Conservative Home's debate blogs


  • DVD rental
  • Conservative Books
My Photo

Conservative blogs

Blog powered by Typepad

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker

« Yeo calls on Cameron to outflank Labour on the environment | Main | Ann Widdecombe backs 'streetfighter' Davis »


James Maskell

I remember hearing about the file a while ago but nothing came of it. I think Labour will release it if they can shake the party's confidence in him when he becomes leader.

"You reap what you sow" is an apt phrase you can apply to DC. He refused to answer the question and thus has set himself up.

The more I look into his Parliamentary record, the less I like him.



Sorry for being blunt but only a deaf ostrich would be surprised if evidence was presented DC had used cocaine - no-one choosing to vote for him is unaware of this. Similiar evidence probably exists for a number of rising new Labour stars.

Increasingly the likelihood of any politician having never taken one off MDMA, cocaine or smoked pot is rising as the 80's 'early 90's university generation enter politics. Voters are more forgiving of past sins than many expect - they are more interested in curent behaviour.

Another point - in vetting it's not if you are "taking Class A drugs" but have you have "taken Class A "- past tense, no minister wants his special advisor arrested whilst in his employ.

Barbara Villiers


You're right no - one with half a brain would hold it against him. What I hold against him is not his alleged drug use but his total lack of character in not coming clean and dissembling. I just want him to be a man about it. Now we are made to look shady, again.

Henry Fitzpatrick

Tish tosh Ted - you're factually wrong re late 80s and early 90s vetting. It was just as I set it out above. But if you're right (and I suspect your conclusion about the future is based on what you would like to be the case, rather than what will actually be) and'people don't care about drugs use', why hasn't Cameron come clean? He knows all too well that *especially* Tory supporters don't share eg your attitude towards drugs use.

But your claim that politicians who went to University in the 80s are bound to have, at least once, done drugs is risible. Run your finger down a list of Tory MPs. It's nerd city.


could it be they appear nerdish as resuilt of overindulgence :-)

If there's any one single issue that's likely to push me towards supporting DC in this election, it's the sheer nastiness and bile coming from some of DD's supporters.

We are all in the same party, you know?

liberal democrat

"He knows all too well that *especially* Tory supporters don't share eg your attitude towards drugs use."

That's perhaps the reason he's not giving anything away over the drugs issue: only a minority of people care, but a majority of Tories do, which is inconvenient considering the electorate here is only the Tory membership.


"If there was anything remotely serious David Cameron would have been prevented from working from the government."

That is total BS Jack Stone. The Vetting is standard procedure for all civil servants at policy level and does not disqualify but simply makes clear that MI5 and the Civil Service know what weaknesses are there.

I hardly think Lamont would have ditched Cameron if they had turned up the fact that the Bullingdon Club was full of coke-snorters and heroin-fixers - they would probably have decided he was no different from their own children. The Treasury probably does have the file and under Sect 40 of the FoI Act they are not obliged to release it.

On the other hand, he might be a Freemason like Churchill and Attlee. You will not find out until you elect him Leader and it gets leaked to the News of The World. Being politics it is best simply to keep it quiet and blackmail him later on - after all it was Jack Straw who blew the gaffe on Jeremy Thorpe wasn't it ?


" over the drugs issue: only a minority of people care,"

Maybe in your asylum, but nationally people are tired of excuses for drugs - the dealers are the guys running around with handguns and most likely it is the libertines using drugs that are the customers for the guys killing policewomen in Bradford and leaving bodies around Peckham and Brixton.

It is the heroin addicts that do most of the shoplifting, burglaries etc. We could do without these dope-heads filling up the A&E units and making housing estates living hell for those who live there.

This rich-kid indulgence in drugs is what destroys the lives of those lower down the feeding chain far away from the boudoirs of the media-political elite and their advertising friends. Maybe Cameron, Vaizey, et al should work in the local mortuary or do a few weeks in an A&E unit in some inner-city hell-hole to get a flavour

Barbara Villiers


Hear, hear!

liberal democrat

"Maybe in your asylum, but nationally people are tired of excuses for drugs..."

You misunderstand me, though this is because I misunderstood someone else. I meant a minority of people and a majority of Tory activists care whether David Cameron has taken drugs. I didn't mean about the awful problems drugs cause in inner cities which I should dam well hope everyone cares about.

My point was that knocking Cameron when, even if he ever did do drugs he hasn't for years, make us look harsh and moralising, that we don't accept people can change, that we want everyone to be nice and pure when 'we've all been bad boys' as someone said to Cameron at the start of the campaign.

It also make us look as if we're too busy talking to ourselves again, talking about the personality traits of our leaders, more bothered about one man and his indulgences at University in the '90s than the problems caused by drugs to millions here and now.

I know Barbara et al will say that's not what it's about but that's how it looks to the man in the street.

Jack Stone

If I were to describe the Conservative Party as nasty I would have many people contributing to this site who are attacking David Cameron on drugs say that |I am talking rubbish.
Don`t you think its nasty for people to condemn someone who as the courage to say that when I was younger I did things that I now regret and that I wouldn`t do now? I do.


I am more concerned with idiots on the Home Affairs Select Committee downgrading drugs as if certifying them as "safer".

Frankly it is time politicians were brought to heel and responsive to popular anger before things turn really nasty. I doubt this shower will be indulged by the electorate much longer - Blair is on a knife edge with 21.6% and he still beat the Tories !

Daniel Vince-Archer

"its not me that`s stupied"

Another masterpiece of delicious irony from Jack Stone. Ladies and gentlemen, we have an unwitting comic genius in our midst!

Barbara Villiers

You still don't get it. I don't have a problem that he did them but I have a huge problem that he won't come clean about it. Someone who wants to be leader of the Party has the obligation to do so because he is putting himself and the Party in danger of making a really huge issue of it. His dissembling indicates a character flaw and that troubles me.

Barbara Villiers

By the way, there was a really small paragraph in the Times today saying that the Government does not feel there is sufficient evidence to reclassify cannabis.

Talk about burying bad news.


Back in the 1960s or early 1970s Penguin Books had a Pelican out on Cannabis and all the research done in various institutes; which is why i find all the recent "discoveries" so fascinating, the wheel truly can be rediscovered.

There are so rude surprises ahead for this population and I personally believe this country will become much, much harder to govern as quite a few threads unwind in the tapestry.

Ed R

I don't feel any need to know what he did or didn't do. Cameron's line is right -- the line in the sand should be drawn when someone enters politics. He's been perfectly up front about that, but some things should be private.


Cameron's line is right -- the line in the sand should be drawn when someone enters politics.

So MI5 should no longer vet members of the government? Is that another policy initiative? I think you will find the Prime Minister will have a full MI5 dossier on Mr Cameron.

malcolm thomas

The timing of Labour starting to attempt smears on Cameron is interesting as it comes hard on the heels of Alistr Campbell opening up with a broadside.

There is little doubt that Labour's media machine including Murdoch and the BBC gave Cameron total support during the Parliamentary rounds. They not only backed Cameron but rubbished David Davis, and completely blanked Liam Fox into the bargain.

What did they imagine they were buying? A shiny new Portillo with few principles - someone who they could manipulate to their own ends? That is how Cameron acted out his approach at that time...the next Blair, who would work with the media more than the Conservative Party.

Fox was openly eurosceptic, and that was enough for the media to blank him.

So why is Labour's media machine now trying to rubbish their shiny new purchase? Is it the realisation that all the eurosceptics are now with him, and most of the Ken Clark europhiles are backing Davis? I think they expected this to be the other way around, as did most of us. Has Cameron sold Campbell a dummy?

Have the media in a state of shock realised that Cameron is determined to put them in their place(hooray), and that he has the courage to pursue policies that are not at all to Campbell/Mandelson's liking?

For heavens sake, doesn't Cameron realise he was chosen by Alistair Campbell, and doesn't he realise that if he actually allows 'conservative' policies to be implemented, Campbell will use the media to finish him just as surely as he used it to select him?

BUT the cork is out of the bottle. The game's shifted. Campbell might have to publish those memoirs sooner than he thinks, turn to Brussels for a nice little earner alongside Mandy. Has the 'gay mafia'(portillo/mandelson etc) finally had its day? are we seeing the sun at last setting on the era of dodgy dossiers and manipulated intelligence?

Campbell obviously still thinks he can turn the tide around, but Knut-like his socks are starting to get soggy in the attempt. When Campbell's done, so is his protege. You can smell it on the air.

Mark Fulford

This is absurd. Cameron was vetted... and approved. i.e. The vetting process found no skeletons to be exploited?

And Henry, your attacks on Jack Stone are very poorly researched. He is exactly who he says he is, and is sensible enough to rise above your b.s.

Barbara Villiers

No, Ed, there is not. We have a perfectly nasty press here who will dig it up so why not be a man about and say it and have done.

henry curteis


Cameron pulled off a great feat by getting Alistair Campbell to provide full media backing for his leadership bid right through the Parliamentary rounds.

To achieve this simple 'con' on the supposedly greatest spinner of them all, Cameron had to make himself believable as another unprincipled politician completely interested in playing a media image game like Blair - and having no fixed policies like Portillo.

Campbell saw in Cameron just the man he was looking for, backed him to the hilt, rubbished DD and blanked Liam Fox who was clearly a dangerous threat to Campbell's pro-EU fixation.

Now Campbell's had a nasty shock. Instead of all the ex-Ken Clark MP's rallying round Cameron, and the eurosceptics deprived of Liam Fox landing in the Davis camp, as everyone expected, in fact the exact opposite has happened.

Ken Clarke's MP's have persuaded Davis to stay in the EPP for two more years and they now back DD; while Cameron has turned out to be the natural home for all the key eurosceptics. This is not the deal that Alistair Campbell paid for, and he is bl**dy livid.

He's now desperate thrashing around for any dirt he can find to put Cameron back in the wrapper, but Cameron fleet has now put to sea, with many months of plain sailing lying ahead.

Meanwhile Campbell's wellies are filling with water. He's squelching around wondering how Cameron eluded him.

Do we have a Nelson of the airwaves appearing in our midst? Have we just witnessed the greatest media con trick of all time? with the once greatest spinner of them all the fall guy. Campbell's having to chew on his own medicine and apparently he doesn't like the taste.

Posted by: malcolm thomas | 20 November 2005 at 19:53

"Ken Clarke's MP's have persuaded Davis to stay in the EPP for two more years and they now back DD"

Who else other than Quentin Davies?

Posted by: John Hustings | 20 November 2005 at 20:07

Don't know. I received this information in an email reply from Roger Helmer MEP.

I had written asking him why he had not commented on DD's offer of the twin referenda on repatriating powers, while he was publicly complementing DC on his 'pull out of the EPP policy' and backing DC.

Sorry am not prepared to provide exact text as it was private correspondence and I don't have permission to publish the email.


Guys, I notice you're all running around squealing as if this is the apocalypse. Please try to remember that as corupt and messed up as this Labour government may be they aren't going to suddenly publish papers on people they don't like to smear them. Then again it depends if they push the "Lets bait the Tory party and watch it destroy itself with infighting once again" Act of 2005 through parliament with the Parliament Act ;)

Daniel Vince-Archer

"Please try to remember that as corupt [sic] and messed up as this Labour government may be they aren't going to suddenly publish papers on people they don't like to smear them."

Where have you been for the last eight years?

The comments to this entry are closed.

About Conservative Home


  • Conservative Home's
    free eMailing List
    Enter your name and email address below: