If you read only one thing today, then make a cup of tea, sit in a comfy armchair, and
make sure it’s Tim Montgomerie’s 7,000-word review of the Conservative election campaign. Tim has opened up his address
book and spoken with many of the main players in the Tory operation – and the result isn’t all that flattering. Here’s a summary passage which gives a sense of it all:
And here’s a passage on George Osborne:“For a period, the ‘Big Society’ was put at the heart of the campaign. Amazingly, the Big Society was never tested in focus groups and it failed on the doorstep. One leading adviser to the campaign complained of a ‘cavalier’ approach to research. ‘They latched on to research that backed their views and ignored any research that challenged it.’ The party had no powerful message on political reform, even though the expenses-gate had traumatised the nation’s relationship with parliament only twelve months earlier. For twelve months the Conservative Party said that Britain’s debts risked Greek-style problems but – perhaps astutely – it never spelt out a deficit reduction programme that was significantly different from that of Labour or the Liberal Democrats. Some of voters’ top concerns – like immigration – were barely mentioned in the party manifesto. Immigration was never given a day in the party’s election grid. A day was found, however, for a schools music competition. The Tory leadership promised change but only defined what change meant at the end of the campaign, via its ‘Contract with voters’. A poll of Tory activists at the start of the election campaign called for more specifics from the Tory leadership. 97% said the campaign was too general.”
“Osborne performed respectably during the two televised economy debates but the Tories ended the campaign with only a very small lead on economic competence.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Don't miss out
Join the conversation with other Spectator readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.
UNLOCK ACCESSAlready a subscriber? Log in