From the heart
David Cameron is to deliver his speech to the Tory conference without reading from a written text. He will, the Tories say, use handwritten notes to remind him of the key points but wants "to speak from the heart and to have the freedom to express what is in his head". The speech may be as long as an hour so he certainly won't have been able to memorise it all.
Brave. When you're behind you need to be.
UPDATE 01:20 PM: Now, lest you marvel at the idea of a man speaking without notes and assume that this means everything he says will come off the top of his head, let me set you straight. A speech writing team has been working on this speech for many weeks. The Tory leader will, I suspect, have memorised the key passages at the start and end of the speech which is made for TV. He will, I suspect, also have a series of bullet points and key phrases for the rest.
Mr Cameron has, of course, done this before - in the speech which secured him the leadership in this very hall two years ago - and when he won. The latter showed the problems you can get into without notes. He declared that he had six priorities and then only listed five.
I'm 
Comments
Let's hope there is something in his head to express, as for speaking from the heart, emotive language has it's place but all this from a potential leader is incongruent, he cannot arouse passion it's David Cameron.
Eh. If I want a pre-written speech I'll just wait until the next government crisis hits.
All kidding aside, I tend to prefer public speaking when it's done without notes. I find myself referring to the text too much, not engaging with my audience. Still, it mightn't be everyone's cup of tea.
Also, considering some types of performance require a lot of memorisation (opera, theatre) I wouldn't say it's impossible to memorise an hour-long speech. It's tricky, yes, but definitely doable, especially if he has those bullet points.
I suppose we'll see when he gets out there!
Will you be on the Daily Politics special in half an hour?
"The latter showed the problems you can get into without notes. He declared that he had six priorities and then only listed five."
I wish the 91Èȱ¬ would stop claiming the tory's figures don't add up.
Speaking without an autocue shows David Cameron to be a communicator able to phrase his words when and where he needs to, without a screen in front of him. That kind of on-the-spot delivery is precisely the sort of skill that a PM needs in meetings, at summits, in conferences, and in tough negotiations. This is a good sign for someone who might soon be running the country.
A politician that can lie without the aid of notes? That's a new one.
"to speak from the heart and to have the freedom to express what is in his head".
Should be interesting! Looking forwards to hearing it now!
Who cares what he does
Could you try and bit a bit more anti-Conservative?
This Labour/91Èȱ¬ bias is getting a bit tired Nick.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that Churchill once gave a speech with only a single piece of paper in his hand which was identified as being a laundry slip. When asked about it he answered that he only held the paper for the reassurance of the audience.
Nick,
I have a feeling you have not delivered many important speeches to large audiences in your illustrious career.
To do what David is doing is very skilful and courageous and desrves a bit more than the rather derogatory comments which you have made.
In my mind deserves accolade not cynicism.
> He declared that he had six
> priorities and then only listed
> five.
It's a big problem, as I'm sure
you'll know from those reports you
make on the tely. My solution is
to always declare exactly two
priorities.
Once I've explained the first,
I subdivide the second into two more,
making three in total. Once I've
dealt with the second, I split
the third into two more after that
and so on until I'm out of ideas.
Most people have stopped counting
and gone to sleep by then anyway!
Jacques
The only Prime Ministers that Britain ever had that could speak in public without notes and without hesitation, deviation, or repetition were Macmillian and Churchill.
The rest were, when it came to speaking in public, a fairly sorry bunch!
Just watched your interview with Andrew Neil, Nick.
Why do you refer to the Labour leader as Gordon and the Conservative leader as Cameron?
Nick, I find that all a bit too disingenuous.
How about commenting on what he is going to talk about and why it is important?
The last time I spoke publicly was as best man to my best friend at his wedding.
I spoke without notes but memorising the important things about him and the jokes. I wanted it to sound unforced and natural. I did it because it really mattered to me what I was going to say and how I was going to say it.
If someone chooses to speak without notes, it's to let the passion come through. I'd give Cameron that benefit of the doubt.
All we've had this week from the 91Èȱ¬ is cynical reporting regarding a conference where the party have stepped up the plate to be counted and are fighting for their beliefs.
All the 91Èȱ¬ has done is sought comment that fits its own internal agenda.
I'm really fed up with it, what ever happened to objective analysis and impartial reporting?
The only Prime Ministers that Britain ever had that could speak in public without notes and without hesitation, deviation, or repetition were Macmillian and Churchill.
The rest were, when it came to speaking in public, a fairly sorry bunch!
In the Roman Republic the likes of Hortensius and Cicero would memorize speech up to 4 hours long for court cases, so this attempt by ChessyDaveis hardly brave
Still pretty brave, nonetheless Nick. I don't ever see you delivering anything without an autocue - certainly not an hour-long speech.
"He declared that he had six priorities and then only listed five."
- Nick, I think that's very unfair! Could you speak for over an hour without notes?? I certainly couldn't!
I have to hand it to him, he pulled it off wonderfully.
Give the man a break and give yourself a break from the usual Beeb-bias!
Cameron has set out his stall and, as he said, Brown should do the decent thing and let the British people decide!
It doesn't make much difference whether he reads it or has learned , he clearly believes what he says, and will no doubt get a little lift in the polls. His core vote will be pleased, but I'm less likely than before to vote for him since the £280k tax cut for millionaires (and above) was announced At least there's clear blue water now.
To deliver that speech without notes, under that pressure, on live TV, is very impressive.
He deserves a chance.
Oh dear Nick, first post a positive comment the an hour later qualify it and add a little criticism.
Not becoming...
I'm not sure that Cameron's real point in not having a script will sink in - it's obviously a dig at Brown's over-scripted and carefully constructed, but ultimately bland and empty speech at the Labour conference. Of course Cameron will have planned it meticulously beforehand - he's not about to just make stuff up at such a key moment.
Trouble is, he's on to a loser. Brown is waiting to see the polls after the Tory conference before he will call an election. If Cameron does well, no election. If Cameron does badly, an election that he won't win.
Having spoken to an employee of the Labour Party, it seems that for the first time in history, they are all rooting for Cameron to do well, as they are scared stiff that they might actually have to fight an election in six week's time.
I've just endured..sorry listened to David Camerons speech and was surprised by how devoid of inspiration or passion it was.It was a an unstructured ramble which will only convince Gordon Brown to call an immediate general election.We are only 4 weeks away from the end of David Camerons political career,and on the basis of todays speech I won't be shedding any tears.
Hi Nick,.
I have to say i thought David Cameron was absolutely fantastic today.
If there's a snap poll Cameron will be the next Prime Minister in in a few weeks time.
I don't think i've ever heard a politician speak so clearly from the heart before.
The British people will take a shine to him for that.
"The speech may be as long as an hour so he certainly won't have been able to memorise it all."
The character Macbeth speaks for about an hour - and Macbeth is one of Shakespeare's shorter plays - to claim that Cameron "certainly won't have been able to memorise it all" is to do his skills as an actor a disservice - on the flip side I hope to see Leading Actors at the RSC starting there performances with the words - "I will not be reading from my script today" - more emptiness and arrogant posturing from yet another Tory leader who will never be PM.
That was the most uninspiring speech I've heard from a party leader in a long time. Where was the passion? Where was the anger?
It was like watching a conversation at a fringe meeting, not a potential last big speech from a leader before a general election.
Cameron can do better than that - what went wrong today?
That was the most uninspiring speech I've heard from a party leader in a long time. Where was the passion? Where was the anger?
It was like watching a conversation at a fringe meeting, not a potential last big speech from a leader before a general election.
Cameron can do better than that - what went wrong today?
That’s David Cameron unplugged Nick.
May I first and foremost congratulate the person or persons that worked on Cameron’s makeup for the cameras. Do you not think Cameron looked fresh Nick?
I was going to write in detail about Cameron’s speech Nick, but for the time being may I say that 99% of it was all wind, unsubstantiated claims and big fat lies, just like the case of Northern Rock. Just to mention one other lie, he says 50% of 11 year olds do not know how to read and write! BIG FAT LIE Nick!
It was also quite rich for Cameron to speak about unemployment, schools, NHS, nurses and doctors. Short memory I should say when 10 years ago we had to wait 2 years for a heart by-pass! No mention about our economy Nick, why ? because he would have another BIG question mark on his head to justify tax cuts.
I have six words for Cameron, Nick:
STOP LIEING THROUGHT YOUR TEATH CAMERON
The speech was not from the heart, but usual rhetoric from a group of people, trying to Americanise Britain. No thanks and not impressed Nick! Have a nice day Nick.
That was the most uninspiring speech I've heard from a party leader in a long time. Where was the passion? Where was the anger?
It was like watching a conversation at a fringe meeting, not a potential last big speech from a leader before a general election.
Cameron can do better than that - what went wrong today?
I have recorded your comments[accidently- I'm not that sad] about "Gordon's" speech[the Freudian slips hadn't escaped my attention either].Now we shall now watch you trash David in your usual fashion. Gordon READS A COPIED SPEECH, FULL OF NO CLEAR COMMITMENTS except things he can't legally do[ Nick's hero] etc ... I could write it now.
I hope I am wrong.
For the record I think he was moderate measured commanding and impressive under stress.
Matt Brown,
As "our man in Westminster", I can assure you Nick does not use an autocue.
And, in case your wondering, the same is also the case for all our other 91Èȱ¬ correspondents stationed throughout the Solar System.
We at the Beeb don’t tolerate autocues. And we’re glad Mr. Cameron has taken our lead and done the same.
The 91Èȱ¬ - You make it what it is.
Nick
There seems to be a consensus building here questioning the 91Èȱ¬'s apparent favouritism towards Labour.
A lot of my friends & colleagues are also concerned, can you explain why we might be getting this impression?
Don't forget that Cicero (and many of the key orators of the day) would memorise huge speeches - often going into days. It happens a lot today as well - I remember going to a 1 woman play in a little theatre in Oxford which was a 2 hour soliloquy.
Auto-cues have helped to make reading from notes more acceptable - and the fact that they are used too often has led the public to believe that speeches are made without conviction. Doing a speech without notes is a very good way to make people think you believe in what you are talking about.
It all started even before the Conservative conference. News 24 put on a journalist (from north of the border, so obviously not a Conservative herself!) to tell us what she thought the Conservatives would be saying. Then, dreary old Ed Balls was wheeled out to say why all their policy ideas would be rubbish!
And so it has gone on, all week. Aggressive, hostile interviewing (and never an uninterrupted answer allowed,) cynical and negative presentation -- and now, sadly, from the usually to-be-respected Mr Robinson, a put-down about an old DC speech, possibly because today's remarkable performance defied negative comment.
Fair's fair -- the Conservatives have made a decent job of working out some policies for the future, and if there's any justice they will be the next government. They deserve a hearing. It's time all the Beeb lefties took a back seat and let the rest of us (including Nick, on his better days!) get on with the serious business of talking politics.
Two quotes from Albert (post 19)
"he says 50% of 11 year olds do not know how to read and write! BIG FAT LIE Nick!"
"STOP LIEING THROUGHT YOUR TEATH CAMERON"
3 out of 6 - Not Bad! I take it that you are 11 years old yourself?
Why is it that journalists and some bloggers are so obsessed by the fact that Cameron spoke without an autocue? Like a million actors, he learnt his lines. So what? Does this somehow make him Prime Minister material? This is just another example of journalists' obsession with trivia.
Cameron is the last in the league of Blairite politics (i.e tabloid + tinsel town propaganda) -- sooner he disappears from the scene better is for the British politics.
Albert,
your spelling of "teeth" as "teath" proves that there are problems with the education system in Britain!
Blair spoke without autocue, notes and whatever at his Birmingham election rally in 2005. I sat behind him and could see for myself. No doubt he did the same elsewhere.
So where's the wonder of all that?
Cameron had a friendly audience today, as did Blair in 2005.
So?
Why is everyone getting so excited about someone being able to deliver a speech without a script? It's what anyone playing a part should be able to do, after all.
I do so love this stuff...91Èȱ¬ anti-Tory, 91Èȱ¬ full of lefties.
I remember feeling the opposite as Labour lost election after election from '79 to '92. The 91Èȱ¬ seemed like the Tory establishment to me then
And then, guess what, I grew up! And opened my eyes and ears! People have opinions. They don't always park them at the door when they start work. Even at the 91Èȱ¬.
Dear old Ned Sherrin, was a raving Tory, and didn't mind who knew it. It didn't stop me enjoying his programmes. Ken Clarke on jazz - superb! On the other side Lord Bragg on just about anything - compelling.
Gow up you sad sad people and accept that politics is best approached with a large pinch of salt!
George,
I wrote my contribution in 3 minutes flat and I do not do spell checks either. As for my education, I was not educated in U.K. but my education took me up to being a Bank Manager.
But my children were educated in UK and one of them is a scientist, ALL THE WAY UP FROM STATE SCHOOLS and under New Labour.
Grow up George! We're talking about substance here not spell checks!
Thanks Nick.
An hour's too long. He should have cut it down to about 30 minutes. And as for the use of autocue or notes - well, if he can't remember what he's saying, how does he expect us to?
I was interested that Cameron accused Brown of that most heinous of crimes - 'dog whistle' politics.
Wasn't the chap who invented the term, and some would say the concept, of 'dog whistle politics' that Australian chappie Lynton Crosby who worked for John Howard? I'm sure Cameron would hate it if someone brought him over here to work as a special election advisor to a major party.
Oh wait, Michael Howard did that in the last election.
Can't think why Cameron hates 'dog whistle politics' so much, they obviously don't work.. well, not for the Conservative Party, anyway.
The US after dinner circuit beckons then . . .
Cameron's speech was superb - clear, passionate yet calmly delivered; hardly a falter in over an hour and all done without notes. Yet, the 91Èȱ¬ reported it in the 6 o'clock news in a low-key manner, unlike the parading they gave Brown last week. The main reason the Conservatives are struggling in the polls is that the 91Èȱ¬ are determined to play them down and build up Brown. Unbiased public service broadcating? That hasn't been the case for years.
What a miserable bunch of commentators we have in the majority of posts 1-39 above. It would surprise me if any single one of them could do as well as DC in his speech today.
And all the time, the 91Èȱ¬ follows it's own political agenda - pre-programmed into its staff on the very day they join.
"Why do you refer to the Labour leader as Gordon and the Conservative leader as Cameron?"
Simple question, yet we never get the answer. Same thing happens in Scotland. Labour's leader is referred to by the Beeboids as "Wendy", but the first minister is always "Salmond" or "Mr Salmond".
Has the 91Èȱ¬ style guide not woken up to the fact that selective use of first names comes across to us, the viewer, as a touch too chummy?
Hey, one might even start to believe there was something in the pro-Labour bias claims....
hmm...how can this be a negative. Show's the guy had got talent and shouldn't the leader of a country have that?
We at the Beeb are often accused of political partism.
This is nonsense.
Unlike Fox News we do not report AND decide. We merely find the facts and give them to you.
The 91Èȱ¬ - policing the planet's police.