Conservative party

Friday

David Blackburn

A gentle fightback

The consensus is that David Cameron made a mess of last night’s TV debate. And whilst he wasn’t bad, he certainly wasn’t good, especially to watch. In a post over at Cappuccino Culture, I make the point that Cameron was the most static and soulless feature of a static and soulless piece of television. Undoubtedly the Tories' greatest presentational asset, his subdued performance is inexplicable. Whilst there is no cause for panic the Tories are rightly trying to regain the initiative. Gary Barlow’s appearance with Cameron at a school this morning didn’t relight Dave’s, or anyone else's, fire.

Peter Hoskin

So what’s changed?

The question is: how much has really changed after last night?  And the answer is hard to pin down.  There are the plastic, surface changes, of course.  Nick Clegg may now be recognised by more that one-third of the nation.  His party will probably come under greater scrutiny from the media and his opponents.  And the leaders' debate is here to stay; a defining feature of this election which will become a standard feature of future contests. But what about deeper change?  Well, I can understand the argument – made punchily by Gideon Rachman here – that this will increase the likelihood of a hung Parliament.  That's probably true.  But there's also a chance that it might help the Tories pull clear of their opponents.

Thursday

Fraser Nelson

The novelty of Clegg wins it for him

“I agree with Nick”, said Brown – and, as it turned out, so did most of the people YouGov polled. Brown lived right down to expectations, Cameron lived up to them (but didn’t exceed them). Few would have had any expectations from Clegg: what we political pundits know to be his clichés will be heard for the first time in many living rooms tonight. Each used tactics we’re familiar with. Brown opened his verbal machine gun, and sought to mow down the audience (they surrendered early on). David Cameron was fluent, articulate – as anyone who has followed politics had come to expect. But dazzling? No. He was subdued, seemed to be biting his tongue at times. He didn’t attack Brown, which seemed to be deliberate.

Peter Hoskin

Nick Clegg triumphs – and Cameron gains – in the first TV debate

So, who won?  Well, hold your horses, dear CoffeeHouser.  First, it's worth noting that that was a good shade more compelling than I thought it would be.  There were moments of heat, drama and political tension, of course.  But there was also a sprinkling of light as well.  I suspect anyone watching that would have picked up a working sense of the differences and similarities between the parties and their leaders. So, who won?  Well, it depends what you mean by "won".  Nick Clegg certainly gained most from the evening.  He was confident, coherent and had a strong line on almost every policy area, whether you agreed with those lines or not.

James Forsyth

Show him the door please

In a move designed to take advantage of everyone’s need to fill air time before the debates, the Tories have launched a new ad spoofing that picture of Brown walking through a set of double doors while two aides squat on the ground holding it open. The ad is just up here in Manchester but the Tories will be hoping to get it onto the news broadcast and in to tomorrow’s paper. This is another example of how the Tory cash advantage is helping them.

Peter Hoskin

Goldsmith’s declaration of independence

Make what you will of his political agenda, but I think this is quite a refreshing admission from Zac Goldsmith today: "There are various things I have said in this campaign with absolute certainty. I said there will be no Heathrow expansion under our Government, there will be no charges for parking in Richmond Park and Kingston Hospital will be safe. If any of those promises are broken I will trigger a by-election and allow people to penalise my party." It's bound to rile some of his Tory colleagues, of course – particularly this close to the election.  But one of the upshots of Parliament's recent spate of scandals is that they – and we – will have to come to accept more independent, and independent-minded, MPs.

Martin Bright

What Do We Really Want from a Labour Government?

After reading Seumas Milne and Timothy Garton Ash in the Guardian and then looking at the advert for the New Left Review on the back of the London Review of Books ("Good Riddance to New Labour"), I do wonder what these people want from a centre-left government. God knows I have been critical of New Labour -- I've had a pop at its record on civil liberties, education, radical Islam, prisons. I could go on. This government has lacked imagination and it has failed to be bold enough. But between 1997 and 2008 Britain became more tolerant and more confident. Hell, it has almost became a modern European nation. It is a better place to be than it was in the 1980s. David Cameron knows that and so do his closest allies in the Conservative Party.

Daniel Korski

Memo to Cameron: don’t be angry

There will be no shortage advice for David Cameron as he prepares for tonight’s TV debate. Wear this tie, smile a lot, be direct but not controversial and so on. The newspapers have been full of tips and lessons from the US debates. The Tory leader is also said to have hired Squier, Knapp, Dunn Communications, a DC-based political consultancy, specifically for help with the TV debates. Allow me to add my piece of (unsolicited but free) advice: don’t be Mr Angry. People want to like you; they want to feel that you can be trusted. They know they don’t like Labour. They know that the country needs change. But they are not yet sure you represent a benign form of change.

Peter Hoskin

Brown’s signature parade

Only 58? Labour's last letter attacking Tory spending cuts this year had 60 economists' signatures attached to it. Their latest, released today, has only 58. Number 10's signature-marshalling skills are clearly on the wane. I sincerely hope that the Tories don't marshal some economists of their own. The last time that happened, back in February, we witnessed the low point of the fiscal debate – with both sides using a bunch of academics as a substitute for a proper conversation with the public. And, lest we forget, Guido's handy graph reminds us just what those economists were and are quibbling over anyway. This is a phoney war, so it's little surprise that Brown has resorted to it once again. Thankfully, signs are that Tories won't pay heed to the bait.

Wednesday

Peter Hoskin

First poll since all the manifesto launches has the Tories ahead by 9 

The figures from YouGov's daily tracker have just been released, and they have the Tories on 41 percent (up 2), Labour on 32 (up 1), and the Lib Dems on 18 (down 2) – so a lead of 9 points for Cameron & Co.  It's worth noting, as well, that the Tory manifesto comes out on top in supplementary questions about which has the best policies, which is most honest and which is the best for the country.  But, to my eye, the most striking result is that relatively low level of support for the Lib Dems.  I imagine that they'd certainly hope for better as they continue peddling their anti-"Labservative" message.

James Forsyth

Follow the money | 14 April 2010

Looking at the papers this morning and watching the news last night, you realise what a benefit in the image stakes the Tory cash advantage gives them. The Tories can afford to hire out better venues than the other two parties. So while Labour launched their manifesto in hospital and the Lib Dems theirs at Bloomberg, the Tories used Battersea Power Station which provided them with much better visuals. We saw the same dynamic on the day the election was called: Labour’s event was in Downing Street, the Lib Dem one in an office and the Tory one on the terrace of County Hall looking over to Parliament The Mirror’s front page today accuses Cameron of using his photo-ops to benefit the firms that are backing his position on National Insurance.

Peter Hoskin

Labour’s response to the Tory manifesto

Anyone else think that Labour's latest poster is like a negative of the Tories' "Vote For Me" effort?  White text on a black background, instead of black text on a white background.  A picture of Cameron, instead of Brown.  I mean, the only thing that isn't swapped over is the tone: both go on the attack, rather than presenting a positive vision. Labour's message here is that the Tories' Big Society manifesto washes its hands of the people.  Which echoes the caricatures - "an agenda for abandonment" - that Peter Mandelson wheeled out yesterday, and which you can expect to hear again and again between now and polling day.  The question is whether this attack will connect at a time when people trust politicians - and their capabilities - less than ever.

Tuesday

Martin Bright

Still Looking for the Clear Blue Water?

With the publication of the Labour and Conservative manifestos we should now have some idea of the real differences between the two largest parties. But I am more struck by the similarities. I know we are supposed to believe that Labour is the party of the enabling state, but it chose to emphasise how it would enable the individual during its manifesto launch, just as the Tories did. For the Tories' Big Society read Labour's "mutualisation". There is not as much difference as the politicians would have you believe. Both policies are born out of a simple, pragmatic realisation that the state will not have the cash to intervene even if it wanted to.

Peter Hoskin

Counting the cost of Labour’s national insurance hike

Insightful work from the FT's Chris Giles, who has dug out a couple of academic articles - including one co-authored, in 2007, by George Osborne's current chief of staff, Rupert Harrison - to work out how many jobs Labour's national insurance rise might cost the economy.  The results?  Well, according to Giles, one says that 23,000 jobs will be lost, and the other comes up with 22,000. Neither of these are figures that Labour will want to crow about.  But, as Giles points out, they are below the "57,000 jobs in small and medium-sized businesses alone" that the Conservatives predict in their manifesto.

David Blackburn

Brown will fear the foreign policy debate most of all

The Tories’ Invitation to join the Government was never going to dwell on defence. (You can listen to the brief chapter on defence here.)  But that doesn’t mean defence isn’t an election issue. It is, and it's one that the Tories will win. Brown’s defence record is abysmal even by his standards. Former service chiefs have described how Brown ‘guillotined’ defence budgets whilst fighting two wars, and field commanders in Afghanistan have made constant reference to equipment shortages. These accusations were corroborated by facts that Brown then tried to distort before a public inquiry. That’s not all.

Daniel Korski

Voting blues

One of the key questions in any election is turnout: whose voters will turn up and whose won’t. People are clearly disappointed in the political class - on a scale from 0 to 10, trust in politicians and parties is hovering around 3 points - but does it mean that they will stay at home, spoil their ballots or opt for fringe parties and single-issue candidates? What about the talk of a hung parliament ? Will it make voters believe that their vote counts - and so bring them to the polling stations -- or make them stay at home, giving up on the idea that any change is possible? In the last three elections turnout was low, relatively speaking: 59 percent of the electorate voted in 2001 and 61 percent went to the polls in 2005.

Peter Hoskin

The return of Chris Grayling

Adam Boutlon's interview with Chris Grayling this afternoon felt like a pressure valve being released.  Grayling's recent low profile had already become a rolling story, and his absence from the speaking line-up at his party's manifesto launch was bound to fuel more murmuring and speculation – so the Tories clearly decided to wheel him out in front of the cameras to calm things down a bit.  As it happened, Boulton was on combative form – arguing that elected police commissioners would just add "another layer of bureaucracy" to society – but Grayling sounded quite reasonable in response.

Daniel Korski

The Big Idea Competition

Whatever your political leanings, it is hard to deny that the Tories won the Big Idea Competition. The Labour Party offered a series of unconnected (if occasionally innovative) initiatives. But they lacked coherence. Their manifesto had what Peter Mandelson called “Blair Plus”, but also what could be referred to as “Prescott Squared”. “What's The Big Idea?” asked Sky’s Niall Paterson. The Tories on the other hand have a Big Idea – decentralisation. Giving power to citizens in a number of different ways. It is a concept that gives shape to the Tory manifesto, providing a ready stock of sound-bites.   But why do we need Big Ideas, as opposed to just Good Ideas?