The problem with caution

Sally Chatterjee

The Conservatives are very nervous. There are clean gains to be made by setting out clear plans, for example on educational reform, a coherent transport policy or perhaps a big simplification of the tax system.

But I think the caution isn't a lack of ambition, it's defensive. If they announce anything then it'll get copied by Labour (see non-dom levies or IHT)

John Lea

Loved the quote about jogging in the interview. It was spot on.

Denis Cooper

I can't say that even "the philosophical and intellectual framework" is clear to me, and in fact that worries me more than the general absence of clear policies at this stage.

Charlie Dyson

Why should they have to be clearer? It was never entirely clear what Blairism was in 1997. Opposition parties do not win elections - governments lose them. The priority has got to be to create the impression of a safe pair of hands and a responsible attitude. Fine details can wait.

IH

I think there is plenty of time for more policy meat on the bone, assuming that the election is next year.

I do like Ken!

Verity

Well, untypically, Clarke waffled and stumbled his way through that one, didn't he? He's aware that Cameron's behaviour, in a politician hoping to win an election, is indefensible.

What this also confirms, to me, is that Cameron has a hidden agenda and fears to drop any clues about it. But for sure it is not something that will please supporters of the Tory Party or he would not be hiding it so obsessively.

It is Europe that he fears will lose him the election if he is candid.

The only way Britain can be saved from Europe is for the Tories to lose the next election and Dave be kicked out as Leader.

Sheila

"What is needed is more policy meat on the bone" - eh?

They have already put far more on the bone than Blair did in 1997.

Ken Clarke is - as always - a liability.

Mark

"The philosophical and intellectual framework the Tories are operating with is clear...."

As mud!?

lawrence greek

I think we just have to accept that we won't see meat on the bones until closer to the election - Brown would either steal the ideas or have time to develop untruths and smears. The 10% arose through honesty and it was probably a good thing, but it didn't stop Brown telling some outrageous lies, and we can't always be sure the media will pull them apart as effectively as happened with the 'Investment vs Cuts' lie. I can understand the caution.

TrevorsDen

Make commitments, win election, find bigger problems than thought, break commitments.

A brilliant scenario - for Labour. Why to Tories persist in asking pointless questions?

Vulture

The suspicion must surely be that in Maison Dave the lights may be on and the windmill spinning, but there's nobody actually there.

drakes drum

Let us never forget that the Tories are riding high in the opinion polls, NOT from what they have been doing, but rather what Brown and his incompetent government are doing.

If someone, not Johnson, probably Mandleson was to take over, then matter could change dramatically.

That Cameron cannot take the Tories higher than the low 40% mark has got to be of great concern to us all.

If,as suggested, that Cameron does not give the promised referendum on the EU (whether or not the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified) That will not only split the Tories apart, Cameron will be a one term PM and will not last three years.

This post highlights the reason whyameron is not higher in the polls. Frankly, to me, he is no leader. He is frightened of telling people what he is going to do. He wants to be elected then tell people. The electorate must and should be treated better than that and, perhaps, he may even go above that 60% mark if he was to be open and honest.

Lets face it, it would be a complete change from Blair and Brown!!!

wonderfulforhisagew

@Charles Dyson 200pm.

Yes indeed 'Fine details can wait.' - for future focus groups to determine. Even so it would be nice to have some inkling of direction less than a year from a general election. Sadly it seems that all that matters is that the PR merchants get the keys to No.10 and then do what is necessary to stay there. Dave isn't called the Heir to Blair for nothing.

Moraymint

Keeping your powder dry is one thing, but he who hesitates is lost.

The impression I get is that the Tory Party (like other political parties and the majority of the British public) have still not grasped the breathtaking scale of the socio-economic disaster that Brown is poised to bequeath to his successor.

With each passing day I become more convinced that our truly shocking economic circumstances will soon become equally shocking social circumstances (I guess I'm talking civil unrest and various other unintended consequences of a nation en route to bankruptcy - not to mention energy insecurity and energy famine in the not-too-distant future - to make the next decade particularly interesting.

Brown's government has lost virtually all control of the public finances and is paralysed by the fact that everyone - especially the civil service - knows that the government will fall next year. Policymaking and meaningful government administration have all but ground to a halt. And we have a year of this madness to go.

Surely, Brown must be the most selfish, power-mad, disconnected politician ever to have held high office - and he's proven to have been utterly incompetent to boot. The guy who single-handedly bust Britain: how ironic is that? Brown and Sir Fred Goodwin must get on like a house on fire.

I agree that we need the Tory Party to start "getting real" about the size and shape of the problem and, moreover, what the hell the Party intends to do turn around the situation.

I also accept that our political elite won't want to frighten the horses, but at the moment the balance is too far towards appearing clueless.

One wonders when the markets will start asserting themselves?

Dean

I don't accept that the Tories' intellectual and philosophical framework (as you put it) is clear. There's a world of difference between traditional conservatism, as represented by Disraeli and Churchill, and free market fundamentalism, which has been the party's dominant creed since 1979. Traditional conservatives support existing institutions and established ways of doing things, unless these are clearly found to be wanting, whereas free market liberals have a blueprint for transforming society which typically involves attacking existing institutions, particularly those in the public sector. Initially it seemed that Cameron was steering the party back to its (true) conservative roots, but since he realised he could win without doing this he seems to have given up. There has been no 'Clause 4' moment.

J H Holloway

Good plan Verity. When the Tories are in opposition there's not much chance of them holding the final 'in or out' EU referendum, is there?

I suspect DC will actually have a vote. His political life was formed by the EU rows from the ERM debacle onwards. A final 'in or out' vote would be hugely cleansing for this country.

And outside of media elite land (Chiswick-Hampstead-East End), there's zero support for the EU project. The appearance of an EU president will finally reveal the superstate ambition.

And if Blair is EU president, it will make Cameron's job easier.

Ideally, we'll do a Norway and become a free-trade associate, member of NATO and have a 50-person mission to the EU. Norway does incorporate EU laws, but only those relating to the internal market. All the rest are ignored.

More Scandinavian-influenced common sense from the Cameroons, please

http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/norway+and+the+eu.htm

Verity

Vulture, well said, and I was just about to make a similar comment. In fact, I'll make it anyway. There are people who don't speak very often and consequently look deep and knowing. It's always a disappointment when one actually has a conversation with them only to find that the deep silences didn't mask any deep thoughts at all. Just vacuity.

Deep down, he's very shallow.

Baldwin

I do not understand this demand for lots of Tory policies.

There is a good chance that those announced now will either be stolen or need to be abandoned if finances prove even worse than feared.

Labour are likely to dumped with vengeance at the next election, regardless of the list of Tory policies announced.

Aidan

Maybe we could be an EU associate member and also join NAFTA

Steve.W

“Don’t frighten the horses”. I know people who are terrified of a Tory government with Ken Clarke in the Cabinet!

JONNY

Who on earth are you trying to deceive Verity?

You know, as well as we do, that if the Tories lose the election you're looking at five more years of Labour.
And then very likely five more.

We don't do government change in the UK. The power cards are all in the hands of the PM in power.
In the past 30 years the only one was in 1997.
Remember?

Verity

Aidan, a year ago I was suggesting that Britain dump the EU, just keeping a light associate trading agreement with them, and join NAFTA. NAFTA works well - as a trading association only. No free movement of people; just goods.

However, since Obama auto-cued his way into the White House, I have a feeling he is going to try and shift this in the direction of an EUesque fascist entity. He's a one-worlder, like Blair and all the Common Purpose politicians in Britain.

He's distracted by the recession at the moment, but I have a feeling his is going to turn his attentions south when he has few free minutes.

The one comfort is, President Calderon is a conservative and a very clever one at that.

NAFTA suits Mexico very well and the country has benefitted from it. But we shouldn't forget, that outside N America, there are, in Central America and South America, around 600m people - Hispanics - and Mexico will feel more of a natural kinship with them than with the US or Canada.

I would rather see us dump the EU except for a few light trading treaties (no EU passports or right of abode or any of that One Worlder crap) and cleave to the Anglosphere worldwide.

At the same time, the Hispanicsphere could be a formidable entity with one foot in Europe.

It isn't that long ago, as a point of interest, that the left was whining on about "small is beautiful". Now they're into the behemoth EU and even looking to enlarge it outside Europe and the realm of sanity.

JONNY

'I know people who are terrified of a Tory government with Ken Clarke in the Cabinet!

Speaking personally Steven.W, I know a good many people who are terrified of a Tory Cabinet without him. The only seriously heavy, seriously experienced man we've got.
And our best communicator to boot.

Verity

Jonny - Care to tell us what your first language is?

"Deceive" ... hmmmm ... an inappropriate use of the word.

I do not "know as well as you do" that if Labour wins the next election they'll be in for five years. I would appreciate your not telling me what I "know", nor accuse me of "deceit" for suggesting that a Labour win at the polls would work to the Conservative advantage.

For the benefit of those who can read English, I have suggested that the socialist house of cards is already rattling in the wind. I would suggest the whole pack would collapse shortly - around a year to 18 months - after a Pyrrhic victory.

Meanwhile, Cameron would have got the sack and a genuine Conservative installed as Leader and, after a vote of No Confidence the Tories would be back in for at least 15 years. A stunning defeat may shatter a broken and dispirited Labour Party forever.

I am not looking for a short term "victory" with the wrong man in charge. I am looking at the destruction of the socialists as a coherent party and revivification of the Conservative cause.

David Cameron is a dangerous man. As was Tony Blair a dangerous man. Neither one of them is very bright, but they are feral and self-focussed.

Is Cameron a leader?

When the shadow home secretary (a man who should have been sacked over the expenses scandal!) spoke about The Nokia Generation and his plan to confiscate the mobile telephones of youths, I knew then that Cameron and his team will turn out just as bad as Blair.

They have proved by that one stupid, unbelievable 'policy idea' that they are as far removed from public opinion as I am from David Cameron.

What has this country done to deserve politicians like Blair, Brown,Cameron and Clegg?

Time for a military takeover!

BEAM ME UP SCOTTY!

TGF UKIP

What is being ignored is that quite contrary to being ideology free, the Hilton/Cameron project is most ideological - an extremely green ideology.

This ideology which is quite alien to the customary sceptical anti-faddism of natural conservatives but is being thrust down the throats of the poor old Stupid Party will be there to massively alienate the public in the unlikely event that Dave actually manages not to blow the election.

What many people seem to fail to appreciate is the influence over and hold on Dave that the Mekon has and his own headbanging zealotry for the Green cause.

Dave and The Clique with their social denmocratic, politically correct, ultra green programme are entirely alien to mainstream provincial Tories and for that reason, under the strains of office, the Tory Party will split asunder and Dave will prove to have been the disaster so many of us have predicted.

Remember: "A house divided against itself cannot hold" and no house will be more divided than a Cameron/Hilton led Tory Party.

A Dave defeat will, indeed be a huge blessing for the Tory Party.

Jane

Call an election and you'll get Tory policies- in the manifesto. Disclose them any earlier than this and you'll get them in the Labour manifesto!

2trueblue

If Cameron lays out his stall right now the store will be robbed. Lets face it, even since the return of Mandelson what have Labour got to offer? They are destroying the country more each day and have no idea how to fix any of it. Sure they are great at announcing initiatives and talking.....no delivery though. They are totally vacuous and make a lot of noise. I would rather wait to see the mess that they leave and then open my mouth.

Ken Clarke needs to learn to work with the rest of the cabinet. He has his own agenda to bind us to Europe and destroy democracy totally. He has an ego as big as his......

Andy Leeds

If I was at Tory Central Office and giving advice I think I would advise them to stay light on policy, but develop it quietly behind the scenes. When Gordon the Moron finally calls an election I would then blow him out of the water with policy. show him up for the idiot he really is.

JohnAnt

I wonder to what extent Mrs Thatcher was elected in 1979 on the basis of declared policy? I seem to recall that Tory government policy accrued over the next four years, rather buffeted by the winds of economic downturn. It was clear that she was not in favour of punk or the unions, but the policy meat was not on the bone until 1982-83.
However, she already represented a determined change of direction, style and values from Labour: I fear that to many voters (including this one) Cameron does not.

Verity

Andy Leeds, and if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Hysteria

Verity = "revivification"

getting a bit excited? Wouldn't plain old "revival" do??

seb2

The philosophical and intellectual framework is definitley NOT clear.

In fact it's incredibly muddled and third way - probably intentionally so.

This is almost certainly what clarke is referring to, not the absence of policy. He even sights one major issue in the interview, the tension between being pro-business and the kind of anti big-business rhetoric which cameron has been very keen on. There is no framework governing that, just competing interests which cameron wants to say he will compromise between better than the other lot.

Archie

Why can't Cameron & co. score much higher against what is generally acknowledged to be the worst government ever? On policy, the strategy seems to be to float trial balloons - Goldsmith's Green nonsense, Grammar Schools and the preposterous "A list" of candidates, to pluck three out of the air - and see how the public reacts. Can't call it policy driven by public opinion, as he daren't mention immigration or the EU, when he would be left in no doubt as to the depth of feeling, so what on earth do the Tories stand for?

JONNY

In plain English Verity:-

the Looney Right should not deceive either themselves or us if they claim that a Cameron defeat would somehow accelerate the voting in of a True Blue Verity-approved Tory government.
Quite the contrary.

Incidentally you should take a good look at PB today, which cites irrefutable evidence that Cameron is running well ahead of his party.
Without him they would be in a sad sad state.

brian kelly

Good post 'moraymint [3:24]. I agree with what you say. Brown is completely decimating this country. It is a matter of the utmost seriousness - and 10 months to go! - how many more insane and deeply damaging projects will be signed up and committed to? It is a deeply distressing scenario.

John Moss

One policy that Cameron gets really animated about is the plan for Swedish style vouchers for the parents of children in secondary schools.

Why not take that to its logical conclusion and promise vouchers for nursery, primary, secondary, tertiary, further and higher education - oh and throw in training for 16-23 year olds as well.

Do that and not only do you "empower" all the voting parents, but you empower every 16-23 year old as well with a block of virtual cash that they can use to further their career.

What better way to bed in the idea of responsibility that underpins the Cameron project? And for that matter, to do it in one fell swoop!

(And of course you can then sack half the DCFS/DIUS civil servant to boot!)

Verity

No, Hysteria. There's a slight difference and I chose to use revivification.

Seb2, quite.

Archie, agreed. I would add that it displays a lofty, bare-faced contempt for the voter. Perhaps his little eco-windmill on his roof is disturbing Cameron's sleep.

Andy

My dilemma is I can't stand the thought of another bout of Labour, but I'm not convinced Cameron would be genuinely conservative. What's frightening my horses is that if we vote Tory, we might actually get yet more of the same from the "heir to Blair".

Verity

Andy - That's why Labour has to get back in. They can't stagger on for longer than a year or 18 months of a new term, and Hague or Redwood can humiliate them (both these gentlemen are able at using words as rapiers) and call a vote of No Confidence.