Conservative party

Identifying Brown’s culpability in Iraq

From our UK edition

The Tories have missed a trick in responding to the predictable news that Gordon Brown won’t be giving evidence to the Iraq Inquiry until after the election. William Hague has just said that it stinks. He should have followed up by listing the questions Brown should be asked – highlighting the extent of his personal culpability in our defeat in Basra and treatment of the troops: 1) Did you ever ask yourself why Britain came to be fighting two wars on a peacetime budget? 2) During the 2007 Tory Patrty conference you went to Iraq and said that 500 troops would be home by Christmas. This decision stunned the Ministry of Defence, and turned out to have been – how can we put this, Prime Minister – untrue.

Willetts takes on the nudgers

From our UK edition

The Guardian’s interview with David Willetts is a decent preview of the Tories’ forthcoming green paper on family policy, and is neatly summarised by Jonathan Isaby here. Although I have my doubts about some Tory thinking in this area, there are a few encouraging ideas in there – such as relationship guidance schemes modelled on those provided by the Bristol community family trust.

What happened the last time Gove played Cameron’s opponent in debate prep

From our UK edition

One of the surprises of the Tory leadership campaign in 2005 was how David Davis bested David Cameron in the TV debate between the two men. Those involved in Cameron’s preparations for that debate blame Cameron’s poor performance on how Michael Gove knocked Cameron’s confidence in the run up to it. Gove was Davis in debate prep and played Davis as a ferociously clever, Oxford Union-style debater and kept leaving Cameron tied in knots. So it is interesting that the Cameron camp have again chosen Gove to play the role of Cameron’s opponent in the run up to a TV debate. This time Gove will, of course, be playing the part of Gordon Brown. These debates are going to fascinate the press.

Call yourself a PR man?

From our UK edition

The latest Comres poll for the Independent indicates, as if we needed telling, that the Tories are yet to seal the deal. It’s far from panic stations – the lead remains at 9 points – but there are two figures that prove where the Tories are going wrong. The majority of respondents feel that a Conservative government would exclusively represent the interests of the rich, and the contention that the Tories represent an appealing alternative to Labour was rejected. If Cameron is merely a PR man I hope he’s cheap. Aside from Alex Salmond I can’t envisage anything worse than five more years of Gordon, and this suggests to me that Cameron is struggling to communicate with voters. Nowhere is this more palpable than the preposterous class war.

The politics of self-defence

From our UK edition

The spin machines are gearing up as we amble towards an election, and strategists’ latest hobby-horse is self-defence. Following the sentencing of Munir Hussain, Alan Johnson admitted feeling “uncomfortable” about Judge Reddihough’s decision. Never one to miss the bus, Chris Grayling went further and faster, suggesting that householders should be immune from prosecution unless they had responded in a “grossly disproportionate” fashion.   It’s rather unfair, but deliciously cutting, of cartoonists to portray Grayling as a plump second hand car salesman posing as James Bond, but Grayling deserves criticism because “grossly disproportionate” is as ill-defined as the “reasonable force” that current legislation describes.

No Christmas cheer in the Mail for Cameron

From our UK edition

The Daily Mail sets about David Cameron in its editorial today. It accuses him of “insulting voters’ intelligence”, tells him to “avoid the PR men, spivs and trashy celebrities with whom he has taken to mixing” and advises him to “spend less time with his spin-doctors, worrying about his image and trying to be all things to all men.”   The Mail matters. Privately Tory strategists admit that its savaging of Cameron’s shift in European policy played a considerable part in depressing the certainty of Tory supporters to vote, one of the reasons for the party’s lead narrowing in the polls. If the Mail was fully on board with Project Cameron, it would shore up the Tory base and leave Cameron freer to concentrate on wooing swing voters.

Will this be the game-changer that Brown needs?

From our UK edition

So there we have it.  There will be televised election debates between the three main party leaders during the next election campaign, after all.  The first will be on ITV, then there'll be one each on Sky and the BBC.  Talk about good TV for political anoraks. Like Tim Montgomerie and Mike Smithson, I suspect that Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg will be happiest with the news.  Both of them, particularly Brown, need potential game-changing events like this to make some progress in the polls.   As for Cameron, he'd probably be better off not giving his opponents a chance to make inroads into the Tories' poll lead.  But he could hardly have resisted live debates in the current political climate.

Simple but effective?

From our UK edition

It's the most straightforward dividing line the Tories could draw: "Tories good, Labour bad".  But it's still striking to see it deployed quite so bluntly as in George Osborne's Telegraph article this morning.  His point is that four more years of Labour will lead us to ruin, whereas a Conservative government would pull us out of the mire.  Here are some snippets: "Down the path of least resistance lie economic decline, higher interest rates, high unemployment, and more social breakdown. This is the path down which a cynical and exhausted Labour Government tempts us. But there is another path that leads to lasting recovery, rising prosperity, social responsibility and a new way of doing things. ... If Labour get in again, that won't happen.

It’s the economy, isn’t it?

From our UK edition

The Tories' 17 point  lead in this morning's Observer Ipsos-Mori poll has got tongues wagging. The headline figure is that confidence in the economy, and by extension the government's management of it, has collapsed since the PBR. Just 32 percent of voters believe the economy will improve in 2010, compared to 46% last month. The politics of debt and the public finances appear to have swung decisively in favour of the Conservatives, and the leadership must press that advantage all the way to the ballot box. But the economy represents only part of the explanation. Anthony Wells' digest of the poll is a must read, and he notes that the 'lack of political weighting' has 'produced such extreme switches in support'.

The pessimism of the left

From our UK edition

Like David, I’m a fan of Polly Toynbee. Every compass needle needs a butt end, after all. She is 180 degrees wrong on most things: but splendidly, eloquently, passionately wrong. I’d like to pick up on one aspect of her column. “Social democrats are the world's optimists, knowing human destiny is in our own hands if we have the will to change. Leave pessimism to the world's conservatives, ever fearful of the future and yearning for a better yesterday.” Now, I have also seen this as a fundamental difference between left and right but (needless to say) the other way around. And it all comes down to your views of human nature. Do you think people are inherently kind, wise and compassionate? I do, which is why I describe myself as a conservative.

Cameron plans to lighten up

From our UK edition

David Cameron’s interview with Tim Shipman suggests that the Tory leader is about to undergo a course correction. The Tories have, rightly, begun to be frank with the public about the cuts that will need to be made and have, again rightly, refused to rule out a short-term rise in VAT. But the ‘we’re all in this together’ rhetoric has only been applied to the tough measures that are needed now not the prosperity that might follow in years to come. If Cameron is to start showing the public more of his vision of where he wants to take Britain then that is to be welcomed. But he also needs the rest of his top team to communicate to the public what the consequences of carrying on spending massively more than the country earns would be.

Slightly surprising stat of the day

From our UK edition

According to a YouGov poll in tomorrow's People (reported by the paper's political editor, Nigel Nelson, on Twitter): "1% more people would rather have G.Brown than D.Cameron round for Christmas dinner." There's better news elsewhere in the poll for the Tories: the gap between them and Labour is back in double digits.  It's the Tories on 40 percent, Labour on 28, and the Lib Dems on 18.

The dangers with a Tory policy blitz

From our UK edition

Sounds like the Tories are going to go policy-heavy in the New Year.  According to this morning's Times, Team Cameron are going to publish a "draft election manifesto" around 4 January, which will – as James revealed in his political column this week – set up a "policy-a-day blitz" throughout the rest of the month.  There will also be a separate policy release "showcasing the party’s commitment to the NHS".  The thinking is that all this will regain some momentum for the party, as well as answering the charge that the Tory operation lacks substance. Question is: will it work?

What happens when quantitative easing stops?

From our UK edition

Where the Gilt market goes in coming months is going to be very important for the UK economy and politics. There is little history of countries being able to sustain deficits of the UK's magnitude, for very long, without serious market problems. At the moment, we're getting by thanks the sticking plaster approach of quantitative easing. The Bank of England has purchased £186bn of gilts so far this year, almost perfectly matching the £179bn the Debt Management Office has needed to sell so far. As long as the Bank is willing to support the market with a fast-rolling printing press, government funding at attractive rates is assured.

Timing contrition

From our UK edition

James Crabtree, a Labour SPAD turned managing editor of Prospect, has a good piece in the new Prospect about how the first step to recovery for Labour after the next election, assuming they lose, will be saying sorry. Crabtree argues that even if the Tory majority is small, Labour would be ill-advised to move straight into oppositional mode, attacking every Tory cut. Rather, he argues, the party needs to understand that its "brand is now nearly as contaminated as the Tories before it."   One of the challenges for the Tories should they win the next election will be bringing home to the public just what an appalling state Labour has left the public finances in.

What will today mean for the expenses saga?

From our UK edition

So MPs have until the end of today to declare whether they're appealing against Sir Thomas Legg's request that they repay certain expenses claims.  Three have already done just that, one from each of the main parties: Jeremy Browne, Frank Cook and Bernard Jenkin.  You imagine that more may follow throughout the day, especially given the rumblings that the Legg review contained a fair few errors. Now, it's only fair that MPs have a right of appeal – but you still wonder what it will mean for the expenses saga more generally.  From the public's perspective, a swathe of appeals could look like MPs resisting reform.

Unless they defuse the issue, the Tories will face Ashcroft questions every day until the election

From our UK edition

If PMQs today showed anything, it's just how eager the Tories' opponents are to bring up the issue of Lord Ashcroft.  Vince Cable set the ball rolling by referring to the Tory deputy chairman as a "non dom", and Harriet Harman gleefully followed up by firing questions in William Hague's direction.  She was cut off – and rightly so – by John Bercow.  But the insinuations about the Lord and his tax status had already been made. Now, you could say that this is pretty low stuff from Labour and the Lib Dems.  After all, David Cameron pledged earlier this week to legislate so that all MPs and peers are UK taxpayers.

The Tories need an attack dog

From our UK edition

Iain Martin has a thought-provoking post up about how the Tories lack an attack-dog. Certainly, the Tories lack a shadow Minister for the Today Programme, someone who can be relied to go on when it is a bad morning for the party and deal robustly with a tough interview. This is a position the Tories will need to fill before the campaign gets under way. As Iain says, Chris Grayling was at one point used as the party’s attack dog. But this has come to overly define his political persona and he hasn’t really recovered from his Wire speech and a lacklustre conference, although his recent more thoughtful speeches on crime have been worth reading. I suspect that Sayeeda Warsi might soon be auditioned for this role. Andy Coulson is very impressed by her media skills.

Tax cuts are a better form of stimulus than more spending

From our UK edition

Greg Mankiw is one of the best academic economists out there and having been chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors has a good sense of how to turn theory into policy. His column last weekend in The New York Times is essential reading for anyone wondering about how Britain can avoid a double dip recession. In it, Mankiw summarises the recent academic evidence which shows that cutting business and income taxes is a more effective form of stimulus than increasing spending. The challenge for Osborne in drawing up his first Budget, if the Tories win, will be how to foster a private sector stimulus for the economy. Without that we could easily end up in double-dip recession, something that would doom the Tories.

Should an opposition sell itself as a responsible government?

From our UK edition

One of the Tories’ favoured lines recently has been that they are acting like a responsible government while Labour is behaving like an irresponsible opposition. But I wonder if this attitude is entirely healthy for an opposition, or whether it ends up blunting its campaigning edge. For example, the Tories’ refusal to say for definite that they will repeal Labour’s planned increase in national insurance stems from their view that they aren’t certain where they would find the £8 billion from. But given the number of black holes and blanks in the PBR and that the deficit is over £170 billion this seems slightly absurd.