Some time ago I was on a BBC Radio programme with Tim Allan, who used to be Alastair Campbell 's Downing Street deputy. He was of the clear view that the Conservative Party had been foolish not to choose Ken Clarke in 1997 or 2001. He was the one Tory politician who had had the potential to worry Labour and to restore the party's reputation for economic competence, he argued. Mr Allan was unsure if Ken Clarke was now too old but thought that he still might be the Tories' best hope.
Attempting to counter such doubts, Ken Clarke's campaign aides are promising an 'old pope, young cardinals' regime. Given other things that Labour insiders are saying a 'young cardinal' (to Ken Clarke, David Davis or other possible winner) may be a good option for David Cameron. Some Labour insiders reportedly believe that David Cameron will probably be the Tories' next Prime Minister - but in eight or so years' time. They see him as the Tory with the skills and public touch to reconnect with middle England. They do not think he is yet ready for the testing job of Leader of the Opposition and has too many gaps in his knowledge and experience. If he was to become leader now they think he could be ruined and that, of course, would suit them nicely.
There is Westminster village speculation that Paul Baverstock, Director of Tory Communications under Iain Duncan Smith, may be appointed to Ken Clarke's campaign team. Mr Baverstock was a principal architect of IDS' 'fair deal for everyone' strategy and his one nation commitment to relink the basic state pension to earnings. 2001's Clarke campaign was notable for its lack of bold ideas. If Paul Baverstock joins the 2005 bid Mr Clarke may be suggesting that he's readier to advance a bolder leadership prospectus.
Also on the personnel front is news that David Willetts has strengthened his team. Atticus in yesterday's Sunday Times, reports that Penny Mordaunt, of Media Intelligence Partners and Tory candidate for Portsmouth North at the last election, is to be Chief of Staff to Mr Willetts' leadership bid.
But be quick - the fee of £55 doubles if you apply after August 15. If you have any problems, ring the Conference Office at CCHQ. You will also need to get your application counter-signed by your association agent or an officer.
Posted by: Simon C | 10 August 2005 at 10:54
"I think there's a problem if leaders are trying to sell a big idea that they themselves don't passionately believe in. We could see this with Michael Howard, where he delivered some nice speeches written by Francis Maude, but never followed up on their ideas because they weren't his own."
Quite agree James. Leaders never have time to write all the speeches and articles that they are required to make, but they do need to subscribe whole-heartedly to the underlying principles. We need emotional commitment to ideas, as well as intellectual understanding.
One small example of the dangers of a leader not being fully in tune came on Today this morning. Michael Howard was being quizzed about the article on judges published under his name today. He was asked about the words "aggressive judicial activism" to which he replied that he hadn't used the word "aggressive". Sadly, he (or rather the article) had used that phrase in the last paragraph. The point is that because he hadn't fully bought into the ideas in the article, he was forced onto the defensive about his choice of language.
This also illustrates the pitfalls of using over-strident language. Little would have been lost to the article if the word "aggressive" had not been used. Using it, and then being unable to justify it, caused a problem.
This is a small example, which of itself is of no real consequence. However, wider lessons about the party's strategy can and should be drawn from it, because if repeated day in day out, it becomes consequential.
Posted by: Simon C | 10 August 2005 at 11:10
Party Conference- Mrs Tyler and I are hoping to attend- for the first time ever. As members who joined nationally, rather than locally, it was actually a bit of a performance to get the apps countersigned. Plus you have to get photos countersigned. We ended up driving a 40 mile round trip to another constituency- where I had previously met the chairman- to get it done.
And having sent off the forms a couple of weeks ago, we've heard nothing. (Like my membership renewal which I sent off 6 weeks ago and have still heard nothing).
Meanwhile, those who've been to Blackpool conferences before utter frankly disturbing remarks about the dregs accomodation you get if you book too late.
Any tips?
Posted by: Wat Tyler | 10 August 2005 at 12:11
"As members who joined nationally, rather than locally, it was actually a bit of a performance to get the apps countersigned."
Let me guess, CCO hasn't deigned to tell your local Association that you exist...
Posted by: James Hellyer | 10 August 2005 at 12:21
Wat, just grin and bear it!
On the question of Ken Clarke, it's been noted above that Clarke does appear to have wide popular support, if several opinion polls are to be believed. It's said that many people find him 'blokish': someone you could have a pint with, I've heard him described as. My feeling is that if he were leader, because he would be back in the limelight as a senior politician, any sheen he had developed on the backbenches as a cool kind of guy would instantly be lost. The attraction would wane as his power increases. Political parties do have their 'characters' and their grand old men who are revered and adored widely, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the public wants to have them as the party leader.
Just a theory, but there you have it!
Posted by: Mark O'Brien | 10 August 2005 at 12:25
"On the question of Ken Clarke, it's been noted above that Clarke does appear to have wide popular support, if several opinion polls are to be believed."
I've always contended that these polls show how recognised Clarke is, not how much people like him. This line of thought is supported by the BMRB poll conducted after the success of the Olympic Bid, where 20% supported a Lord Coe leadership bid!
Posted by: James Hellyer | 10 August 2005 at 12:43
Thanks James&Simon.
Posted by: malcolm | 10 August 2005 at 12:46
Your experience Wat,mirrors mine exactly.I rejoined the party(nationally) at the beginning of the year after a ten year break.Trying to get information out of the local party has been extaordinairily difficult and even offers of help have been met with silence.It would be easy to give up.
It's only my hatred of the present government that's kept me (trying to be) active!
Posted by: malcolm | 10 August 2005 at 12:55
Wat, don't get too impatient about the conference passes. They are all sent out together in a mass mailing about 2 or 3 weeks beforehand, with conference programmes etc etc.
Your membership is a seperate matter - although why did you apply centrally rather than to the local association, good grass-roots peasant that you rejoice in portraying yourself as?
Malcolm - I understand the frustrations. Have you met anyone in your local association yet? Or managed to get to any of their meetings & events? You should find it easier to get involved once you have seen a few faces. Keep pushing, show yourself around and you could even end up as Chairman with a vote on the leader in a few years time!
Posted by: Simon C | 10 August 2005 at 13:14
My experience is the same as Wat's and Malcolm's! I moved back to Devon after a few years away and renewed my membership through CCO. Despite CCO getting me to set up and run a branch of Conservatives Direct in my constituency during the election, the local association only found out I was a member when I contacted them repeatedly.
It's no wonder some of don't trust CCO to do anything properly if they can't even manage the membership list.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 10 August 2005 at 13:14
"You should find it easier to get involved once you have seen a few faces. Keep pushing, show yourself around and you could even end up as Chairman with a vote on the leader in a few years time!"
Surely that should say the "right to be consulted (but not necessarily listened to) on the choice of leader if your constituency has a Conservative MP."
Anyway, the key problem to getting involved with local associations is that many of them don't seem to anything beyond ladies' coffee mornings. When, for example, you are your constituency branch of Conservative Future, it doesn't generate much in the way of activity. That's why it's important to get involved with CPF meetings whenever you have the chance.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 10 August 2005 at 13:20
Surely that should say the "right to be consulted (but not necessarily listened to) on the choice of leader if your constituency has a Conservative MP."
Absolutely. Sorry, I was thinking more about my post-lunch coffee than about precision of language (a huge mistake on this blog). I will try to be more careful.
Agree too about the CPF (Conservative Policy Forum for non-anoraks). In this day and age people will only join a political party if they are interested in politics. That interest needs an outlet for expression. The CPF has become tired & disused, and needs revitalising.
Posted by: Simon C | 10 August 2005 at 13:31
Excuse my ignorance(once again?!) but who are the the CPF and how can I join?
Like you Simon,I'm often thinking about lunch when I post to this blog.This I hope goes some way to explaining some of the horrendous spelling and horrible typos that litter my posts!
Posted by: malcolm | 10 August 2005 at 14:17
The CPF used to exist in many constituency associations. CCHQ/CCO would send out a regular briefing on a policy issue, & invite the CPFs to comment. The centre would later issue a summary of the comments received & a response. The idea was that CPFs could thereby feed into the policy-making process.
I think that's right, although I haven't been involved in an active CPF for some time.
Posted by: Simon C | 10 August 2005 at 14:27
That is indeed right, Simon. All the CPF branches should be feeding back on the general election campaign at present. I think they're meant to report by the middle of next month, so if you ask your local association office Malcolm, they should be able to tell you when and where the meeting is.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 10 August 2005 at 14:34
Thanks chaps
Posted by: malcolm | 10 August 2005 at 14:47
We (or rather the Editor) could try to register Conservative Home as a virtual branch of the CPF...
Now then, what DID we think of the General Election campaign?
Posted by: Simon C | 10 August 2005 at 15:42
"I suspect I'm not alone in finding one of the offputting things about the Davis campaign the "calibre" of the MPs who back him ... shades of Planet Redwood?)."
This is a massive concern about "Desperate" Davis. I'll wager he won't be photographed near, for example, Eric Forth or Derek Conway in the near future. Unless he becomes leader and we find them in his Shadow Cabinet. Do we want them anywhere near the top of the party?
Posted by: Bellman | 10 August 2005 at 15:55
A very long subject!Probably shouldn't even start to reply as I'm in the office and supposed to be working.But in short it was a campaign that started brightly but got worse as it went.We had few ideas,were very unambitous and presented some of our ideas with absolutely no confidence (particularly over the economy).The worst moment for me was on the party leaders Question Time when MH was bitterly critical of Blairs lies over Iraq (which was good) but then blew it by saying he would have done the same even if he knew we were not threatened by WMDs!
In the end I was suprised by how well we did given the campaign.Sorry to sound so negative but that's how I feel.
Posted by: malcolm | 10 August 2005 at 15:56
The problem with the worry that a Davis Shadow Cabinet would include some rather unusual figures is that all the people who would make up the core of the Shadow Cabinet have still got their names being touted for a leadership bid! Whoever succeeds Howard will be rather constrainted by many factors when he makes his Shadow Cabinet, not least because we already have a fairly good team on paper, with just a few holes here and there which will be easily filled up, and I don't think Davis would be too radical in his choices.
Posted by: Mark O'Brien | 10 August 2005 at 16:00
Some interesting comments. on the subject of the election I am sure CCO ar ecollating reports from all the constituencies. I have just drafted my report on what worked and didn't in my campaign - so there will be quite a bit of reading to be done.
It seems to be a common complaint about activists who want to get invovled not being "welcomed" too well by their constituencies in some parts of the country. If you want me to raise it please pass on your details and I will see what can be done.
Party conference will be an interesting one this year. Hope to see many of you there. Show some pity for me - as I have to attend all three (with work) so will be somewhat weary after having to endure One Blackpool and Brighton week before ours even begins!
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | 10 August 2005 at 17:16
The biggest difficulty for me in choosing between the many potential candidates is the relatively small amount of solid positioning we have heard from any of them. Another poster comments above on the eventual withdrawl of Willetts, and whilst I don't see him as a Leader, it is worth noting that he is almost the only one who has really given a narrative on what modern Conservatism is for, and why we would be different. We need to tell a story of life in a new Conservative Britain, to start doing this as quickly as possible, and until Cameron does this convincingly I will continue to ally myself behind Davis. That said, I will be watching very carefully as the various bids evolve to see which camp Willetts becomes the intellectual powerhouse for, as he could provide a turning point for me. Personally, I would love to see an alliance of the Davids - but no, I'm not saying which ones...
Posted by: RichardC | 10 August 2005 at 22:17
Richard - don't tease the readers like that - do tell!
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | 11 August 2005 at 07:56
Out of interest, could "old Pope" Ken Clarke pursue an "old cardinals" policy? Who would he have in cabinet? Sir Peter Tapsell?
Or is the young cardinals policy simply stating he has no choice?
Posted by: James Hellyer | 14 August 2005 at 13:59
ジュンは62012あなたは、[url=http://www.coachmise2013.com/]コーチ 財布[/url] コーチ 財布 単に彼らが単に守屋は、[url=http://www.coachmise2013.com/]コーチ アウトレット[/url] コーチ アウトレット その [url=http://www.coachmise2013.com/]coach アウトレット[/url] coach アウトレット 結果にもかかわらずインチ採用されている適切な戦略と職業の方法に慣れていない場合は、インターネットからお金を稼ぐことは難しいことが、彼/彼女は、[url=http://www.coachmise2013.com/]www.coachmise2013.com[/url] www.coachmise2013.com または彼が譲歩しな[url=http://www.annkacoachvip.com/]Coach アウトレット[/url] Coach アウトレット ければならないあなたがOunoすべて突き出すを与え彼女は[url=http://www.annkacoachvip.com/]コーチ アウトレット[/url] コーチ アウトレット 、この多く[url=http://www.annkacoachvip.com/]コーチ 財布[/url] コーチ 財布 の高齢紳士を楽しんで守谷市に加えて、 [url=http://www.annkacoachvip.com/]www.annkacoachvip.com[/url] www.annkacoachvip.com 彼はあなたのパートナーの自明絶対に [url=http://www.annkaseiko.com/]グランドセイコー[/url] グランドセイコー [url=http://www.annkaseiko.com/]セイコー 時計[/url] セイコー 時計 ストアオンラインのこの特定の素晴 [url=http://www.annkaseiko.com/]セイコー 腕時計[/url] セイコー 腕時計 らしいフォームをOuno.[url=http://www.annkaseiko.com/]www.annkaseiko.com[/url] www.annkaseiko.com できるように、愛を言及しないように崇拝告白以来 [url=http://www.annkaoakley.com/]オークリー サングラス[/url] オークリー サングラス 光るとさえ [url=http://www.annkaoakley.com/]オークリー アウトレット[/url] オークリー アウトレット 天使を通して幸い [url=http://www.annkaoakley.com/]オークリー 激安[/url] オークリー 激安 バップを簡単にすることができます靴を実行すると、 [url=http://www.annkaoakley.com/]www.annkaoakley.com[/url] www.annkaoakley.com プレイのバリエーションやデザインに入ってくる。 [url=http://www.annkaralphlauren.com/]ラルフローレン[/url] ラルフローレン 不利な噂はフィンガーズの靴に関する到着以来、より一般的になってきた。 [url=http://www.annkaralphlauren.com/]ポロラルフローレン[/url] ポロラルフローレン [url=http://www.annkaralphlauren.com/]ラルフローレン アウトレット[/url] ラルフローレン アウトレット ブルックス固定Six.0Brooks、このアプローチを知っていて、また、彼または彼女のサービス会社名を入れてはなりませんしかし、たくさんの人々の習慣runners.Coachハンドバッグを持つ "新しい、その後改善された"様々なことに10.Buyグッチ7を思い付いた接続文字列ではなく、[url=http://www.annkaralphlauren.com/]www.annkaralphlauren.com[/url] www.annkaralphlauren.com キーフレーズの中でそれらはからの彼/彼女の会社が利用可能に好む。
Posted by: TealKasyhal | 24 June 2013 at 07:45