ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Andrew Porter to be Telegraph's Political Editor

34yr old Porter will take over from George Jones in October. He is The Sun's Deputy Political Editor, and previously was the Deputy Political Editor of The Sunday Times, Telegraph Editor Will Lewis' former paper.

Deputy Editor

A General Election within one year?

Iain Dale has already noted the BBC's OTT coverage of Brown's first day as Labour leader.  Throughout this week I'll be keeping a daily eye on the coverage of The Daily Mail and of The Sun of Brown's first week as Tony Blair's successor.  Both newspapers will be crucial influences on whether Brown can maintain the coalition of voters that delivered three victories for Mr Blair.  Both have a history of indulging the Chancellor.

Both newspapers have more or less the same front page splashes: 'Election In A Year' (The Sun - which bills its story as an exclusive!) and 'Brown Gears Up For Sping Election' (The Daily Mail).  Have they been spun by the man who has promised to end spin? Or are their political antennae making the same conclusions from the appointment of Douglas Alexander as General Election Coordinator?

EU referendum: Page two of The Sun declares 'Over To EU: Irish Referendum Pressure On Gord'.  Political Editor George Pascoe Watson quotes William Hague and piles the pressure on 'Gord' to  honour 2005's Labour manifesto promise.  In The Mail there is extensive coverage of William Hague's intervention, Melanie Phillips writes that Brown will deserve to forfeit voters' trust if he does not grant a referendum and the Mail leader says: "Mr Brown insists that he wants the public to be 'informed and consulted'. But not, apparently, on Europe. He holds out no hope of a referendum."

Harriet Harman: Neither newspaper is impressed with Harriet Harman's victory.  The Mail describes her as an "ice cold feminist" and reminds us of her 'Harriet Harperson' nickname (shouldn't that be Harperkin to avoid the reference to 'son'?!).  Both newspapers say that Brown has snubbed her by giving her a "non-job" (The Sun).  The Sun's overall verdict on HH:

"The election of Harriet Harman as Deputy Leader cast a shadow over Mr Brown’s unopposed inheritance of the job he has waited thirteen long years for.  But the man who the Queen will appoint Prime Minister on Wednesday showed he is quick-witted and ruthless.  Within minutes of Ms Harman’s election he made it clear she will NOT be the new Deputy Prime Minister in place of John Prescott.  Though as party chairman Harriet will have a similar role to hopeless old Two Jags — keeping the Old Labour lefties in line.  They won’t mind her disowning of the Iraq conflict as “wrong”.  They might agree with her thumbs down to nuclear power, a suicidal policy that would leave us at the mercy of the unpredictable Russians and the volatile Middle East.  Who knows?  The trouble is that she is so politically correct some of her MP colleagues call her Harriet Harperson.  Mr Brown spotted her weaknesses a mile off — which shows he has good judgment as he prepares to announce his new Cabinet.  He will have enough on his plate fulfilling his promises on housing, education and the NHS without having Ms Harman making a mess of one of the great Ministries."

The Brown speech: Both newspapers say that they are waiting for the beef but both gave the general message a thumbs up.  The Sun said "Gordon Brown had an almost perfect day."  The Mail:

"After such a very long time to gather his thoughts, Gordon Brown could be expected to press all the right buttons when he made his maiden speech as Labour leader. He did not disappoint.  Education, the NHS, housing, voters' disenchantment with the political process, fear of crime and worries about devolution - each was mentioned as he accepted the party crown at the conclusion of his non-election... Mr Brown has proved beyond doubt his ability to command a great office of state. Now he has to bring the same skill to the whole business of government."

Strong Brown: Both newspapers - particularly with regard to non-jobbing Harriet Harman - emphasised Brown's ruthlessness. The new Labour leader won't mind that.

Other stories: It's often not the editorial line but the selection of stories that most influences readers.  Today's Mail was encouraging in that respect.  Here are some anti-Government headlines in today's newspaper:

• East Europe migrants bring surge in pickpocketing crime
• Quarter of marriages revealed as sham as rules are tightened
• Now pupils might miss out on a place at university if their parents have good jobs
• Labour has lost support of doctors says BMA boss
• Mum denied cancer drug funding has to sell her house
• ASBOs leading to more crime
• Prisoners released without checks in rush to free-up cells

It will be relentless news stories like that which will eventually do for Brown.  I hope.

Just when The Telegraph warms to Cameron, the Mail goes AWOL

Via under-the-table means, ConservativeHome readers had advance sight of David Cameron's big speech last night.  In a sign of the Cameroons keenness to repair relations with the newspaper-of-choice for Tory activists, The Telegraph didn't have to get hold of its copy in such a way.  The speech gets front page treatment today.  There are also detailed extracts of the speech printed on page four and a welcoming leader:

"Readers who complain that David Cameron's approach to politics is insubstantial might usefully ponder his latest speech. The Tory leader is plainly determined to recapture civic society for the Conservatives.  The Left, at its core, stands for the power of the state; the Right for the freedom of the individual. But in between the state and the individual is the realm of society: the realm of guilds and orchestras and parish councils and public companies and Girl Guide troops and Facebook communities."

Facebook communities are now a small platoon.  What would Edmund Burke make of that?

But, if the Telegraph-Tory relationship is improving, the Mail-Tory relationship continues to be tricky.  The longstanding Brown-Dacre affection is reflected in The Mail's page two lead: Brown to allow UK to have a referendum on Europe.  In a leader the Chancellor is described as "Eurosceptic".

The Mail's Political Editor, Ben Brogan, also speculates that senior Cameron aide George Bridges is to replace Oliver Letwin MP as the day-to-day 'bomb-proofer' of the policy review process.  Mr Letwin's role will become more strategic.  More annoying for CCHQ is the Melanie Phillips column on page 18: No wonder it's so hard to trust Dave.

Never one to pull her punches, Ms Phillips says that the Tories are "in panic-stricken disarray."  The article contains one attack after another on Project Cameron.  Ms Phillips is very much her own person but it is Paul Dacre who generally decides the subject of her Monday column.  The fact that he has commissioned this piece from Mel P reveals that the Mail's ridiculous affection for Gordon Brown appears to be continuing.  On tax, support for marriage and investment in crime-fighting, the Chancellor is at odds with the key 'values' of the Mail.  The Mail's affection for Mr Brown is a subject for another day, however.

Concluding our brief look at the traditional right-wing press, The Sun Says ignores Cameron's speech but attacks the handling of the museums issue:

"With Tory poll ratings nose-diving and David Cameron reeling from the grammar schools debacle, another old Etonian on his front bench has a brilliant idea: Scrap free admission to museums.  Yes, you read it correctly. Axe the most universally popular initiative of Labour’s entire period in office."

The Sun continues in a line of attack you'll hear a lot from Brown: "Tory culture spokesman Hugo Swire has never been short of a tenner. And that’s the problem. He and many of his colleagues simply don’t understand ordinary families."  ToryDiary covered the museums story yesterday.

Telegraph spins report to reignite grammar school argument

If you picked up a copy of the Telegraph today, formerly known as the Torygraph, you'd have seen a story on the inside page entitled "Study shows grammars benefit poor pupils":

"The row over academic selection was reignited last night after a study concluded that more grammar schools would boost the results of working class pupils and raise education standards nationwide. Researchers said that expanding the number of selective places was just as likely to benefit children from poor homes."

However, the report is entirely about how it may be better for poor children to do more core academic subjects instead of vocational skills within schools - and nothing to do with school selection. The authors were even savvy enough to leave a clear disclaimer on this:

"Clearly this research cannot be interpreted as evaluating the overall effects of a comprehensive or selective ('tracked') system of education" 

The report, published in the journal of the LSE's Centre for Economic Performance could have just as easily been interpreted as supportive of the comprehensive system. It effectively criticises academic selection (tracking) at one point when it says:

"we show that the net effect of the de-tracking reform was to increase [improve] examination results at the end of compulsory schooling"

And on page 26, in one of the few mentions of selection, it supports the Willetts view of social selection:

"Part of the large differential in educational outcomes between these socio-economic groups is directly attributed to the lower probability of children from poor family backgrounds entering into grammar schools."

Moving Simon Heffer away from the comment pages doesn't appear to have lessened the hostility to Cameron's Conservatives on the part of the Telegraph's editorial team, they clearly leant on Education Correspondent Graeme Paton to spin this report so misleadingly.

Deputy Editor

11am update: Left-wing co-author Sandra McNally has come to the rescue of David Willetts by clarifying that the report was indeed not relevant to the grammars debate:

"This paper is only directed at one narrow question about Northern Irish education.  The paper does not address or provide evidence on whether selective or comprehensive education systems do better and provides no support for reintroducing grammar schools across the UK.  The paper does, however, provide evidence that the grammar school system entrenches social disadvantage."

Educational economist Gervas Huxley has gone through the report and found this to be true:

"The fundamental message of this research is that less able children benefit from an academic as opposed to a vocational education system. It says almost nothing about streaming, setting, selection, grammar schools, the 11+ or anything else."

Pressed for a quote last night Graham Brady said that "the figures speak for themselves", unfortunately for him they don't say what he was led to believe!

5pm update: "In an interview with the House Magazine former frontbencher Ann Winterton said that the policy announced by shadow education secretary David Willetts was deeply unpopular with ordinary members of the party." - ePolitix

The Daily Mail: The Conservative Party must unite behind the best leader it has had in years

Most Daily Mail readers will have gained a very negative sense of the current position of the Cameron project from their newspaper this morning.  Ben Brogan has written a page six piece headlined "The Tories terrible week".  The article's three subheadings are:

• Willetts in jeopardy over grammar row;
• Outcry over red-top editor's new PR role;
• MPs' scorn over 'heir to Blair' claims.

Readers turning to pages 14 and 15 will see a double page article from former Thatcher adviser Robin Harris that is headlined: "Why does Cameron despise the Tories?"  On page 25 Peter Oborne's regular column also makes very uncomfortable reading.  The headline: "The Leader's 'heir of Blair' strategy is in disarray.  His enemies are on the prowl."

Few readers will probably read the leader column on page 14 but it will offer some relief to Team Cameron.  The leader (not currently online) notes that "the inelectable fact is that [David Cameron] is the first leader in more than a decade to make the party look electable".  The leader continues:

"If Michael Howard brought discipline, then Mr Cameron, by giving the party a new caring image, has reconnected the Conservatives to countless people who had been alienated by the perceived harshness of some Tory policies.  He has executed this stategy with both brilliance and courage."

Although critical of Mr Cameron's addiction to the appeasement of The Guardian-BBC (a key concern of Mail Editor Paul Dacre) the leader-writers warns that the party must "unite behind the best leader they have had in years."

For David Cameron the last two weeks will make him stronger if he learns the right lessons.  Lesson number one is that he must pay more attention to the breadth of the Conservative coalition.  There should be no retreat from the greener and gentler conservatism that has been so successful in attracting LibDem voters back into the Tory column.  But he must pay more attention to the concerns of striving voters and other natural Tories who would like him to address their concerns about crime and immigration and squeezed disposable incomes.  As this website has constantly argued - there need be no conflict between a compassionate engagement with the problems of developing countries, for example, and a very tough approach to border control.  The party can and should combine a massive prisons building programme with more support for the children of prisoners.  ConservativeHome believes we have the right leader for our times.  With this week's inspired appointment of Andy Coulson he now has a key adviser who can help him connect with the traditional, northern and lower income voters who are currently unconvinced by the new Conservative Party.

No longer The Torygraph?

I've written for Comment is free about the difficult relationship between The Telegraph and the Tory leadership.  I argue that The Telegraph should still matter to the Tories:

"In the same way that Tony Blair pursued the endorsement of Rupert Murdoch and The Sun, David Cameron has devoted an enormous amount of energy to neutralising the traditional hostility of the BBC towards the Conservative Party. Keeping The Telegraph happy matters a lot less to Team Cameron than a good relationship with Nick Robinson et al. But the Telegraph-Tory relationship should still matter. The Telegraph remains the newspaper most widely read by the party's most active supporters although the blogosphere is already beginning to provide these supporters with faster, more comprehensive and interactive coverage of Tory news. In a close election The Telegraph would play a vital role in energising centre-right voters."

3pm update from The Guardian: Simon Heffer to stop being Telegraph Comment Editor.

Heffer spikes Michael Howard's grammar schools article

Rumours around the Westminster village yesterday suggested that today would see an article appear in The Telegraph in which Michael Howard would question the new Tory policy on grammar schools.  I was told that The Telegraph was "excited" by the piece. 

A member of Michael Howard's office confirmed the existence of the article yesterday morning.  When David Cameron's office heard the same rumours they rushed to persuade Mr Howard to dilute the article.  The operation was so successful that Simon Heffer has declined to publish it.  The episode is only the latest example of the difficult Telegraph-Cameron relationship - brought into focus again yesterday by WebCameron's attack on the "near hysterical" Telegraph.

A YouGov poll in this morning's Telegraph found that 49% of voters support a mixture of grammar schools and secondary moderns.  Support increases to 71% amongst Tory voters - a figure nearly identical to ConservativeHome's January 2006 finding that 73% of members oppose David Cameron's 'no more grammars' pledge.

The Times notes that David Willetts sought to defuse MPs' anger by offering to "repeal laws that allow parents to vote to scrap existing grammar schools".

Cameron attacks the 'bring-backery' of The Telegraph

David Cameron has just responded to the grammar schools row on WebCameron:

"I announced over a year ago that the party would not go back to a policy of opening new grammar schools or introducing the 11 plus and so am slightly surprised that the press has got so excited about this clear pledge being given all over again by David Willets.

The Telegraph coverage and comment is near hysterical. They simply don’t understand that the idea of introducing a few extra grammars says nothing to thousands of parents worried about children languishing in failing schools. In many ways, “bring back grammars” is a meaningless slogan, as the reason the 11 plus went in so many parts of the country is because it was so unpopular with parents. It is a classic example of fighting a battle of the past rather than meeting the challenges of the future. And it is politically naïve as it just says “we’ll help a few more escape failing schools rather than turn them round for all children.” The way to win the fight for aspiration is to put those things that worked in grammars – aggressive setting to stretch bright pupils, whole class teaching, strong discipline to name but three – in all schools.

What is sad is that the commentators miss all the things we’d do that would help standards and aspiration for all – synthetic phonics at primary school, zero tolerance of bad behaviour, unchallengeable rights for heads to exclude difficult pupils, enforceable home school contracts, saving special schools, setting and streaming, and expanding academies, allowing churches, voluntary bodies and others to open new schools.

Perhaps if I put the words “Bring back” in front of some of these policies they might just get it."

That use of 'bring back' makes me slightly suspicious.  The last time  I read that phrase used politically was when David Willetts used it in a June 2005 speech: "We mustn't drift into lazy 'bring backery' - the political equivalent of comfort eating."  It's just possible that Mr W helped Mr C with his drafting!

It's another sign of the strained Telegraph-Cameron relationship.  CCHQ were furious at The Telegraph's initial reaction to Gordon Brown's Budget.

Talking of The Telegraph - I understand that former grammar schoolboy Michael Howard is writing about Tory education policy for tomorrow's paper.   I'm told not to expect anything controversial, however.

PS If any candidates learn anything interesting from this evening's conference call with David Willetts - you know where to find me!

Alan Duncan attacks Sunday Telegraph journalist's "shoddy" work

I was on Sky News again last night to preview the newspapers.  My fellow previewer was Alan Duncan.  Whilst we were waiting to go on the show we started talking about Melissa Kite's speculative Sunday Telegraph story about a shadow cabinet reshuffle.  The story talked about demotions for William Hague and Liam Fox.  Alan Duncan was very unimpressed.  He called it “shoddy journalism" which showed "very poor judgment".  "If she really thinks this is authoritative then I doubt she will soon either enjoy much respect or access,” he concluded in a quotation that he authorised me to publish.

The Shadow Secretary of State for Trade and Industry wasn't the only senior Tory angered by the story.  Another Conservative frontbencher who contacted ConservativeHome dismissed the story as "complete rubbish" and continued: "Why does Patience Wheatcroft [Sunday Telegraph Editor] allow this nonsense to be published?"  Melissa Kite did not have the range of contacts within the Conservative Party to establish the truth of stories fed to her by people with axes to grind, my source told me.

Earlier this year Melissa Kite attempted to derail the launch of the social justice policy group with a spurious story about Iain Duncan Smith's view of gay parenting.  I suggest future Kite stories are consumed with a healthy dose of salt.

Will The Sun finally set on Brown?

On Thursday morning ConservativeHome gave The Sun a 'Brown-noser' award for its Budget coverage.  The Sun talked of an "income tax gift" from The Chancellor to the British people and its leading article warned that the Tories' opinion poll lead could easily melt in the spring sunshine.  Well... a Populus survey for The Sun's sister newspaper, The Times, shows that it's Brown's opinion poll standing which is facing the heat.  Just 11% of Populus' respondents expect to pay less tax than before the Budget and many more - 26% - fear that they will pay more tax.  "The most worrying finding for Mr Brown," says The Times, "is that the number of voters thinking that he will be a good prime minister has dropped from 40 to 30 per cent since last December."  Yesterday's Telegraph/ YouGov survey gave a similar message.

The irritation of The Sun at Mr Brown's smoke-and-mirrors Budget was, I think, revealed by Trevor Kavanagh, The Sun's veteran political commentator, at the end of this morning's Today programme.  Compared to the positive piece Mr Kavanagh wrote on Thursday morning he was very downbeat today.  The Sun won't have enjoyed being made to look a fool by Mr Brown.  There could be consequences.  Let's hope so. 

The Budget press awards

Columnist Award: Jeff Randall.  Mr Randall's piece in this morning's Telegraph is almost the only thing you need to read about yesterday's Budget.  It is magisterial in its analysis of what the Chancellor's words mean for business, pensions and the nation's finances.  The article's opening paragraph also wins the Best Quotation Award:

"For most taxpayers, Brown's final Budget feels like being given a few quid by the burglar who has been robbing our homes since 1997. Not exactly a cause for wild celebration; a glass of Tesco's cheap fizz at best."

Brown-noser Award: The Sun.  Britain's best-selling newspaper's front page headline is bad enough but today's Sun Says is unbelievable:

"While the Tories have ducked firm pledges on tax, Mr Brown has steamed ahead and sensationally cut them. Cameron’s 15-point poll lead may now melt like snow in the spring sunshine."

Does Ms Wade really think her readers are going to believe that guff?

Can't-make-its-mind-up Award: The Daily Mail.  Paul Dacre can't quite get over his admiration for Gordon Brown and the Mail's main leader declares "Final flourish to ten remarkable years."  Opposite that leader Stephen Glover announces to readers that Mr Brown has been a "great Chancellor."  Fortunately the rest of the newspaper subjects Mr Brown to more searching examination.  "What Gord Giveth, Gord Taketh Away," is the front page splash.  Within the newspaper Edward Heathcoat Amory questions Gordon Brown's record on marriage, City editor Alex Brummer makes the case for lower and lower taxes and Quentin Letts calls it an exercise in "befuddlement."

Most honest front page of the day: The Daily Express. "Tax Cut: It's Just A Big Con," the Crusader informs its readers.

Most incisive coverage overall: The Business.  Allister Heath and Fraser Nelson confirm their reputations as two of British journalism's foremost analysts.  Their coverage yesterday was fast and insightful.

***
See here for how The Mail and The Sun covered last year's Budget.

Paul Dacre accuses the Tories of surrendering to the BBC's worldview

"Today's Tories are obsessed by the BBC. They saw what its attack dogs did to Hague, Duncan Smith and Howard.  Cameron's cuddly blend of eco-politics and work/life balance, his embrace of Polly Toynbee, a columnist who loathes everything Conservatism stands for, but is a totemic figure to the BBC, his sidelining of Thatcherism and his banishing of all talk of lower taxes, lower immigration and euroscepticism are all part of the Tories' blood sacrifice to the BBC god."

Wow!  This is what Paul Dacre, Editor of the Daily Mail, has said in a very public declaration of impatience with Project Cameron (and, perhaps, some disappointment that the Tory leadership is no longer fashioning its agenda for the Daily Mail's consumption?).

ConservativeHome has long noted the Tory leadership's pursuit of Robinson Man and also last week's weak response to the BBC licence fee settlement.

Telegraph becomes the Torygraph again?

ConservativeHome has already noted The Telegraph's increased friendliness to Project Cameron.  New Editor Will Lewis put a much more positive spin on a recent YouGov poll than his predecessor, for example.  Stephen Glover, writing his regular media column for The Independent, made similar points on Monday.  Mr Glover puts much of it down to a recent visit by David Cameron to the Channel Islands home of The Telegraph's owners, the Barclay brothers.  Mr Cameron is publicly critical of Simon Heffer but is apparently more concerned at the negativity of Jeff Randall, The Telegraph's respected Business Editor.  Mr Randall knows David Cameron from his time at Carlton, selling ITV Digital and does not remember him fondly.  He recently derided the Conservative leader as Camera-on.

The last two days appear to confirm the ConservativeHome/ Glover view.  On two successive days the leader columns have been very generous towards the Tory leader.  Today the newspaper described Mr Cameron's warning of a snap general election as "deft."  "The Tory leader has picked his moment well," the newspaper continued.   Yesterday's rather dull report from the security report apparently evidenced "intellectual clarity and an assured geopolitical grasp."

The re-emergence of the Telegraph as the Torygraph comes at a time when the Daily Mail has also been more positive.  It gave a strong welcome to last week's Tory report on marriage although Mail insiders tell ConservativeHome that Editor Paul Dacre's fondness for Gordon Brown will mean that the newspaper will always host decent opportuinities for the Chancellor to reach its readers.

The political mood over at Mount Murdoch remains difficult to read but the Conservative leadership will be pleased that the traditionally right-wing press may be beginning to shift a little more Torywards.

The Observer's Ned Temko recently analysed David Cameron's relationship with the right-wing press.

Yesterday was a good day for the Conservative Party

Following yesterday's welcome from The Sun, this morning's Daily Mail gives a very strong endorsement of yesterday's Breakdown Britain report from Iain Duncan Smith's social justice policy group.  In a special leading article it declares:

"For the best part of two decades (often as a lonely voice) this paper has consistently argued that the single greatest cause of the social problems of modern Britain — from binge drinking and drug abuse to educational failure, welfare dependency, vandalism and violent crime — is the breakdown of the family.  Now, to his immense credit, Iain Duncan Smith, instead of sulking like some of his predecessors at his ejection as Tory leader, has laboured mightily to produce a devastating 300,000-word report, Breakdown Britain, that unequivocally draws the same conclusion."

This Mail reaction is very good news for David Cameron.  He cannot afford to have so many of the traditional Tory newspapers offside as was in danger of becoming the case.  Yesterday he gave unequivocal backing to Iain Duncan Smith's analysis and sided with the traditionalists on marriage, rather than the modernisers.

More than anything, however, Mr Duncan Smith's report should not be seen in political terms.  It is a hard-headed, 300,000 word attempt to try and understand why life is getting harder for so many Britons when the nation has never been wealthier and when we've never spent so much money on welfare.  Thoughtful reviews from The Times, The Independent and Martin Kettle in The Guardian all suggest that  the report will receive the serious study it deserves.

Iain Duncan Smith showed that there was real weight to David Cameron's policy review process.  The 'Breakdown Britain' report was not the only example of compassionate conservatism on show either.  MPs Gary Streeter and William Hague issued a powerful report on human rights abuses around the world.  Yesterday was a good day for the Conservative Party.   

46% to 33% prefer Cameron to Brown

The ConservativeHome poll of polls and a new survey for The Daily Telegraph from YouGov both give the Tories a 7% lead over Labour.

The most encouraging finding for David Cameron's office, however, is YouGov's discovery that 46% of voters would prefer a government led by David Cameron to 33% preferring a government led by Gordon Brown.

Friday morning (8.45am) update
New Telegraph Editor tilts newspaper towards David Cameron

A fortnight or so ago ConservativeHome speculated as to whether the new Editor of The Daily Telegraph would tilt the newspaper's attitude towards David Cameron in a more friendly direction.  It appears that the answer to that question is 'yes'.  Back in July The Telegraph/ YouGov poll had the Tories 5% ahead and The Telegraph chose a 'Support for Cameron begins to cool' headline.  Today - with the Tories 7% ahead - the newspaper chooses a 'Tory leader surges ahead of Brown as voters' choice' headline for its front page.  Last week The Telegraph was quite gentle with the Tories on tax.  Today's Telegraph leading article still thinks David Cameron has more to do but contrast today with July's assessment by Anthony King, the newspaper's polling expert:

KING IN JULY: "The Conservative Party increasingly resembles a tired runner panting along in sweltering heat. He is ahead in the race but only because his main rival is even more exhausted.  According to YouGov's latest monthly survey for The Daily Telegraph, 38 per cent of voters now say they would back the Conservatives in an early general election. That represents a decline of one point since last month and only a modest improvement - five points - since the Tories' poor showing in the general election last year.  The Conservatives have been shuffling along with between 32 and 38 per cent support for most of the past three years. They have occasionally attained 40 per cent but it is more than a decade since they last exceeded 40 per cent.  The Tories today are no better off than they were under William Hague, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard.  David Cameron's election as Tory leader last December has so far made remarkably little difference. An initial tick upwards has been followed by several ticks downwards.  Voters still seem not to know who the Tories are or what they stand for."  Today Professor King is preferring to emphasise that the Conservative lead (although virtually identical) has been sustained.

THE TELEGRAPH LEADER TODAY: "As for Mr Cameron, he has put the Tories back in the game. For the first time since Black Wednesday in 1992, they have opened a consistent — if hardly convincing — opinion poll lead. Now comes the tough part. Mr Cameron must turn his party into a ruthlessly effective opposition — for, when Mr Brown finally take the reins, he will strain every sinew to demonstrate that it is not just Tony Blair who can hammer the Tories. It promises to be quite a fight."

Is the new Editor of The Telegraph a Cameroon?

Will Lewis - who had been running the Telegraph's emerging digital operation and its move to new multimedia headquarters in Victoria Street - has been appointed as the new Editor of The Daily Telegraph.  Just 37, he takes over from Acting Editor John Bryant who will remain as Editor-in-Chief.

The Times notes that "unlike previous editors of the broadsheet, Mr Lewis has no background in Conservative or right-of-centre politics".  CCHQ will hope that Mr Lewis will be more positive about Project Cameron than the outgoing editorial team.  The Telegraph leader columns have been consistently Hefferesque in tone for many months.   

The Barclay Brothers, owners of the newspaper, may also be hoping that Mr Lewis' immersion in new technology will give the newspaper an advantage in the digital age.

See Guardian story and Telegraph announcement.

There is no such thing as a Tory press anymore

Earlier this week ConservativeHome highlighted the Daily Mail's shallow response to Gordon Brown's Conference speech.  Yesterday's leader in The Mail was as ungenerous to David Cameron as the newspaper had been generous to The Chancellor.  The Mail's behaviour when set alongside The Daily Telegraph's suspicion Project Cameron and the ways in which The Sun has still been spinning for New Labour does give credence to Peter Oborne's view that there is no longer a reliable Tory press.  Mr Oborne is quoted in today's Independent on Sunday saying the following:

"The Tory press is a fantasy in the minds of people like Polly Toynbee. It doesn't exist any more and it hasn't since 1990 when it fragmented and parts of it then went pro-Blair. The real division in the British press is between the neocons and the rest - America versus Europe if you like - and in the neocon camp I would put the Telegraph, News International, the Express and The Observer [because of its stance on Iraq and Blair's foreign policy]."

Mr Oborne has emerged as one of Fleet Street's leading backers of David Cameron - yesterday writing an article for The Daily Mail predicting that the Tory leader will be able to crush Gordon Brown.  Bruce Anderson, Matthew d'Ancona, Daniel Finkelstein, Michael Portillo and Alice Thomson are other columnists who reliably defend Project Cameron.

Related link from April: David Cameron's cheerleaders in the press (and the lack of them)

Has The Mail lost its political compass?

Over recent years the Daily Mail may have become a reliable thorn in Tony Blair's side but it has consistently had a soft spot for Gordon Brown.  Insiders say the Brown-friendliness is very much the policy of the Mail's Editor, Paul Dacre.

Today's Daily Mail leader (not yet online) suggests that Mr Dacre's generosity is set to continue.  Here are some key sections of the leading article:

"His sure-footed performance yesterday - unflashy (like the man himself), full of conviction and moving at times - showed up his rivals as the pygmies most of them are..."

"Mr Brown's voice rang with unaffected truth when he said of his mother and church minister father: 'My parents were more than an influence, they were - and still are - my inspiration..."

"There is a decency and integrity about Mr Brown that the Mail admires.  If he can bring these qualities to government, that can only be a huge improvement on the Blair era of spin, sleaze and cronyism."

The Mail provides a reminder that Team Cameron should not underestimate Gordon Brown for he clearly does have qualities that appear, in large part, to be an antidote to some of the least popular aspects of Blairism.  But The Mail really shouldn't be allowed to get away with today's leader.  'Brown offers Britain a moral compass' is the leader's headline but The Mail appears to have thrown away its political compass in its assessment of Mr Brown.  In almost throwaway asides, the Mail leader notes Mr Brown's addiction to spending, the pensions crisis and the deterioration in schools'n'hospitals as if these were small matters in comparison to Mr Brown's "decency and integrity."  The Mail says Mr Brown deserves "huge praise" for Britain's economy.  He doesn't.  His regulations and tax burden (much of it stealthily imposed despite that "decency and integrity") are steadily eroding Britain's competitiveness.

Today's Sun Says isn't as flattering to Brown as The Mail but it falls into some of the same traps.  Tony Blair's premiership may be coming to an end but the once-right-wing press is still not yet free from New Labour's spell.  Falling for New Labour's spin in 1997 is forgivable but still falling for Labour in 2006 - given its record - is inexcusable.

Related link: Newspapers are still falling for New Labour's announcements

Newspapers are still falling for New Labour's announcements

Yesterday Work & Pensions Secretary John Hutton gave a speech on the importance of the two parent family and today's Daily Mail gives it an enthusiastic welcome.  Mr Hutton, the newspaper's leader writers declare, "deserves credit for challenging the politically correct nostrums that wreak such damage."  They continue:

"If only the same could be said of the Tories (with the honourable exception of Iain Duncan Smith, whose commitment to sanity on this issue deserves praise).  Under David Cameron's leadership, a party that was once proud to promote family values has so far had nothing of substance to say on the subject."

The Mail is being too hard on David Cameron - who has, after all, given IDS the task of recommending a new family policy for the Tories - and is far too soft on Mr Hutton and New Labour.  Nine years into the Labour project you would have thought that newspapers like the Mail would have wised up to the utter meaninglessness of Labour's announcements.  Hutton says the family is important but one of the first acts of New Labour was the abolition of the married couples' allowance.  Tony Blair makes anti-union noises but capitulates to the unions on pensions policy and bungs them millions of pounds of taxpayers' money.  Gordon Brown promises to give the armed forces all of the resources it needs for our dangerous world but we all know that troops are terribly under-resourced.  I could go on but the Daily Mail should know better.

Related link: The Sun spins for Brown

The Cameroons would need to invent Simon Heffer if he didn't exist

In a letter to this morning's Telegraph Oliver Letwin MP defends the record of the Conservatives under David Cameron's leadership.  He highlights the fact that the "Conservatives won the recent local elections handsomely and have established a consistent lead in the polls for the first time in more than a decade".

In terms of the success of opposing Labour the Tories' policy chief points to the fact that the Government has been forced to abandon its police merger and home information packs plans.  He also writes that the ID cards scheme has been put into "deep freeze".

Mr Letwin's letter was prompted by Simon Heffer's latest attack on David Cameron.  "I fear that no activity or achievement on the part of David Cameron's Conservatives would be enough to satisfy Mr Heffer," Mr Letwin concludes.  Few could disagree with that part of Mr Letwin's analysis.  Simon Heffer is surely the kind of critic that Mr Cameron's advisers would need to invent if he didn't exist.  For the Cameroons Mr Heffer embodies the bombastic Toryism that they are determined to leave behind.

The Economist: Cameron is a confident Commons performer, accomplished interviewee and disciplined strategist

Earlier today I noted The Telegraph's negative interpretation of its latest YouGov poll.  Other ConservativeHome readers have pointed out Jeff Randall's piece in the newspaper's Business section.  It doesn't pull its punches.  Comparing the Conservative Party to a company, Randall concludes:

"A company that's rapidly losing touch with its heartlands. It's akin to Waitrose suddenly abandoning its regulars in favour of those who prefer groceries from Kwik Save. Lightweight management. Underweight investment."

Great line although it's the Kwik Save customers that Project Cameron can most accurately be accused of neglecting.  Click on the graphic above to enlarge a section of the piece.

But if Project Cameron is losing friends at The Telegraph it is winning them at The Economist.

The Bagehot column, within its end-of-term report, describes the Tory leader as a "confident Commons performer", "an accomplished interviewee"* and a "disciplined strategist who has ruthlessly set about re-branding his party".  The column concludes:

"To that end Mr Cameron's speeches, while short on specifics, send out the signal that every day and in every way the Tories are becoming kinder, gentler and more at ease with modern Britain. So far his MPs, normally a mutinous lot, have done little more than mutter to themselves about the rumness of some of his sayings. It probably helps that for the first time since 1992 the Tories have a consistent, if modest, lead in opinion polls. But whether Mr Cameron's bold marketing strategy can be reconciled with the beliefs and instincts of the party—beliefs and instincts that have lost it three elections on the trot—will only become apparent when he emerges from his self-imposed policy purdah next year."

* Few would disagree that Mr Cameron is an "accomplished interviewee" after he bested Jeremy Paxman during last year's leadership election.  There have been complaints, however, that he is now dodging the tougher interviews.  The Diary column of Tuesday's London Evening Standard carried a report that he has consistently been turning down Channel Four News requests.  I can't remember him returning to the Newsnight hotseat either.

Murdoch's mixed signals about Cameron

A few weeks ago we reported on an interview The Australian had with Rupert Murdoch, in which he warned Gordon Brown against holding a snap election, for the sake of dynamism in British politics (and perhaps so he could have an easier choice at the next general election). He has reiterated that position, as well as saying he likes Brown very much on a personal level. He is, however, sounding less keen on "very bright" David Cameron, the FT reports -->

June 28th

Australian interview: "Can you see yourself supporting David Cameron?"

Murdoch: "Oh yes."

July 21st

American interview: "What do you think of David Cameron?"

Murdoch: "Not much."

YouGov's daily tracking has recorded a slight dip in support for Cameron since the hug-a-hoodie speech, Desmond Swayne's leaked emails and the delay on the EPP. These things might have been on News Corp CEO's mind when he went on to say:

"He's totally inexperienced. He's going around the country making speeches which...must be hugely upsetting to a lot of his older followers."

It seems clear Murdoch is deciding to be undecided. He is criticising Cameron for upsetting his "older followers" - presumably a reference to the "Thatcherites" - whilst remaining positive about our high-tax chancellor.

Deputy Editor

Murdoch: Blair should resign

Rupert Murdoch has said that Blair should quit before the next election, and that he might support the Conservatives. He fired a shot over Gordon Brown's bow in an interview with The Australian, saying that holding a snap election would be cheating the public:

"...for no reason other than the dynamics of British politics we would like to see at least a year to 18 months a stand-off between Gordon Brown and David Cameron so we can decide which of those most coincides with our views. Those two are going to decide the next election and I think the British public would be cheated if they only got a month or two’s warning."

Equally significantly, when asked whether he could see himself supporting David Cameron he said "oh yes".

Deputy Editor

Tom Towers of The Jupiter

Douglas Hurd has just finished the first of a new 'Sunday supplement' series on Radio 4's Westminster Hour.  The former Conservative Foreign Secretary is discussing the relevance of Anthony Trollope's novels to today's politics.

Lord Hurd's first instalment focused on the power of the press.  This builds on a Spectator article he wrote a year ago when he complained about Britain “becoming a nation of strong journalists and weak politicians”.

Lord Hurd quotes from one of my very favourite Trollope novels, The Warden.  This section describes the unaccountable power of Tom Towers, Editor of 'The Jupiter':

"It is true that in far-off provinces men did not talk daily of Tom Towers but they read the Jupiter, and acknowledged that without the Jupiter life was not worth having. This kind of hidden but still conscious glory suited the nature of the man. He loved to sit silent in a corner of his club and listen to the loud chattering of politicians, and to think how they all were in his power— how he could smite the loudest of them, were it worth his while to raise his pen for such a purpose. He loved to watch the great men of whom he daily wrote, and flatter himself that he was greater than any of them. Each of them was responsible to his country, each of them must answer if inquired into, each of them must endure abuse with good humour, and insolence without anger. But to whom was he, Tom Towers, responsible?

No one could insult him; no one could inquire into him. He could speak out withering words, and no one could answer him: ministers courted him, though perhaps they knew not his name; bishops feared him; judges doubted their own verdicts unless he confirmed them; and generals, in their councils of war, did not consider more deeply what the enemy would do, than what the Jupiter would say. Tom Towers never boasted of the Jupiter; he scarcely ever named the paper even to the most intimate of his friends; he did not even wish to be spoken of as connected with it; but he did not the less value his privileges, or think the less of his own importance. It is probable that Tom Towers considered himself the most powerful man in Europe; and so he walked on from day to day, studiously striving to look a man, but knowing within his breast that he was a god."

Heffer: Cameron will live to regret insulting right

David Cameron and Simon Heffer do not get on.  Today's Heffer column in The Daily Telegraph is only the latest round of the Heffer Vs Cameron series.

Simon Heffer believes that the Tories should now be 16% ahead given "Labour's meltdown" and the weakness of the Liberal Democrats under the "utterly inept" Ming Campbell.   He thinks that Labour will recover somewhat under Gordon Brown and that the LibDems will ruthlessly ditch Ming.  Where will this leave the Tories, he asks?

Mr Heffer argues that the Tories need to do more to positively address Britain's failures under Labour.  He highlights illegal immigration, the pensions disaster, Labour's economic mismanagement and the 'Sovietisation' of parts of Britain in terms of dependence on the state:

"Perhaps Mr Cameron's most harmful assumption is this: that, in the end, the Tory public, and the supposedly Tory press, will have nowhere else to go, so he can muddle along in the middle and end up in Downing Street. If the Conservative Party were any longer Tory, he might have a point - but it isn't. I am alarmed by the number of readers who write to me to say they have voted, or will vote, BNP. The entirely respectable UKIP now stands at four per cent in the polls, and almost all its support is precious votes taken from the Conservatives. Above all, the abstention party goes from strength to strength. Mr Cameron wilfully does nothing to counter these forces, except occasionally to insult them. However unlikely it may now seem, he and his party will live to regret that."

Mr Heffer's style of attack is probably what Max Hastings was thinking about when, in yesterday's Guardian, he wrote:

"Every time a neanderthal columnist attacks the Tory leader in a rightwing newspaper, I find myself wondering how much the Cameron camp paid for the privilege."

Mr Hastings appears to think that Mr Cameron's greatest strength is that he is prepared to ignore people like Mr Heffer:

"His greatest strength stems from a recognition that the British people have changed immeasurably, that the past has no message for them. If the Tories are to hold power again, the endorsement of bankers and retired colonels will never suffice. Just as Blair triumphed in 1997 because he knew old Labour was finished, that the unions had become an embarrassment, so if Cameron gets to Downing Street it will be because he takes no heed of Conservative geriatrics, and woos new Britain. It is the big tent all over again: "We're a party for everyone - young and old, sick and healthy, rich and poor. Margaret Thatcher's great achievement was to convince the British people that this country's best days were not in the past. We've got to do the same - to give the message that our best days are still ahead.""