Who would make the best leader in a contest with Labour’s next Prime Minister, Gordon Brown?

For Steve Richards, in today’s Independent, the question topping this post is the key question facing the Conservative Party. He attacks the “absurd” and “superficial” nature of the leadership debate up until now and its focus on appealing to gays or not wearing ties.

The task of challenging Mr Brown will be a daunting one. The Iraq factor – which damaged Labour’s standing amongst its most traditional voters - will be unwinding by the next election. And if the economy is weak it may actually play to Brown’s advantage. A YouGov poll for the Centre for Social Justice found strong support for Mr Brown being in charge of a troubled economy. Brown in 2009 could parallel Major in 1992. Voters may prefer Labour to revive the economy if they still enjoy a lead on economic competence (which is currently double figured).

Mr Richards argues that only two Tories are up to the job of challenging Mr Brown – Ken Clarke and David Davis. He says that Mr Clarke’s popularity with the electorate and Mr Davis’ frontrunner momentum make them the stand-out contenders.

David Cameron is rejected as untested in the heat of political battle – but his “time will come”.

Mr Richards is optimistic that the Tories can do well at the next election:

“They seek to flourish in a conservative country that has not been fundamentally changed by a Labour government. They do so with the potential support of powerful right-wing newspapers. This should make them optimistic.”

Nick Wood, former Tory Director of Media, is much less keen on Ken Clarke. Mr Wood thinks that the Tory contest will be a Davis v Cameron clash. On Clarke he writes:

“Clarke, or a leftish disciple such as Rifkind, may yet stand. But given that he is out of step with most of his party over tax and spending and public service reform, as well as Europe, and given that at 65 he is old enough to be Cameron’s father, he stands no chance of beating Davis.”

Read Nick’s full article on conservativehome.com.

Comments

[Jack Stone]

So state schools are bad because they are run by the state. Does this also apply to health. Go into an election with a policy of privatising schools and hospitals your be lucky to get an hundred seats let alone two hundred. The Conservative Party needs to start thinking about how best it can win the next election, not how best to lose it.

[James Hellyer]

"So state schools are bad because they are run by the state. Does this also apply to health."

Yes. Look at the survival statistics of cancer patients where we are among the worst in the developed world.

"Go into an election with a policy of privatising schools and hospitals your be lucky to get an hundred seats let alone two hundred."

Nice straw man. There's a difference between something not being state run and it being "privatised". Other European countries mix public and private health and education provision. The funding still comes via the state or social insurance, but the control is in the hands of the consumer.

Why should we persist in advocating sub-standard centrally managed health and education provision. Britain deserves better.

"The Conservative Party needs to start thinking about how best it can win the next election, not how best to lose it."

Becoming indistinguishable from Labour by offering a managerial agenda will not win the next election. For a managerial agenda to succeed, you have to be seen as a safer pair of hands. For that to happen Labour has to drop the ball... big time.

[Edward]

Its odd that the two front runners are the ones saying least about what they want to do.

The ones with the ideas seem to be Fox, Willetts, May, Duncan, Rifkind. Although Cameron is saying a lot about education.

Cameron would be the best guy to win back the middle class support from LibDems in particular, that AB vote. But Davis has the advantage of being someone that neither looks nor sounds like a tory and hopefully can rid us of some of that stigma.

[malcolm]

I don't know how anyone without personal knowledge of any of the candidates can have made up their minds yet as we just don't know what any of them really (except in the most general terms) stand for.
Several have major handicaps ,Clarke (europhile,too old),Cameron(too young,inexperienced),DD,(mate of A.Campbell,serial plotter apparently,mate of Derek Conway) and Rifkind (reminds us of Major era).
One of these four I think will be leader and I only hope that they soon begin to give us some good concrete reason to vote for them (in the unlikely event that we have a vote!)

[Jack Stone]

The party will only return to power when it fights on the centre ground and convinces the public it as changed and is committed to improving public services. On all three counts David Cameron is the only person capable of doing that.
I think how well a person performs in the House of Commons is over rated and a good performer doesn`t always guarantee success as Hauge proved but anyone who as seen Davis and Cameron perform in the house can`t fail to agree that the younger man beats his older rival hands down!

[James Hellyer]

"The party will only return to power when it fights on the centre ground and convinces the public it as changed and is committed to improving public services. On all three counts David Cameron is the only person capable of doing that."

David Cameron himself dismissed your centre ground prescription in his 2005 Keith Joseph lecture. Like David Davis, he spoke of the common ground. Bad luck!

I would also add that you cannot improve some public services while they are publically run. And if people say things like "you want to dismantle the NHS" we should be prepared to say, "Yes. We do. It is a lousy system. Why wouldn't anyone sensible want to replace something that has failed - that causes thousands of unnecessary deaths a year with something much better?"

The party needs to be saying such things for years and that, as the failure of the NHS model - for example - becomes still more apparent, then the party's idea will be seen to be vindicated and the Conservatives will be perceived as the right organisation to do something about it.

[Jack Stone]

The sort of politics that David Cameron is taliking about is what I and most people would perceive as being the centre ground.
Go into an election promising the dismantling of public services and the Conservative Party will be finished!

[James Hellyer]

"The sort of politics that David Cameron is taliking about is what I and most people would perceive as being the centre ground."

Except he repudiates that cocept in his Keith Joseph lecture.

"Go into an election promising the dismantling of public services and the Conservative Party will be finished!"

Nice strawman. Replacing the NHS, for example, does not mean dismantling public services. It means replacing a failing state managed system with an alternative system. However, it doesn't mean that the funding will change - the system could still be funded via taxation.

It isn't helpful that you lazily associate public service reform with "dismantling public services". But why don't you continue Labour's job for them.

[James Hellyer]

And the centre ground is a meaningless term. It is simply the midpoint between the two parties. It's an arbitrary term that ensures a perpetual leftwards ratchet.