Ken Clarke may back Andrew Lansley

Writing in this morning's Sunday Times, David Cracknell and Andrew Porter report claims from aides to Andrew Lansley that Ken Clarke may back the Shadow Health Secretary's leadership campaign.

Andrew Lansley was a strong enthusiast for Ken Clarke's 2001 leadership bid and they share opposition to the Iraq stage of the war on terror.

There is growing concern amongst the Conservative Party's left-modernisers that they have failed to find a champion for their beliefs. Cameron, Clarke, Lansley, Rifkind, Willetts and even Alan Duncan are all bidding to be that champion.

Earlier in the week Andrew Lansley set out the principles underpinning his leadership bid.

He expressed concern that Michael Howard's right-to-choose policies, proposed for the public services, became perceived as part of a "Conservative obsession with markets, efficiency and productivity".

He has warned that the party will be in the wilderness for twenty years if it does not 'reform' and become "united, tolerant, compassionate and honest." Last month he even suggested that Tories should consider renaming themselves as The Reform Conservatives.

Comments

[James Hellyer]

"He expressed concern that Michael Howard's right-to-choose policies, proposed for the public services, became perceived as part of a 'Conservative obsession with markets, efficiency and productivity'."

Surely the problem is that we have never sold the public the ends that these policies lead to, rather than the policies themselves (especially as we barely discussed out education policies in the election campaign beyond banal statments about "school discipline").

It sounds like Lansley is another of our MPs who has learnt the wrong lessons from the past, and merely offers the Conservatives the chance to snatch defeat from the jaws of defeat by turning us into New Labour-lite!

[The Political Thinker]

I totally agree with you James. The problem with the policies on choice wasn’t so much the actual policies rather we didn’t go into enough detail explaining why they were good; and to be honest seldom did we even talk about the policies on choice.

In my opinion they were very good policies, and regardless of the new leader I’m hoping they’ll stay. When you look at them in detail, and look at the bigger picture, they make so much sense you wonder why they’re not already in place!

[Bruce]

I offer this suggestion tongue firmly in cheek: There is one potential candidate who's a proven winner, who would bring the Tories toward that magic "middle" and would "modernize" the party to make it more "tolerant, compassionate and honest" as the leftist media defines it. And it's not Andrew Lansley, however worthy a person Lansley may be. Hint: the magic candidate's first name is Tony.

What Tories have to do is not to try and fit some leftist definition of "tolerance" and "compassion", but rather assert the eternal truth--that conservative policies embody (among other virtues) true compassion and tolerance.

[D&D]

Bruce you are spot on. Tony is the accpetable face of new Labour, which allowed the middle class to vote Labour, but with Gordon Brown set to be PM hopefully we can break from an increasingly left drifting, back to 'Old' Labour Party

[Jack Stone]

When the party says to people we are going to give you the choice wether to go private in the choice of your school or hospital they give the impression that they are not interested in improving the state sector and also most people believe that this choice will not affect them.
I believe the party will not return to power until it overcomes the distrust people feel to the party over public services.
The party as to say how it will manage the public sector better than Labour and re-assure people that the party are not just about cuts and privatisation which Labour have made people think they are.
The party have got to come to terms with the way people see it and decide how they are going to overcome these obstacles. It is not going to be good enough just to restate polices that the party stood for at the last two elections or to decide that those policies should be even more hardline.
New thinking, a new sort of language and a move back to the centre is the answer. I also believe that Andrew Lansley`s idea of a change of name isn`t a bad idea. After three election defeats its about time that the party had an open mind about anything.

[Michael McGowan]

Come off it, Jack. What you are proposing are not new thinking and language at all but a full-scale retreat to the failed Butskellite managerialism that has left us with shoddy and very expensive public services. The Tory policies on choice at the last election were a very watered-down variant of what is on offer every day of the week in Germany, Holland, Denmark and Sweden to all taxpayers, rich and poor, as part and parcel of state provision of public services. Not surprisingly they do the job better than we do because their public services are run for the benefit of the public, not politicians and their hangers-on. The whole point about choice is that it IS all about managing the state sector. Only the cowardly incompetence of the Tory Party prevents it saying so.

[Michael Kors Grayson]

good articles

[Michael Kors Belts]

thanks for share!