Opposition politics
Last night Team Cameron were toasting the end of the Brown bounce. This morning they were shouting at the radio as we reported the news of a former party chairman and deputy leader generating about division.
It's often said that it's a clear vision that binds parties together. The truth is less uplifting. The glue that binds them is sometimes anger at their opponents but more often is simply the prospect of power - or, to be more precise, the prospect of future patronage. This is particularly the case with David Cameron who, like Tony Blair, constantly berated his own party about the need to change.
The way politicians assess the prospect of power is by reading the polls. Thus, when David Cameron was riding high in the polls his party stayed loyal. Once he slipped, that loyalty fractured. Those divisions are damaging to, you guessed it, his poll ratings. And so it goes on - the vicious circle of opposition politics.
Political leaders can, of course, aid this process. Gordon Brown has ruthlessly used his patronage to tempt Tories to break ranks. The Tory Deputy Treasurer Johan Eliasch was offered a role advising on his passion - deforestation. It was all the more tempting senior Tories mutter since he was disappointed not to have been given a peerage.
Patrick Mercer, sacked by Cameron, was hired by Brown.
David Cameron may have made things worse by appearing to change strategy - to, in Labour's words, have "lurched to the right". He denies it but many in his own ranks believe it and welcome it. So, they think - no doubt Michael Ancram thought this - one more push and he'll harden the policy on tax (or Europe or selection or immigration). This creates division, which damages the polls, which... You've get the point.
The irony (Tories may use rather more colourful language) is that this comes on the day the Brown bounce seemed to have been squashed. Team Brown won't be too worried by that. They can cheer themselves up by simply watching their opponents.
I'm 
Comments
Michael who? Oh , Ancram. I vaguely remember him.
The Thirteenth Marquis of Lothian, as I believe he is also known, is one of yesterdays Tories. He was on the bridge of the good ship Conservative in it's previous collisions with the iceberg of electoral defeat, and quite rightly was given a good shove out of the door. He should give up with his bitter and twisted comments,and sink back into privileged obscurity
Nick, this news is a blip, it's hardly registering in the rest of the mainstream media.
Much more interesting is Browns lack of bounce, and Labour party ranks so bereft of talent that the Prime Minister has to resort to employing Camerons castoffs when appointing advisers. Gordons backbenchers must be absolutely seething.
Once again, the "Nasty Party" shows it's true colours. never forget the Tories are the party of Tebbit, Powell & Ridley and all the gloss of presentation will never overcome their core values, which are against the interests of working class families.
The regular polls do not show any dip in voters' support for the Labour Government.
Copying Labour's spending plans is not a winning strategy.
I'd back Haigh for the next Conservative leader in October 2009.
Michael Ancram ignores the reality that since the Tories last won an election there have been 15 years of Thatcher-believers going to the grave, to be replaced by 15 years worth of young electors who've grown up in a different world.
The best thing the Conservatives can do is award such 'grandees' as M Ancram the same fate that Labour awarded such as Tony Benn and Roy Hattersley.
And the government wonders why the public are disillusioned by politics and politicians...
In today's world, integrity is seen as weakness (you have to be willing to backstab to succeed) and ethics as ammunition (support manners or morals and you set yourself up as a target for gleeful pot shots).
So true that the prospect of power is the name of the game. It's just a shame they are all so incapable of thinking beyond their own personal benefit, when the gameboard is the country and its people.
I despair of the Conservative party, they seem to have a death wish. We have a Prime Minister by default, who as Chancellor ruined pensions, raised taxes by stealth, disappeared everytime there was a crisis and whose record should be an easy target for a decent opposition party. But what do they do whilst this country is going to the dogs, fight like spoilt children.
With regard to Conservatives acting as advisers on policy to Gordon Brown this brings one thought to mind, "Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly."
Individuals won't win the next election, team work will. If they attack the Government instead of each other they will pull it off, if not, goodbye Conservative Party.
Do you really think that "Team Brown" (all 3 of them) don't care that his poll lead is evaporating? Or that anyone outside the Westminster Villiage cares much what Michael Ancram (who he) says? I know the 91Èȱ¬ is being very slavishly Brownite and trying to parrot the Brown Line but it'd be a good idea to retain some objectivity. When Cameron's lead in the polls evaproated did you major on some obscure ex-Cabinet Minister who didn't much care for Brown (there are plenty - he sacked the lot of them)?
Dennis Moore said "never forget the Tories are the party of Tebbit, Powell & Ridley"
err... just like Labour are the party of Foot, Benn, Scragill and the winter of discontent. So that's alright then
This could actually be a good thing for Cameron if he gives this a polite brush off it could put to rest all the claims that he's gone to the right.
Two things though
1) Why in this country do we still subscibe to the theory that just because a political party talks about ceartain subjects they are to the right or left of politics? Shouldn't all subjects be up for discussion regardless?.
2)Why do some peole insist on beleving that Cameron's just like Thatcher? If thats the case why wasn't Blair blamed for Labours winter of discontent? Or was the New he'd put in front of his partys name really all that was needed to convince people it wasn't the sme party? Should the consevites do this as well?
Welcome to the Conservative Party 2007 - normal service has been resumed.
Now that homophobia has reasserted itself within the Tories, can we assume that other traditional prejudices will not be far behind ?
On another worrying note, does anyone else think that the Conservatives might do a GWB, and start forcing religion down everyone's throats ?
(I'm thinking about the Tories been willing to embrace extremist parties in Europe in order to form a coalition, as well as past Tory party leaders reaching out to Evangelicals)
There was a time when I truly believed that the Tories had changed. I'm glad I found out the reality before the next election.
Nick,
You could argue that this sort of intervention will be welcomed by the Cameroons.
It highlights the fact that the advantages proposed for married couples includes gay civil partnerships (I don't remember the media reporting that) and, more importantly, hearing from this dinosaur shows exactly how far Cameron's Conservative Party has come and that his direction is exactly right if he wants them to ever be electable again.
Hi Nick, It is not easy to be in opposition. You are perfectly right Nick, and when you have an opposition which is trying to reinvent itself by trying to please God and the Devil at the same time there is only one way to go and that is in OPPOSOTION.
The Tories have two choices. The first is to stay Conservatives and keep their policies siutable for the rich. Incidentally it was the rich that created the party in the first place. This means that people like Redwood and other extreme right wingers get their own way and plunge this country into the boom and bust economy which was very convenient to the very rich, including the signing of treaties WITHOUT REFERENDUM! But hey, not now, cause they are not in office. This is the mistake that the Tories make when they say something about Iraq when if it was for the Tories they would have bone into Iraq, ON THEIR OWN AGES AGO!
The second choice is to find someone in the Tory party (definately not Cameron) who has balls big enough to get rid of all those that have damamged the party with their extreme conservatism and stick to his or her agenda by challenging the ones that wish to take us back to the days of disastrous economic mismanagement, when we had over 3 million unemployed, 17% inflation and a currency which no one wanted to deal in. Remember Black Wedneday Nick?
The Tories should take a hint at what Tony Blair did to the lefties in his party. Look at the Unions today! At one time they were the ones that controled Labour and with their extreme lefty ideas plunged our economy into abyss and had to borrow from the International Monetary Fund to bail us out. The days of Dennis Healey will not come back. As an ex Tory we fought Labour tooth and nail to persuade them to rid themselves of the Unions' hold on Labour's power. Tony Blair recognised the problem since he was young. Even now the Unions try to get their own way, but higher wages at the moment = higher inflation = higher interest rates especially when crude oil prices rocketed through the roof.
Nick, it is time to give Cameron a big kick in the butt and I do not see a bright future for the Tories as they are leaving it too late to get rid of the elite's power in the party, the likes of Cameron and the gang around him. Being educated at Eton will surely make it sound posh, but that does not make one brainier then others. Have a nice day Nick.
Nick,
All through Blair's leadership you could find party members, former MPs, and actual MPs attacking Blair daily yet they never go much airtime. One Tory has been opens their mouth and it becomes headline news.
Yet a story you'd think was of some importance, a strike caused by the collapse of a PFI (whose parent companies donated money to Labour) forced on the Tube by Brown, doesn't get on your blog.
Andrew,
May I refer you to Anthony Wells' excellent polling blog:
Nick,
What happened to the weekend's Radio 4 story that Brown is looking at Denmark's local rates system where you are charged 1 per cent of your house's value per annum?
Dennis Moore says that the Conservatives are against the interests of working class families.
Brilliant! and to think that Labour ARE for working class families! of course it's simple to see how could I have been so BLIND.
Cameron, I like him. It's just a shame that he can't pull the Conservatives out of the 80s and 90s. Maybe it will take another parliament in order to do so but I'm prepared to vote for him at the next election.
As for the 'poaching' Cameron should milk it by explaining how the Labour MPs are so short of talent that Brown has to approach his own party for advice. Now, which party would you vote for?
Brown can go hang for all I care. I don't think my mind will change about him by the next election (whether that's sooner or later). Too many failed projects, cock-ups, and tax-credits?? what was he thinking? Far too friendly with shady big business a bit like Blair.
You won't post this, so I'm not sure why I waste my time writing. Seems that only left of centre thinking is given favour in the 91Èȱ¬.
But I resent the comments about Cameron's education. It is typically left wing to harp on about an inclusive society yet sneer at any brought up with money.
An accident of birth is not Cameron's choice. In the same way that being Scotish is not Browns.
Of politicians considering jumping ship to another party, an earlier poster wrote "they are all so incapable of thinking beyond their own personal benefit". How true - we are truly living in an age of career politicians. They will say whatever it takes to keep their job and, in the face of glaring evidence, refuse to resign over any of their own mistakes (or perhaps they will resign but then come back later to take another role). Brown's current desire to recruit from other parties suggests not that Labour needs the help but that, when the [expletive deleted] hits the fan, they'll have someone from another party to blame. Genius!
Nick and other political journalists need to have something to write about.
That is self-evident but also requires some very 'special' attributes that not many people have.
For example, the now semi-retired jounalist Andrew Alexander was 'forever' the business/City editor of the Daily Wail.
But not actually 'forever' because he did start out as a political journalist.
So why did he give up on that job?
Simple really, Alexander tells us that the job was 'impossible' because of the lies that the politicians told him.
That gives you a flavour of the political correspondents job - the ability to not get too depressed by the politicians fabrications and more, to be able to 'filter' the message such that the long suffering English public eventually get something approximating to 'the truth'.
Seems to me that that is about the best we can hope for, when there is no meaningful accountability for politicians.
Nick,
If Ancram had a brain he would be lethal! A bit pointless publishing something like that when Cameron has narrowed the gap against Labour to 1% in the polls (As published yesterday and today).
Mr Ancram seems to have forgotten that Margaret Thatcher worked to bring down the barriers in Europe, was an architect of the Single European Market, and she was one of the biggest proponents of welcoming the former Communist countries of Eastern Europe back into the European fold. These policies, along with low taxes, made the UK a magnet for overseas investment and laid the foundations of our current prosperity. They were also the reason why I supported the Conservative party at the time.
It also included getting big government out of family life, which was treated as a private matter not to be regulated by a nanny state.
Strange that Mr Ancram now dresses up an anti-EU policy and "belief in marriage" as part of the Thatcher legacy. They are no such thing.
I had the privilege to hear Patrick Hutber, one time editor of the Sunday Telegraph and one of Margaret Thatcher's key advisers in the run up to her being leader of the Conservative Party. He talked about the importance of caring, compassionate conservatism - just what is appearing now in the policy reviews.
Nick,
In spite of all the support and propaganda spouted by the clearly Left leaning media, including the 91Èȱ¬, in Brown's favour over the last few weeks he is now only level pegging in the polls with Cameron.
Some analysis please?
I'd eat my hat (if I had one) and you publish this comment!
If Michael Ancram believes the answer to electoral disaster is to ressurect Thatcherism; he is even more deluded than Brown's desire of an "all the talents" government. I'd hardly call a sacked Tory official a "talent".
I'm always being reminded, whenever Tories come out and openly contest the leadership line, of the position of John Major and the gang of has-beens who we never really hear much of any more. Then they tried to force an anti-EU line on the Tory government, but only succeeded in ensuring that Tony Blair got a much bigger majority in the subsequent general election. Great. Brilliant. The rest is history. Michael Anchram may be a fine upstanding man of principles and courage. However (and I don't wish to be unkind when I say this) if he wouldn't mind keeping his irrelevant thoughts to himself, it'll make a whole lot of us that much happier.
An amazing article. When there is a strike on the tube caused by Mr Brown's bodged PFI and the debacle in Iraq, Nick Robinson chooses to highlight the competence of the Tory party rather than the government. And he�s talking about Tory politicians who are not even on the front bench. It�s disgraceful left-wing bias. If Nick Robinson can�t give us some balanced comment perhaps he should leave this job.
For people who wish to be leaders and acquire power, I find the gymnastics of many politicians to be embarrassing. They're in a funk over Prime Minister Brown grabbing the centre and pushing them away, and tearing each other apart like rats in a cage when they don't get what they want. They need to learn to relax and show some consideration.
Firstly, the Prime Minister isn't pushing them off the centre ground, they're pushing themselves off. Their misunderstanding and fear creates bogeymen in their own minds and tugs them around like a dog on a leash. Then there's the unsavoury issue of their desire to acquire power. It may make them feel better but power has its own kickback.
As we get older we get more certain and insular. This is brittle and out of touch, like a broken clock that's only right twice a day. This is the state the opposition parties, politicians, and membership are in. Their frustration and infighting is merely an artefact of this. If they opened their minds and were patient they'd do better and feel happier.
Fear and greed are a cage. These "Masters of the Universe" may have some knowledge and skill, but their attitude can be arrogant to the point where it blinds them, as surely as a desperate single mother on a housing estate scratching lottery tickets. It's quite sad, really and no surprise that Confucius valued contentment above all things. Wise man.
As I look at Parliament, the media, public, and the great masters of history, I find it quite remarkable that people can achieve so much, yet, our ability to see this and feel at ease with each other and content with what we have remains so elusive. I have enough frustrations and enemies and shrugging it off seems like a good idea because, mostly, it's not real.
Slipping of the blood encrusted rusty hook of fear and greed isn't easy. Developing some sense of self worth and gratitude for what this world offers is useful. By turning inwards and developing better quality of execution and proper sensitivity appropriate success unfolds naturally. If this can work for me why gnash political teeth and tear political clothes?
''When you do something, if you fix your mind on the activity with some confidence, the quality of your state of mind is the activity itself. When you are concentrated on the quality of your being, you are prepared for the activity." -- Zen Mind, Beginners Mind, Shunryu Suzuki.
Want better policies and popularity? Be better politicians.
Can one of your correspondent or you explain to me how Brown can get away with sending young service personnel to their deaths without any good cause and on lies = against the will of the country and Cameron seems to go along with it.
I remember the days of wine and roses in the 1960's when a welsh contemporary of our motherland sang "Those were the Days".
My late father's favorite song.
And weren't they just.
Harold McMillan words "You've never had it so good" calling from our black and white TV.
I read today David Cameron would penalize the unhealthy those who smoke and are overweight, that would have been a travesty in the 1960's and probably caused a rising of the people.
He also wants to put non learners into village schools but as there are none left in Wales because of the labour hoover swallowing them all up for demolition mainly how would he intend to do this.
He could hire me as his script writer but somehow I don't think we speak the same language.
Dioch.
Michael Ancram and John Redwood should go on tour together. Quality entertainment!
If a "lurch to the right" is what is necessary to pull this country out of the shambolic mess that Labour has got us all into over the past ten years then bring it on.
Well if you give as much publicity to one small incident then we really will gain very little perspective of the political scene. Today we had G Brown comparing himself to being like M Thatcher! A conviction politican. He has spent every advantage that we had economically and we have little left to bolster ourselves against the not so fair winds that are blowig our way now. He has convicted our pensioners to poverty, our future generation to sub-standard education, lack of responsibility for themselves,
continual sound bites are not enough. We do need someone that we can trust and nothing G Brown says gives me any confidence, we have heard it all over the past 10yrs., education, NHS, a better deal for everyone......... heard it all before. Time for change and the sooner the better. When the real game is on we will see what the British public will do. It is ironic that someone who wants us all to be engaged in politics is not the slightest bit interested in our views on the Europe question or the promise of a referendum. It was very nicely put today, all the red lines are intact, yep, pull the other one. G Brown and his ilk always think that the public are stupid. Go and do some real research on the streets, ask straightforward questions and you will find that the public are very quick and can tell you what they think.
Nick, I'm not one of those Conservatives who is obsessed with leftie bias at the 91Èȱ¬. But I really doubt you - or anyone - would give the same sort of coverage to, say, Brian Gould or Roy Hattersley or Frank Dobson attacking Brown. My suspicion is that Labour attacks don't fit the prevailing narrative. Blunkett, for instance - a more significant figure than Ancram has made attacks on Jack Straw and Labour's position on a European referendum. Nothing in the papers!
On a similar note, why do you have to be male and overweight to be a Tory grandee? How is it that Michael Ancram or Quentin Davies is accorded a status that Ann Widdecombe or John Major never could aspire to?!
Nick,
I am not a forecaster of the political bell weather nor am I likely to run for eletion any time soon. As a mere innocent bystander, I simply look to the 91Èȱ¬ to report every story in a fair and balanced way. Having sat through the usual nonsense that comes in August, we are now entering a more serious side to politics. It would help therefore if you took to analysing every story that merits debate in the same way that you seem to jump at the chance to put forward yet more negative news about the Conservatives.
I for one waited in vain for the 91Èȱ¬ to report that Brown had placed Keith Vaz into the role of Chairman of the 91Èȱ¬ Affairs Select Committee, something that the allegedly neutral leader of the house to her shame failed to block.
This showed Brown up in his true light - a bully and control freak. Yet instead, you report him as introducing a new politics. Nothing could be further from the truth. So how about it? You do your job, and I may stay a contributor to your blog!
"The glue that binds them is sometimes anger at their opponents but more often is simply the prospect of power - or, to be more precise, the prospect of future patronage."
But has this to do with democracy? Where does Representation of the People feature in it?
Intellectually Bankrupt?
In a week when the Labour government faces the worst British military debacle since Suez, Gordon Brown's dead cat bounce is ended, and the same Mr Brown suddenly decides to court Torygraph readers and finds that he really does admire Margaret Thatcher, the 91Èȱ¬'s political correspondents decide - almost to a man and woman - that the headline-grabbing story of the moment is an attack on the leadership by an embittered former Tory grandee.
There is either something wrong with 91Èȱ¬ journalists' judgement, or the 91Èȱ¬ really is institutionally politically biased.
Not that the 91Èȱ¬ have in any way encouraged the "Tory split" and lurch to the right stories. Witness the Today programme desperately looking for a story as reported here
Will we ever be able to get rid of theatre politics? In spite of negative migration being over compensated by uncontrolled immigration, the fact remains that about 400,000 people left Britain for other shores. I am sick and tired of politicians behaving like low quality commedians. There are hundreds of thousands struggling to make ends meet and the Parliamentarian clowns keep playing silly games. Grammar schools? Comprehensive schools? Whatever schools? Who cares? We want decent and affordable education regardless of the kind of schools. People are going under paying debts and all the clowns can talk about is new taxes. Never mind the trees if we have no roof over our heads and have no food on the table.
Poor David Cameron, thrashing about, still trying to make a sound impression on his own party and the country but failing at every turn. Many years ago where I was brought up we had a description for young men acting like David. 'A lad wearing a man's trousers.' He is just not growing into the job or the trousers is he?
Poor David Cameron, thrashing about, still trying to make a sound impression on his own party and the country but failing at every turn. Many years ago where I was brought up we had a description for young men acting like David. 'A lad wearing a man's trousers.' He is just not growing into the job or the trousers is he?
Dips in the polls are only a real concern for political watchers because the only time that polls matter is in the immediate run up to an election when people can be influenced by the slightest slip or fall.
Claims that Brown has had his honeymoon are also facile as it is Labour who have reconstructed this country for the last generation who have forgotton Thatcher's era.
It also seems foolish to claim that a premiership of ten years would not create a lasting influence either good or bad that we have to live with.
The Tory problem was that they neglected the fact that most of the country liked Thatcher's policies and Blair took them forward with the added social concern that was required for a fresh start. If Cameron simply focued his policies on business incentives, private enterprise and strong personal responsibilty just like Thatcher he would probably win the next election as I think Britain is inherently Conservative by nature. Blair won the election in 97 by first making pacts with big business just like the tories and with media mogals. Does anyone honestly believe that the far left ever stood a snowballs chance in hell of getting power? Bush was and is despised but people knew what he stood for and we all like a leader who bosses and is dogmatic. Churchill, Thatcher, Reagan right through to dictators!
No kindly kindly weeping willow will ever get the nation behind them even if we all like them as people.
If the tories want power again they need to simply be themselves and enjoy ridicule just like Thatcher while stating what they stand for which is business, money, and less tax and make no bones about it.
They should also start attacking like crazy and stir up huge divisions that reaches the cheap sheets and thus the masses.
John Kerry was a nice fella but that simply wont do.
That's why we love Alan Sugar, Gordon Ramsey and Ann Robinson!!!
I hope you don't mind me coming back to this blog but there is a line being taken in many posts over several of your blogs, including this one, that there must be something better to report on. What puzzles me is whether the failure of the Beeb to report on the things it has left out is really (or mainly)the result of bias, or a failure of the Tories to push their case hard enough? In fact, I don't think the Tories ever really managed to come up with a decent counter to the accusation that when they held the government to account they were being "opportunistic". A rather ridiculous accusation, clearly designed to deflect criticism, that came into ordinary political language post the 1997 election.
Given that this story was a 2 minute wonder, how come, 2 days later, it is still the current topic? Is nothing else happening in the world?
Anyone care to place bets on which of the two main parties will change its name to Norsefire first?
I've noticed that but I'll stick with Nick on this one. The broadcast news and blog are different things. They can work together but a blog is an opportunity to do something different. I'm not saying this is why Nick has picked the blog issues he has but it's possible. The broadcast news is something he has to do but the blog is a "skunk works" that gives him an opportunity to express insights and gather opinions on things that might have some background or future relevance.
I've been pretty happy with the topics he's chosen to write on and finding points of view that can add something to this isn't easy as he has been nailing a few things quite well. I mean, c'mon. The guy has a degree in politics, economics, and philosophy from Oxford. He's not just some bumbling fact gatherer that churns out paint by numbers news packages. The quality of his thinking, sensitivity to what's going on, and writing is good and something to be grateful for.
Britain is a very cluttered and contrary country. The goals, process, and outcomes are intrinsically linked. At the heart of the matter is how we think and feel. We can't necessarily change much in the world directly but we can have some control over this, and that's the issue government, opposition parties, and public are having to face right now. Who are you? Where are you going? Who do you follow? What do you want? It's popcorn Zen but needs asking.
"All that you accomplish or fail to accomplish with your life is the direct result of your thoughts." -- James Allen.
Sooo veeery many tory whingers swearing that black is white & the Beeb is biased against them.
I read above that Michael Ancram's attack on MacCamaroon is less significant than David Blunkett repeated prognostications.
Such nonsense!
Blunkett made it to 91Èȱ¬ Secretary, and since his sacking has been living in a cupboard at the 91Èȱ¬ and so trotted out regularly to say anything which fits almost any discussion. Better than working for a living . . .
Ancram, on the other hand, was Deputy Leader of the Tories for a while, Party Chairman and formerly N Ireland Sec.
He chose to make his attack immdiately after the publicly announced dip in Labour's poll lead, quite a whammy for the Conservatives!
His speech uses Mrs Thatcher as a stick to beat the current leadership.
The wonder is that more was not given over to such unusual NEWS, and far less to Blunkett's maundering on at every opportunity.