Tory leadership.  As his then political secretary I waited for the result upstairs with him and Betsy in his office and then sat with them both in the car as they drove through an extraordinary number of photographers.  I'll miss you Smith Square!

Cam and Sam double act "has rescued the Tories' financial fortunes"

An article in this week's Spectator (not yet online) suggests that the Tories will enjoy a major financial advantage at the next General Election.  Spectator Political Editor Fraser Nelson expects Tory debts to be "an eminently manageable £5 million" once the old Smith Square premises have been sold - "against some £23 million for Labour."  Here are some key quotes from Fraser's piece:

• "In a normal non-election financial year some £15 million is routinely raised by the party. Yet last year the figure was no less than £21 million."
• "There is a new breed of millionaires who will pay astonishing sums to see, hear and touch the hem of the golden couple they believe will soon be in No. 10 Downing Street. With apparently effortless charm, and more or less overnight, the Dave and Sam double act has rescued the Tories’ financial fortunes."
• "Everyone involved in Tory fundraising offers the same explanation for the new bonanza. ‘It’s entirely down to David. No modern Tory leader has been so deft with the donors,’ said one fundraiser. ‘He remembers their names, their wives’ names, their business problems, everything.’"
• "‘If we let Steve [Hilton] commission all the focus groups and polling he wants, we’d be as broke as Labour,’ says one party official. ‘Luckily, David has realised what was happening and sorted things out.’  Here is a rare example of a harness being fitted to Mr Hilton, and a sign of the clout exercised by Ian McIsaac, the party’s little-known finance director, who vetoed his spending."
• "Opinion polls show that 59 per cent of voters want an election within six months of Mr Blair’s departure. The Chancellor may want to capitalise on a honeymoon period. But elections cost £20 million to fight, and only one party in Westminster can raise this type of money. There will be no snap election because Labour cannot afford one."
• "Unless Mr Brown manages to find new donors, he faces an electoral nightmare: going to the polls with a campaign that is explicitly dependent upon the munificence of the trade unions, who today account for £3 of every £4 Labour raises. This prospect makes Conservatives salivate. ‘Gordon Brown leading a union-financed election campaign,’ says one shadow Cabinet member. ‘Very Old Labour.’"

Fingerprint Events wins Party Conferences contract

The annual Tory conference has been a major drain on the party's finances for a number of years.  The party has been repeatedly advised that, if run in a different way, the spring and autumn conferences could become reasonably healthy profit centres.  It is to the credit of Francis Maude and his team that they have ended the previous arrangement that the party had with CCO Conferences.  CCO Conferences was an independent company that had run the conferences for a number of years but whose contract was terminated after 2006's Bournemouth Conference.  Anyone who ever booked a fringe event or hotel venue through CCO Conferences will know that it often charged hefty fees but the money went to the conference company rather than to party funds as part of the deal it enjoyed with CCHQ.

Last week the party announced that Fingerprint Events had been given the contract to run the conferences from now on.  It's a flat fee-based arrangement where all surpluses accrue to the party.  The press release has been removed from conservatives.com but the text is here as a pdf.  ConservativeHome immediately emailed CCHQ to establish the exact nature of the "discussions" held with a "number of events agencies" and whether those discussions matched the tendering standards that Tory governments imposed on local authorities in the 1980s and 1990s.  This is CCHQ's reply:

"The tendering of the contract to manage Spring Forum and Annual Party Conferences has been handled by a procurement company which advertised the contract in the events industry magazine 'Event' during September.  The tendering process involved face to face interviews with a number of companies, and after discussions to see which model met the Party’s conference needs best, Fingerprint Events Ltd were awarded the contract by the Party Board.  Commercial Confidentiality Agreements signed with all companies restrict us from releasing further details other than contained in the original press release. Fingerprint Events were judged to have the most suitable model especially in terms of CCHQ control and the financial return to the Party."

Unfortunately this response adds little to the original press release and leads me to believe that the tendering process did fall short of the competitive tendering standards that Tory governments expected of local authorities.  Those processes were introduced in order to ensure that insiders did not unfairly win contracts from local authorities and that local taxpayers and the Treasury received value for money.  It would have been better if Fingerprint Events - which appears to be run by people with a long-standing connection to the party - had won the contract after a more formal and less secretive process.  There has been a long history of well-connected individuals winning big contracts from the Conservative Party.  Fingerprint Events was only registered as a company on 6th November 2006 and it is unclear who its real owners and directors might be.

In conclusion: The party's contract with Fingerprint Events is undoubtedly an improvement on the previous arrangement but has the party's possible return been maximised?  I fear not.  The conference attendees who suffered from last year's security nightmares might be content with any new arrangement, however, as long as they can get into the conference hall!

Year2(7) Strengthen the press operation

Recommendation 7: George Eustice currently coordinates media for David Cameron but he is having to do so with a much smaller team than his predecessors.  The lack of a broad and experienced team has meant certain storms have not been brought under control quickly enough.  The Polly Toynbee and Tosser affairs should never have been allowed to grow so big but the incident that has caused most upset amongst MPs was the hug-a-hoodie debacle.  The appointment of a senior communications executive at CCHQ and a stronger team for the regional media are both essential.

Year2(5): Put a grassroots favourite in charge of CCHQ

Recommendation 5: 32% of Tory members are dissatisfied with David Cameron and the party leader desperately needs a party chairman who can energise activists by explaining the leader's ambitions to Associations  throughout the country.  Francis Maude was the right man to oversee the A-list and the reforms to CCHQ but his negative approval ratings mean that he is not the Chairman to take the party up to the next General Election.  The party needs a grassroots favourite in the hotseat at CCHQ.  Someone who can address the fact that some of the party's best known right-wingers are outside of the shadow cabinet.  ConservativeHome does not suggest that Francis Maude should be removed from the frontbench but his modernising mission at CCHQ is on its way to being accomplished.  Mr Cameron now needs a different Chairman.

The Guardian profiles Steve Hilton (and misses the elephant in the room)

Pictures from today's Guardian of Steve Hilton 'webcameroning' the Tory leader during their India trip.

This morning's Telegraph calls him the party's real deputy leader and there's a useful profile of Steve Hilton in this morning's Guardian although Patrick Wintour and Tania Branigan miss one of the most important features of the man who is undoubtedly the most important political influence on David Cameron.

That most important feature is Steve Hilton's control freak tendency.  ConservativeHome regularly hears from inside CCHQ about a project becoming stalled because it is still awaiting the green light from The Director of Strategy.  Most Tory leaders have shared a low opinion of CCO/ CCHQ and David Cameron has already been burnt by CCHQ.  The early problems with the A-list, the mishandled Mayoral process, the Bromley by-election operation and basic problems of membership management have only encouraged Steve Hilton in his belief that CCHQ requires micromanagement.  Hilton and Francis Maude's relationship has often been very strained as each competes to knock an often dysfunctional operation into shape.  Francis Maude is fairly portrayed as an ultra-moderniser but even the Party Chairman has had to moderate Steve Hilton's desires for greater central control of the candidate selection process.

The Guardian also fails to mention Steve Hilton's controversial £23,000pcm remuneration package.  We've never learnt if that was a temporary measure - as was said at the time - or if it continues.

What is certain about Steve Hilton is that no Tory adviser has ever enjoyed such influence on a party leader in modern times.  It is also true that he has managed to combine his dominant role with being very well liked.  People respect his creativity and his commitment.  His drive to control David Cameron's message and get CCHQ to perform as he wishes is entirely transparent and his colleagues have respect and affection for him.  The danger is that his dominance is excluding other voices - but that's a subject for another day.

Nick Pisani resigns

CCHQ's Director of Presentation has resigned from his job today.

Nick was responsible for the style of last week's Party conference, and was formerly Editor of BBC1's Question Time.

Deputy Editor

5pm update from CCHQ: "Francis Maude, Chairman of the party said: "Nick Pisani joined us from Question Time with a brief to revamp our party conference and make it look and feel completely different from any that preceded it. This he did with great energy and creativity, introducing many fresh and innovative elements that were extremely well received by the party and the public. He has made a great contribution to the overall presentation of the party and we are sorry to lose him.

Commenting on his decision to leave Nick Pisani said “It has been an exhilarating experience to work at the heart of a political organisation and watch politics in action from the other side of the fence. The conference was a huge success and I am very proud of what was achieved. However a number of exciting new opportunities in the media have come my way, which are too good to pass up”."

CCHQ may move to birthplace of New Labour

"The Conservative Party is believed to be days away from signing a deal to move its campaign headquarters to London’s Millbank Centre, the office complex from which the Labour Party plotted its landslide 1997 election victory, The Times has learnt."  If true, the deal had better be good because the symbolism is really unfortunate.

CCHQ isn't yet fit for purpose

Last Friday I wrote one of ConservativeHome's most controversial posts - 'Is CCHQ fit for purpose?'.  It did not go down well at CCHQ and I received a couple of angry phone calls (which were relatively easy to deal with) and a handful of 'I'm hurt' phone calls (which I never find so easy).  On the other side of the debate, however, I cannot remember a post that received quite so many spontaneous emails from ConservativeHome readers agreeing with everything that I had written.  Friday morning's specific ConservativeHome complaint about the discourtesy of not telling the 'untopped-up' about their B-list status certainly appeared vindicated by that day's events:

(1) Four hours after I had posted my complaint CCHQ emailed all candidates telling them that if they hadn't received a letter they weren't on the top-up (progress); and
(2) CCHQ told the press of the delay to the primary process before the declared London primary applicants (confirmation of the discourtesy problem). 

CCHQ/ CCO has never been loved by grassroots members, of course, and I certainly do not blame the current Chairman and his team for all of the CCHQ's weaknesses (although the problems of the A-list and the Mayoralty primary process are certainly the current regime's responsibility - as I said on yesterday's Newsnight).  CCHQ is like a supertanker that has been off course for a long time.  It isn't going to be turned around quickly and last Friday my telephone conversations with members of the CCHQ team revealed a number of important appointments and initiatives that should improve HQ's effectiveness.  Francis Maude has promised to explain those appointments and initiatives to ConservativeHome readers once they are underway.

My bottom line is that CCHQ is - at the time of writing - a weak institution.  I know that is the view of the Leader's office.  A senior member of that team has complained that you pull the CCHQ levers but no action results.  CCHQ being weak in year one of a parliament is bearable if it is strengthened and made 'fit for purpose' by years three and four, in particular. 

PS A letter to today's Daily Mail (click on image below to enlarge) highlighted another CCHQ weakness - a sloppy approach to membership recruitment and retention.  Jeremy Middleton is currently spearheading a copmprehensive review of membership policy and so this may be another area which won't be a problem soon... but, as with all of the other weaknesses I highlighted last week, noone should be under any illusions as to the mountain of hard work that needs to put the CCHQ supertanker on course for victory.

Is CCHQ fit for purpose?

Rumours are rife that David Cameron has over-ruled Francis Maude and ordered a six month postponement of the London Mayoral process if a big-hitter candidate does not come forward before today's 5pm deadline.  It was predictable and predicted that CCHQ's rushed timetable would be unlikely to yield an adequate field of candidates.

Unfortunately it's only the latest example of a failure of CCHQ to deliver the kind of political operation that David Cameron deserves.  There remain central weaknesses in CCHQ:

• We know best attitude.  This was summed up in last year's post-election plans to change the constitution of the party (which had to be abandoned) and anti-democratic plans to abolish grassroots members' right to vote in the leadership election (which failed to win the required level of support). 

• Candidate selection.  The A-list has been beset by a wide range of difficulties.  CCHQ unsuccessfully attempted to keep the names of A-listers secret... many of the 35 seats that CCHQ decided should select candidates first had not been consulted and decided not to select... more non A-listers are being selected than women A-listers... and only this week 'B-listers' haven't even received the courtesy of a letter telling them that they are not on the top-up... ConservativeHome has been highlighting the huge hurdles facing lower income candidates since the start of the year but the drive for a representative party has not begun to address this key issue of social justice.
  

• By-elections.  The campaign in Bromley & Chislehurst fell far short of the Liberal Democrat effort.

• Centralisation.  The party's poor performance in northern England demands a radical response but there are no clear plans for a serious decentralisation of campaigning power to Yorkshire or Lancashire, for example, although the major cities are now twinned with shadow ministers.

• Wastefulness. Anyone who has ever worked at CCHQ knows the level of wastefulness that characterises operations - particularly at election times.  At this year's local elections Conservative councillors all over Britain who had ordered bespoke pledge letters received the wrong material - with all of their letters addressed to residents of one ward in Manchester.  The 'Built to Last' referendum is a waste of party resources given its uncontroversial and motherhood-and-apple-pie content.

• Rush, rush, rush.  Important issues are not developed properly and policy announcements are rushed out.  In the last few days Association officers all across Britain are being invited to consultation meetings about the party's rebranding exercise.  People are being given two weeks' notice in the middle of August to present their views.  I'm reminded of Inigo Wilson's definition of "consultation" in his excellent Lefty Lexicon: "A formal system for ignoring public views while patronising them at the same time".

There are some excellent individuals in CCHQ and a series of recent appointments are designed to address some of the above weaknesses.  There should be no shying away, however, from the continuing failure of CCHQ to be the campaigning force that the party needs.

Gary Streeter MP: Francis Maude is the right man for the job

There's a glut of Platform articles at the moment and a lack of political news today so I'm posting Gary Streeter's defence of Francis Maude on the ToryDiary:

"I welcome the advent of this website as the place that the Conservative family meets to chat, but like all family gatherings, there are occasional misunderstandings. Like the recent poll placing our chairman last in the shadow cabinet rankings (another great idea Tim – thank goodness it wasn’t around when I was in it!)

There are only a handful of politicians at Westminster for whom I would die in a ditch. Francis Maude is one of them.

Do we come from the same ideological perspective? No. Do I agree with everything thing he says and does? No.

But do I think he is one of the shrewdest people we have got, with sound judgment, an incisive intellect and integrity? Yes.

We should not be fooled by current opinion polls. The next election is not won. A working majority for Gordon Brown is still my personal prediction unless…

Unless we change and become positively attractive. If not, the still strong economy and the “change” from Blair to Brown threaten to get Labour out of jail.

And this is essentially the Maude mission: to make us look and feel and sound different, to change the way we campaign and the nature of our candidates. In short, to make us electable once again.

Francis has taken tough decisions recently, some of them hurting friends of mine. I have no idea if he has done the right thing in his reshaping of CCHQ. But I know he has a first class mind, loves the party and has done what he thinks to be best for the party, having carefully considered all options. I trust his judgment. Thank goodness we have got a chairman who is prepared to take tough decisions to knock us into shape, rather than court short term popularity. It has not always been thus.

He surrounds himself with good people and lets them get on with it. He requires regular reports and holds people to account. Example: he gave Eric Pickles the freedom to run the recent local election campaign and look at the result.

He has been relentless in the pursuit of inclusivity; essential if we are to win again. His appointments of vice-chairmen from different background demonstrates this.  We are for the first time in years making headway with different communities.

It was a mystery to me why the party of enterprise had not embraced modern managerial techniques for as long as I can remember. But now Francis has brought in senior managers to manage CCHQ in a modern and effective way. He has seen the crucial role of technology in future elections and is seeking to harness this for our party.

He has changed the party campaign structure so campaign directors will now concentrate on target seats rather then a specific geographic areas (or get caught up in admin). He is focusing ruthlessly on what it takes to win. Good.

David Cameron is leading the party brilliantly and he is right to be positive in the media, wherever possible. But we still need a regular attack dog, and the chairman bites the government’s legs to good effect when necessary.

Will all his reforms work? Probably not. Is every decision correct? No, he is a human being.  But is he the right man, at the right time, in the right place. Of that, I have absolutely no doubt."

Editor's comment warning: Let's use this thread to debate what Francis is doing at CCHQ - whether it's right and whether it's working.  I'm going to take a very dim view of people who post personal attacks on our Party Chairman.  My finger will be hovering close to the delete button although mayhem will probably go unnoticed from about 2pm until 4pm!

Is David Cameron happy with Francis Maude?

This morning's Telegraph reports that "David Cameron has ordered a shake-up of Conservative headquarters amid rumours that he is unhappy with the performance of Francis Maude".  ConservativeHome received similar intelligence from a well-placed source at the end of last week.  Fuelling the alleged unhappiness is the suggestion that Mr Cameron was surprised at the failure of the A-list process to produce new standard-bearers for the party. 

A recent ConservativeHome survey found that Mr Maude had a net satisfaction rating of just 6% amongst the Tory membership.  Team Cameron is said to think that a more popular Party Chairman might find it easier to persuade local Tories of the virtues of A-list candidates.  "Friends of Mr Maude," told The Telegraph, that there was no rift "and emphasised that neither he, nor the party leader, had been directly involved in the priority list selection, which was carried out by a separate panel."

The Telegraph reports that the Bromley & Chislehurst Conservative Association may be excused from having to choose from the A-list amid concerns that any Tory candidate will face a fierce challenge from UKIP's Nigel Farage as well as the Liberal Democrats.  UKIP are attempting to rebrand to offer a more Thatcherite policy agenda.

Editor's note: "ConservativeHome hopes these rumours are untrue.  This website does have serious concerns about the A-list but it was the leader himself who instituted the process.  Mr Maude had to handle the very difficult Tory loans issue and did so with skill.  Francis Maude has done more than any other member of the shadow cabinet to build bridges with Tories on the net.  His interview with ToryRadio has gone online today.  Central Office is a notoriously difficult animal to master.  It would be risky to install a new Chairman just as the current Chairman was getting on top of the task.  David Cameron should realise that running a major political party is not just a matter of press releases. Bold leadership needs to be balanced with deliberation. Real change needs to be carefully considered and implemented with sensitivity. If the rumours are true, then Cameron is playing a risky game." 

CCHQ restructures

Francis Maude has just finished addressing the staff at CCHQ - to announce a long-awaited restructuring - and he has just phoned me to go through the main changes:

• The desk officers will be relocated to parliament with, for example, the treasury desk officer moving into George Osborne's office (and so on).  Exactly the same level of capacity will be available to the frontbench teams in support of their parliamentary duties.  Some desk officers may become part of the Parliamentary Resources Unit (a research capacity also located in parliament and funded by Tory MPs from their allowances).
• John Glen - reporting directly to Oliver Letwin - is expected to oversee the vital policy group teams and the emergence of a coherent set of policy commitments.  This policy set-up will probably inherit the Conservative Research Department title.
• George Bridges, who chairs the 8.30am morning meeting, will run a strengthened political unit.  The political unit will be responsible for opposition research, strategic briefing of parliamentarians, refinement of key messages, briefing for PMQs, rapid rebuttal and close cooperation with the media team and leader's office.

The press office will become the media team/ office and will be more focused on broadcasters and regional media.

Nick Pisani - who was recently appointed from BBC1's Question Time - will oversee strategic presentation and major events.

No new changes have been made to the campaigns capacity.