ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Boris "despises" Cameron says The Times

We have come to the end of an historic week in British politics.  Coming on top of Smeargate we have had revealed the full extent of Labour's economic failure.  On Wednesday the Budget revealed the extent of Labour borrowing.  Today we've seen the depth of Labour's recession.  I expect Tory leads to be large from now on - perhaps as large as yesterday's YouGov lead of 18%.  There is now a massive expectation of a Conservative victory.  98% of Tory members expect David Cameron to be Prime Minister in ConservativeHome's April survey.

With this expectation will come enormous scrutiny from the media.  The Tories have not faced serious examination yet.  That's going to change.  Much of it will focus on Tory policy but much will inevitably focus on the personalities that will soon be governing Britain.  Two relationships within the Tory family will face most scrutiny; the Cameron-Osborne relationship and the Cameron-Boris relationship.

The scrutiny begins tomorrow.  The Times alleges that Boris Johnson "despises" David Cameron.  In return Mr Cameron is said to think that Mr Johnson is "lacking the necessary moral cut-out or alarm system to be a serious politician."  Strong stuff.

It's true that Boris Johnson was disappointed that his early support for David Cameron was not rewarded with a bigger frontbench job when the latter became Tory leader.  It's true that Mr Cameron was initially sceptical about Boris' credibility as a Mayoral candidate.  Boris then resented George Osborne's (necessary) interventions in his Mayoral campaign.  Beyond that I wouldn't want to speculate.

Whatever the differences of the past it's vital that the three men at the heart of the Tory project - David Cameron, George Osborne and Boris Johnson - work out a way of getting along.  The media are keen for endless TB-GB-type rows.  That mustn't be allowed to happen.  None of the characters have the psychological flaws of Gordon Brown.  Brown's treatment of Tony Blair was extraordinary.

Boris and Cameron both enjoy very high satisfaction ratings among Tory members.  91% of Tory members are satisfied with David Cameron (7% dissatisfied).  92% of Tory members are satisfied with Boris Johnson (6% are dissatisfied).  But Boris should also reflect on another ConHome finding that 43% think he is not a credible candidate for Prime Minister even after he has been London Mayor.  They appear to be happy with his performance at City Hall but are sceptical that he can go right to the top.  He needs to focus on being a successful Mayor.  At that he's made a great start.

Tim Montgomerie

'The Left must rescue Cameron from the Tory Right'

That's Jenni Russell's message in her column for The Guardian.  She accepts that the Conservatives are almost certain to be Britain's next government and she encourages the Left to engage with David Cameron and avoid him (a) failing or/and (b) coming under the influence of the dreadful Tory right:

"The dominance of the progressive wing of the party can't be taken for granted. It is a fragile thing, and if it is to succeed it needs constructive criticism. I asked two insiders how many people in the party were fully behind this new Toryism. "Ten," said one, "but it's an important ten." Another said grimly: "Twenty-two - the shadow cabinet." Standing behind the more socially responsible Conservatives are plenty of gin-drinking, Mail-reading Tories nostalgic for the harshness of Thatcherism. They would cheer, along with the left, if this experiment failed."

A few observations:

The Cameroons tend to be dazzled by wooing from the Left: I do worry that the Cameroons are too flattered by the Guardian and other left-wing organisations that show them interest.  It's true that the Conservative project needs to be broadly based but there's too much fascination with unsatisfactory ideas like Red Toryism and nudging.  Old fashioned ideas like Margaret Thatcher's housewife economics may not be so sexy but they are the ones that will get our country out of Labour's economic mess.

Will the Left cool on Cameron if he pursues his social agenda? The most genuine (and important) thing about Project Cameron is its interest in social renewal.  It will be interesting to see how the Left's view of a Cameron government evolves if it stays true to its poverty-fighting agenda of emphasising marriage, faith-based charities, welfare reform, school choice and harm avoidance approaches to drug addiction.

The Right lacks coherence: Jenni Russell's caricature of the Tory Right is ridiculous but the Right is now very hard to define.  There is no great unifying force behind it if it exists at all anymore.  There is certainly no accepted definition of Thatcherism.  The Tory Right is split on Europe, foreign policy and confused on economics.  It has no leader although David Davis, Iain Duncan Smith, Michael Fallon, Liam Fox, John Hayes, Edward Leigh, Owen Paterson, John Redwood and John Whittingdale all represent important strands.

The ten who get it: And who are the "ten" who are fully behind the undefined "new Toryism"?  I am only sure of six...

1. David Cameron, of course.
2. George Osborne, more socially liberal and more hawkish than DC but the tactical brain of the whole project.
3. Steve Hilton, the strategic brain responsible for the decontamination project, for the emphasis on green issues and social responsibility.
4. Edward Llewellyn, Cameron's Chief of Staff, gatekeeper and hugely influential in the evolution towards 'realpolitik' in foreign policy.
5. Oliver Letwin, responsible for putting together the overall policy programme of the next government and intellectually its Gandalf.
6. Michael Gove, hugely trusted by David Cameron and responsible for the education brief that is intended to be the most radical of his government....

There are others, of course, who are hugely influential - Lord Ashcroft, Andy Coulson, Andrew MacKay are stand outs - but the above six would be my candidates for being fully behind the "new Toryism" and who are at the centre of power.

Tim Montgomerie

In defence of Steve Hilton

Steve Hilton, David Cameron's Director of Strategy, is subject to a strong attack in the latest edition of Standpoint magazine.  The attack contains at least two inaccuracies in the first paragraph.  It overstates his salary (although it is still very considerable) and suggests that he campaigned for Michael Portillo (not true).

But I don't want to get into a line-by-line examination of the piece.  Steve Hilton brings two big advantages to the Cameron project:

• First, he guards and promotes its big idea - that the long-term health of our country depends upon a revitalisation of everything that lies between the individual and the state. Within the Cameron circle he defends and promotes the idea constantly.  It's an idea I share.  It's the big idea at the heart of Iain Duncan Smith's Centre for Social Justice.  David Willetts called it civic conservatism.  Oliver Letwin called it the neighbourly society.  Chris Patten talked of bigger citizens and a smaller state.   It's the conservatism of Burkean small platoons.  The Berger-Neuhaus vision of people-sized institutions.  Helping individuals off welfare; giving local people control of policing; strengthening genuinely local schools; helping families to stick together; a bigger role for voluntary organisations.  The state has become so big in Britain because society is weak.  As it has got bigger society has become weaker in a vicious cycle.  There'll be neither social justice nor a smaller state if we can't find ways of making society stronger.  That's the Hilton vision and its's fundamentally conservative.
• Second, he's more strategic than tactical. It's true he has constant brainwaves that flame brightly for a short period, that he wants implemented immediately and then often burn out.  But many work and his overall disposition is to keep the Conservative Party committed to the long haul task of focusing on social renewal.  David Cameron - like most party leaders - is surrounded by many tacticians.  Hilton's big picture focus is rare and precious.

It's probably true that 'Early Cameron' relied too much on Steve Hilton.  It's good that the Tory leader is now surrounded by a broader group of advisers, not least Andy Coulson who has led the evolution to a 'pub ready' operation.  As 'Team Cameron' has become more balanced so, too, has the message broadened. 

Steve has been in California for much of the last few months.  He's in London for a week every month and will be here all through May for the European and local elections.  His time abroad ends in July when he returns to Britain for good. 

Tim Montgomerie

12.45pm: Robert Halfon's view

Tory reshuffle likely "within days"

With reshuffle speculation getting out of control it is now expected that the much-anticipated Tory reshuffle will happen sooner rather than later, "within days" according to one senior aide to the Tory leadership.

The biggest nonsense award goes to those writing that the Deputy status for William Hague is a snub to George Osborne.  William Hague is one of the party's biggest beasts and it's good news that he's taking a larger political role as he winds down his outside interests.  But noone should think that George Osborne isn't going to continue to be the second biggest force in the parliamentary Conservative Party.  Titles aren't everything.  Prescott was Tony Blair's Deputy in name but was never as powerful as Gordon Brown.  And that's not just because he occupies the biggest job in the shadow cabinet (after leader), it's because he remains very close to David Cameron and makes many of Project Cameron's biggest political judgments. 

One new suggestion is that Jeremy Hunt and Caroline Spelman might 'job swap'. If Caroline Spelman doesn't then receive a clean enough bill of health from the 'nannygate' inquiry she'll step aside from Culture, Media and Sport and be replaced by Ed Vaizey from within that team, so requiring no second big reshuffle. For the record - and a fair number of people are suggesting otherwise in threads - I believe in the integrity of Mrs Spelman and hope and expect her to be exonerated.  See ConHome's 7th June 2008 post.  There is a separate issue of whether she could continue as Chairman.  You can register your opinion on that question in this poll (which closes at 3pm today).

Of all the pieces written on the reshuffle this piece by Fraser Nelson is the best.  He writes about one of the most under-written influences on David Cameron: Andrew MacKay MP.  On Mr Mackay's own website we learn this: "Andrew is Senior Political and Parliamentary Advisor to David Cameron. Andrew works out of the Leader's Office, attending all key meetings, including the Shadow Cabinet.  At his appointment David said that he wanted someone of Andrew's experience to be by his side overseeing relationships with the Parliamentary party and beyond."  Here is the key extract of Fraser's article:

"Those in Norman Shaw South [Cameron's Nest] may laugh at the more fevered reshuffle speculation in the press, much of which strikes them as demonstrable nonsense. ‘But the troops don’t think it’s nonsense,’ explains one frontbencher. ‘And that’s the problem’. Email is no substitute for direct contact. The geographic dislocation of the Tory office layout has broken lines of communication. All of this feeds paranoia and amplifies the Chinese whispers echoing around Parliament. Many of these whispers can be traced to remarks that Andrew Mackay was making too loudly over dinner one evening recently — to the effect that Mr Cameron had decided to sack a senior frontbencher the day after the election. You might imagine these remarks to be of little consequence — Mr Mackay being only a former whip with almost no public profile. But those aware of his real significance in the party today would have craned their necks to listen, for he occupies an increasingly important and little-documented role. In the words of one shadow Cabinet member, he has become ‘something of a Rasputin figure’. Officially, he is ‘political and parliamentary adviser to the leader of the opposition’ — an intriguing title which gives him a passport to Mr Cameron’s morning meetings. But his real role is much broader. ‘Some time ago, David said to him: “I want you to be my Willie”,’ one MP tells me — referring, of course, to the service the late Lord Whitelaw supplied to Baroness Thatcher. ‘That’s Mackay’s skill: he can sniff the air, tell which tribes are forming, who’s up to mischief. He reports back to Cameron.’ Hence his potential relevance as a reshuffle rune-reader. Mr Mackay can advise as to which groupings need to be kept sweet, and which frontbenchers can be safely disposed of. His role does not require him to be popular, and his friends say he is happy in the shadows and ‘likes his holidays too much to join the front bench’. While his influence is rather mysterious, it is not seen as malign. As the leader’s office operates in a separate orbit from Parliament, Mr Cameron needs the best intelligence he can get."

Andrew MacKay is already a powerful figure within the Conservative Party. He'll be a major power in a Tory government, too.

Tim Montgomerie

David Cameron is giving too many speeches

David Cameron is the Conservative Party's biggest electoral asset.  ConHome subscribes to Mike Smithson's view that the Tories do better in the polls when the Tory leader is in the news.  There is a real danger, however, that Mr Cameron is overdoing one part of his public role - giving speeches.  He has given five within the last week and has not given a really good one since the Party Conference.

A speech by the leader of the Conservative Party should be an occasion.  It should matter.  It should be very well-written, thoroughly pre-briefed and water-tight.  Nothing should be done that endangers the Cameron brand.

Here are four reasons why Cameron shouldn't give quite so many speeches:

• On occasions there appears to be a temptation to find something to say.  This has led to (1) rushed policy announcements - for example, the widely-criticised employment recruitment subsidy - and (2) a rush to controversial rhetorical positions that are vulnerable to charges of posturing.  Today's Mail criticises the remarks on welfare made by David Cameron yesterday while today's FT criticises Cameron for Monday's speech against bankers.
• Restricting the number of speeches would encourage more imaginative ways of presenting ideas. It's easy to give a speech but sometimes more impactful to produce a viral video that makes the same point or to hold a regional media event.
• It would give more opportunities for frontbenchers to step forward.  The Conservative team is an impressive one and they could do with a bigger share of the public stage.
• Fewer speeches would also give the inner Cameron team more opportunity to consult experts inside and outside the Conservative Party.  The sheer number of speeches means that there is inadequate time to absorb the views of others - a process that could turn an interesting speech into a genuinely persuasive speech.

Tim Montgomerie

The politics of envy is back

The Labour Left has a lot to enjoy at the moment.  All the talk - across the globe - is of more regulation and state control.  But nothing will give them more pleasure than the return of higher taxation on the wealthiest Britons.

It was one one of the few real accomplishments of New Labour that they appeared to understand that heavy taxation of the wealth was counterproductive, leading to a brain drain of talent and a killing of incentives.  That belief died today.  Old Labour is back and with it an attempt to reignite the politics of envy.  Paul Goodman MP recently reminded us where envy takes us: "In the medium to long term, envy means lower profits, less wealth, fewer jobs, less money for public services."

A higher tax on the wealth isn't going to raise much extra revenue.  That's not its point.  It's all about political positioning: cuddling up to the LibDems in the hope of a future coalition deal and of wrongfooting the Conservatives. It's also dishonest; Brown and Darling are hoping that voters will believe that only the rich will be hit by today's boomerang budget, when in reality we'll all be hurt by Labour's tax bombshell. Tick, tock, tick tock.

Britain doesn't need more tax; it needs a leaner, reformed public sector.  In a superb piece on today's Platform, Susie Squire discusses The TaxPayers' Alliance's latest Public Sector Rich List. She shows how the rich are getting richer in the public sector and she notes a complete breakdown in the relationship between reward and performance. Read her piece here.

Tim Montgomerie

George Osborne's non-Treasury roles

In today's Spectator, Fraser Nelson details the responsibilities of George Osborne beyond those of Shadow Chancellor - co-ordinating for the next general election and managing party policy.

Nelson notes of the last of these roles the degree to which the Shadow Chancellor is also now the de facto head of policy:

"Mr Osborne’s third job is de facto party policy chief and, in this capacity, he has effectively supplanted his former boss in the Tory Treasury team, Oliver Letwin, who now defers to him in policy meetings. Such is his stature that shadow cabinet members grumble about being outranked even by Mr Osborne’s aides, who have accrued the de facto power to approve or reject proposals in his absence.

"The only consolation is that Team Osborne includes perhaps the best and brightest in the Tory party — an elite squad including Matt Hancock, Eleanor Shawcross, Rohan Silva and Rupert Harrison — whose members are seconded from time to time to other party responsibilities. Few shadow cabinet members could dream of gathering around them such a staff."

Nelson suggests a clearer focus from Osborne on the Treasury role would be preferable:

"A year ago it looked as if Mr Osborne could do all three jobs standing on his head. Now, none is going well. Take policy development. An email was sent out from Tory HQ earlier this week blaming Lord Mandelson for the increased number of Labour initiatives getting into the newspapers. To counter this, a request was made for a ‘strong and steady flow of our own policy ideas to release between now and Christmas’. And in the true Cameroon spirit of recycling, such ideas ‘do not necessarily need to be brand new’. Hardly the battle roar of a party brimming with intellectual energy.

"It is not that Mr Osborne lacks talent: quite the opposite. Staff in Tory central office say he brings clarity and enthusiasm to campaigning strategy. Those who attend policy meetings report that he is an indispensable corrective to Mr Letwin, who tends to complicate things. Yet there remains widespread confusion about who does what at the top of the Tory hierarchy, thanks to the Cameroons’ penchant for doubling up and doing each other’s jobs. Rumours swirl about tensions among them, and yet another reorganisation of the Conservative Research Department is now on the cards."

The Cameron circle needs to be bigger

In many ways the 'big Conservative tent' is functioning again under David Cameron.  Big beasts like Michael Heseltine, Ken Clarke, IDS and John Redwood were all used in the policy review process.

In other respects, however, Project Cameron is built around far too tight a circle.  Frontbenchers complain that they are not involved in their development of their policy briefs.  Very few of the party's big economic brains have been actively consulted by the leadership on the current challenges.  The shadow cabinet rarely takes important decisions.  David Cameron has no equivalent of the Policy or Strategy Boards that ensured that MPs rather than advisers 'owned' the big political calls.  4.30pm: CCHQ has told us that there is a policy board. Its membership is:

• William Hague
• Oliver Letwin
• David Cameron
• George Osborne
• Philip Hammond
• Francis Maude
• PLUS The relevant shadow cabinet minister when his/her policy area is under discussion.
  

Our apologies for that.

It is difficult to run a party and impossible to run a government when the leader's inner circle remains relatively closed to outside advice.  We've worried about this before and it remains a problem.

> Step 1/10: Tories need to explain their macroeconomic strategy for the recession

Online readers slam BBC coverage of Osborne

An indication that the way the BBC has covered alleged links between Oleg Deripaska, Peter Mandelson and George Osborne has been very ill-received is the comments thread to Robert Peston's story on Tuesday. The BBC's business editor is attacked by the overwhelming majority of commenters for giving so much focus to this political story - or non-story, as some suggest.

"what has all this speculation and innuendo to do with your post as Business Editor?"

"Mr Peston - close your Labour mouthpiece over a NON STORY . We know your background in politics. Labour. Why did it take Sophie Raworth to ask the questions that you so called reporters would not - and why grovel to a person who is proven to be corrupt - finally, WHY, when Nissan is cutting back production, the UK is dying, and the Clown is borrowing MORE money, ARE u not really quizzing Labour, instead of an if and but and maybe story. The answer, even as an ex Labour voter, is obvious. BIAS."

"When Mandleson does nothing improper but his judgement is called into question it gets a couple of minutes on a Sunday morning BBC show. When Osborne does nothing improper but his judgement is called into question it gets wall to wall coverage on every news broadcast going at the BBC. Consistency?"

"This is beyond a joke! Robert Peston is supposed to be the Business Editor. When is he going to go back to doing his job, instead of commentating on political tittle tattle? There are very serious business stories in the news today!!!!"

"The BBC has become nothing more than a mouthpiece for the worst spin doctors of the worst Government this country has ever has. You Sir are a parody of a serious journalist. It surely cannot be you are peddling this titttle-tattle because Mr Osbourne (quite rightly) is backing the complaints made about you to the SFA? You are a disgrace and the organisation you represent is a disgrace"

"I think you are flying very close to the wind sensationalising a non story. I was not impressed with your performance nor that of many others on radio 4 this evening. You were struggling to put a coherent sentence together when asked direct questions. I wonder why? Lord heseltine I thought was quiet brilliant dismissing your story as a non story."

"Why in your original article 'Rothschild v Osborne' did you start with a background of Rothschild to suggest that you believed his side of the story ...'does not make allegations lightly'. Would you consider that Osborne would make a denial of 'soliciting' a donation lightly - or were you not ensuring balance in your article? Should you not be disclosing your conflict of interests in your articles, namely that Senior members of the Tory party have asked for an FSA investigation into the leaking of market sensitive news in the last few weeks? You were Gordon Browns biographer were you not? Did the Independent not suggest that you were identified as being part of the 'Brown' camp in their review of your book back in 2005?"

"Why is business editor Robert Peston, now commentating on politics matters? Its the economy stupid is his job description! Has Nick been fired? Or is the fact that the BBC has lost control of what its reports choose to write on. In this case, will John Simpson be doing the football column from now on?"

The BBC apparently remains keen to keep the story going, publishing today an opinion poll it commissioned assessing how the public views the Shadow Chancellor - with mixed feelings revealed.

The indispensable George Osborne

Not a great day for George Osborne.  The allegations about what he and CCHQ CEO Andrew Feldman said to Russia's richest man are hardly helpful to the Conservative cause.  The allegations follow a testing time for Mr Osborne.  The Telegraph, in particular, has been questioning George Osborne's effectiveness during the economic crisis.

ConservativeHome has had its differences with Mr Osborne - on matching Labour's spending, green taxes and the dynamic effects of taxation - but we recognise his indispensable contributions to the renewal of the Conservative Party.  We thought it a good time to remember ten of them:

1. David Davis was hot favourite to win the 2005 Tory leadership race but he didn't.  George Osborne ran David Cameron's insurgent leadership campaign; a campaign which won him ConservativeHome's 2006 Campaign of the Year award.  George Osborne's political skills are extraordinary.  It's one of the reasons Mandelson wants to damage him.  Labour understands the centrality of Mr Osborne to the Conservatives' election hopes.
2. George Osborne recruited Andy Coulson as the party's head of communications.  The former News of the World Editor has been an essential driver of the party's improved press operation.
3. When the Conservative Party was at its weakest under David Cameron's leadership - during Brown's honeymoon - it was George Osborne who crushed the über-moderniser thesis and insisted the party start talking more about crime and immigration.  His recent switch to a more incentive-based approach to the environment fits with this pattern.
4. The Shadow Chancellor's greatest moment came at the Conservative Party Conference in 2007 when he announced the effective abolition of inheritance tax.  It transformed the Tory opinion poll position and was decisive in stopping an election that Brown might easily have won.  The Spectator fairly described that IHT announcement as "the single most effective policy ever announced by the Conservatives in Opposition".
5. When the Boris campaign was adrift in the autumn of 2007 it was Osborne that encouraged changes in the campaign strategy and staffing.  The recruitment of Lynton Crosby as effective head of the campaign was an important 'Osborne call'.
6. Over the last year George Osborne led Tory opposition to Labour's abolition of the 10p tax band.  He recommended that it be front-and-centre during the party's campaign to win Crewe and Nantwich.  As John Redwood has noted, it was George who first dubbed Brown's 10p budget as the tax con, not tax cut budget.
7. George Osborne also came up with the "Labour didn't fix the roof while the sun was shining" soundbite.  Few soundbites have done more to nail Labour for its failure to use the 'boom years' to prepare us for today's tough challenges.
8. The Shadow Chancellor is a big convert to the social justice agenda.  In the most impressive speech of his time as Treasury spokesman, to the CPS in the summer, he explained the many links between the weakness of society and the growth of government.  The party's social reform agenda is more necessary in a recession, not less.
9. The two year council tax freeze - announced at this year's Party Conference - won't save Britain from recession but it will be an important vote winner on the doorstep.
10. There are also many other good economic policies he has overseen.  Top of the list would be the plan for tax simplification, the fair fuel stabiliser and new powers for the Bank of England.

ConHome's first post of 2008 identified George Osborne as "the Conservative politician to watch in 2008".  We paid tribute to his considerable skills but we also warned against his tendency to become too political:

"It is now important that many more voters want to trust him with the nation's finances.  He needs to look in charge of his brief.  Solid.  Reassuring.  With policies to reverse Britain's declining competitiveness.  He is pursuing promising ideas on tax simplification, IT's transformative effect on government and financial regulation.  We need to hear much more about those and less of what George Osborne thinks about Labour's day-to-day political woes. 2008 is the year in which George Osborne must become the nation's Chancellor-in-waiting."

We stand by those words.

Tories prepare 'Brown rescued the banks but not the real economy' message

Last night ConservativeHome received a briefing on Tory thinking on the current crisis and next steps.

The main message that the strategist wanted to communicate was that the Tory leadership was unfazed by recent events.  David Cameron's great quality is coolness under fire, we were told.  He didn't panic during Brown's 2007 honeymoon and there is no panic now.  Only resolution.

Team Cameron readily concede that Brown has enjoyed a good few days.  They expect the Conservatives' poll lead to drop into single figures in the next month or so.  They expect to lose the Conservative lead on economic competence but expect it to be restored by the new year.

The Tories are not worried about being largely out of the news.  They have decided it's largely impossible to compete for serious airtime with Government at this time.  They note that frenetic activity by Vince Cable is doing nothing to reverse the LibDems' slide in the polls.

The Tory leadership hopes and expects the recapitalisation package to succeed in stabilising the banking sector.  But the leadership does not expect that Brown will win any long-term credit for any of this.  Brown, we were told, will soon have seen to have saved the banks but not averted recession and there aren't many votes in that.  They are cataloguing evidences of Labour "triumphalism" at recent events for later use.

And this is the key: The Tories are going to present themselves as the people to rescue the "real economy".  They are convinced that Brown will not connect with voters who start losing their homes and jobs next year.  "He is incapable of empathy".

There is a debate as to how radical the Tories' "real economy plan" needs to be.  George Osborne yesterday wrote about "Conservative plans to freeze council tax, abandon the new car tax, keep businesses facing bankruptcy afloat and help low income families with heating bills could all be put in place in the coming months."  'Hares' around the Tory leadership believe that this list is far too modest for the severity of the looming recession.  They believe that the crisis gives the party complete freedom to revisit every aspect of Tory economic policy and they hope for much more radical action.  The 'tortoises' favour a wait-and-see approach.  They want to see how the economy is faring in 2009 and make a decision then about economic policies.  They don't want to be boxed in by "rash announcements" now.

Although the Conservatives are ready for a spring 2009 election they don't expect one.  Brown has an extraordinary faith in his abilities as Prime Minister.  The last fortnight has reinforced that belief.  He'll hold on to his office for as long as he can.

The Cameron-Osborne rock

Rachel Sylvester, from her new perch in The Times, suggests that there is "a fundamental disagreement" between David Cameron and George Osborne when it comes to the family. Rachel Sylvester is probably right in saying there are differences. ConHome has heard the same.  Osborne is more socially liberal than Mr Cameron (and also, as a matter of fact, more hawkish on foreign policy) but it's not a "hot" dispute. Mr Cameron began his leadership campaign with a pledge to recognise marriage in the tax system and there'll be no retreat from that pledge. In a recent speech to the Centre for Policy Studies Mr Osborne was emphatic in his support for the party's family policies - recognising that stronger families were essential to reduce the long-term welfare burden.

Given the "hot" tensions between Brown and Blair it is understandable that journalists are keen to see parallels in the Cameron-Osborne relationship (Peter Oborne has done the same).  It is probably true that Mr Osborne is at least as influential as Mr Brown was in the comparative stage of preparing for government.  Mr Osborne as General Election coordinator has made a large share of the biggest strategic decisions over the last year - shaking up Campaign Boris, hiring Andy Coulson, making the inheritance tax promise.  But there isn't the rivalry that existed between Brown and Blair.  The two men get on well and with Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton are members of what Iain Martin has called The Quartet - the group of four that makes all the big judgments about Tory strategy.  It was David Davis' exclusion from the inner circle (not the formal meetings, which he sometimes chaired) that contributed to his decision to resign from the frontbench.

If the two most powerful men in the Conservative Party agreed on everything it would be spooky.  It's good that they see some things slightly differently.  Mr Osborne is more of a hare, Mr Cameron more of a tortoise although the Tory leader is apparently now readier than his Shadow Chancellor to push towards lower taxation.  Ms Sylvester is also unlikely to find the wider party unhappy with Mr Cameron's policy on marriage (Tim Yeo and a few others excepted).  ConservativeHome's own poll of the next generation of Conservative candidates found 93% favoured support for marriage from the tax system.

5pm: With the Daily Mail jumping on to the Sylvester story it's worth noting this line from George Osborne's July speech: "We are committed to introducing a recognition of marriage into the tax system." Seems pretty unambiguous to us.

Samuel Coates to join David Cameron's office

Tim Montgomerie writes:

"Other blogs got there first but I am delighted to confirm that Samuel Coates, Deputy Editor of ConservativeHome, looks set to join David Cameron's office as part of the speechwriting team. 

At the age of 22, Sam's likely appointment after a number of competitive tests and interviews is a tremendous personal achievement, I wish him every success.  His commitment to the social justice agenda and his interest in international human rights will be just two of the significant contributions I know he'll make to Team Cameron.

David Cameron's gain is definitely a big loss to ConservativeHome.  Sam has become a very good friend over the two-and-a-half years we have worked together, and I'll miss his company as well as his enormous contribution to this website. Today is a day for congratulating Sam.  We'll be announcing the recruitment process for his successor tomorrow."

> The photo of Sam and David Cameron was from a recent 'Day in the life of David Cameron' feature.  Sam's namesake at The Times will be pleased that there'll now only be one Sam Coates covering Westminster!

The Telegraph makes mischief

"Every morning at nine, Mr Cameron meets key aides and shadow ministers including William Hague, Michael Gove and George Osborne. Mr Davis has always been put out that he is not invited."

Those two sentences appeared in yesterday's Telegraph, from Robert Winnett.  Quite damaging on the face of it but not true.  We happen to know that David Davis attended the morning meeting as often as George Osborne.  When David Cameron and William Hague are both away David Davis actually chaired the meeting. 

Not content with getting it wrong once the Telegraph's Political Editor Andy Porter repeats the idea again this morning:

"Davis was irked that despite his seniority, he was rarely asked to attend the Tories' regular 9am strategy meetings. Instead, the close cabal is made up of George Osborne, Michael Gove and William Hague; chiefs of staff Ed Llewellyn and Catherine Fall; and communications chief Andy Coulson. Steve Hilton, the Svengali figure credited with rebranding the Tories, used to attend, but recently his appearances have been limited, as he prepares to move to California."

The Telegraph would be on stronger ground if it wrote about the closeness of David Cameron and George Osborne, for example.  (Only natural given Mr Osborne's chairmanship of Cameron's leadership bid).  They didn't do that but have made very specific and more troubling accusations about David Davis being sidelined from this key meeting.  We know that The Telegraph is not writing the truth.  We can't believe that CCHQ hasn't told The Telegraph that it's untrue.  Why The Telegraph persists in writing it is the real question.

10am, Sunday 15th June: David Davis, interviewed by Andrew Marr, confirmed that he did attend the 9.15am strategy meeting.

3pm, Sunday: Andrew Porter has now blogged on these morning meetings.

Andy Coulson coordinates summer media offensive

It was last summer that George Osborne recruited Andy Coulson as head of party communications.  The former News of the World Editor played a major role in helping the party avert an autumn election.

PR Week - that great source of stories about turmoil in Downing Street - reports that Andy Coulson is planning a publicity offensive over the summer.  There will be no vacuums but a grid of stories to ensure that there is little respite for the embattled Labour Government. 

PR Week spins the "summer offensive" as meaning a growth of Andy Coulson's power now that Steve Hilton will be relocating to the USA for six or so months.  In reality it is more a reflection of David Cameron's desire to avoid any complacency.

Gavin Megaw - former CCHQ press operator, quoted by PR Week - gets closest to understanding the more strategic role that Steve Hilton will now be playing: "Ironically, it will be much easier for Steve to capture the real mood of the country and translate it into the party's long term plans from outside the Westminster bubble, away from all the short term politicking and media distractions."

Steve Hilton, Cameron's 'guru', off to USA for six months

The Sunday Telegraph is reporting that Steve Hilton, chief strategic adviser to David Cameron, is relocating to California where his wife - Rachel Whetstone - is taking up a six month appointment at Google's world HQ.

It appears, however - despite The Sunday Telegraph's headlines - that Mr Hilton will remain a key adviser to David Cameron, on full pay but playing a strategic, rather than a hands-on role.

It is a mark of Mr Cameron's respect for Mr Hilton that such a distant relationship has been accepted.  So many decisions in politics come out of team discussions and a fast reaction to events.  Mr Hilton's role will now have to be even more strategic - focusing on the big picture direction of the party.

Alongside George Osborne and Andy Coulson, Mr Hilton is part of what Iain Martin has called The Quartet that runs the Conservative Party, with David Cameron.  Although Mr Hilton is seen as a moderniser - and was behind the greener, gentler emphases of the period up until the course correction of last August, September - he also strongly supports the party leader's social conservatism and commitment to marriage, fatherhood and the family.

Speaking to ConservativeHome last week Steve Hilton was full of the joys of fatherhood himself and his commitment to his own family explains this move to California.

If the move is only six months - as billed - there are advantages to the Project Cameron.  This is a time for Mr Hilton to observe the US presidential campaign at close quarters and be refreshed in his strategic insights.

> More on the role each key Quartet adviser plays: Andy Coulson, Steve Hilton, George Osborne.

David Cameron's Chief Speechwriter leaves for charity work

He joined the leader's office less than two years ago but, according to an impeccable source, Danny Kruger has resigned as Chief Speechwriter to David Cameron.

The parting is very friendly.  Danny has decided to pursue his commitment to Only Connect - "a theatre company and resettlement charity working in London prisons."  Read more at OnlyConnect's website.  The charity was the brainchild of Danny's wife, Emma, and they are now planning to build it up together.

Alongside Peter Franklin, Philippa Stroud and Cameron Watt, Danny has been one of the most effective 'back office' advocates for the party's social justice agenda.  He'll leave a big hole in the leader's office but his decision can't be faulted.  It's a great thing to write big speeches about the poor.  It's more earthy to be helping people at the coalface.  Good luck Danny.

Related link: A rehabilitation revolution

"A party within a party"?

The Mail on Sunday's Simon McGee reveals a new dining club within the parliamentary Conservative Party; The Green Chip Club.

The by-invitation Club - focused on the 2005 intake - was formed at the start of the summer by frontbenchers Michael Gove and Greg Barker in order to bring together some of parliamentary party's leading supporters of Project Cameron.

Backbench dining clubs are not unusual but many MPs will still feel excluded from a club that appears to be a new favoured circle of David Cameron's Preatorian Guard.  Given the involvement of George Osborne, Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton, it is clearly a club that enjoys the full blessing of the leadership.

The MoS notes that William Hague and David Davis are excluded.  There's probably not too much to be read into that.  Other key members of the Cameron inner team aren't part of this dining club either.  Oliver Letwin for example.  It is nonetheless an unwelcome development.  The revelation that there is a group of MPs with privileged access to Team Cameron will not be welcomed by those in the parliamentary party already unhappy at the ability to influence the direction of the party.

Listed below are the Club's thirty members.

The Tories can't afford to lose Andy Coulson

On Tuesday evening, over at Three Line Whip, David Hughes reported that Tory communications chief Andy Coulson "has no desire to emulate Alastair Campbell and become the Number 10 spokesman".  Like David Hughes, ConservativeHome is a big admirer of Mr Coulson and hopes that the party can keep hold of him.  He has helped to engineer a big improvement in the Tory operation - since he started work last summer but some do believe that his time at David Cameron's right hand is a stepping stone back to a big media role.

He is a member of The Quartet - Iain Martin's description of the four people who make all of the biggest decisions in the Conservative Party: David Cameron, George Osborne, Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton.  Steve Hilton is on a two-day week at the moment following the birth of his first child.  Iain Martin worries that the Tories miss his creativity.

But it is not really more creativity that the Tories need.  They are buzzing with ideas.  Fraser Nelson writes this in this week's Spectator:

"‘You can get it if you really want’ runs the current Tory advertising slogan. But get what? The problem is not that Mr Cameron has no answer. The problem is that he has about a dozen — and cannot narrow them down. Many of his policies, such as welfare reform, are radical and urgently needed. Some are worth casting a Tory vote just to see them enacted, such as Michael Gove’s promise of school reform. But no policy has yet been explained in a way the ordinary voter can understand."

The lack of a big theme was discussed by ConservativeHome yesterday.  The best thing that Team Cameron can now do is to pause a little more, decide on some big messages and focus relentlessly on those messages.

Fraser's Spectator piece warns the Tories that Brown's operation is now becoming competitive again.  The Conservatives cannot afford to let their operation slip.  Brown has been strengthening his team in recent weeks and is even learning to delegate.

Can a Basildon man save the Tories again?

John Harris of The Guardian authors a profile of Andy Coulson, Tory communications director, in today's glossy Weekend section of the newspaper.  It appears to be a profile based on very little access (Andy Coulson rightly wants an end to the Tories talking about themselves and what he calls the "internal wiring") but does, nonetheless, offer a readable overview of the man widely credited with helping to turnaround Tory fortunes:

Coulson the man: Raised in the Essex town of Basildon, Andy Coulson was educated at a comprehensive.  He is married with two young sons.  Harris spends a large part of the piece discussing the extent of Andy Coulson's involvement in the royal bugging scandal that led to his resignation from the editorship of the News of the World.

George Eustice likely to manage party's relations with conservative coalition

George Eustice is to stop being the Leader's Press Secretary from the end of the month.  He's going to take a two month sabbatical - to read some books, not newspapers - and will then probably return to a part-time position at CCHQ in the new year.  If he does return it will be to coordinate David Cameron's relations with the conservative family of think tanks, campaigning groups and websites/ blogs.  George is, I understand, also hoping to stand for Parliament and cannot do that and continue to handle press for the leader.

I hope George does undertake this coalition role.  It was one of the ten ideas proposed by Donal Blaney earlier this month:

"As the conservative movement in Britain grows at an impressive rate, Team Cameron likewise need to ensure that the members of the conservative movement, and in particular its leaders, are kept in the loop and feel they have a channel of communication to the Party leadership. The appointment of someone with a role similar to Tim Goeglein at the White House (who is in charge of White House relations with the conservative coalition) will help ensure the broader conservative movement remains if not wholly on side then at least broadly on side, thereby avoiding future misunderstandings and rows."

On a personal note I'd like to record my own little tribute to George.  ConservativeHome hasn't always been 100% helpful (!) but he's always been courteous to me and a pleasure to deal with.  I travelled down from Blackpool with him after this year's Conference - the BBC's Nick Robinson was also with us - and, licence feepayers, party donors, CH mug purchasers, take note - we were all in the second class carriage.  I hope he takes up this coalition manager role.  His experience at the 'No campaign'  and his closeness to David Cameron makes him ideal for the job.  In my two months as chief aide to IDS, when he was leader, I identified such a role as a priority task.  It would be great to see it finally happen...

Cameron should be above dissing his internal critics

David Cameron launches his National Citizen Service idea today.  I think it's a great idea but this morning's BBC News bulletins were giving at least as much attention to Mr Cameron's putdown of Michael Ancram.  This is what the Conservative leader told The Sun (my emphasis):

“I want all Conservatives to think carefully before they open their mouths... When you make changes you’ll get blasts from the past who signify nothing.  Political leadership is about taking a long-term approach. It’s about ignoring noises off stage.  I don’t think when Tony Blair was trying to change the Labour Party he spent his whole time worrying about what Tony Benn was saying.  I set a clear course that has already reaped huge benefits. Look at our local election results."

'Blasts from the past who signify nothing'?  Mr Ancram's intervention was ill-timed - as ConservativeHome argued on Tuesday morning - but Mr Cameron really must stop trashing his critics.  His frustration is understandable but his behaviour is not statesmanlike.  It's a reminder of the time when he attacked critics of his grammar schools policy as "delusional" or when he criticised Ali Miraj and Stanley Kalms in a Today programme interview.   Mr Cameron should allow others to deal with his critics.  He must be a unifying figure and he's only given a 11th hour burst of life to the nearly dead Ancram story.

Cameron's office still needs to do much more to build better links with the parliamentary and wider party.   This is what Anne McElvoy wrote in yesterday's Evening Standard: "I have been struck in the past two months by the fact that many Tories who defended the new leader in effusive, not to say excessive, terms last year, have become sour and negative now.  Too many of them feel neglected by him and his team... There are frequent complaints from people who thought they had an 'in' with him being treated coolly or even haughtily by his office, or letters written by people who have been kind to him, returned unsigned or ignored."  I hear many, many similar stories.

Project Cameron's key achievements: Unity amongst the true 'Top Tories'

Yesterday ConservativeHome began a series looking at Project Cameron's key achievements by focusing on the renewal of the party's one nation tradition.  Today we look at the unity at the top of the party.  Tomorrow we look at 'governing by proxy'.

Whenever I read a headline which includes the words 'Top Tory' I know I need to be suspicious.  'Top Tory' is invariably used by mischievous journalists to  illustrate a story about somebody we've never heard of.  There's been a lot of Top Tory stories recently.  Top Tory donors who haven't given much to the party for a long time.  Top Tories who are only 26 years old.  Top Tory candidates upset at failing to get selected for plum seats.

What is remarkable is that the real Top Tories have been very loyal to Project Cameron.  David Cameron's most significant resignation was the departure of Graham Brady from the frontbench over grammarsgate.  Graham Brady is a considerable figure but he wasn't in the shadow cabinet.  Much bigger Labour beasts have criticised Gordon Brown.  I think, for example, of ex-Home Secretary Charles Clarke or Brown's former Permanent Secretary who compared the Chancellor to Stalin.

All of the big beasts of Team Cameron have been united and loyal.  Although some can be criticised for their work-rate - perhaps related to the extent of outside interests - the true Top Tories have been increasingly evident in the media, defending Project Cameron.  David Davis has encouraged the right to get behind David Cameron.  Liam Fox has backed the leader on grammar schools and climate change.  William Hague has told the party that there's no other show in town.

The unity has also been evident in the policy group process.  David Cameron has succeeded in enlisting the support of people seen as right-wingers - IDS (social justice), Peter Lilley (international development) and John Redwood (competitiveness) - and those traditionally seen on the left - Stephen Dorrell (healthcare), Ken Clarke (democracy), Michael Heseltine (regeneration) and John Gummer (environment).

And what about true Top Tory donors?  The Guardian - that bastion of pro-Tory comment - noted yesterday that the Tories are "in robust financial health"  and listed some of the people who have delivered the financial improvement.

Even amongst grassroots members - where there is concern over strategy - 87% back David Cameron to remain Conservative leader.

George Bridges resigns

Other blogs have noted George Bridges' decision to resign from his senior campaign post at CCHQ.  As Ben Brogan points out, it was only recently reported that he had been tasked with 'bomb-proofing' the policy review process.  The conspiracy theorists will, no doubt, be out in force.  It may be true that, as Ben Brogan writes, the increasingly influential Lord Ashcroft was not a big admirer of George but my understanding is that he decided to quit because he's getting married.  Simple as that.  He didn't want to spend the first months and years of married life juggling a political position that often needs 24/7 attention.

While we were on the subject of CCHQ I learnt out one thing earlier today that horrified me.  I was speaking to a very senior political journalist and they told me that days go by without a call from Team Cameron's press operation.  Hours don't go by, this journalist told me, without a call from Team Brown.  Over to you Andy Coulson...

War with the Mirror

A rather slanted piece in The Observer sourced by the Mirror describes David Cameron's first meeting with Daily Mirror Editor and former spin doctor Richard Wallace. They met at Cameron's request, alone at his Portcullis House office, to discuss the Mirror's repeated personal attacks on "Tory Toff" Cameron.

Wallace dismissed Cameron's claim that "You're treating me worse than the Sun treated Kinnock in the 1980s.", saying that this kind of criticism was "par for the course for politicians". Noting the Michael Howard vampire image when he was elected leader, he said that as the Mirror is the only card-carrying Labour paper it is "duty bound to heap opprobrium" on Cameron every day.

Afterwards Wallace said: "I was quite shocked. This is a man who wants to be Prime Minister, and he was whining away like a little schoolboy". On Friday he was apparently incandescent about Cameron's comments about the private meeting at Cheltenham, telling George Osborne: "The gloves are off. "If you want a war, I'll give you a war'." (Quote sanitised, we're a family website).

It's a similar situation to when Tony Blair tried to gain favour with right-leaning newspapers in the run-up to 1997. Learning from Kinnock's mauling, he and Alastair Campbell were successful in winning back The Sun and other newspapers, although they were disappointed at not being able to win over the Daily Mail.

Cameron had raised the prospect of lifting the ban on CCHQ dealing with Mirror lobby journalists, but that looks unlikely to happen for some time!

Deputy Editor