ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

If the Tories do lose the next election, in true Derren Brown stylee, I predict that the ConHome headline the day after will be;

"Ken costs us the election"

A nice shower of cold common sense from Jonathan this morning - some of us did get a little over-excited on Tim's post on Saturday.

It's a particularly good point about the LibDem seats. Many of these are in the South-West and I think they are there for two reasons. The first is that this has always been a Liberal stronghold. The second is that the fishing industry has been devastated by the Common Fisheries Policy and the Tories, Edward Heath in particular, have been blamed for that - correctly in my view.

I would suggest that many votes in these areas would come over to us if David Cameron got a little further away from the fence upon which he frequently sits and made a clear committment to unilaterally withdraw from the CFP. That would also remove the rug from under UKIP which also make large inroads into natural Tory territory. UKIP are very strong in the South-West and in our constituency made the difference between keeping the Labour incumbent and returning a Conservative MP.

In the end, its not just about avoiding triumphalism that will win people over, it's about having the right policies.

I agree with much of what you write Jonathan but my post on Sunday was careful to warn against complacency:

"Of course there is no room for complacency and I see no signs of complacency in the Tory team. The reshuffle produced a sharper team. Eric Pickles is redoubling efforts against the Liberal Democrats. I understand that candidates in target seats are about to face a new, tougher management regime."

My reason for writing what I did - and I do expect a landslide victory - was that there is no more need, for example, for hasty policy announcements. Policies must now be prepared for enactment not for tomorrow's newspapers. I actually believe that if the Conservatives look more and more like a Government-in-waiting to the electorate and less like an opposition-chasing-the-news then the prospects of a handsome Tory win will actually increase. I hope recent opinion polls give the Conservatives the reassurance to be able to behave so.

PS This won't be the first time Jonathan and I disagree. We sign all ToryDiary entries that aren't simple reportage now. ConHome isn't The Borg (Star Trek fans will know what I mean)!

I think that it will be an interesting election.

My reading is that the slump will continue throughout 2009 and 2010. And then any recovery will be slow and shaky. We already have incredible Government debt (and they've 18 months still to go).

So this will make for very bad headlines and that having steered the economy on to the rocks and spent a fortune trying to 'rescue' it, Brown is a busted flush and should be sent packing.

In addition, whilst we have UKIP to contend with, Labour has Nationalism in Scotland and Wales. These will be strong alternatives to Labour.

We must guard against arrogance and triumphalism though I think Cameron is far too sharp a cookie to do that anyway.

In recent weeks, we have raised our game. Highlight the shame and incompetence of Brown and his cronies and paint a positive vision. No magic wands just offer direction and hope.

Brown will have no answer to that...

Spot on. Why does this site keep veering from one perspective to the other? In autumn last year Tory Diary was arguing that Ossborne should go, everything was a disaster and that Labout would be ahead in the polls come the New Year. I think ConHome would be best served by more consistency in its analysis and less wild swings its views. This site often gives the impression of just blowing with the wind depending on the popularity stakes of the moment

John@10:14

Don't forget that the BNP traditionally draw much of their support from Labour not from the Tories. They are generally pushing a nationalist socialist agenda.

If the party is to win it will have to start putting a far better case than it is putting. People need to see a theme. To see how different the country would be under Cameron than it is under Brown.
The party will not win just by highlighting Labour`s failings it has to have a positive message itself.
It hasn`t really got that at present. It seems to react to everything at not be proactive and sell itself.

Raising the issue of re-taking the LD seats is key to victory. Tim calls them bindweed and he is right. I hope that their vote is really squeezed by a two party push. But we need both their setas and to reduce their size as we have at present one large and one medium sized block of anti-tory MPs that use up the media space. We need to reduce that and getting the LDs down below 30 should be a goal.

Alas under the previous Chairman initiatives like Coleshill have been dropped. Mr Pickles is wonderful, I hope that he continues for a few years and say a prayer for his health.

I predict a Tory majority of 100, unless Cameron and Osborne screw the pooch. I wouldn't put it past them, but I wouldn't bet money on a hung parliament even.

Complacency is never good, but you need to be listening to peoples concerns more. They need to know that you are going to tackle the issues that are important to them.

Another MOST important factor is unity. The papers are continually being plastered with Ken Clarke's opposing opinions to the party line. This is great ammunition for the opposition and they will exploit every word he says.

This makes a mockery of the leadership if it can't keep its people under control.

"(Don't forget - it's been argued that without the Referendum Party in 1997 Bliar would only have had a majority of 30 - 50, which is what he was expecting)"

The Conservatives won't get a landslide until they offer people a future. To make their pitch on the basis of being slightly less useless managers than the other lot , but with all the same policies they'll be lucky to get a majority and it will be apathy which will win them the day, just!

I also question if the Conservatives have learnt the lesson the EUsceptics dealt them, so far it would seem the party has given themselves an EUsceptic wash, but in light of the action of Conservatives Governments which ensured us in this EU nightmare, then it is going to take some substance and binding policies to buy the support of EUsceptics, whishy washy statement just won't do. The Conservatives also haven't learnt their lesson in regards to accommodating views over the English question, just as they ignored the views of EUsceptics they are in danger of opening a flank to that issue that will cost them seats and haemorrhage much needed support.

I agree Iain @11:18.

It will be impossible to know what the Tory potential is until we know how they emerge from the Euro elections.

Also, and this is a completely unsubstantiated rumour sent to me so take it with a pinch of salt, but has anyone else heard anything about the Royal Mail currently actively making plans for UK euro coinage?

Being presumptuous is never a good idea as the British electorate don't like smug bast8*ds.

I am confident that were there an election tomorrow then we would win our target seat but we(the PPC and I) never tell that to the foot soldiers or the public. We simply say that we have every chance.

If we go about saying we will win by a landslide then my main fear is that the activists will take their collective foot off of the gas and we will lose seats that we ought to be winning. Instead of getting a 100+ majority, we get much less.

Take nothing for granted, leave no stone unturned. We need to keep our noses to the grindstone and don't look up until 10pm on 6th May 2010. That is the secret to winning this election!

Stating the obvious I know, but what matters is what happens on polling day. Sure, the recent Lords scandal has given the Tories a boost, but beware - there may be a few Conservative nasties coming out of the woodwork and you can be sure Labour will be doing their best to find them. Remember Conway - and he`s still an MP?

Past history has shown anything can happen and it probably will, so don`t write Brown off yet. The problem Mr. Cameron has is that while many are fed up with Labour, there is no great enthusiasm for him and his party. Or perhaps I`ve got it wrong?

Surely, there's no such thing as a sure thing. I've been surprised how quickly the comments have veered back towards predicting a landslide given the lessons to be learnt from the last few months. Mr Cameron evidently agrees -- hence the gamble on Kenneth Clarke.

What an interesting thread. Very salutory comments, Jonathan.

We all hope that recovery will start soon and there are a few (very few) glimmerings of hope. When that does start, Gordon Brown is going to claim that it is all down to him and voters might believe him. He generally takes the credit and passes the blame.

I believe David Cameron needs to be more positive in his attacks on Brown and state some of the things the conservatives would have done. He could state that, as the tripartite regulatory system set up by Brown so clearly failed, he will restore to the BoE the oversight of all the banking system.

He could point out that, contrary to what Brown frequently claims, inflation has not been low (it has been over 10% for many people) but Brown's change of index kept it artificially low, thus making cheap credit readily available which led to the housing boom - and bust!

He could compare the differences between George Osborne's guaranteed loan scheme with the government's in order to demonstrate that the conservatives are not "a do nothing party".

Cameron must also correct Brown's assertion that public debt in the UK is lower than in America and elsewhere. It only is if you conveniently ignore off-balance sheet items. I expect lots of people would like to do the same with their mortgages - "oh, no, I have bought a house but as I pay for it over 30 years, it doesn't really count as a debt!"

The Tories are ahead in the poles because the Labour Government has imploded rather than due the any marked enthusiasm for the Cameroons and their opaque policies. Furthermore, there is no perceptible Conservative revival in Scotland and the North of England and UKIP will rise again in the public consciousness as we move towards the EU Parliament elections in June.

It seems to me that a Tory Government would not be significantly different for the current Labour Government, certainly on the most important issues we face (the economy, energy, education and defence) so I shall continue to work to undermine the cosy consensus of the political class.

Where Tim Montgomerie is spot on is with his recommendation that the Conservatives behave like the next Government not a headline chasing opposition party.

A landslide or not it is important that our Party's leadership looks as though they are ready for government and avoid all shallowness.

Whilst we should not be complacent, we should do all in our power to further the collective nervous breakdown sweeping the Labour Party and the left.

Their emotional state is as much driven by the thought of an impending wipeout as anything else.

That means broadening and deepening our support across the country so that even Labour MPs in notionally safer Labour seats begin to fear the future.

Should Labour and the Lib Dems face a 1997 style electoral apocalypse? Absolutely yes. Are they? Not yet.

Excellent and very well argued (and apposite) post from the Other Editor and some brilliant responses.

No election is won until close of poll, and although I'm not a RC there is a very appropriate saying "He who goes into the Conclave already the Pope emerges as a Cardinal" There's a lot of leaflets to go through letterboxes yet, a lot of doorsteps out there to visit and a lot of people to win over. At the moment they hate Stalinovitch McBroon but I don't think they love us yet. (Otherwise the local election results every Thursday would be better - they are at present a little worrying.)

We do need to show the SW Libs why they should vote for us and we need to guard against the threat of UKIP depriving us of winnable seats. (Don't forget - it's been argued that without the Referendum Party in 1997 Bliar would only have had a majority of 30 - 50, which is what he was expecting)

However, I must admit I'd rather look at these polls than those in 2001 or 2005.

It is always governments that lose elections not oppositions that win them. cf 1979, 1997, 1964, 1970
On that front Brown is doing a great job.

I think 1970 (along with Feb 1974) is the exception which proves the rule. Wilman was doing very nicely until Heath came up with "We will break into the price and wages spiral at a stroke" and wrenched the election from Labout (Admittedly, the defeat in the World Cup probably didn't do HW much good, but that can hardly be said to be the Government losing the election, Unless Harold was responsible for Gordon bank's tummy upset!)

Similarly in Feb 1974 Heath was doing quite well on a "Who Governs Britain" platform and even just before election day the polls were predicting a Con victory. However Wilson forced the election onto matters as a whole.

"Sure, Iain, because thumping the tub of Euroscepticism in 2001 really helped win back support...."

Well Raj I look forward to seeing the electoral success the Conservatives would achieve running a Clarke EUphile campaign.

Lindsay Jenkins and David Eyles,
Of course, almost everyone would agree that we should leave the obscene CFP, but I am sure that you both know as well as Cameron does that the only way we will ever be able to achieve this is by withdrawing from the EU itself. This is clearly why he dropped this idea, since both he and Hague have repeatedly stated that they would never, under any circumstances, consider leaving the EU.
Both pro and anti EU commentators on this blog have frequently stated that the Conservative policy with regard to the EU is "settled" so can somebody please explain EXACTLY what this means? For Cameron certainly won't.

By the time of the next election the Lisbon Treaty will almost certainly have been ratified(by bribery and duress)by the remaining signatories, so a referendum over that will no longer be an inconvenient hurdle for Cameron to jump. Renegotiation of the individual terms of a state's membership, never a realistic possibility even under the terms of the previous treaties, will become even more impossible. Whilst supporters of Lisbon claim that this will grant a right of withdrawal from the EU to individual member states, this right already exists under both international law and previous EU treaties and all that Lisbon will do is to establish the EU's right to impose conditions, including (as yet unspecified)sanctions and financial penalties for withdrawal.

The prime objective of the Lisbon Treaty, as is openly admitted (boasted) by the leaders of the majority is to speed up the process of "ever closer political union" leading finally to a Federal European state. If that is the will of the British people, expressed in a referendum, then fine, those of us who believe in what little may be left of democracy in Britain would be bound to accept that decision.

But, if we elect a new Government which claims to be eurosceptic, without specifying what this means, and, without offering us any choice, submits to the relentless march towards EU federalism, we will have no one but ourselves to blame.

To be fair to Cameron, however, so far as the EU is concerned he does not have many options, other than to declare that he no longer rules out withdrawal as an option and that he will offer a referendum upon this before signing any further treaties.

The only election that counted recently, where it was a straight Labour/Tory fight, was in London in May 2008. The Lib-Dem vote was squeezed so hard that Brian Paddick's eyes almost popped out.

I said at the time that this was because: 1) we had a real chance of winning and, 2) it was close. Because of that people didn't either stay at home, or vote for a "protest" party, because their vote wouldn't matter. These scenarios are applicable either in a certain win or a certain loss scenario which in part explains the low turnouts of '97, '01 and '05. The last time a General Election was like that was 1992.

But this cuts both ways. Livingstone's vote was up substantially, but ours went up more. Things were slightly different in Crewe three weeks later, where the candidate was less independent and more "Labour", so the grumpy, not voting for you lot, attitude didn't help them there and I don't think it will help Brown in a General.

So the lesson is what? Present your fight as a close fight if you're up against Labour - it almost certainly will be closer than you think - and if you're up against the Lib-Dems, present the national fight as a close fight. I suspect that will be the case as well.

"or shall we have a go at the Commisars themselves?"

Perhaps first gather up an army, the EU Parliament has just put forward a motion to bring Sea Angling under the CFP control, now may be it has passed by our so called representatives but there are one hell of a lot of Anglers here and the EU's desire to meddle has just given the anglers and commercial fishermen common cause. As such there might just be a whole load more votes for getting rid of the CFP than politicans realise.

To John Moss @ 20.32 – I totally agree with you and would like to add a 3rd - people (Londoners) where really and truly feed up with Livingston and wanted rid of him, and fast. They did not want 4 more years of his divisive communist befriending dictator hugging abusive business. In addition to that campaigners on the door step where wasting no time in pointing out that it was close, very very close and every vote counted its weight in gold.
If we fight the coming election the same way we fought last May in unseating Livingston, it will be a night to remember. The alternative does not bear thinking of.

A landslide is unlikely, but with a breakthrough in the West Midlands and the North West, which 2008 indicated, a majority of 25-35 seats is a reasonable bet.

There will remain a distortion as our vote tends to be rather concentrated, whereas Labour have low turnouts in safe seats, and since around 1990, have got better at spreading their vote wide but not very deep.

But I don't believe we need an 11 point extrapolation lead to get a majority of 1.
If the Tories were around 40 or more, the electoral system would tilt back towards them with less tactical voting, and a 7 point lead should suffice.

It's important to crush the Lib Dem vote as low as possible aswell, otherwise extra gains from Labour would be needed. I don't think there'll be a landslide because opinions will be quite polarised about the economy - those who want a new approach vs those who want to cling to a statist role.

I am a very left wing person and used to be a loyal Labour supporter.
I will not be voting for conservative per se but rather against Labour.