Editorial: David Davis should fear a Cameron-Fox ticket

It keeps getting better for David Cameron.  After Wednesday's warmly-received speech he has become the bookies' favourite and a steady trickle, trickle, trickle of endorsements has installed him as the clear second-placed candidate in this blog's list of publicly declared MPs.

Last week proved that a week can be a very long time in politics but a long eight or nine weeks stands between DC and the Tory crown.  That's a lot of time for his candidacy to be unpicked by the serious scrutiny he should now face.  The big weakness of his campaign is his lack of clear policy positions.  Behind this weakness are two different questions:

1. Is David Cameron substantial enough?
2. Is David Cameron conservative enough?

The three older candidates in this race - each with a substantial history of policy positions - might be forgiven a lack of detail.  DC, with only four years in parliament, must not get away with vagueness.

We think we know where DC stands on marriage, Iraq, co-payment for public services and that he shares George Osborne's commitment to tax reform.  We also know that he shares much of Iain Duncan Smith's passion for social justice but we don't know much else.  [I'm currently compiling a long list of questions for Mr Cameron that should be answered over the course of this campaign.  If you have an essential question please email it to me at [email protected] and I'll post it later this week.]

The great fear of the right is that David Cameron will reduce the Conservative Party to a pale blue imitation of Tony Blair.  One way of correcting that will be to install his tennis buddy, Liam Fox, as his running mate.  Dr Fox, of course, is still pursuing his own leadership bid but he may have pinned too much hope on the socially conservative Cornerstone group, who appear to have all the unity of Monty Python's People's Front of Judea.  If Liam Fox offered Cornerstone withdrawal from the EU they'd probably splinter over how quickly it should be delivered.  We'll know more after Tuesday's parliamentary meeting of Cornerstone...

If Dr Fox did join David Cameron's team it could threaten David Davis' base on the right of the party.  DC would still have to address the substance issues but that could partly be achieved by giving Oliver Letwin and George Osborne (an outstanding Shadow Chancellor over the last few months) more prominent roles in his campaign.  If DC is seen to be at the head of a formidable team he could become unstoppable.

Comments

[AnotherNick]

When the list of questions is compiled will you send it to the Cameron Campaign so that he/or at least they can have the opportunity to answer?

[Disraeli]

Cameron is the candidate of 'modernisation'. Fox has placed himself firmly as the candidate of anti modernisation. Any Fox-Cameron ticket would be as cynical as Clarke-Redwood and, given the antipathy that is held for Fox by the moderate modernising wing of the Party (certainly the sense I got from conference) such a ticket is probably unlikely.

[Editor]

I certainly will 'AnotherNick'.

[AnotherNick]

Probably won't be Alan Duncan leading the negotiations!

[AnotherNick]

Sorry, a few too many posts from me on this page, I'll shut up in a sec.

Thanks Editor, just want to make sure that the campaign would have a chance to respond.

[Disraeli]

Alan Duncan is a case in point of the modernisers distaste for Dr Fox. Having said that, AD's credibility is hardly high at the moment given his astonishing U-turn after telling Cameron to "go away" in The Sunday Times a few weeks ago.

[Samuel Coates]

This would be my 'dream ticket', although Willetts would have given it that extra dollop of substance.
I disagree with Disraeli in that I think it to be an eminently feasible union - I don't see how it is as 'cynical' as the Clarke-Redwood one, and many people I know, particularly social conservatives, have been torn between Fox and Cameron.
Lets hope!

[James Hellyer]

Cameron is the candidate of 'modernisation'. Fox has placed himself firmly as the candidate of anti modernisation.

Cameron is the candidate of "modernisation" in as much he's adopted the self-styled "modernisers" introspection about the party. The electorate are not imnterested in what Conservatives think about themselves. They are interested in what the parties will do for them. "Modernisers" ignore that.

Far from being anti-modernisation (with your implication being that the party would move backwards), Dr Fox wants us to be modern in the sense of having an agenda that matters to people now, rather than forever focus on ourselves.

We lost the 2001 and 2005 election because our policy agenda didn't matter.

In 2001 we said "vote Conservative and save the pound." The government had promised a referendum. Our agenda didn't matter. We lost.

In 2005, we fought on immigration and issues like gypsies. These weren't people's greatest concerns. Our agenda didn't matter. We lost.

The way to buck this trend is to have an agenda that does matter and will appeal to people. That would do more to shatter the "nasty" meme than any number of "modernisers" dwelling on it.

[James Hellyer]

And Tim...

"The three older candidates in this race..."

Which one of Clarke, Rifkind, Davis and Fox is younger than Cameron? Hmmm.

Or has one been written off already?

[Roly]

The exact nature of the comparison with Clarke/Redwood is that though Fox might well be tempted to support Camron over Davis, very few of his backers will be. What with them being the people who hate Portilloism, and won't back Davis on the first round purely because he *doesn't* hate them quite enough .........

Anyway, it falls down in that, Fox is going to come out ahead of Cameron on the first round. I can *very* easily see 4th placed Clarke being a vote or two shy of 3rd placed Cameron on the first round, but then (after Rifkind goes out) seeing Cameron being the 2nd cove eliminated. You read it here first. (And the numbers do add up!)

[Henry Cook]

"Cameron is the candidate of "modernisation" in as much he's adopted the self-styled "modernisers" introspection about the party. The electorate are not imnterested in what Conservatives think about themselves. They are interested in what the parties will do for them. "Modernisers" ignore that."

A highly unfair attack on DC. In no way was his speech, or indeed his whole campaign up to now, introspective - he can be accused of other things, such as inexperience, lack of detail etc but not introspection. He is just as outward-looking as Fox, it is their agendas that differentiate them.

[James Hellyer]

but not introspection.

Which is why the basis of his campaign is changing the PARTY'S culture.

[Editor]

"Which one of Clarke, Rifkind, Davis and Fox is younger than Cameron? Hmmm. Or has one been written off already?"

I should have written oldEST, James.

We all know - pretty much - where Clarke, Davis and Rifkind stand on the big issues. They've been in parliament long enough to gather a track record. Fox is more inexperienced. But Cameron - just four years an MP - is a parliamentary puppy.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

As I wrote on the other thread, it is unfortunate that people seem to think that recasting our image and policy substance are mutually exclusive.

We need both in order to be successful come 2009/10.

[greg]

The Cameron/Fox/BBC joint ticket?

Check out the link to ConservativeHome Blog from the BBC Conservative Conference website (Go to the "Related Websites" drop down menu) :-)

[James Hellyer]

See. I've been saying that Tim is a fully paid up lackey of the liberal media elite for ages. He's nothing more than a BBC stooge.

[Fox Blogger]

The question is of course, would such an alliance work AFTER Foxy was knocked out (assuming that happens, and if Cornerstone back him it may not).

[James Hellyer]

I think the issue over an "alliance" is whether the junior partner can deliver their supporters. In '97 Redwood couldn;t deliver his supporters to Clarke. Similarly in 2001, Ancram couldn't deliver most of his to IDS.

[Coffee Monster]

Re: Questions for Cameron.

In The Sunday Telegraph today we learn that:

"Mr Davis believes that the Cameron and Fox teams set up lethal propaganda operations. He believes that allies of both sides were planted among the crowd, making loud comments as he spoke, such as "rubbish" and "this is nonsense"."

I doubt whether Cameron would answer the question of whether or not this is true but I wonder if anyone who was at Blackpool has any further information on this? If true it certainly reinforces the idea that Cameron is a politician more concerned with spin than substance.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

I suspect that is little more than a slur on Fox and Cameron, to be honest. If there had been noticeable heckling, it wouldn't have taken five days to get into the press, especially given what happened at Labour Conference the week before...

In any case, all sides are playing the media and to pick out one unsubstantiated rumour and use it against certain candidates is more than a little unfair.

[James Hellyer]

He believes that allies of both sides were planted among the crowd, making loud comments as he spoke, such as "rubbish" and "this is nonsense".

If these excuses are all Davis and his team can come up with, then he does not deserve to be leader.

Davis delivered a lacklustre speech because he had a poor speech and insufficient time to rehearse it. End of story.

[Coffee Monster]

I am merely trying to clarify whether it is true or not, if it is not then clearly that reflects badly on Davis for making such a suggestion. However, if it is true then I believe it crosses a line and goes beyond merely 'playing the media'.

[James Hellyer]

If there was serious enough heckling to disrupt the speech, I think a) it would have been noticed at the time, and b) the press would have picked up on it before now.

I didn't notice any heckling - just lacklustre cheering.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

I've just read Sunday Telegraph article and it is damning of Davis's campaign. If anything, the baseless accusations of "plants" just make him come off even worse...

[James Hellyer]

That's Davis's major ally in the press gone - up until now Melissa Kite had been turning every story on the leadership race into a Davis hagiography.