Is Finkelstein fighting the last war?

Hugh

Perhaps you're right, but you don't really explain why the Tory's should risk coming out with this so far ahead of an election when they are already doing so well in the polls.

William Norton

Danny has a number of blind spots. For example, he is vehemently against any Tory strategy based on tax cuts: it is not the case they we have to learn how to sell them better, the 2001 and 2005 strategies were fundamentally unsound and it is better instead to promise to slow the growth in public spending, and may be tax cuts can follow in due course.

The only problem with this insightful analysis is that in 2001 and 2005 the policy was to, er, slow the growth in public spending to create room for tax cuts. The only difference now is that we've dropped any specific numbers and acquired a good slogan in "sharing the proceeds of growth" i.e. we've learned how to sell the 2001/2005 policies better.

Surprised no one has noticed that Danny's been spending most of the last 3 years arguing against himself. Not really much of a departure for him to suddenly leap to the defence of Brownism. Perhaps he thinks that the best way to finally deliver the kiss of death to Brownism is for the Tory Party to embrace it?

Verity

I wish the people who say Cameron can't abandon the centre ground (which is soft left) because otherwise the Tories would again be called "the nasty party" (thank you Theresa May, you moron), I believe the country is hungry for more conservative governance and would respond well to a vow to leave the vile and absurd EHRA, locking up prisoners without TVs and computer games, building new prisons (with loos facing whichever way the architect decides; not what the Muslim religion dictates). Oh, and they'd like their ancient freedom of speech restores.

A couple of days ago three middle aged, professional people protesting the building of a new runway somewhere, narrowly escaped arrest because the message on their T-shirts was "inflammatory". When one considers that one can say whatever one damned well pleases in the United States,including making disparaging remarks about other races and religions, without so much as a raised eyebrow from the police forces, one realises how far into totalitarianism we have been dragged.

I believe the people would rejoice if the Tories did becomed truly right wing and a stake driven through the heart of thought fascism, aka "political correctness". The Americans rub along with each other very well without it.

Water

“To my mind, this is both defeatist and wrong” and you’d be right by my construal. I say this with regards to a particular facet of Danny’s attack (located in the latter half) which claims the Tories would be faced with a lack of resonance (as regards the electorate) were DC and his gang to elucidate their position with regards to policies. Danny is quite unfounded, a critic yearning for increased clarity would surely be placated were such measure (which become inevitable as crunch time draws closer) to manifest.

Dave B

Whatever Mr Cameron is doing, the polls suggest it's working.

Marcus Cotswell

What Danny is doing is trying to put to one side what he thinks might be the best policies for running the country, and offering his view of what is the best way for the Tories to present themselves to the electorate. It's not about having the courage of his convictions, or otherwise.

Teh Labour brand now is nowhere near as toxic as the Conservative brand in 1997 - but you didn't see Tony Blair 'lurching to the left' to exploit this.

What I really struggle to get to grips with is why exactly everyone here (on the Speccie blog, that is)seems so keen on the Tories coming out publicly with lots of 'bold' or 'radical' policies here and now?

The implicit argument seems to be that because the Tories are 20 points up in the polls, they can 'get away' with putting forward a 'radical' programme, so that when/if they get into Government and the policies turn out to be unpopular in practice, they can turn round and tell people that this is what they voted for and so they can't complain. Since the strategy is unlikely to secure even a first term, I suppose it is more-or-less redundant to ask whether its proponents believe it is likely to garner a second one.

What Cameron is doing, and Finkelstein (I think) supporting, is trying to get a 'doctor's mandate' to be 'anything but Brown', just as Blair, by stayign close to Major, secured one to be 'anything but the Tories'.

the fact that Blair proceeded to screw it up is irrelevant. What you do with the majority once you get it is much more under your control than the getting of it.

dennis

I think Danny is broadly right.

There's no need to set out anything more than the outlines of policy now. The government has an army of civil servants and friendly quangocrats who could rubbish anything more detailed to order.

Also - why not wait and see if Brown/Balls blink first and go off to chart out ground to the left of where they are now? That's the way their members and activists want to push them. So, let 'em be pushed.

Verity

Psst! Does anyone know what Water is actually talking about? Is he writing in English?

Verity

Marcus Cotswell: "he fact that Blair proceeded to screw it up is irrelevant."

But he didn't "screw it up". He was very successful in helping the Muslim lobby gain ascendancy over the agenda, and very successful in removing freedom of speech from the British Isles, and very successful in imposing thought fascism that forced people and writers to self-monitor before daring to commit anything to the public gaze.

Blair was an outstanding success.

David Lindsay

He's getting what he wants. Any Tory who really does want to differentiate himself from New Labour has to resign and seek re-election as (it seems) an Independent.

Kevyn Bodman

Finkelstein is wrong.
Elections are about choice.
If the Conservatives are not going to be much different from Labour then why do they want to form a government?
Why not go off and play golf if someone else will do pretty much what you would do anyway?

The answer that jumps out at me is that they want to be in power because they fancy power.
That's no good at all and is part of the reason why my natural tendency towards politicians is to despise and distrust them.

If a party has views on policy then the electorate should be made aware of them.
Not to do so is cowardly and/or deceitful; two more reasons why I tend to despise and distust politicians.

It's not possible to give detailed policy on every single issue, but it IS possible to be clear on the major ones so that when minor details are addressed the position taken doesn't come as a shock or surprise.

Here are my major policy ideas:

EU referendum; Lisbon yes/no and in/out
Civil Liberties; DD is already articulating this and he's right.

Education; Swedish system improved for Britain; choice in teaching and then rigour in testing.

Immigration; complete stop to all non -EU immigration to be reviewed after 5 years.

Social Cohesion; NO concessions AT ALL to minority groups. They can fit in or leave.

Tax/ Spend.
Cut or eliminate all benefits for healthy people of working age.
I used to be a great fan of the Welfare State but it is now abundantly clear that it is ruining the life prospects of a lot of younger people in unskilled/lower income groups by eating away at self-reliance.
And cut taxes hard in line with spending reductions.

Defence policy.
Use the Armed Forces in conflict as little as possible but give them everything they want when they are ordered into action. So, get out of Iraq and Afghanistan.Use our forces to defend clear British interests.

Crime/policing
Lock up violent criminals, restore preventive police patrolling and stop snooping on ordinary people.

I think a manifesto like that would be widely and wildly popular.

Since I've been justifiably scornful of politicians keeping their ideas quiet I must also say that I am in favour of the complete legalisation of all drugs. Burglary, robbery, driving while stoned/smashed etc. remain crimes but drug use itself to be completely legal.

Whoops that last one might have upset a few, so maybe it's best left for the second term?
But it makes sense. But I'll let that one go if I can have the others.

Come on Cameron, get off the centre ground and show us how your lot would be different for NuLab.
Give the voters a CHOICE.

Water

Pssst Verity try reading the article then it will make sense.

Sally

The centre right Conservative party is the natural party of government. Labour could only get elected by moving to the right under Blair. Cameron needs to be careful, in this modernising of his, that he does not turn the Tories into the Lib Dems. After all there is a reason the Lib Dems are in third place and always will be. At the moment the Conservatives are way ahead in the polls despite hardly spelling out any policies. This is becasue most people think they know what the Tories stand for and after 11 years of Labour and the economy now worsening, people turn to what they trust and know best, and that is the Conservative party. Labour have never been tested in an economic downturn whereas the Tories have.

Verity

Psst, Water. I did. And it didn't.

Kaye, UK

After a decade of New Labour throwing money around like there is no tomorrow (wasting it), introducing policies that have led to social breakdown and all the human rights nonsense etc, people are now ready for the Conservatives. I do not believe it is as much about policy as personality.

Dave, Cheshire

Daniel Finkelstein IS WRONG. Just when the country is wanting a credible centre right party to vote for, the last thing Cameron should do is move too far to the left. The reason the Tories lost the last two elections: THE LAST TWO LEADERS OF THE TORY PARTY, SIMPLE AS! This is proven by a survey that was done at the last election were when voters were shown the policies of the Conservative party they overwhelming supported them but then when they were told they were Tory policies support halved.

CAROL-ANN

WE HAVE TWO LEFT WING PARTIES WE DON'T NEED A THIRD. PEOPLE WANT CHANGE NOT THE TORY PARTY TO MERGE INTO LABOUR/LIB DEMS.

Praguetory

Danny is usually wrong. He remains so.

TGF UKIP

Was tempted to join this at length but no need to. The voices of sense, as opposed to the voices of social democracy have already well and truly shredded Finkelstein.

I will say, though, that this goes to the very heart of why I so despise Cameron and his present Tory Party. It is the refusal to argue the conservative case. They are a shallow party without an apparent ideoligical core. The statistic from the latest YouGov poll says it all - only 35% think a Conservative Government would handle Britain's problems any better than Labour. And why, indeed, should they think Blue Labour would be any better than Real Labour?

And to you all you Daveist Defeatists who say Conservatives simply can't afford to be conservative I would simply say Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan!

Diversity

Daniel is devious and fun. Maybe what he really has in mind is making it easy for the Brownite-Blairite rump to form British Labour after the next election, and so hope to have quasi-permanent ConBritLab coalition in power?

Hysteria

Hmmm - Verity and Water - interesting debate - I side with Verity on this.

Kevyn Bodman - some interesting ideas - but I think I agree overall with TGF - the more Team DC avoids coming out with serious policy, the more they will be perceived (rightly or wrongly) as "just like the rest" - doesn't the reaction to the DD announcement show a great number of people are looking for a real alternative approach?

DW

OK, the Left's approach of micromanaging, authoritarianism and high taxation is proving undesirable and unworkable.
The country is suffering economically and socially from bad spending and bad policies.
Most voters now realise this, but they are worn and weary with Labour and do not yet have the appetite to contemplate (much of) the truly radical.
Cameron is no slouch. At the moment it is all about creating a PM in waiting, making the Tories electable etc, but once in power, there is the opportunity to turn this country round a la Right. I, for one, will not be in the least surprised if the 'heir to Blair' as soon as possible, slashes taxes, chucks out the EU referendum (or whatever is annoying the British people about the EU at the time), overhauls immigration, introduces education vouchers at primary schools, even challenges the founding principles of the NHS.
Thatcher didn't reveal her hand before she was in. Neither will Cameron. He has more political self confidence and ability than Blair ever had.
Not a commonly-held view, I know, but I do think there is a lot more to come with Cameron that we can't yet imagine.

Kevyn Bodman

DW at 11.19pm.
I'd be happy for Cameron to do the things you suggest.
But I'd be very unhappy if he did them after hiding those plans through an election campaign.
Were he do to that how would you defend him against the charge of being a power-hungry, lying electoral cheat?

Marcus Cotswell

A hypothetical (for most of you) question: what approach would you recommend to Cameron if you DIDN'T think that the policies you fervently supported also happened to be wildly electorally popular?

DW

Kevyn - I expect Cameron to be power hungry as he is Leader of the Opposition and the current PM and his crew are wrecking the place. There's no point if he has no appetite for the job.

Lying electoral cheat which, by the way, you could say about Labour re university fees, EU referendum etc.
First we haven't seen Cameron's manifesto.
Second these policies are not inconsistent with One Nation Toryism, which are the principles I would expect the Tories to fight the next election (because, in my opinion, it is right, and it has the broadest appeal.)
The art of politics is in the timing. You can't spring something on an economically battered electorate when they are not as far along the learning curve of solutions as you. Preparing the way in rhetoric and practice takes time. (Frankly I would also expect that Cameron has not yet worked out the fine detail, so not much point in putting them up to public and media scrutiny at this stage and scaring everyone off, esp when Labour's the one in power and its own policies are actually in practice.)
You can lead, and as you lead, voters will discover things on the journey they didn't quite realise they had wanted to see!
Lying electoral cheat is too strong. It is the art of a salesman, who allows the would-be customer, to discover for themselves, that that product is indeed what they want/need!

PS 3.46am!!

Marksany.blogspot.com

I'm not sure whether you call it left or right, but the policy Cameron needs to develop is "fixist". He has to come up with a way to fix broken govt systems - benefits, education, health, transport etc.. These systems are broken and a drain on all our pockets. IF they worked, they'd suck up less of our money and taxes could be cut. So Dave, get searching for a fixer. Try John Seddon www.systemsthinking.co.uk