Winning in 2015

Steve Tierney

I struggle to understand why anybody is surprised by yesterday's economic news. There is no quick fix for this problem. We'll be slumping in and out of recession for years.

If we dropped the NHS reforms then we might as well give up. Our whole purpose would then be deficit reduction - ie, fixing Labour's latest mess. While that is certainly a necessary job, we also need to make changes to prevent it happening again. And again. And again. And again.

ollie

If Ed Miliband is still Labour leader at the next GE, the Tories shouldn't have much trouble gaining a majority.

Middle England will not vote for an unmarried, Godless Marxist - no matter how bad the cuts are.

Pettros

Ollie I think Middle England is doing fine for the Tories, its the rest they need to consider!

Hugo Chav

James,

The Tories have got to re-frame the economic argument by more clearly laying all the blame on Brown, Blair, Balls and Milliband.

Through semantics Labour have called it a "Global Financial Crisis" thus absolving blame. In fact, it is a "Western Financial Crisis" explained clearly below.

It would be refreshing to see Cameron and Osborne lead with this "buzzword".

Here is the juice:

FT - 26/1/11:

Asia has had enough of excusing the west

By Kishore Mahbubani

Most crises are known by their origin, from the Mexican peso crisis of 1994/5 to the Asian crisis of 1997/8. Given there is no doubt who caused our world’s latest troubles, it should adopt its logical name: the western financial crisis. This reluctance to call a spade a spade reflects an inability to reckon with changes the US and Europe have to make to avoid a repeat. This worries the rest of the world, and Asia in particular – even if western leaders are shockingly unaware of how they are viewed.

Before this crisis Asian policymakers deferred towards their western counterparts. We assumed the west knew best on finance and economics. The enormous blunders since committed by the US and Europe mean deference has been replaced by disquiet. There is a simple reason why the west has not noticed: Asians are too polite. Sometimes it takes a relatively rude Asian, like me, to express our continent’s true feelings.

Fortunately, a few others have begun to speak out. Rakesh Mohan, the ex-deputy governor of the Reserve Bank of India, noted the “global financial crisis has had its roots in the US”. Andrew Sheng, chief adviser to the China Banking Regulatory Commission, strongly criticised US banks and regulators, saying: “When our teachers are no better than us, we really have to think for ourselves.” Top Chinese bank regulator Liu Mingkang has said of US financial reform that “after the death, the doctor came”.

These sentiments are now shared across Asia. Indeed, if the Thais and Indonesians did not come from inherently polite societies, they would say to the US and Europe: “The time has come for you to administer the same bitter medicine you prescribed to us: stop living beyond your means.”

Continued...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/44616bb0-28c0-11e0-aa18-00144feab49a.html#axzz1C4Pyg9vy

Vulture

It was following Finkelstein's idiotic strategy of being more 'progressive' than Labour ( as approved by Maude, Leftwing and Hilton) - that lost the 2010 election and got the Tories into the dire mess of a Coalition in the first place.

I hear no crowd noises of 'What do we want? AV/EU/higher VAT - When do we want it - now!'

Yet Finkers continues to labour under the delusion that what concerns North London dinner parties is what the voters are screaming out for

The best guarantee of a Conservative majority in 2015 is to sweep away the Heath-Cameron clique, rid us of the Lib Dems and go to the country on a populist Tory ticket.

ollie

Vulture, getting rid of Cameron would be the Tories' biggest ever mistake. While he's there, they have a chance of re-election. If he goes, they have NO chance.

Pettros, the rest as you put it, don't really matter. Swing seats (like my constituency of Wolverhampton south west) are the only places that matter.

If Labour elected Ian Huntley as their leader, the retarded celtic fringe would still vote for them.

Rhoda Klapp

Somebody tell me whatever the hell Danny Finkelstein did or said or indeed wrote which gave him the guru status accorded to him by Spectator bloggers. Has he ever been right? Or correct?

Adrian Sells

Steve Tierney is right: there's nothing surprising about yesterday's numbers and we will be stuck in a period of prolonged economic low growth (call it a depression if you like).
This is the worst debt bubble and economic downturn since World War Two and we can't expect simply to bounce back.
The coalition's best hope is to take as much pain early on as possible and hope for a window when things feel a little less bad to go to the country. In the meantime they have to press on with reform of institutions like the NHS as well as deficit reduction.

steven

what a mees this goverment labour said it was a global situation we faced the tory said we make it better what a disaster that turned out to be uninployment up to highest ever inflation up and now saying biggest gap beetwen wage packet and cost of living since 1920 i will never vote for david conman or the torys ahain

James Harding

Finkelstein is an active and regular adviser to Osborne - so he should really declare that when he poses as a neutral pundit.

normanc

A lot of what if's in that article. It's no given that the deficit will be got rid of in the next 4 years (in reality it would have to be 3 years as we'll need at least one giveaway budget prior to a GE to show us that things are getting better).

The current plans are based on a massive increase in the tax intake based on above trend growth.

I know I say this in post after post but I honestly believe that there is a great danger the deficit will still be roaring away for the forseeable future. And the longer it goes on, the larger the interest payments, which makes it more difficult to grow the economy, etc. A very vicious circle that can't be solved by tax raises, only brutal spending cuts and there is not only no appetite for doing that, the best political environment they had to do it with the public on side was about 8 months ago.

Ruby Duck

What Hugo Chav said - IN CAPITALS.

Mark Cannon

I don't waste money on the Times, but Funklestein appears to have lost whatever bottle he had. The health reforms were set out in the Conservative manifesto and those Tory MPs who are apparently grumbling about them should get out and spread the word to their constituents rather than talking to feeble journalists.

The government has embarked on an extremely ambitious programme of reform in many areas, not least health, welfare and education. It has to deal with the deficit and a weak economy. The government is not perfect, but if it can bring home its reforms, reduce the deficit and return to steady growth by 2012 all will be well. This is no time for panic.

Commentator

Why are we paying much attention to the witterings of second division journalist working for a dying newspaper who is simply an echo chmaber for Steve Hilton?

Moraymint

"If growth does return, as I still expect it to ..."

Which planet do you live on exactly James?

On what precisely are your UK economic growth expectations founded?

Can you point to those economic and fiscal policies that you feel will unleash the British entrepreneurial spirit?

Which parts of the UK economy do you see as ripe for investment and are all set and skilled to grow fiercely in the coming months and years?

Any thoughts on the likely impact of the continuing dead weights of the national debt and the UK's almost unimaginable levels of spending on welfare, health, social security, the EU etc etc?

I need convincing that we're all set for economic growth. I'm also a tad worried about the end of mankind's era of cheap energy, the inexorably rising costs of natural resources and the exploding resource demands of the BRICS nations and other emerging economies.

Other than that, everything should be alright soon.

Vulture

Ollie-

You are entirely delusional. There is no evikdence whatsoever that Joe Public like
Dave's pink-green liberal agenda which manages to combine traditional Tory heartlessness with Guardianista political correctnessin one deeply unattractive package.

You have not even begun to grasp how hated Heath-Cameron will be one year hence.

Tiberius

I've sometimes wondered, Vulture, whether you enjoy the wind up or whether you truly believe what you say.

The evidence you require is the GE outcome for the Tories in 2010 compared to 2005 and 2001. That's not to say they could not have done better in 2010.

I'd also bet that Cameron is not disliked (let alone hated) as much as Mrs T was between 1980 and the Falklands war.

Vulture

Tiberius:

In 2001 and 2005 New Labour were at the high point of their popularity and the Tories were still troughed in the deep unpopularity incurred by the imbecelic John Major.

ANY Tory in those two elections would have lost - and lost badly. Or do you seriously suppose that Dave would have won?

He was lucky in that he had to face the horror that was Brown. But even then - even then - he still could not win.

What I claim is that the public - especially the non-Metropolitan working class - like hardline Tory policies on crime, the EU, and immigration. The fluffy Guardiasnostas don't - but they would never vote Tory anyway - not even for Dave's brand.

As for your threat that Dave will start a war to try to boost his popularity ; what will he fight it with, now that he has denuded our swanky new aircraft carriers of aircraft?

Verity

James writes: "might compromise Cameron’s standing as a different kind of Tory." Nothing can "compromise" that weird, destructive claim, James. Except Cameron isnīt a "different kind of Tory" because he is not a Tory at all.

Preditably, I agree with every word Vulture wrote.

Ollie, no, England won't vote for a "godless Marxist" and neither will they vote for the Trot Common Purpose candidate. They will swill over to UKIP, and UKIP will get its first few MPs into Westminster.

As to the incessant quoting of Finkelstein, I refer y'all to Rhoda Klapp's post above.

Cynic

"Running on a platform of ‘hope, confidence, and growth’ should deliver a Tory majority." Sounds good, but by then it will be increasingly clear even to an IQ zero on the top of the Clapham omnibus (should such public transport still be running) that any such hope, confidence and growth will only be permitted if explicitly sanctioned by the EU.

TGF UKIP

While James is even more besotted with Daft Danny than he is with David Brooks, this can all be safely ignored given that he whole farce is going to disappear in a shower of sparks and shit long before 2015.

By the way Vulture, you could also have mentioned that in 2001 and in 2005 Hague and Howard were systematically sabotaged by the Tory Left during the course of those campaigns.

2trueblue

UKIP has had its opportunity and where did it go? The voters will become more entrenched to the left or right next time or not vote at all.
For the Tories it all depends on how much and how fast the coalition can deal with the debt and the deficit. It is not a game, and Liebore made it clear as they 'slashed and burned' prior to leaving, that to them it was all a game.
The details of how, where and what they did with the money is now becoming public knowledge and they will not be able to rely on the 'beeb' to tell it how they want. When you have maxed out totally on what the country had, and way way way beyond, and during a time of growth, you have to shut up, or contribute, and let the other guy clean up your crap. Liebore was all about the personalities, Bliar/Brown/Balls/Whelan/Cooper, and forgot what they were meant to be doing, running our country, Would you today trust any of them with your bank account or to run your company?

AAE

It'd be better for poor worrying Danny and the spineless Tory MPs if they spent rather more time facing realities rather than trying to fend off criticism from the BBC et al. How about starting with the fact that thousands needlessly die in the NHS - why is this a non-story?

Dimoto

Candidate for Cameron's communications chief - Jeff Randal ?

dg

Finkelstein was SDP during the 1980s. Since the early 1990s he's been an influential adviser to the Tory Party. No wonder they've lost 4 elections in a row.

'If only we were more left wing and modernised a bit more'

Finkelstein's advice has never led to a general election victory. What it has led to is a coalition that resembles very closely the SDP that David Owen (The Fink's mentor) imagined.

Yuck!

Boudicca

I quite like Cameron and he is certainly making a better fist of PM than either Blair or Brown. I just don't like the left-wing CONservative policies he is pursuing.

For me, the game-changer is the EU. I violently object to paying £48 million a day to this corrupt entity, plus billions more to prop up the Euro when the country is up to its eyeballs in debt.

Our membership of the EU is so obviously one where a Referendum is required to give the British people the right to decide on the country's direction and to end the continual debate about our membership. Polls regularly show that 70%+ of the electorate want a Referendum. Our political elite, including Cameron, disagree so they refuse to listen.

I think we should get out and that is what I would vote for. But more than that, I just think we MUST have a Referendum because that is Democracy in action. And that is what I shall vote and campaign for - which means UKIP.

If Cameron loses the next GE because of the UKIP vote, he will have no-one but himself (and the wet left-wing CONservative elite) to blame.

As far as I'm concerned, voting for the Lib/Lab/CON trinity makes no difference. The are all pro-EU and they all deny the British people the right to self-determination.

2trueblue

Boudicca, agree with you totally on this post. We must get our referendum, and if Cameron does not see that he will be history. Voting UKIP is not where we should be going. We should keep telling Cameron and our own MPs that we are owed our referendum The numbet of votes UKIP got are exactly the number that would have given Cameron his majority. That needs to be said over and over to the Tories.

Verity

Ollie 2:14 pm - "Vulture, getting rid of Cameron would be the Tories' biggest ever mistake. While he's there, they have a chance of re-election. If he goes, they have NO chance."

Incorrect.

Opposite.

While Cameron is there, the Tories are dead in the water. Chopped meat. Bait. Finished.

I have never seen one comment reading, "I really like Cameron!". Never. I have never read a positive endorsement of any of his vapid thoughts or self-serving announcements. Not one. No one's ever been reported as having said, "Great speech by Cameron yesterday!" Or, "Wow! The Big Society! I LOVE IT!"

Some vapid women wrote in to The Daily Mail when he had the effontery to pose on the steps of Downing Street with his wife and his new kid, as though introducing it to the nation as an important element.

The slicker Blair knew that that level of effrontery wouldn't work.

He stood on the steps of No 10 with a cup of tea and a nappy over his shoulder or something. He didn't present the kid to the nation as though standing on the balcony of Buck House.

Cameron is on a glory trip on the EU train and everyone knows it. As far as I can see, he has no supporters.

He's a liability for the Tories, but they allowed it.

Ollie, "if" he goes the Tories won't stand a chance? Shurely shome mishtake, ossifer?

Verity

Chaps and Chapesses - Read NormanC 2:40 p.m.

Verity

Mark Cannon: "The government has embarked on an extremely ambitious programme of reform in many areas, not least health, welfare and education...".

Sorry, but "welfare" should not be up there in the top category. That should be Defence, education, immigration.

Fergus Pickering

If Cameron loses the next GE because of UKIP then he will have UKIP to blame. UKIP's only role appears to be to deliver us to a Labour government - which will promptly give us a referendum on Europe of course. UKIP is a one issue party. Does anyone know what ELSE they stand for, except keeping women chained to the sink, that is?

Boudicca

Fergus Pickering
January 27th, 2011 3:12am

UKIP is not a one-issue Party, as you would see if you looked at their website. They most resemble 'old' conservatism. They have a full range of policies, which can e viewed here. http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies

What they don't do is pretend that they can deliver on policies, such as a reduction in immigration and stronger measures against terrorists, when the power to do so now rests with the EU. The Lib/Lab/CON Trinity lie on this point. That is why leaving the EU is their top priority.

yank

Why is it that the Spectator censored my post to this discussion? It had to be censorship for content, content in express disagreement with this blogpost.

Was it because I pointed out the absurdity of a wet conflating Dave and the wets with Reagan, an actual conservative?

Was it because I scoffed at the suggestion that Dave and the wets will even be around in 2015, let alone that they today merit a blogpost concerning their electoral prospects then?

Inquiring minds want to know. Why did the Spectator censor that post?

As you answer, suggest you first take a read through the comments here that you chose not to censor. They may give you insight as to the absurdity of your blogpost.

In the future, suggest you not embarrass yourself with comparisons of wet politicians to Ronald Reagan.

Cameo Parkway Kid

Verity. Exactly.

Defence wise, we have become Belgium with nukes - for instance, we had the best ASW capablility in the world, now its on a par with 1935.

Education has become a plaything for rich yummy-mummys and religous nut-jobs who want to set up their own free-school.

And Theresa May, in her effort to appease the LibDem wing, has made it so easier for our Pakistani brethren to take the odd pot shot or two at aircraft inbound to Heathrow.

Cheers Dave. Do me a favour and stick to easy constituency politics in the leafy glades of Witney.

Tom Paine

Yank,

It's probably because you're preening pain in the arse.

yank

That's pretty much how I see it, Mr. Paine. The Spectator's censorship policy aims to silence those who disagree.