Hot on the heels of William Hague's endorsement of David Cameron comes the backing of Dr Fox (see The Sunday Times).
The Shadow Foreign Secretary (the first round choice of your Editor) is reported as saying that his decision was a “close call” but he wanted to see the leadership passed to the “next generation”.
Many of Dr Fox's leading supporters - John Hayes, Oliver Heald, Eleanor Laing, Stephen O'Brien and Gary Streeter - had already endorsed Mr Cameron. Dr Fox said:
“I set out a very clear agenda in my own leadership campaign that what I wanted to see was a Conservative party that was very robust on the economy and committed to wealth creation, that was willing to stand up strongly for Britain abroad, but wanted to be seen as more compassionate at home. I have decided to back David Cameron because I think the best approach for us to win is one of greater collective decision-making and leadership which accepts that it is important to return to a concept of first among equals.”
This talk of "collective leadership" will be very important. If IDS, Dr Fox, William Hague and Mr Davis play prominent roles in a Cameron team leadership there is likely to be strong positions in the war on terror and against drugs.
Dr Fox's reasons for backing Mr Cameron will be reassuring to Michael Gove MP. Early last week, Mr Gove, an early supporter of Mr Cameron, had identified five similarities between the Fox and Cameron campaigns:
1. Foreign Policy should be Idealist not Realist.
2. Let’s not wobble on the war.
3. We need a more meritocratic Britain. But that still isn’t enough to heal our broken society.
4. Don’t be afraid of the market.
5. Modernising doesn’t mean going soft – it means recognising how the world has changed.
The Sunday Times believes that Mr Cameron now enjoys the public support of 109 Tory MPs.
Writing for The Sunday Telegraph Mr Cameron promises to distance himself from the belligerence, vanity and lack of follow-through inherent in Blairism:
"The last thing Britain - or the Conservative Party - needs is more Blairism. I believe we need a new style of politics: thoughtful, measured and moderate. I believe we need serious long-term policy thinking to tackle the challenges we face. And I believe that if you give people more freedom and opportunity, they and society will grow stronger. That's the kind of leadership I offer, and I'm confident it will return our Party to government."
However, Michael, we are being pushed around by the media if we don't give Redwood a big role. Just because Matthew Parris doesn't like him is no reason to give him a portfolio where we will be quiet. We need to let him explain hs ideas rather than try and gag him. If anyone here has read his books (Singing the Blues, Just Say No etc.) they will appreciate he isn't a looney, his ideas are pure Conservative. He ran the No.10 policy unit at its most inventive time under Thatcher. He was promoted rapidly in the 90's because he was intelligent, hard working and able to get his message across. If we are really about changing the country not just 'managing' it then people like Redwood, Letwin and Willets must be given big roles and told to think the unthinkable.
Posted by: John Coulson | 13 November 2005 at 18:39
I think its a bit late to declare loyalty now. KC at least still pretends to be waivering so not to join the ships mutiny. I find it ironic that ageism is part of our voting strategy, how many top 100s have not got mature and experienced board directors, so the biggest company in UK (HM Govt.)should not rule out a candidate on age young or otherwise, I hope whoever wins gets the job done and our party unites the message Conservatives must win!
Posted by: John Metcalfe | 13 November 2005 at 19:02
I agree entirely John. I somehow doubt that Cameron and his acolytles will.
Posted by: Richard Allen | 13 November 2005 at 19:03
I was replying to John Coulson
Posted by: Richard Allen | 13 November 2005 at 19:13
Shadow Chancellor is an important position and I agree that we need a heavyweight operator to fill it. Osbourne, even were he not linked so closely to Cameron as to create an unbalanced top team, does not yet have the gravitas to take on one of the Government's few genuine big beasts, Gordon Brown.
If Clarke agrees to serve, he would fantastic. In his absence, Hague is a good bet as well. Redwood, for all his experience and intelligence, sadly does not appeal to the electorate as a whole.
Posted by: Alex W | 13 November 2005 at 19:30
When have the electorate ever given a resounding 'no' to John Redwood? They haven't. To Major, Hague and Howard - yes they said no. However, the vast electorate are not concsious of Mr Redwood as being intelligent and bursting with ideas. We need to be bold. He is a Conservative - we should not be ashamed of him.
Posted by: John Coulson | 13 November 2005 at 19:43
What are you people talking about?
John Redwood Shadow Chancellor?
Let's get real.
Posted by: Goldie | 13 November 2005 at 20:06
Forget Clarke - he has enough to do at BAT and Unichem and I suspect he will bow out of the Commons at the next election. I doubt he feels much warmth towards Conservative MPs at present............the Cameron group will no doubt want to purge the older generation as Blair has done to free up seats for their coterie
Posted by: Rick | 13 November 2005 at 20:09
Goldie,
What a very narrow outlook you have. You obviously must only look as far as The Sun. We need to out think Labour and the Liberals. To do this DC needs to surround himself with intelligent and eloquent individuals. To simply label supporters of a man John Major and Margaret Thatcher put into Government as mad is very foolish.
To anybody who agrees with Goldie I think you should really look beyond the disparaging comments of Matthew Parris et al. This is the Conservative party, lets start acting and talking like one.
Posted by: John Coulson | 13 November 2005 at 20:16
John Redwood is no doubt talented, however perhaps a role of policy development, similar to that of Keith Joseph would be more appropraite for him. I would like to see Hague as Shadow Chancellor and Fox to remain in a top job, perhaps Shadow Home Secretary. For the first time in a long time, I think there is serious competition for the top jobs in the Party and that is encouraging. If we have a Shadow Cabinet team including the likes of Cameron, Davis, Hague, Fox, Osborne, Redwood, IDS, Willets, Rifkind, etc. then the Conservatives will look like a Government in waiting for the first time since the late 1970s.
Posted by: Rob | 13 November 2005 at 21:32
I agree with Rob. We need to harness talent but be realistic with who should be on the frontline and who working just as hard in the background. Redwood would be generally unpopular. But he is very talented in a role such as his current one, or trade and industry he could be excellent, but you wouldn't pick him for one of the big 3 jobs or health, education or work & pensions. He may be his most useful though working in the background - it may not be as glamerous, but we need clever minds underpinning our policy.
Posted by: Kate Castle | 13 November 2005 at 21:56
I really doubt somebody as image-conscious as David Cameron would allow John Deadwood anywhere near a high-profile job.
Mark my words, the formation of Cameron's first Shadow Cabinet will be a truly ugly spectacle indeed - expect a nauseating display of backslapping amongst the Portillista/Notting Hell set and backstabbing for anybody that doesn't conform with their vision for turning the Conservative Party into a pale imitation of New Labour.
I imagine the knives are out and being sharpened already. There's going to be more blood on the carpet than at the Satanists' convention at Carpetland.
(I wonder who he'll give the position of Shadow Home Secretary to because let's face it, it's not going to be David Davis is it?)
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 13 November 2005 at 22:56
Daniel, I know we disagree over the leadership, but to suggest that a Cameron shadow cabinet is going to be some sort of armageddon really doesn't cut it. You can and have made a lot better arguments than that!
Posted by: Cllr Iain Lindley | 13 November 2005 at 23:05
The fact that you regard it being suggested someone is gay is a 'smear',is very revealing,Barbara.
Posted by: Gareth | 14 November 2005 at 08:12
Gareth,
You really are very immature and you have a huge chip on your shoulder to boot. If you read the posting properly you would have read that Fox was never going to back Davis because HE thought that the Davis camp briefed the press about HIM being gay (which by the way has been making the rounds of Westminster for years)and that it wasn't true. It actually almost came to blows between Conway and the accuser so that's how much you know.
As for Fox or anybody else that matter I don't care what you do with you sexuality as long as you don't do it in the street and scare the horses. I find heterosexual couples who play tonsil tennis in the streets disgusting before you accuse me of being homophobic.
Gareth, I don't know how old you are but you sound about 10. Grow up!
Posted by: Barbara Villiers | 14 November 2005 at 09:52
Oh Gareth how little you know........surely an untrue accusation is a smear ?
Posted by: Rick | 14 November 2005 at 10:14
Who actually are you Barbara Villiers? Reading your posts one would think you are actually a right hand woman to both of the respective leadership hopefuls.
Posted by: John Coulson | 14 November 2005 at 10:16
Just very knowledgable and very fair minded!
Posted by: Barbara Villiers | 14 November 2005 at 10:35
and painfully modest...
Posted by: | 14 November 2005 at 10:40
"Just very knowledgable and very fair minded!"
I am warming to Barbara.......I shall paint myself a mental picture of her based on these proclaimed attributes and attempt the finer points of detail as discussion progresses.
Posted by: Rick | 14 November 2005 at 11:21
"The Illustrious Lady: A Biography of Barbara Villiers, Countess of Castlemaine and Duchess of Cleveland "
It appears to be out of print.............
Posted by: Rick | 14 November 2005 at 11:24
Barbara Villiers - National Portrait Gallery
http://www.npg.org.uk/live/search/portrait.asp?mkey=mw07219
Posted by: Ted | 14 November 2005 at 11:44
It does say a lot of MPs that they vote for people rather than polices. Again like last week what will Cameron be doing in the next two years in terms of putting the Conservative brand about the country. I think the answer will be nothing and that in itself is not only a waste but has to be the main reason why people should vote Davis?
Posted by: Peter | 14 November 2005 at 11:52
How about this as a shadow cabinet:
Leader : David Cameron
Deputy Leader & Foreign Secretary: Liam Fox
Defence Secretary: Andrew Lansley
International Development: Caroline Spelman
Chancellor: William Hague
Chief Secretary to Treasury & Policy Development: George Osborne
Home Secretary: David Davis
Northern Ireland: Michael Ancram
Leader of Commons: Malcolm Rifkind
Leader of Lords: Lord Strathclyde
Constitutional Affairs: Oliver Heald
Education & Skills: David Willets
Health: Damien Green
Work & Pensions: Iain Duncan Smith
Trade & Industry: Andrew Mitchell
Derugulation: John Redshaw
Environment: Oliver Letwin
Local Government: Chris Grayling
Family, Culture, Media & Sport: Theresa May
Transport: Stephen Dorrell
Chief Whip: David MacLean
Party Chairman: Francis Maude
Deputy Party Chairman: Michael Gove
I am afraid no room for the big beast!
Posted by: Merry | 14 November 2005 at 13:15
Defence Secretary: Andrew Lansley
Will he be as lazy as over Health ? I should think John Reid will have fun with him......put Fatty Soames back there
Posted by: Rick | 14 November 2005 at 13:17