If I had a vote in today’s ballot of Tory MPs I’d be voting for Liam Fox. I think he deserves to progress to the final stages of this contest although I fear that the list of public declarations suggests that his campaign will, unfortunately, end within a few hours, or on Thursday.
Here are my reasons for endorsing Dr Fox today:
Liam is an authentic Conservative. He believes in lower taxation but knows that tax relief can only be part of a wider ‘prosperity agenda’. He takes an uncompromising approach to crime and drugs. He is a principled Eurosceptic and has confirmed this Euroscepticism with a commitment to disentangle Tory MEPs from the Old Europeanism of the EPP. A party led by Liam would be built on the rock of these core Conservative commitments but it wouldn’t stop there.
Liam understands that the core beliefs, described above, and which have characterised conservatism since the Thatcher years, are not enough. Both Liam and David Cameron have embraced the And Theory Of Conservatism and its belief in a more compassionate politics. Liam’s idea of mending the ‘broken society’ was unfairly characterised as gloomy by yesterday’s FT. But for many people - who can’t afford to read Companies & Markets - life is pretty grim. Ignoring the real problems in British society may be an option for a newspaper that caters to a dwindling number of metropolitan readers but it cannot be an option for a political party that aspires to govern for the whole nation. Liam’s heart for the socially excluded – particularly for victims of domestic violence and the mentally unwell – could drive the socially just conservatism that could transform the electoral prospects of our party.
Liam is a hawk in the war on terror. The world has always been full of evil men but, as Peggy Noonan wrote some time before 9/11, it is gravely dangerous today because of the relative ease with which those men can get hold of portable weaponry of devastating power. Dr Fox understands this risk and the need to pre-empt the danger that rogue regimes – like Saddam’s Iraq - will feed international networks of terror. He has stood firm on Iraq throughout his brief time as Shadow Foreign Secretary and he could rebuild the Conservative Party’s relationship with the White House that became so sour during Michael Howard’s leadership. I hope he would use that renewed relationship to combine the USA’s commitment to technology-driven environmentalism with the sense of urgency that Europeans bring to this vital issue.
Liam believes in party democracy. He was late in declaring his opposition to the planned disenfranchisement of party members – perhaps out of loyalty to his friend Michael Howard – but he eventually came out in favour of an electoral college. An electoral college falls well short of the open primary, mass connections system of party democracy promoted by Theresa May (and latterly by Francis Maude) but it is better than that offered by his rivals for the Tory crown. David Davis supports a role for members in the first round(s) of voting but believes that MPs, and MPs only, should make the final decision. David Cameron hasn’t declared his view. Ken Clarke’s leading backers first called for the rollback of party democracy and then fell silent when they realised that their man had little chance of prospering amongst Tory MPs.
Liam is pro-life. An in pro-life I’m not just meaning he opposes abortion and euthanasia. I mean his commitment to defend the right to life and liberty of everyone. For Dr Fox a pro-life philosophy includes better care for the mentally ill but also those people in faraway lands whose human rights are abused. Right-to-die campaigns are gathering pace in Britain and Dr Fox, whilst upholding freedom of conscience on these issues for the parliamentary party, could help public opinion to see how a right-to-die easily becomes a duty-to-die. Liam’s willingness to raise the issues of abortion and human rights has a wider significance to me. I doubt focus groups advised him to talk about reducing the number of abortions (nearly 200,000 in Britain last year). The fact that he still did shows he has the courage and authenticity that British politics needs after the spin’n’squander of the Blair years.
The online poll run by conservativehome suggests that I’m in disagreement with 82% of my readers. All I can promise is that I’ll keep my opinions to the Editorials and Good Week, Bad Week features and will attempt to keep the news postings as free of bias as humanly possible. There are, of course, concerns as to whether Liam Fox is experienced and substantial enough to be Tory leader. I have sympathy with those concerns but they apply to David Davis and David Cameron, too. Ken Clarke is undoubtedly up to the job but I struggle with his record on Europe and his opposition to the liberation of Iraq.
That's a strong case for Liam Fox and it shows why I wouldn't be unhappy with Fox as leader even if I am backing Davis.
Posted by: Richard Allen | 18 October 2005 at 14:13
If DC fails to make the run off I would prefer to see LF as Leader rather DD.
Mr Editor, is this just your endorsement for the 1st round. If LF fails to make the run off who will then get your support.
Posted by: Nelson, Norfolk | 18 October 2005 at 14:20
The problem all along with Fox's candidature has been "Cornerstone". Or to put that another way, it is, yet again, the Right's fault that it has screwed up.
The Right won the last leadership election by playing to win from the start. It piled in it behind its candidate and stuck to him. This time, too many people on the Right ponced about pretending that there was some merit in Edward Leigh, or someone like that standing. And as an inevitable result, because they didn't do the realistic thing - backing Fox early and in some numbers - he never got the criticial momentum his campaign needed.
For what it's worth, a slight silliness from some on the Right to 'Fox the man' (ie that they thought he was a 'lightweight', whatever that was supposed to mean) played its part in this balls-up. But more fatal, probably, was his recent tenure in CCO. Doing Howard's dirty work over eg Flight did him no credit with the hardline Eurosceptics or taxcutters.
It's a pity, as Fox was the best of a generally 2nd rate bunch. And Cameron, as he has said, is going to split the Party.
Posted by: Henry Fitzpatrick | 18 October 2005 at 14:24
Fox just doesn't have the "X" factor. And the crucifix brandishing, slavish pro-Americanism and crypto-Neo-Conservativism are troubling.
That said, he put up a better fight than expected and can hold his head high.
Posted by: paul d s | 18 October 2005 at 14:24
Good on you Tim for getting of the fence and like Richard would have no problem with Liam becoming Leader but Davis would have to be first.
Posted by: Peter | 18 October 2005 at 14:25
A well made case for Dr. Fox. I have always been swaying between supporting Cameron or Fox, two widely different candidates, but both sharing that special something which i believe makes them credible statesmen. I would prefer Fox and i hope that i have a chance to vote for him, but i think that the tories have a good chance to go on a prosper whoever ends up leading it, with the exception of Clarke who i think would divide the party and drive a wedge between members and MP's.
Posted by: kris | 18 October 2005 at 14:27
That's a very good case for Fox. I just fear that if he won, he would be subjected to endless sniping from the "modernising" left of the party.
Posted by: Sean Fear | 18 October 2005 at 14:29
People like Fox are why the public don't vote en masse for tory. I hope he loses to KC today, but knowing the tory mps' unique ability to pick the wrong leader it wouldn't surprise me if KC, the only one of the candidates to have actually achieved anything will go.
Fox is probably the worst of all the candidates, just for his extremely worrying views on the 'war on terror', but the others bar KC aren't much better on this.
Posted by: Mark | 18 October 2005 at 14:30
"Liam is an authentic Conservative"
... who is incapable of reaching out beyond the hard core of 30% of voters who are also 'authentic' conservatives. But, never mind, we're a debating society afterall, not a party serious about taking power if that means compromising our beliefs.
Posted by: Gareth | 18 October 2005 at 14:32
Liam Fox is the surest way to the destruction and eternal irrelevance of the Conservative Party.
Posted by: Russ | 18 October 2005 at 14:35
I believe that Liam Fox can appeal beyond the party faithful with him emphasis on mending the broken society etc. I think there is a growing number of people genuinely concerned about the lawlessness and break down of society, maybe not enough as in America, but enough to win us an election in 5 years time. I don't think Fox will win us a landslide, whereas Cameron might, but we would win victory whilst still retaining our core values. After all what is victory for victory sake actually worth when you've sold your soul to get there.
Posted by: kris | 18 October 2005 at 14:40
Liam Fox may be a good minister but he simply is not Prime Ministerial material.He lacks that special extra something that makes leaders stand out from those who are there to be lead.
I also believe it would be totally distastrous for the party to elect someone who is putting forward views that are in many ways further to the right than those that have been responsible for the party being defeated at the last two elections.
No I am sorry Mr Editor you are wrong. The only person in this contest capable of defeating Labour and returning the party to power is David Cameron.
Posted by: Jack Stone | 18 October 2005 at 14:41
Russ is wrong and ConservativeHome is right. Foxy is the choice today, on Thursday and in the Party Ballot.
Posted by: Fox Blogger | 18 October 2005 at 14:42
The stuff about union jacks turned me off. Fox is a nice guy, but against Brown, we'd look pretty lightweight.
Posted by: | 18 October 2005 at 14:48
Mark is spot on. As a pro-lifer, I admire Liam's stance on abortion: a society, which aborts thousand of babies each year, is not a compassionate society to be living in. That said, abortion should remain as a free vote and it's not really an election issue (most pro-lifers already know who to vote for and not to vote for). Fox, ditto Davis, have not said or done anything to attract those people whose votes are 'up for grab'. We have elected four leaders on a right-wing platform and the voters have responded by flocking to our opponents. We need somebody who looks and sounds like he, and it will be a ‘he’, is not a politician and can capture the mood of the country. On drugs, for example, Fox and Davis are out of tune with public opinion. People really don't care if MPs did - or occasionally do - dabble in Coke or Spliff. Newsnight's poll confirmed this fact.
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | 18 October 2005 at 14:56
Who is Fox likely to lend his support to if he is eliminated today or Thursday?
Posted by: | 18 October 2005 at 14:58
Not sure if he gets on with DD? Most don't...
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | 18 October 2005 at 15:00
It only matters up to a point who Fox backs, whether he goes out first, or comes 3rd, but a bad 3rd where he quits before Thursday. What matters, either for a 2nd round vote (Fox having come 4th today), or for him eg quitting tomorrow and endorsing someone, is what his followers do. And they, most of them, are not likely to follow him, even if he does pick Cameron. But here's the thing - what's in it for Laim Fox personally, or the brand of Toryism he believes in, for him to try and make Cameron leader?
Posted by: Henry Mackintosh | 18 October 2005 at 15:11
I can't see Fox backing Cameron. If Davis or Clarke become leader then Fox still has a fair chance of becoming leader at some point in the future. One factor that will work against Cameron is that his youth threatens the future ambitions of others.
Posted by: Richard Allen | 18 October 2005 at 15:15
"That said, abortion should remain as a free vote"
And Dr Fox said it would remain so.
On drugs, for example, Fox and Davis are out of tune with public opinion. People really don't care if MPs did - or occasionally do - dabble in Coke or Spliff. Newsnight's poll confirmed this fact.
By saying that 28% of people wouldn't vote for a cocaine user to be PM?
Posted by: James Hellyer | 18 October 2005 at 15:16
Who will IDS back in round 3? We can all remember how he sacked DD as Party Chairman...
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | 18 October 2005 at 15:16
Interesting Tim there was nothing in your post about actually winning or actually governing.
Sure Liam Fox is an honest and principled conservative who has run a fairly decent campaign. Although his sniping at Cameron could have been done without.
At the conference he made time to address a small make poverty history meeting and was (actually not great). But his speech attempting to compare the EU to the USSR was disgusting.
I'm sorry Editor but you just don't "get it"
Posted by: wasp | 18 October 2005 at 15:16
He could signal a move to a united Party if he were to back Cameron - bridging the centre left/right, mod v rockers, while at the same time indicating that it's time for a new generation. After all, I thought GPs were trained to heal wounds.
Posted by: | 18 October 2005 at 15:18
Where Bernard goes, IDS is sure to follow.
Posted by: Richard Cave | 18 October 2005 at 15:19
Justin, are you the person who used to be called "Tory boy" and talked about the poor eating fruit of tress and catching fish from rivers?
On a only slightly more serious note: why do people have to get in tune with 'public opinion' on drugs when they don;t have to get in tune with it as far as abortion concerned? For what it's worth. there's no polling evidence that suggests majority support for wholesale decriminalisation of proscrived substances. And equally, every opinion poll there is on abortion in Britain says that a majority thinks it should be legal. You're a bit picky when and where you want to get in tune with 'public opinion', aren't you?
Posted by: Richard Cave | 18 October 2005 at 15:24