CentreRight

Believe it or not, Party Political Broadcasts were first shown 75 years ago. Who said the age of spin was something new?!

That said, I would suggest that it is only over the last couple of decades or so that the format has become especially sophisticated; prior to that it was often simply a case of sitting a politician in a studio and having them talk awkwardly straight into the camera and address the nation.

I'm looking forward to attending Hanover's celebration of the anniversary tonight and they have put together this compilation video to give a taster of a longer commemorative film which will be available to download from their website shortly.

Do readers have memories of favourite PPBs from years gone by?

I fondly recall the one produced for the 1987 election which was basically footage of nothing but Margaret Thatcher meeting every President and Prime Minister going - simply seeking to highlight her dominant position on the world stage...

Update: I stand corrected. Baroness Ashton will, it turns out, remain a member of the European Commission as well.

William Hague has just issued the following reaction to the appointment:

“We congratulate Herman van Rompuy and Cathy Ashton on their appointments. We wish them well. We will work with them in the British national interest. We did not agree with the Lisbon Treaty’s establishment of these posts but they are now a fact. We look to the President of the Council and the High Representative to ensure that the EU’s business as an association of nation states is conducted efficiently.
 
“So I am very pleased that those of us across Europe who said that the President should be a chairman, not a chief, have won the argument. Gordon Brown spent a great deal of energy and political capital trying to secure the presidency for Tony Blair. The summit’s result is a defeat for him. Now that Britain will no longer have an EU Commissioner with a major economic brief it will be vital that the British Government, whichever party is in power, engages closely with the EU Commission to ensure that it keeps to a pro-growth agenda.”

---

It is being confirmed that Baroness Ashton is to be the EU's new "High Representative" - the job being described colloquially as "European Foreign Minister" (the Belgian Prime Minister is set for the job of President).

She is of course currently Britain's European Commissioner, so a vacancy is now created for that post. Would Gordon Brown dare send an MP out to Brussels and create a by-election? I think it highly unlikely. Ashfield - the seat of the most obvious Labour nominee, Geoff Hoon - was lost to the Conservatives in a by-election in 1977 when a Labour MP took a job in Europe.

So who might Brown send to Brussels now?

In my post a little earlier, I pointed out how the Government failed to include any of the legislative measures recommended by the Kelly Report in the Queen's Speech.

One such measure was the banning of MPs sitting concurrently in devolved legislatures.

And it got me thinking. Who stands to lose most from such a ban? There are currently seventeen MPs with a dual mandate. One of those is in Scotland: Alex Salmond, who is standing down from the Commons at the general election to concentrate on his duties in the Scottish Parliament.

The other sixteen are in Northern Ireland: all nine DUP MPs, all five Sinn Fein MPs and two of the three SDLP MPs.

Now, David Cameron and Owen Paterson have made clear that all the MPs elected under the Conservative/UlsterUnionist banner in Northenr Ireland will be expected to be full-time Westminster MPs after the general election.

But were the MPs from the other Northern Irish parties hoping to continue as part-timers (but getting an additional chunk of salary and allowances, of course)? And was the decision of Gordon Brown not to include this measure in the Queen's Speech a sop to them perchance?

It wouldn't be the first time that a crackdown on the way we do politics didn't extend across the Irish Sea - the legislation on registration of donations to political parties still does not extend to Northern Ireland.

Just a thought.

The BBC has been leading its bulletins today with the story that Gordon Brown is to apologise for the Child Migrant Programme which saw thousands of disadvantaged British children sent elsewhere in the Commonwealth for "a better life" during the mid-Twentieth Century - but with many ending up in institutions or as farm labourers.

The BBC reports that in a letter to the chairnan of the Health Select Committee, the Prime Minister has opined that "'the time is now right' for the UK government to apologise for the actions of previous governments".

Excuse me?

Whilst I wouldn't want to dismiss the suffering to which some children may have been subjected under this programme, why on earth is it something for which Gordon Brown should apologise? It was nothing to do with him whatsoever. He wasn't even alive, let alone in active politics when the policy was implemented.

If he's so keen to issue apologies, wouldn't it be better to start with something for which he is actually responsible, like the state of the economy?

> On his blog, John Redwood has listed ten things for which he reckons Gordon Brown could legitimately apologise.

> Use Twitter to list things for which Brown should apologise and please use #SaySorryBrown

Today the former Transport Secretary Stephen Byers has announced his intention to quit the Commons at the next election.

He's the latest in the line of uber-Blairite ex-Cabinet ministers throwing in the towel - joining the likes of Alan Milburn, John Reid and Ruth Kelly who have already announced their retirements.

Given the fact that Charles Clarke is looking on distinctly shaky ground with his notional majority of 3,000 or so in Norwich South and you potentially end up with a pretty small coterie of disaffected Blair acolytes bothering to hang on in Parliament.

I have also heard some wonder recently whether James Purnell still has the thirst for House of Commons life after his resignation from the Cabinet earlier in the year and that he may yet call it a day and leave politics to go and make some money.

As a matter of fact, the only remaining members of Tony Blair's first Cabinet from 1997 who are currently expected to seek re-election next year are Gordon Brown, Harriet Harman, Alistair Darling, Jack Straw, Margaret Beckett, David Blunkett and Frank Dobson.

Today's Guardian carried a report suggesting that Tessa Jowell and a variety of "progressive" ministers are pressing for Gordon Brown to include electoral reform in the Queen's Speech next week.

It's utterly absurd to think that introducing such a controversial measure at this juncture in the life of a government would be anything but a supreme waste of time and energy - and I wouldn't expect to see it included.

However I am especially struck at the irony that one of the measures that Jowell et al are pushing for is to reduce the voting age to sixteen.

These are the very same characters who in government have increasingly set up the constructs of a nanny state, part of which was to increase the age at which you can buy cigarettes from sixteen to eighteen.

Where is the logic in believing that sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds cannot be trusted to take decisions about their own health and wellbeing, yet they should be trusted to help decide the future direction of the country?

What David Cameron said at the party conference seems extremely apt here:

"We've got to stop treating children like adults and adults like children."

Too right.

I am not in central London today, but am somewhat disturbed to have just received the following email from a friend in Westminster:

"I have just been to look at the wreaths on the Cenotaph in Whitehall. Beneath the wreaths from the PM and DC (on the West side) were three wreaths from The National Front, Youth National Front and National Front ex-servicemen. Rather odd that they are now so prominently displayed."

Quite so. Can anyone shed any light as to how they could have been allowed to get there?

On the eve of his speech announcing a new policy on Europe this week, David Cameron found himself as guest of honour at no less an event than the 2009 British Curry Awards.

And whilst I imagine there were indeed other things on his mind on Tuesday night, he still showed up for the event, attended by over 1,600 people (including yours truly), all of whom were treated to a sumptuous feast of the finest curry.

Mr Cameron gave a speech in which he congratulated the enterprising spirit of the thousands of people who serve the culinary delights of the Indian sub-continent in their restaurants in Britain - as well as praising their sense of community and family. He also noted that their integration into British society was a signal to the likes of the BNP that Britishness cannot be defined by skin colour.

In the photo above, the Tory leader is pictured at the dinner with Sari-clad Westminster North PPC, Joanne Cash, and St Albans MP, Anne Main, who is chairman of Conservative Friends of Bangladesh.

Today Commons Speaker John Bercow has upset traditionalists by presiding over a sitting of the UK Youth Parliament in the Commons chamber itself. It is the first time in history that anyone other than elected MPs have been permitted to take their seats on the green benches.

At the event, he also made an unprecedentedly robust attack on a political party for a Speaker, in reference to the British National Party. This is what he had to say:

"I'm under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to be impartial as between the forces of democracy on the one hand and the forces of evil on the other... I do feel very, very, very strongly as someone from a Jewish background that the evil of the BNP is that its whole politics is based upon and driven by hate. That is a poison which we could well do without."

Very strong stuff indeed.

Jonathan Isaby

I was unable to make Prospect magazine's Think Tank of the Year awards last night, but am delighted to hear this morning that the Centre for Social Justice won the top gong of Think Tank of the Year 2009.

Since its founding in 2004, Iain Duncan Smith, Philippa Stroud and their team have conducted huge amounts of detailed research and set an agenda in fighting poverty which David Cameron has embraced and put at the heart of Conservative policy - and they are to be congratulated on doing so.

> Got to the Prospect blog for further details of all the winners

That's right, one of the biggest jobs in political journalism is up for grabs.

The FT Westminster blog reports that George Pascoe-Watson, who took over from Trevor Kavanagh in the political editor's chair at the best-selling British tabloid in 2006, has been lured by the big bucks of Portland PR.

So there is a vacancy for what will be a highly influential post in the run-up to the general election, just a couple of weeks after the paper put its full weight behind the Conservative Party...

Update: GPW has said on his departure for pastures anew:

"I cannot wait to join Portland's brilliant, energetic and dynamic team. I leave The Sun with nothing but happy memories of 22 years on Fleet Street. I was thrilled to have played a key role in switching The Sun's support to David Cameron.

"I leave The Sun in the brilliant hands of Dominic Mohan, a friend and colleague who I anticipate will build on Rebekah Brooks’s formidable success. And it is now time to use the skills and experience of 22 years on the country’s biggest paper to great effect. 

"The political and media landscape is undergoing historic change. David Cameron is on course to be the next Prime Minister.  Now I'm looking forward to using my experience to help Portland's clients make sense of a new political and media age."

11pm update: Iain Dale has blogged that the paper's defence editor Tom Newton Dunn has been appointed to replace Pascoe-Watson.

The various politicians interviewed on television today have all been asked about Gordon Brown's eyesight, on the back of news that he has two small tears to the retina in his good eye - although his eyesight has not diminished and he requires no further treatment.

Liam Fox - the only Conservative to have appeared on the small screen so far this morning - has just given Adam Boulton short shrift when asked about the issue. Dr Fox said it was "unkind" to make an issue out of it and added, as PoliticsHome records, that he was "not concerned":

He added that speculation about the Prime Minister's health was "not the sort of politics we ought to be indulging in", and that whilst there were "lots of reasons" for the Mr Brown to stand down, his health wasn't one of them.

Quite right too.

BBC Parliament is tonight at 7pm showing the general election night programme that was broadcast in 1959. Presented by Richard Dimbleby, father of current election night anchor David, it is the first time in the fifty years that have passed since that election that the programme has been rescreened.

The press release from the BBC sets the context:

"1959 was a watershed in political broadcasting. The BBC mounted its biggest election night programme to date, which attracted an audience of 13 million. Coverage comes from the largest studio at Lime Grove which was specially adapted for the occasion. Richard Dimbleby leads the studio team, accompanied by Cliff Michelmore and Alan Whicker. The political professors David Butler and Robert McKenzie provide analysis, using the now infamous ‘swingometer’. Fifty-seven television cameras are at work, with some moving throughout the night to new locations to contribute to the rapid reporting of results.

"But 1959 wasn’t just about the television; it was about the politics too! The Conservatives were led into the election by their very own ‘Supermac’; Harold Macmillan. Living standards had risen for the masses under the Conservative government and Tories went into the election with a seven point lead. Despite the polls, it was by no means certain who was going to win. Labour had run a slick campaign, and under the leadership of Hugh Gaitskell they were more unified than they’d been in years. The Liberals also had high hopes after having recently won their first by-election victory in thirty years."

Enjoy!

Earlier this evening I was in esteemed company on an IPPR platform, sitting alongside - among others - Francis Maude and David Willetts.

The topic of the meeting was "What should the first 100 days of a Conservative Government look like?" and more than 300 people packed into the fringe meeting in the hope, it would seem, of Francis Maude lifting the lid on precisely how his Implementation Unit intended translating policies into action if a Conservative Govenrment is elected next year.

Needless to say, they were disappointed and there was, of course, no complacency from the shadow cabinet members, who both spoke in terms of what would happen rather than what will happen. 

I took the opportunity during my contribution to make several suggestions of what I believe should be early priorities of a Conservative Government, and highlighted some of the top priorities of the grassroots as found by our survey last week.

My desire to see a Tory Government elected with a mandate to renegotiate our relationship with the EU was warmly welcomed by activists in the audience, and I was given even louder applause when I reported my support for the grassroots' most favoured policy of a Civil Liberties Bill to repeal many of the draconian and illiberal measures implemented by the Labour Government.

But, interestingly, I won the loudest cheer for my suggestion that we should end the situation where millions of the least well-off have to pay income tax on the one hand and claim benefits on the other - meaning that Peter is robbed in order to pay Paul, who then gives some of it back to Peter.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that I have done (or even could do) all the maths on it all, but I hope that the Treasury team will look at it (even if raising the threshold at which people pay income tax is Lib Dem policy...)

Tim has just noted how Michael Crick is musing over whether the party might brand itself as the "Modern Conservatives" in the run-up to the general election.

But haven't we heard that somewhere before?

Those with a good memory of recent party leadership elections will recall that at both the 2001 and 2005 leadership elections the domain name www.modernconservatives.com (now defunct) was registered and used by none other than David Davis.

Indeed, he used it as a slogan on T-Shirts during the 2005 campaign, as the picture here - first posted on ConHome in 2005 - reminds us...

The accusation that, in terms of the economy, he didn't fix the roof while the sun was shining, is regularly levelled at Gordon Brown by leading Conservatives.

But today in Manchester that accusation is all too literal.

The weather is dreadful - it hasn't stopped raining all day. And as I was sat in the conference hall earlier at Manchester Central, it became clear that water was dripping down through the roof onto the edge of the main conference stage.

Goodness knows when or if it will get fixed - there's ceratinly no sign of any sunshine...

In his Today programme interview this morning, David Cameron was asked about whether he had ever been hunting.

It's hardly the most topical and urgent of issues, and as far as I was aware, I thought it was pretty well known that Mr Camerion had been hunting in the past - before the class warrriors on the Labour benches trooped through the division lobbies to ban it.

Anyhow, he was asked about it this morning and gave a straight reply:

"I was brought up in the country. I have taken part in a number of rural sports, including hunting, from time to time, but not for several years... Personally, I think the hunting ban has been a farce. I don't think it works. I think it wastes a huge amount of police time."

Yet this appears to have outraged the sub-editors at the Guardian, who have headlined a report on the paper's website "David Cameron confesses to history of hunting" as if he had been committing some heinous crime rather than indulging in a perfectly legal activity. And the use in the strap line below of the word "admission" seems to imply that he has been forced into saying something of which he should be ashamed.

As far as I am concerned this is the non-story of the day - but it would seem that some on the Left will think there is political capital to be made out of it...

I have just attended the Conservative MEPs' reception, where I was delighted to meet Michal Kamiński, the leader of the new group of European Conservatives and Reformists, who has just arrived in Manchester.

I am hoping to get a chance to speak to him properly later on during his visit to conference, but we spoke briefly and he thanked me and the many many ConservativeHome readers who have expressed support for him as he faces that series of outrageous smears from our political opponents.

If you want to catch him speaking here in Manchester, you can see him tomorrow (Tuesday) when he will be addressing a fringe meeting in the Alexandra Suite of the Midland Hotel at 12.30pm.

Tuesday update:

At the ECR fringe meeting, Mr Kamiński spoke of his admiration for the British Conservative Party and how it had been a great inspiration to him in the 1980s when he was living behind the Iron Curtain. He said that once again it was time for the British Conservatives and their allies to inspire citizens of Europe.

He emphasised his desire to change the European Union, making the point that the Eastern European perspective that he and other members of the new group have is especially important in terms of seeking a Europe where nation states remain sovereign.

The Conservative Party football team, (pictured with their scarves in support of England's 2018 world cup bid), were victorious in the annual match against the press 1-0 this morning. MPs Graham Stuart, Edward Timpson, David Burrowes and David Gauke all played as did PPCs Chris Heaton-Harris and Karl McCartney.

Party Chief Executive Andrew Feldman was injured at virtually his first touch of the ball and limped off the pitch; the sole goal was scored by Iain Makepeace, the party's art director, who impressively curled in a free kick from 25 yards to ensure the Conservative victory.

The press team improved in the second half as the Telegraph's Andy Porter was moved from centre back into midfield and posed the biggest threat to the Tory defence, but to no avail. Chris Heaton-Harris narrowly missed doubling the Tory margin of victory with a dipping volley which hit the crossbar from 20 yards.

The one consolation for the press is that they beat Labour 5-1 last week in Brighton.

Billboards around the city are thanking Mancunians for the warm welcome they are giving us...

...the "ready for change" message is emblazoned around the conference venue...

...and there's an important variation on it at the bar at the Midland Hotel!

Here's an extract of the report from the following day's Independent:

On law and order, Mr Major offered an attack on truancy, and announced experimental plans to put electronic tags on "young tearaways", imposing curfews on offenders aged from 10 to 15 years. "If we know a young trouble-maker is out there, night after night, disturbing the peace and committing crimes, we'll make sure the courts have the power to order him to stay put. At home, and off the streets," he said.

Major's "disturbing the peace" would surely translate into New Labour-speak as "anti-social behaviour".

The paper also reported John Major's attacks on Tony Blair as "a man who had never done a "real job" of work in his life", with the Prime Minister accusing him the Opposition leader of "using the language of crusade, dream and passion as a cover for lack of substance."

I need not remind you what happened at the following general election...

Loosely based on the TV programme of the same name, the Democracy Dragons' Den will see a variety of MPs, journalists and activists pitch ideas about how to revitalise democracy to a star-studded panel of dragons including Dan Hannan MEP and Eleanor Laing MP, shadow justice minister.

And ConservativeHome readers are invited to take part!

Here's the brief: if you have an idea about Reform of the Lords, Reform of the EU or Reform of Parliament, outline your ideas in no more than 400 words in an email to Janice Small. The best will be chosen to pitch to the dragons at the event in Manchester, which will take place between 12.30pm and 2pm on Wednesday 7th October in Exchange Room 2 of Manchester Central (the main conference venue). 

Please ensure that you have a conference pass for the secure area and are available for the event!

A story featured in many of today's papers concerns two people - both police officers in fact - who have been prevented from looking after each other's children because the state didn't know about it.

The Guardian summarises the case thus:

The women, both 32, have taken turns looking after each other's daughters twice a week for the last two and a half years while they worked a ten-hour shift at Aylesbury police station in Buckinghamshire.

However, the pair were reported to Ofsted by someone – thought to be a neighbour – and an investigation was launched. New legislation means that people who baby-sit for more than two hours at a time or on more than 14 days a year should be registered and follow childminder rules, including undertaking first aid training and following the so-called "nappy curriculum" for under-fives.

According to the education watchdog, the rules apply in cases where parents receive a "reward" for the child care – which can include money or simply free baby-sitting in return.

I suspect most ConHome readers will share my incredulity at the story. The responsible minister at the DCSF is, of course, quick to cite the "safety and wellbeing" of children to justify the law.

But is it not just another example of the Government branding hard-working people trying to do the right thing by their families as potential criminals until such a time as the state gives them an all-clear?

12.30pm update:

“The Government’s rules stopping two policewomen from looking after each other’s children defy common sense. The Government’s review is all very well, but these are rules that Labour ministers made law just three years ago.

“There is no better illustration of the overly bureaucratic nature of this Government’s regime for childcare, which is driving childminders away from the profession and now stopping parents and friends sharing childcare duties. After the recent ISA rules governing adults dropping off children to play in football teams, this latest case demonstrates yet another intrusion into the lives of ordinary people caring for children.”