Simon Heffer is living up to his reputation this morning in The Telegraph with his case for capital punishment. I've already received an email from a 'modernising Tory friend' complaining about the 'uncivilised Mr Heffer'. I happen to disagree with capital punishment and the case made by Mr Heffer and John Stevens but I cannot stand the way certain Tories look down on a tough approach to crime.
Crime is dismissed as a core vote issue but, as Matthew d'Ancona writes on same pages as Mr Heffer, few things could be further from the truth. Mr d'Ancona has also encountered a 'Disgusted of Notting Hill' and his unhappiness at David Davis' prison works message. Mr Cameron recently wrote about crime for the Yorkshire Post but his uncertain line on cannabis (see this post on the role cannabis may have played in the attack on Abigail Witchall) and ecstasy worries some law and order Conservatives.
Mr d'Ancona warns David Cameron that he must not risk being outflanked by Labour on this vital issue:
"Whatever one thinks of Mr Blair's record on law and order, his analysis is correct. Violent crime, anti-social behaviour, the emergence of ever more brutal gangs, the sex-slave trade, and global terrorism: the modern world, with its open borders, incivility and pockets of near-anarchy, is breeding new criminal phenomena that require new strategies. Today's political leader ignores this fast-mutating threat at his or her peril. A truly modern Tory must indeed deal with the world as it is. But to be a moderniser is not simply to acknowledge the diversity of contemporary society, important as that is. It is about recognising new dangers and devising robust responses to them."
Related post: Jonathan Sheppard on It'll pay the Tories to turn to crime.
Editor, you do not mention that Jonathan Sheppard, on his blog, suggests that Abigail Witchall's killer was drunk (rather than high) on the day of her murder. Drink and drugs can cause people to do terrible things in addition to damaging their health. We ought to take a consistent approach to both.
Posted by: Selsdon Man | 23 November 2005 at 09:46
I think bringing Abigail Witchall into the cannabis debate is more than a little below the belt. How many acts of violence are committed by drunks every single day?
Posted by: Cllr Iain Lindley | 23 November 2005 at 09:49
The cannabis isssue is one mentioned by the police - and repeated by me. I have grave concerns about the use of cannabis. Selsdon - Yes absolutely, drink was probably a contributory factor.
My issue is that some suggest cannabis and more importantly, frequent use, is harmless - when actually I don't believe this is true. It can have dire psychological effects.
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | 23 November 2005 at 09:56
"the modern world, with its open borders, incivility and pockets of near-anarchy, is breeding new criminal phenomena that require new strategies"
So freedom of movement is to blame? The forces of authoritarianism will use crime an excuse to encroach on our freedoms.
Posted by: Selsdon Man | 23 November 2005 at 09:58
There are some in the Cameron Camp who forget that the people who suffer disproportionately from crime are the old and the poor, although not just the old and the poor as the John Monckton murder trial is illustrating. Do the Cameron Camp intend to show any solidarity with the vulnerable whose lives are ravaged by crime or would they rather side with those self-loathing members of the chattering classes who always have the option of escaping crime by retreating into their gated communities?
Posted by: Michael McGowan | 23 November 2005 at 10:24
Michael, the sort of people you describe are the "redneck vote", according to one contributor to this forum. For some "modernisers", those are precisely the sort of people we don't want voting for us.
Posted by: Sean Fear | 23 November 2005 at 10:46
Personally I'll be campaigning for as many votes as possible.
The drugs issue for me isn't one that we should try to score points politically in the leadership race. I think there is a huge issue to be faced and I would weldome a debate on how we as a party will proceed.
I think our pledge to increase by 10 fold the number of rehab places at the last election was spot on. The problem is that such a policy focuses on the "cure" - and not prevention.
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | 23 November 2005 at 10:50
Sean, I fear that you are right. The 1950's snobbery of the Conservative Party has not died but merely mutated.
Posted by: Michael McGowan | 23 November 2005 at 11:11
Yet again I've experienced the slightly unpleasant sensation of reading one of Heffer's articles and agreeing with the sentiments expressed within. Nurse!
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 23 November 2005 at 11:16
"the modern world, with its open borders, incivility and pockets of near-anarchy, is breeding new criminal phenomena that require new strategies"
So freedom of movement is to blame? The forces of authoritarianism will use crime an excuse to encroach on our freedoms.
Of course it is ! This country has no border controls. Look at the local crime log here - Namibian on work permit to train as shelf-stacker rapes woman and steals her cash card - sentenced to jail then deportation.
Respectable Pakistani knifed to death by Iraqi asylum-seeker now thought to be on run in Kurdish area of Iraq.
Jamaican drug dealers and hit man wander in and out of country and move north to infringe turf of Pakistani drug families.
Albanian gangs import white slave traffic from Ukraine and treat them like cattle.
African children imported into UK for re-export as slaves in Europe or human sacrifices in England.
Drug mules flying in from Jamaica or into Manchester Ringway from Pakistan, often children.
And do the police have the language skills to infiltrate these gangs, or the family ties to penetrate Al;banian and Kurdish clans ?
No !
What we have is frankly the usual rubbish from journalists and politicians who have such a superficial grasp of life outside the cocktail bar
Posted by: Rick | 23 November 2005 at 11:47
Authoritarianism ? How droll.
What this country is is a pushover with a social services police force and a Keystone Cops Prosecution Service. The English are just chaotic and incompetent, they cannot organise themselves and just resort to playing word games as the Albanian mafias set up shop.
The British have little experience of organised crime - the Krays were a long time ago - but now they cannot simply launder the cash for Russian mafia dons, they must coexist with Albanian, Kurd, Jamaican, Chinese gangsters who don't mind using Uzis and Macs and Berettas to reduce police manpower
Posted by: Rick | 23 November 2005 at 11:52
From Matthew D'Ancona's article: "Not long after David Davis delivered his speech at the Conservative conference, I ran into one of David Cameron's closest advisers. 'Ugh!' he said, as if chewing a particularly Right-wing wasp. 'Build more prisons! As if that's the answer!'" How many other visitors to this site can report encounters similar to this? Let's hear about them and discuss them. With so many ballot papers still unreturned there is still time to talk about this problem.
Posted by: concerned | 23 November 2005 at 11:57
Cameron on question time just after the conference said he favoured building more prison places.
Posted by: wasp | 23 November 2005 at 12:05
Well done Rick! This really is love!
Comrade Cllr again confuses the issue. No one doubts the dreadful influences of alcohol - which is why we are so against the new licensing laws until such times as we get binge drinking under control. However this does not mitigate the psychological dangers of the cannabis that is available now. There has been yet another report from long term research which states that 4 out of 5 schizohrenics have habitually used cannabis. How much more evidence do you need Comrade, and more important, does Cameron need? Is he so eager to appeal to the chattering classes that he'll continue to gloss over this?
Posted by: Barbara Villiers | 23 November 2005 at 12:11
Right but I'm talking about the enthusiasms of his supporters. Their commentary runs to much more than opposing building prisons. Who else has heard, as I have, that Thatcherism was an aberration? Or that taxes ought to be going up? Or that the social democratic consensus on public services is here to stay?
Posted by: concerned | 23 November 2005 at 12:12
Concerned,
Yes, you are right to be concerned and so am I.
Posted by: Barbara Villiers | 23 November 2005 at 12:22
"The English are just chaotic and incompetent, they cannot organise themselves"
Isn't that a bit of a sweeping statement?
Posted by: TC | 23 November 2005 at 12:24
If anyone has a comment from a "moderniser" that caused you concern, I urge you to post it here. Note the person who D'Ancona spoke to was a "senior adviser" to the leadership campaign currently ahead in the polls.
Posted by: concerned | 23 November 2005 at 12:27
"The forces of authoritarianism will use crime an excuse to encroach on our freedoms."
What about freedom to live life without the fear of being a victim of crime?
What about the freedom of pensioners in inner-city council estates who are forced to cower in their homes because of the fear of being attacked and robbed by a smackhead seeking to fund their next fix?
What about the freedom of legitimate businessmen (and women) who operate under the constant shadow of being raided by gangs of bored young thugs or an organised crime ring seeking to fund their illegal operations?
How about we start worrying about the freedom of the vast majority of the British public who lead innocent lives and wish to be free from the spectre of crime instead of pandering to the ultra-soft liberal lobby that insists on making life easier and more comfortable for criminals?
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 23 November 2005 at 12:27
The Matthew d'Ancona article makes an important point about the views of some people in one of the campaigns, surely this is a good place to discuss those views on this subject and others and what they may mean for the party if that campaign wins. Who else has had similar conversations to the one he reports?
Posted by: concerned | 23 November 2005 at 12:36
Great point Daniel.
Yes,what about our rights? You know, Cameron's mealy mouthed condoning of Labour's useless crime policies may just be his undoing.
It's all well and good to utter idiocies such as 'we're all in this together', his stock answer to everything but he has done little to address crime as an issue.
Posted by: Barbara Villiers | 23 November 2005 at 12:38
"The English are just chaotic and incompetent, they cannot organise themselves"
Isn't that a bit of a sweeping statement?
perhaps it is Top Cat, but no less true.
Posted by: Rick | 23 November 2005 at 12:43
And about Matthew d'Ancona's substantial point, namely the off-the-record views of one campaign's supporters?
Posted by: concerned | 23 November 2005 at 12:44
"Mr d'Ancona has also encountered a 'Disgusted of Notting Hill' and his unhappiness at David Davis' prison works message."
I may be mistaken here but wasn't the area of home affairs (crime and immigration) the only major policy area (depending on whether you consider Europe to be a major policy area or not) that the Conservatives consistently outscored Labour on in pre-election opinion polls?
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | 23 November 2005 at 12:47
that the Conservatives consistently outscored Labour on in pre-election opinion polls?
Obviously an oversight Cameron intends to correct to bring all ratings in line.......Gordon Brown to serve two full-terms as Prime Minister looks a real possibility after all.
Posted by: Rick | 23 November 2005 at 12:49