thetorydiary: June 2009

« May 2009 | Main | July 2009 »

June 2009

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Cameron's trump policy

Many on this site attack the Cameron project as 'policy lite'. For them, today's speech by Michael Gove should be cheering. He analyses the terrible failure of the current system - Eton produces more kids with three As at A Level than the comprehensive system manages with the entire cohort of 75,000 Free School Meal kids; independent schools produce more three As than every comprehensive combined. He analyses the dumbing down of exams and the important switch by top private schools from state-controlled exams to the internaitonal GCSE.

The section at the end summarises Gove's policies...

New powers for teachers to control violent behaviour.
New powers for heads over pay and conditions which will break the grip of Unions.
New powers for all state schools to do top quality international exams
More control of universities over exams, which will expose and reverse dumbing down and break the power of the QCA.
Big shake-ups for all the quangos and the Whitehall structure.
A genuine system of school choice with organisations and parents free to set up new schools (and radical changes to planning law and building regs to make this possible)
Parents free to control the taxpayers' money spent on their child so they can switch it to one of the new charter schools, and radical freedoms for these schools outside the grip of the state...

This combination of policies will change Britain fundamentally - and in ways that will be very hard for Labour to reverse - and is perhaps the single most important reason for Cameron victory.

Tim Montgomerie

> Download PDFof Gove speech.

Posted at 13:41 in Education | Permalink | Comments (43)

Grant Shapps exposes the lie of Brown's promise of "local homes for local people"

Grant Shapps, the shadow housing spokesman, is suggesting today that Gordon Brown's announcement yesterday that local people who have been waiting a long time for a council house will be moved to the front of the queue falls foul of the government's own equality legislation.

According to his understanding of the law:

The Equality Bill, recently introduced before Parliament by Harriet Harman, will impose a duty on all public sector bodies to reduce socio-economic disadvantage when making ‘strategic decisions’. Giving housing priority to someone who is local above someone who is socially or economically disadvantaged will potentially breach the new duty.

Councils will also still have a duty under existing legislation to give 'reasonable preference' to the homeless, those in overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing, and those with medical or welfare problems.

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 11:38 in Housing | Permalink | Comments (92)

Policy won't win us power, admits Oliver Letwin, but it will determine whether we're successful in government

Oliver Letwin has been an enormous influence on Project Cameron. The first of Michael Howard's shadow cabinet to back David Cameron for the Tory leadership he has played a pivotal role in setting the party's strategic direction. Caution on tax, an emphasis on climate change, social justice and 'not banging on about Europe' all have Letwin's fingerprints all over them.

Noone works more closely with David Cameron's number one adviser, Steve Hilton.

Mr Letwin is just one of two shadow cabinet ministers to sit in David Cameron's leadership suite - the other being George Osborne.

Mr Letwin - now directing policy for the Conservative Party - has told today's Daily Politics show on BBC1 that it's very unlikely that an ordinary voter would be able to name even one of his party's policies:

DAILY POLITICS REPORTER ROSS HAWKINS : "Which of your individual policies do you think that somebody who isn't involved in politics is going to know? If we went and asked people..."

OLIVER LETWIN <INTERRUPTS>: "Very few. Probably none. My own view is that formulating policies in opposition is a fantastically important thing to do becaue if you get elected they will be the things that actually lead to a successful govt or otherwise. But I don't believe that you fight and win elections primarily on people going to websites and reading every last detail of your policy on x or y. I don't suffer from that delusion."

REPORTER: "So if we went out onto the streets now and asked 200 people if they could name a single Conservative policy and none of them could, that wouldn't worry you?"

LETWIN: "No and I think if you went and asked them the same question about Labour or Liberal policy you'd find the same. Most people are just not very interested in the details of policy."

It is, of course, true that October 2007's inheritance tax policy had a massive impact on Tory fortunes but it's true that most voters don't pay a lot of attention to policy. As I suggested on Saturday, moderation of style is probably a lot more important than moderation of policy in reassuring the electorate (if reassurance is the goal).

Tim Montgomerie

Posted at 10:30 in Policy groups | Permalink | Comments (33)

Why do European political leaders continue to lecture British Conservatives about leaving the EPP?

Today's Guardian reports that the Swedish Prime Minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt (pictured), has openly criticised David Cameron's decision to take Conservative MEPs out of the EPP in Brussels and form a new eurosceptic grouping:

As Reinfeldt prepares to assume the rotating presidency of the EU on Wednesday, he says it is a pity Cameron has decided to leave the main centre-right grouping in the European parliament, the EPP-ED, adding that he will need to adopt a more pragmatic approach in government.

"If David Cameron becomes prime minister, part of what he wants to do in the world and Europe will need European structures," Reinfeldt says of Cameron's ambitions to tackle climate change. "I hope he will feel comfortable in working with other European leaders. He will need us. To address this issue he needs European leadership, not only British leadership."

Reinfeldt comes from the Swedish Moderate Party, which sits in the EPP in the Euroepan Parliament, and is by no means the first Centre-Right European leader to make an issue out of David Cameron's line on the EPP. Within days of becoming Tory leader in 2005, he came under fire from Angela Merkel about it and Nicolas Sarkozy has also reportedly expressed concerns.

But why do they feel the need to keep making such interventions? Dare I suggest that it is not Britain's best interests which they have at heart, but rather those of the integrationist political class of Europe?

That is to say, when a serious political player on the European/world stage in the form of a British Conservative leader (and future Prime Minister) makes such a move, it surely makes it all the more likely that others will also realise that there is an alternative and join us in shattering the cosy federalist consensus.

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 09:00 in Europe | Permalink | Comments (106)

What Labour laws should a Conservative government repeal?

Should the NHS be immune from spending cuts?

What should the Conservatives do if Lisbon is ratified?

Should candidates adopted for hard-to-win seats be freed to apply for easier-to-win seats?

Click here to answer these and other tracker questions in June's ConHome survey.

Posted at 07:55 in ConservativeHome Members' Panel | Permalink | Comments (52)

Monday, June 29, 2009

ComRes pours a little cold water on to Tory heads

The Tory lead is down to 11% in tomorrow's poll for The Independent.

Earlier, however, in a preview of the poll Andy Grice noted that the poll also finds that "The Tories are more trusted than Labour to decide where the expected public spending cuts should be made."

One observation from me: If you put ComRes' figures into UK Polling Report's Election Calculator you get the Tories 3 short of a majority. If you reverse the figures and put Labour on 36% and us on 25% you get a Labour majority of 116. Sorting the unfair electoral system has got to be a Tory priority.

Tim Montgomerie

Posted at 22:11 in Opinion polls | Permalink | Comments (64)

Who can revive the IEA... and how?

Earlier today Iain Dale broke the story that John Blundell is to leave the Institute of Economic Affairs. The official statement is here.

The IEA and the Centre for Policy Studies drove the Thatcherite revolution but the IEA has been much less influential since then.

If I had to name the top centre right think tanks now it would be Policy Exchange and the Centre for Social Justice. Reform and the CPS would be my next most influentials.

The TaxPayers' Alliance and MigrationWatch are hugely important but neither are quite in the conventional think tank mould and that brings me to my point: Are think tanks thinking enough about how best to change the intellectual and political climate?

Daniel Finkelstein urges the IEA to use this moment to consider whether it's "a body that wants to influence policy, or is it primarily concerned with educating people about free markets?" A good question but there are other questions too. Too many think tanks are doing the same things that a 1970s think tank would do. They're still producing papers that aren't well read and measuring their impact by newspaper column inches.

None of the think tanks have a really good blog (the ASI's is best) but, then again, are blogs important?

Continue reading "Who can revive the IEA... and how?" »

Posted at 19:22 in Think tanks and campaigners | Permalink | Comments (9)

Any questions for you?

Please use the thread below to suggest any question topics for the end-June survey (that will go live tomorrow morning).

Posted at 14:36 in ConservativeHome Members' Panel | Permalink | Comments (68)

David Cameron questions Burkha-wearing teachers and offers Opposition time for the Royal Mail Bill at his monthly press conference

We have already published two items from David Cameron's press conference this morning:

Here are some of the other highlights of what he said:

On Sharia law/Burkhas
On the subject of the story in today's papers about the extent of sharia law "courts" in Britain, he said that "there can only be one system of law in a a country like ours" and that whilst people should be at liberty to seek guidance from religious officials, this "cannot override your rights in law". In other words, we need to make sure that people who are using sharia courts "are well aware of their rights in British law". As regards the wearing of burkhas and niqabs, he said that it's a free country and that people have to be free to wear what they choose; however, he said there were issues in some areas such as regards school pupils and teachers: "You can't wear the full garb and be an effective teacher," he said.

On the delay in Royal Mail part-privatisation
He said the claim of Lord Mandelson that there was not enough time for the Second Reading debate on the bill on the Royal Mail was "extraordinary" given the long summer recess approaching. He said that the Conservatives would be happy to surrender one of their Opposition Day debates to allow for the Second Reading and/or sit for a bit longer into July. He said he was sure Lord Mandelson would find the offer "very helpful".

On Labour spending claims and attacks on "Tory cuts"
He said that Labour "can't relinquish the comfort blanket of spin and deception" and that they were failing to state the real facts on public spending. The Prime Minister is "spinning like it's 1999", he said, and that there was "a thread of dishonesty running through his premiership". The Government is in "a complete shambles" and is showing a "lack of respect for the people of this country". "Cuts cannot be avoided whoever wins the election," he added. On the claims being made by Labour about "Tory cuts", he said: "I don't know how the PM gets out of bed each morning". Some of the claims being made in leaflets in Norwich North such as abolishing free TV licences are "complete and utter rubbish".

Continue reading "David Cameron questions Burkha-wearing teachers and offers Opposition time for the Royal Mail Bill at his monthly press conference" »

Posted at 11:45 in David Cameron | Permalink | Comments (35)

Shadow Cabinet to give up all outside interests by the end of December

Speaking at his monthly press conference, David Cameron has announced that the Shadow Cabinet will relinquish all outside interests by the end of Decemebr.

He said that outside interests "can be a good thing" for MPs, and cited examples of the former doctor who wants to update their qualifications, the farmer who retains the farm, the entrepreneur who wants to retain an interest in the business he has built up etc.

He added: "I don't think a chamber full of professional politicians is a good thing" and said that the main thing was that MPs should be judged by what they do for their constituents and that it was perfectly possible to have an outside interest and be a good MP (just as there are idle MPs with no outside interests). It is imperative, however, that the public have all the relevant information.

He went on to announce that the shadow cabinet now recognised that at this particular period towards the end of the Parliament, it was important that they focused on their portfolios and that they have decided that from the end of December they will relinquish all outside interests. This applies to all MPs in the Shadow Cabinet and Lord Strathclyde (who does draw a salary as opposition leader in the Lords), but not Baronesses Warsi and Neville-Jones.

I welcome this announcement - having written on Friday that I believed the time was coming where the Shadow Cabinet owed it to the public to concentrate on preparing for government.

Additionally, the party is publishing today the details of the shadow cabinet's outside interests which will be publicly available on Wednesday. 12.45pm Update - they are as below.

Jonathan Isaby

The remaining shadow cabinet outside interests as of July 1st 2009 are as follows:

Continue reading "Shadow Cabinet to give up all outside interests by the end of December" »

Posted at 10:36 in Parliamentarians' duties and remuneration | Permalink | Comments (35)

Should the Conservative Party be apologising for the policies of the 1980s if it is to make electoral advances in the North of England?

The above question is inspired by last night's Sunday Supplement at the end of the Westminster Hour (45 minutes in), in which the Evening Standard's Anne McElvoy presented the first in a short series considering the potential for Conservative advances in the North of England.

Since the 1997 general election, swathes of the North of England have been Tory-free zones in parliamentary terms, although recent local elections results - in Lancashire and North Tyneside for example - bode extremely well for the next general election.

But would the party be aided in its efforts to make gains in the North it it were to apologise for the policies of the 1980s which saw the end of coalmining and other industry - and associated unemployment - in many areas?

Shadow Schools Secretary Michael Gove - who described feeling "more like one of Thatcher's orphans" rather than one of Thatcher's children growing up in Scotland in the 1980s - had this to say when interviewed by Anne McElvoy:

"We have got to acknowledge that the action that was taken during in 1980s to ameliorate the pain was insufficient. We simply didn't get the extent to which not just the economic future but the dignity, the culture, the society of parts of the north of England was built around those institutions and we were insensitive to that and I think we've got to show in what we say and do that we appreciate that. I think a simple 'sorry', frankly, would be inadequate actually to the scale of what is required".

Continue reading "Should the Conservative Party be apologising for the policies of the 1980s if it is to make electoral advances in the North of England?" »

Posted at 06:37 in Conservative strategy, Northern challenge, Thatcher & Thatcherism | Permalink | Comments (116)

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Philip Hammond states that "protecting frontline public services" is the key when reviewing government spending

Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Philip Hammond, has appeared on Sky News this morning, expressing the position that "protecting frontline public services" will be the key when reviewing government spending.

He reiterated the point previously made by the Conservatives that Labour's own figures already show that it plans cuts of around 7% in total public service spending over three years - although not starting until 2011. He said that this timing was "for purely political reasons" and that the Conservatives would start the process in 2010.

He said: "We need to fundamentally restructure the way we deliver public services... so that we can protect frontline public services... that's the key."

Aside from repeating already identified projects which the Conservaitves are committed to abolishing - the NHS computer, identity cards, the Contact Point database and regional assemblies - he would not be drawn any further on where the axe would fall under a Conservative Government.

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 11:41 in Tax and spending | Permalink | Comments (31)

Cameron considers joint Downing Street HQ with Osborne

I have just completed my 15,000 word guide to David Cameron's 'West Wing' - a guide to the key shadow cabinet members and staff advisers that have taken the Conservative Party to the edge of power. It'll be formally published on Tuesday at our 'Inside David Cameron's Conservatives' conference.

I mention it today, though, because Fraser Nelson has previewed one of the key findings in today's News of the World (not online):

"I hear Cameron and Osborne have a novel idea for government: move in together. They're thinking of sharing one big HQ, rather than settle down in No10 and the Treasury respectively."

As I've been studying Cameron's West Wing the most striking thing is the power of George Osborne. George isn't just Shadow Chancellor; he's also General Election co-ordinator. It is no exaggeration to say that as I've been meeting staffers over recent weeks in preparation for this guide, George Osborne's name is mentioned at least three times as often as David Cameron’s. In reporting this I'm not suggesting that Osborne is more influential than the man who leads the Conservative Party. He obviously isn't. My conversations with staffers have focused on the workings of the Tory machine and it is clear that they defer to Osborne when key decisions of tactics, resource deployment and staffing are made. If you look back on many of Project Cameron's biggest decisions - abandoning uber-modernisation, recruiting Andy Coulson, overhauling Boris Johnson's campaign - George Osborne's influence is enormous.

George Osborne's power is reflected in the geographical arrangement of the Tory leader's office. See the crude sketch below:

Click on image to enlarge

Osborne's staff, headed by Matt Hancock but also including the super-influentials, Rupert Harrison and Rohan Silva, sit within the leadership suite. Also there, notably, is Oliver Letwin (who, I say in the report, is one of four shadow cabinet influentials).

The proximity of the Osborne and Cameron offices is something the Tory leadership is anxious to retain if the Conservatives win the General Election. I am not aware of definite plans for integrating Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street but thinking is going in that direction.

Tim Montgomerie

Posted at 08:51 in Government-in-waiting, Team Cameron | Permalink | Comments (50)

Conservatives back at 40% in new YouGov poll

A YouGov poll for today's People newspaper sees the Tory lead increase to 16%, with the party again hitting the psychologically important 40% rating.

Comparisons are with the YouGov poll published in Friday's Telegraph.

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 07:49 in Opinion polls | Permalink | Comments (52)

Saturday, June 27, 2009

The next Conservative government must rebuild our armed forces

The leader writers at the Daily Mail complain that both Gordon Brown and David Cameron issued tributes to Michael Jackson:

"Was it really necessary for Mr Brown and David Cameron to issue tributes, and for the BBC (one of whose TV reporters in LA donned a black tie) to indulge in such besotted coverage as on the Today programme, where Wacko Jacko's 'genius' was compared to that of Mozart and Beethoven? Truly, we live in a world which no longer discerns between those who achieve fame, and the few who are genuinely touched by lasting greatness."

I don't actually think there was anything wrong with the Tory leader's simple statement. You can be sure that many would have been more unhappy in this 'age of Diana' if he had stayed silent (as this website did!).

Today, however, we pay tribute to people who really are heroes. It's Armed Forces Day and on Platform Adrian Blair calls for much better medical and psychiatric care for our veterans.

Liam Fox and David Cameron have both campaigned for a renewal of Britain's military covenant and that is to be welcomed. Too many soldiers return from service overseas to inadequate healthcare. Too many young soldiers live in substandard accommodation. Too many service families get poor education because of the schools system's failure to account for their circumstances.

None of these problems will be adequately addressed if the Tory government cuts the UK defence budget in a disproportionate way after the next election although that is exactly what is going to happen if the NHS - which has been showered with cash in recent years - is protected from spending restraint. Time and again when we survey Tory members we find that they believe that our armed forces should be at the front of the queue when it comes to public spending. They are right and - although MoD procurement needs to be overhauled - the Conservative leadership needs to listen to them.

Brown and Blair sent our armed forces to war on a peacetime budget (as the Chief of the General Defence Staff conceded this week) and the consequences of that have been personally disastrous for many of our under-equipped servicemen and internationally our reputation as a military power has also been damaged.

Defence of the Realm is the first priority of any government and it should be natural and instinctive for a Conservative government.

Tim Montgomerie

Posted at 08:59 in Defence | Permalink | Comments (108)

Friday, June 26, 2009

John Bercow: "Something of a relief" to leave Tory benches

John Bercow yesterday: “I confess for somebody who’s historically and perhaps even legendarily independent-minded that that is frankly something of a relief.”

Tim Montgomerie

Source: Bloomberg

Posted at 12:29 in Parliamentary moments | Permalink | Comments (94)

Has the time come for all members of the Shadow Cabinet to give up their outside interests?

This morning's Guardian reports that some members of the shadow cabinet will retain their outside interests until "just before the general election".

It comes in the wake of the decision by some of those at the top table - such as Andrew Mitchell, Alan Duncan and Grant Shapps - now to forgo lucrative outside earnings before they would have been obliged to declare the details of what they are being paid for those other jobs as of next month.

In November last year, it was reported that David Cameron wanted his shadow cabinet ministers to give up all of their outside interests; however, he did not pursue that course of action after apparent resistance from within the ranks.

As I have written before, I am not opposed to our MPs having outside interests in principle - on the contrary - and blanket bans on things are generally to be questioned. For example, I think there is a difference between spending an hour on a Sunday morning firing off a column for a newspaper and regularly going into an office to work on a weekday.

But as the inevitable general election gets ever closer, is not the time coming for the shadow cabinet to call time on those outside jobs which the public will surely see as a distraction from the task of ousting Labour and preparing to take the reins of government?

I suggest that it would be a powerful signal that the Conservatives are serious about wanting to take power if, by the time of the party conference, David Cameron can announce that all his shadow cabinet have rescinded their business interests and are 100% focused on the main matter in hand.

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 07:03 in Frontbench, Government-in-waiting, Parliamentarians' duties and remuneration | Permalink | Comments (73)

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Tories at 38% in YouGov/ Telegraph survey

Other parties are at 19%.

List of expenses repayments by Conservative MPs published today

2.30pm Update: Scroll to the bottom of the post for the new repayment details

---

This afternoon the Conservative Party is to publish details of how much individual MPs have repaid to the authorities after making "questionable" expense claims.

The BBC suggests that the figure will total around £250,000 - double the amount already known about.

It comes after the party's scrutiny panel has finished going through the claims of all Conservative MPs. Incidentally, for reference, the membership of the panel was:

David Gold, senior partner at Herbert Smith (not David Gold the Eltham PPC)
Patrick McLoughlin MP, Chief Whip
John Randall MP, Assistant Chief Whip
Ed Llewellyn, David Cameron's Chief of Staff
Ian McIsaac, The party's Head of Compliance
Jeremy Middleton, Chairman of National Conservative Convention

David Cameron addressed MPs this morning at a meeting which I am told was "good-natured", with MPs listening in silence as he explained how the information was to be made public this afternoon.

I also gather that a number of MPs - including Andrew Mackay, the leader's former senior adviser who stepped down over his own claims - praised David Cameron for the decisive lead he has taken on this whole issue.

1.30pm Update:

In advance of the publication of the information, David Cameron - prior to making his speech about the individual and the state - said that Conservative MPs has "responded overwhelmingly in a positive way" to the work of the scrutiny panel. He emphasised that whilst those paying money back had not broken the rules, it was about "understanding public anger" and having to "atone for the ways of the past".

Jonathan Isaby

> On Sunday Tim Montgomerie noted 'the grim mood of the parliamentary Conservative Party'

2.30pm Update:

The party has now published a full update in the findings of the Scrutiny Panel and has summarised its findings as follows:

Continue reading "List of expenses repayments by Conservative MPs published today" »

Posted at 11:46 in Parliamentarians' duties and remuneration | Permalink | Comments (63)

"Emergency cuts cabinet" could meet immediately after a Tory election victory

The Guardian is reporting this morning that if a Conservative Government is formed after the next election, then (shadow) chancellor George Osborne may seek to hold a "two-day emergency cabinet session" to discuss and agree how to bring public spending under control department-by-department.

The paper suggests that at present there is a supposition that individual Cabinet ministers will have to justify their departmental budgets privately to a "star chamber" of a few big beasts; but it reports that there is now increasing pressure for the decisions to be made collectively at the top table:

"Some shadow cabinet members are arguing that an emergency collective cabinet decision might be the most effective approach: it would allow the tensions between the big-spending ministries, such as defence and schools, to be aired in front of the cabinet, binding everyone in to whatever decisions were taken."

My initial reaction is that this latter approach would be eminently sensible; not least because it could also herald a move back in the direction of Cabinet Government, which has hugely diminished under successive administrations.

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 07:24 in Tax and spending | Permalink | Comments (77)

David Cameron underlines the Conservative commitment to rebalance power of the individual over the state

Earlier in the year, some wondered about the potential impact of the recession on the debate about civil liberties.

And at lunchtime today, according to a report on the Today programme, David Cameron is due to make a speech in which he will emphasise the need to rebalance the relationship between the state and the individual in favour of the individual.

On issues such as the DNA database, the surveillance state and the way councils have used the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act to snoop on private citizens, the Conservative leader will promise reforms to the legislation to shift the balance towards the rights of the individual over the state.

In addition, he will embrace the spirit of freedom of information legislation and seek to extend it with a "right to data", meaning that the public will have the right to access all kinds of data, such as police clear up rates and information relating to outcomes across different hospitals.

I'll update this post later today when we have more detail.

2pm Update:

David Cameron has now made the speech are here are some key extracts:

Continue reading "David Cameron underlines the Conservative commitment to rebalance power of the individual over the state" »

Posted at 06:58 in Civil liberties | Permalink | Comments (59)

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

CCHQ produces new attack ad taking up David Cameron's theme from PMQs on Labour spending lies

Following the theme of today's PMQs, the party has just released this attack ad...

Posted at 15:16 in Tax and spending | Permalink | Comments (38)

David Cameron and Gordon Brown exchange accusation and counter-accusation on spending at an unedifying PMQs

Jonathan Isaby's verdict: Speaker Bercow intervened a number of times to call for order, citing that the public don't like it, which suggests that he intends trying to clamp down on cat-calling and disorder during PMQs. The public probably will not have found today's exchanges between David Cameron and Gordon Brown especially edifying either, as they exchanged statistics and accused each other of not telling the truth...

12.28 Speaker Bercow intervenes on a Labour MP trying to attack Tory spending plans by reminding the House that the Prime Minister is not responsible for Opposition policy.

12.20 Labour MP Martin Salter (who was unofficially in charge of Bercow's campaign for his Speakership) prefaces a question by emphasising the need for the whole House to get behind him.

12.17 Daniel Kawczynski accuses Brown of insulting the President of Poland by attacking the Polish Law and Justice Party of which he is a member; Brown says he has good relations with the man and that the Tories should question the policies of some of their partners in Europe.

12.15 James Duddridge asks specifically if Brown has had contact in any way with Damian McBride; Brown (as last week) says no.

12.14 Clegg accuses Brown of dressing up spending as "investment".

12.14 The Speaker calls for order for a third time.

Continue reading "David Cameron and Gordon Brown exchange accusation and counter-accusation on spending at an unedifying PMQs" »

Posted at 11:34 in PMQs | Permalink | Comments (43)

Have you booked your place on the ConservativeHome cruise?

ConservativeHome will be cruising down the Thames on Thursday 23rd July from 7pm until just after 10pm.

Daniel Hannan MEP will be joining us for the cruise and will be making a brief speech. During the evening we'll also announce the winners of our movement awards.

The cost will be £30 and will include a big BBQ. After one free drink there will be a cash bar. If you'd like to join us for the cruise please send a £30 cheque (made payable to ConservativeHome) to ConservativeHome, 5 The Sanctuary, Westminster, London, SW1P 3JS. Alternatively you can pay by PayPal. Click here and pay £30.

Tim Montgomerie

Posted at 09:07 in About ConHome | Permalink | Comments (29)

Public school boys run Britain says David Davis during a defence of grammar schools

David Davis flexed his muscles last night during a Spectator debate on grammar schools. Public school boys now 'run Britain' he added: "The media, the law, business - they are all dominated by public school boys."

The Daily Mail records some of his key words:

"Every chance I had was created by that grammar school [Bec Hrammar School in Tooting] and that is what grammar schools have done for hundreds of thousands of children from poor homes, council estates, even broken homes, through the postwar years. They were the greatest instrument for social mobility ever invented. The charge against the grammar school is that they helped the brightest at the expense of the weaker child. The truth about the comprehensive system is that it failed the best without helping the weak...

Today we are witnessing the results of a failed revolution, where egalitarians abolished grammar schools to level opportunity in our society, and accidentally destroyed the chances of the very people they were trying to help... They punished the bright poor kids who were held back. They handicapped the intellectual capacity of the country. And out of this catastrophe there was only one winning group. Do you know who they were? Yes, the public schools. Who teach just 7 per cent of the population."

As ConHome has reported before, we expect backbench Tory MPs to amend any education bills from Michael Gove and David Cameron so that they allow for new grammar schools.

Tim Montgomerie

Posted at 08:59 in Big Beasts, Compassionate conservatism, Education | Permalink | Comments (148)

June 2009

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Monday, June 29, 2009

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Friday, June 26, 2009

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

New on other blogs