The Tories in the stocks
Fraser Nelson 1:28pm
Here’s something new for party conference season: real people. About 200 of them. Firemen. Unemployed. And, yes, workers. They are brought to you courtesy of Victoria Derbyshire’s Five Live show, where I am sitting at the back listening to this mass focus group session. It has become (for me, anyway) an unmissable feature of the party conference season – a welcome injection of real life into the all-too-myopic conferences. Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet members turn up knowing that this session will be about all the normal, disinterested person will hear about the conference. Now and again, she asks them to clap or boo depending if they agree or disagree. It’s fast-moving, and very much to the point.
One point has jumped out at me immediately. A lady at the front said she was unemployed and does not want the Tories. “But don’t you feel Labour has let you down?” she’s asked. Yes, she says. But she doesn’t trust any politician now. Lots of nodding. This is the silent voice of anti-politics, the unspoken force at this election. Often, in my job, I feel I’m presenting a false dichotomy – for most of the public the ‘none of the above’ or ‘plague on all your houses’ vote is the strongest emotion on election day. Around me, I see younger people checking their iPhone or reading the papers. Much of this does no interest them: and this matters.
Anyway, here are a few points from my time on the show.
1. Chris Grayling says that the Tory position on Lisbon will become clear if (heaven forbid) it is ratified by the next election. “When we get into the general election campaign, David Cameron will set out clearly what he intends to do.” What can he mean? My suspicion: that there is talk internally about a referendum, not on Lisbon but a wider question – as yet undecided. This would explain the strange, rather embarrassing silence.
2. An Irishman says the Tories are “not being entirely honest” about the types of cuts they will have to make. Being Irish, he’d know all about that – Dublin is freezing nurses pay, threatening to sack them if they can’t make the savings. All the sort of stuff that will probably have to be enacted here. And are the Tories being entirely honest? Of course not. They have not put a figure on this – for understandable electoral reasons. The flip side of this strategy is to be accused of keeping secrets. IMHO Tory cuts will be in the region of 13% to 20% versus the 7% outlined by Labour in the last Budget. It’s understandable why they don’t spell this out. But also understandable why punters, especially ones with an eye on the fiscal carnage underway in Ireland, smell a large whiskered rat.
3. Paul, a student, says “increased unemployment is not a price to pay” for correcting the deficit - and is rewarded by applause. The idea that the Tory cuts will bring unemployment (one promoted by that idiot Blanchflower recently) is seeping into the public consciousness. There is a big vacuum where a Tory response to this point should be.
4. Hammond seeks to reassure. “We have guaranteed for the lifetime of the parliament real-terms increase in NHS spending… which recognizes the central importance it has in people’s lives.” Really, Philip? So what does this say about education cuts – are they less of a priority? Again, the language and logic is just so sloppy. Does a government measure commitment in terms of budget? Isn’t that the Labour error? It’s all just sitting there, waiting to backfire in an election campaign.
5. Derbyshire invites the audience to clap or boo, depending on how they feel about the Tories. The boos have it. This is, of course, Manchester – but the surrounding area is pregnant with marginal seats. Grayling frowns.
6. I have to say that Grayling – bald, sitting down with a blue dotted tie that clashes with his pink striped shirt - goes down far better with these punters than the actuarial Hammond, who dresses every bit like the multi-millionaire he is. Grayling is the sort of bloke that you’d expect to see in your local. Hammond is the sort you’d expect to see whiz past you in a limo. Grayling spends an unhealthy chunk of his life campaigning around this part of the country, Hammond spends his behind a desk with a calculator (and I’m glad, because someone has to). “We have to establish credibility to maintain Britain’s creditworthiness” he tells the audience – all well and good, Philip, but how many people in this room are concerned about the AAA rating? You can argue they should be, but they’re not. Anyway, Hammond has his skills. But the Tories should be careful how they deploy him.
7. John from Lincoln says he wants job cuts in local government like – for example - the Five a Day co-ordinators. “They’re just wasting people’s taxes”. This, Mr Hammond, is how to express the argument in clear English. Thatcher used to open mail from voters, not to learn about ideas but to read and copy the language they used. She spoke directly to England, as Reagan (and, yes, George W Bush) spoke directly to America. Time Coulson started courses in vernacular English and forced the Shadow Cabinet to attend.
8. Grayling says he hates the term “anti-social behavior” – it’s criminal, and should be punished as a criminal act. Applause. His law-and-order agenda is going down well here. Good. Grayling has not yet made as much impact in Home as he did in Welfare – perhaps this is beginning to change.
9. Dan Hannan calls for a “wider renegotiation of our position” with Europe if Lisbon is ratified. “We will want to look at a package of the things we would like to have back. EU criminal justice system, the moves towards a foreign office with embassies abroad.” “Do you expect 27 other countries to renegotiate that with you?” “If we ask for British opt-outs, there is quite a lot to be decided.” I agree with Hammond – and please note, Mr Cameron he is not calling for a post-ratification referendum on Lisbon. There really is no Tory split on this, yet the Tories have not managed to persuade the media of this.
10. I wish, CoffeeHousers, that you could hear what has just happened. Many of you say the punters don’t care about Lisbon. Derbyshire asks who wants a referendum on Lisbon: clap if you do, she says. The noise is deafening. “Absolutely, because no one has told us what the Lisbon Treaty is about,” says one of the punters. Who wants a post-ratification referendum? Silence. Please note, Mr Cameron, even the Eurosceptic British punters do not want a pointless post-ratification referendum. What’s the problem in ruling it out? Even Bill Cash doesn’t see the point.
11. Grayling talking about the “broken society agenda” – interesting. I thought he personally didn’t like that phrase (which was forged in the Liam Fox leadership campaign which Grayling backed). Grayling tried the “Jeremy Kyle generation” but that was about as contagious as H5N1 bird flu. Which is to say: not very.
12. Ahhh – Grayling in trouble. Edward, a student who looks like a mini Vernon, denounced Grayling for comparing Mosside in Manchester to The Wire.” It’s “snobby” he says – huge cheers from the crowd. Dogged wee Grayling fights back immediately: “did you read my speech?” “No.” “Well, I didn’t say that. “I don’t come from an inner-city area,” says Grayling – to quiet laughs from the audience, as if this were the understatement of the year. This isn’t a cross-section: they all look quite young, and most under-25s don’t vote in Britain. So Grayling shouldn’t take it too hard.
13. Grayling is asked what he’d do about judges who let criminals off too lightly. He replied “Scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights.” This, I’m afraid, is disingenuous. Dominic Grieve is one of those lawyers who loves the ECHR (and spoke in favour of it in his maiden speech) – he plans a scam whereby the Bill of Rights would be deemed junior to the ECHR and, therefore, worthless. The Human Rights Act may go, but all it did was give a British face to legislation which would under the Tories still reign over English justice.
14. Mark Francois takes on the accusation – much parroted by the left – that the Tory new coalition partners are racist, homophobic, Hitler-saluting baby eaters. He takes this head-on. I like his style. He knows his stuff. Francois is going places: he works hard, gets his facts right, projects himself well. Buy.
15. I finish off by asking Francois what Grayling meant – what plan on Europe does he have? He was all coy, but I could see a smile on his face that he wouldn’t allow if this were television. “You have a cunning plan, don’t you Mark?” He joked that no one has yet compared him to Baldrick. But a cunning plan there does seem to be. And I, for one, can’t wait to hear it.
Previous
Vulture
October 5th, 2009 1:53pm Report this commentI like the cut of Grayling's jib, just as I do those of other Tory slapheads like Hague and IDS. But Hammond is one of Dave's sleek clique and Grieve is a clever idiot with no common sense straight out of Two Brains Willett's stable. They don't get out much and they don't go down well with ordinary people - especially the ordinary northern people the Tories need to win over.
Dave should be careful he doesn't slip on his own oilyness.
Frederick James
October 5th, 2009 1:56pm Report this commentA post by Witan on pb.com deserves an airing here (quoting verbatim):
"I am not in the inner circles of the Tory party so when I give a possible scenario if the treaty is ratified it is the product of my own imagination.
"The Irish referendum was based on a promise to change Lisbon once ratified by attaching the ‘promises’ made to Ireland to the next accession treaty. This mechanism was necessary otherwise all countries would need to ratify the Lisbon treaty again if there were changes to the treaty at this stage. They would in practice ratify the amendments to Lisbon through the accession treaty. Those treaties also need unanimity.
"Whichever country it is the subject of the next accession treaty, Ireland has to wait until that happens for the promises to be fulfilled. That could be years, or might not be.
"If the Lisbon treaty has been ratified when Cameron takes control it is likely to be in its original form as no new accessions would have happened.
"So there is no reason why concessions to the new UK government could not be added in just the same way and through the same mechanism and the same treaty as they will be for Ireland.
"Accession treaties require unanimity even under Lisbon and if Cameron said he would need to put it to a referendum the pressure would be on the EU to conceded because a no vote even on a accession treaty, where the referendum included a clause not to reconsider for three or five years, would throw the whole EU machine into chaos. Croatia would not join, Ireland would not get its concessions.
"In those circumstances a few changes in respect the social chapter and legislation would not seem to great a price for the EU to pay.
"Afterall the EU grandees have set the precedent in Ireland and can hardly say it cannot be done as it has been done.
"Naturally, if this were the plan you would not want to signal it in advance as all those Labour shills who demand to know fully understand. They are making a fuss because they know no government shows its hand nine months in advance of a vital and difficult negotiation. To do so only allows the other side to prepare a defence and begin a campaign against you well beforehand.
"And Cameron is not going to do that."
paracelsus
October 5th, 2009 1:57pm Report this commentWhat did you expect? This is still, for all intents and purposes, Labour's backyard.
At best, the reaction was going to be mixed. Grayling needs to be replaced though.
Hawkeye
October 5th, 2009 2:06pm Report this comment"A lady at the front said she was unemployed and does not want the Tories. “But don’t you feel Labour has let you down?” she’s asked. Yes, she says. But she doesn’t trust any politician now. Lots of nodding."
Did anyone ask her what her answer was then - other than to do nothing and vote for no one?
She may not want to vote tory, but maybe she should look at who she wants to vote against.
Publius
October 5th, 2009 2:07pm Report this comment'Dan Hannan calls for a “wider renegotiation of our position” with Europe'
Quite. No one is pretending that, once ratified across the EU, Britain can unratify it across the EU. But we can do something about ourselves and our own position.
Once again we are being softened up with the "it's a done deal so you'd better accept it and forget about it" line. I, for one, have heard that once too often, and over the years all we have had is more and more EU.
No so much 'reculer pour mieux sauter' as just thrown in the towel.
DavidDP
October 5th, 2009 2:08pm Report this comment"Grieve is one of those lawyers who loves the ECHR "
Like Churchill. Good for him.
Sunder Katwala
October 5th, 2009 2:16pm Report this commentYou report Chris Grayling used a 'did you read my speech' defence, appearing to claiming he didn't compare Moss Side to the Wire.
This seems disingenuous. Has he read his own speech? He explicitly claimed not only that the Wire reflected the reality of Moss Side but that
"in many parts of British cities, The Wire has become a part of real life in this country too"
----
In case he has forgotten, this is what he said:
"A few weeks ago, I spent one of the most illuminating evenings that I have had since entering politics out with the specialist police team in Manchester's Moss Side that works to tackle the gang issues in the area.
Even as someone well aware of the gang problem in our society, it was a shocking and enlightening experience. What was going on there at the time was nothing short of an urban war.
...
An urban war taking place on the streets of one of our biggest cities.
Over the past decade violence in our society has become a norm and not an exception.
....
The culture of violence that was a feature of US cities a generation ago is now a feature of British cities.
The same is true of the culture of deprivation, harm, addiction and failure that is a feature of the worst US urban areas.
That world too is also following the culture of gangs and violence across the Atlantic.
It's the world of the drama series The Wire. A series that tracks the nightmare of drugs, gangs and organised crime in inner city West Baltimore.
It's a horrendous portrayal of the collapse of civilised life and of human despair.
Neighbourhoods where drug dealing and deprivation is rife.
A constant threat of robbery to fund drug dependency.
Communities dogged by violence and by violent crime.
The Wire used to be just a work of fiction for British viewers. But under this Government, in many parts of British cities, The Wire has become a part of real life in this country too".
----
Richard Jenkins
October 5th, 2009 2:23pm Report this commentI want to have my say on the Lisbon treaty, and I want to have it through the ballot box in a referendum. It would not be pointless to have a referendum on Lisbon after ratification, for this reason: WE WANT TO HAVE OUR SAY. The negotiating position of a Conservative government would be hugely strengthened if it could say that its position reflected the expressed democratic will of the British people - whatever that turned out to be. And by the way, whatever happened to "no parliament can bind its successors"? As with the rules in Animal Farm, that presumably now reads "no parliament can bind its successors - unless it ratifies an EU treaty".
BrianSJ
October 5th, 2009 2:27pm Report this commentGreat post. Thank you.
I hope it is read in places that matter.
Nicholas
October 5th, 2009 2:33pm Report this commentSounds like a typical Anti-Tory rent-a-crowd to me.
Representative? Doubt it.
Red Rag
October 5th, 2009 2:37pm Report this comment"This isn’t a cross-section: they all look quite young, and most under-25s don’t vote in Britain. So Grayling shouldn’t take it too hard."....you forgot to add for Graying not to take any notice of them, they don't vote....so they don't matter.
Who is it that said the Tories had actually changed?
Simon Stephenson
October 5th, 2009 2:54pm Report this comment"A lady at the front said she was unemployed and does not want the Tories. “But don’t you feel Labour has let you down?” she’s asked. Yes, she says. But she doesn’t trust any politician now. Lots of nodding. This is the silent voice of anti-politics, the unspoken force at this election."
Fraser, it's because people like you get this wrong, time after time, that nothing is ever done to remedy it.
The woman in question is not "anti-politics", she's anti- the contemporary manifestation of politics. You can't possibly argue that "politics" should only be recognised as the present processes of social decision-making. Maybe what this woman, and millions of others, are "anti" is firstly the fact that they are to all intents and purposes excluded from the political process completely, and secondly that the people who are actually making the social decisions will go to any lengths of guile, deceit and disingenuity to deny that this is so.
Isn't the reality that it's actually pro-politics to be anti- the class of people who no longer embrace fundamental honesty as one of their governing features?
Fraser Nelson
October 5th, 2009 3:37pm Report this commentSimon, we're arguing about wording - you know v well what I mean. Anti-party, anti-Westminster, anti-established politcial groups call it what you will. But she's from Her Majesty's Loyal Abstainers and they're a v significant force
TrevorsDen
October 5th, 2009 3:59pm Report this comment"What can he mean? My suspicion: that there is talk internally about a referendum, not on Lisbon but a wider question – as yet undecided. This would explain the strange, rather embarrassing silence. "
What can he mean - well he has said this in the past -
"we believe that the EU is patently in need of reform: it does too much and a great deal of what it does is done badly – the persistent attempts to take ever more powers from nation states, the mismanaged budget, the failures of the Common Fisheries Policy and, sadly, more – which is why we have campaigned for reform and modernisation in the EU.
We believe political integration has gone too far and people do feel that Brussels ’ power has grown without their consent.
We are optimistic that with a firm view of our national interests in mind and a clear vision of Europe’s proper priorities – global competitiveness, global poverty and global warming – we can succeed in reforming the EU so that it is fit for the twenty first century. It will not be fast. It will not be easy. But we believe it can be done."
I know he said it because I have the email to prove it.
I can sympathise with the sentiment - except global warming - if you substitute energy conservation I can go with it.
Where all British government s have failed is in delivering the claw back EU powers. The truth is our own civil servants are happy to do empower themselves on the back of the EU.
Stu
October 5th, 2009 5:40pm Report this commentNot sure you need to resort to calling Danny Blanchflower an idiot, Fraser. Yah-boo nonsense imo.
James Hudson
October 5th, 2009 7:41pm Report this commentI did intend to vote for Cameron but am now
tending towards UKIP.
How difficult is it for Cameron to say in his conference speech that he will inform the EU bigwigs that if the Lisbon Treaty, i.e. Constitution, is finalised without a British referendum then it will have no legitimicy in the U.K. The British electorate were promised a referendum and a referendum they will have otherwise the Treaty will have no democratic credibility in the U.K. No British parliament can bind its successors. By his disengenuous words over Europe Cameron is showing himself to be no better than Brown.
Paul B
October 5th, 2009 7:46pm Report this commentHeard the show Fraser, and excellent it was. The wait and see policy of DC is really not sustainable, the public are rightly extremely cynical and do not see why he cannot say what he would do should the Poles & Czechs ratify the treaty. I agree with the great unwashed and because of DCs obfuscation on the subject, Im inclining towards voting UKIP. His policy is a avote loser
Simon Stephenson
October 5th, 2009 8:09pm Report this commentFraser (3.37pm)
Mmmm. If I thought we were only arguing about wording I wouldn't have posted. What I believe is not being taken on board by the political class is that there is a large amount of "anti" feeling that is generated not from a failure on the public's part to appreciate the necessities of political contest, but from the quality of the political contest having dropped off a cliff over the last 20 years. There is a widespread feeling that there is no grouping in the present political class that can adequately govern the nation, because it's become composed of people who are not geared to do other than fight the wrong battles.
We're not anti-politics, we're anti what it's been turned into, and we're anti the people who perpetuate this. What we're for is a restoration of honesty, precision and intellect as the basis of social decision-making, thinking beyond the next opinion-poll, and a clear message to go out to the con-men and snake-oil salesmen that their presence is no longer welcome in this area.
Tony
October 5th, 2009 8:37pm Report this commentI am surprised, Fraser, that you failed to mention the segment of discussion about the Lisbon treaty, where Victoria Derbyshire herself bellowing "Rubbish!" in response to the stock answer about 'not letting things rest there'.
This more than anything demonstrated the "Tories in the stocks" feeling you write about.
I can understand and sympathise with an audience being dissatisfied and reacting accordingly. But surely a BBC presenter should be professional. She certainly did not behave that way at the Labour and Lib Dem conference discussions.
Later in the afternoon, Peter Allen joined in the hectoring, self righteous anger fest as he bellowed and spoke over guests on the subject. The media has its agenda and nothing is being allowed to get in the way of undermining the Conservatives.
Laughing Gravy
October 5th, 2009 8:43pm Report this commentI have been wracking my brains to see the way forward if Cameron finds Lisbon fully ratified by the time he becomes PM. Now, thanks to the post from Frederick James, quoting Witan on another site, I am begining to see a strategy emerging. I have long accepted that Lisbon could not be reversed for us if fully ratified (not while remaining an EU member) - so what would be the point of a referendum on Lisbon? Now I can see it would be possible to have:
1 An advisory referendum on the acceptability of Lisbon to the British people; to settle the question,
2 A process, as describe by Frederick James, to obtain further concessions; these to be codified and legalised in the Croatian Accession Treaty,
3 An Act of our Parliament requiring a referendum before another other EU treaty or transfer of power is ratified.
quadratus
October 5th, 2009 9:04pm Report this commentRead Hannan's blog today.
TGF UKIP
October 6th, 2009 1:39pm Report this commentSimon Stephenson 2 Fraser Nelson 0
Face up to it Fraser, you are one of them. Not surprising really as you spend your entire life in the metropolitan village, among the villagers.
Interesting post, though, which may well be reflected in the size of the vote for UKIP, BNP, Greens etc next May.
Back to top