The Tories' great manifesto launch

AndyinBrum

So you weren't that impressed then?

toco

Well we are all demanding change and it seems we now have the opportunity to grasp the chance to make a difference.The Conservative manifesto offers a new approach which is so refreshing and welcome after so much waffle and broken promises since 1997.

Dean

Fraser - you say that for the amount we spend on the NHS we could provide everyone with BUPA cover and have a much better system. But who would treat the "pre-existing conditions" that no private, insurance-based health care provider, including BUPA, will ever agree to cover?

By failing to understand the market failure at the heart of all private health care provision, you just make yourself look silly. Even the well off don't want a system that will leave them unprotected once they develop a chronic condition.

On this issue, Cameron is right and you are wrong. But that makes sense, doesn't it? Cameron has had experience of nursing a sick child, and you haven't, judging by the naivety of your comments.

biggestaspidistra

It sounds dreadful.

Alexander Macleod

The name is Shaun Bailey, not Sean

Tim W

I thought it was good. It was a bit long but when you've got a chance to force all the top journalists to listen to you then you might as well take it.

Those videos clearly don't work on TV. I think Andrew Neil said at the conference that it was BBC policy to not show them. In that case another idea needs to be found.

The Manifesto seems radical but I hope the Tories get the majority they need to put it into practice. If there is a hung parliament then its a lot of hard work and good ideas put to waste.

Thomas Aquinas

@Dean: I'm no expert, but I think "pre-existing conditions" are limited to original sin, and I'm not sure the NHS is competent to deal with that.

Noa Zrk

"He spoke about the Cameron proposal for employee buy-outs – a good idea. Let them make a profit, and then we’ll turn bureaucracies into industries..".

Whaaat? How can Labours cherised quangoes ever produce anything other than ever-increasingly complexity than simply strangle business, enterprise and personal intiative?

Rather than this anaemic Andrew simply perpetuating the Guardian knot, we need a new Alexander, prepared to ruthlessly cut, slash and burn the incomprehensible complexities of the Gordian era.

Percy

Fraser, Dean is right BUPA is great if you're not ill. But if you are or get seriously ill you'll find BUPA may not be so keen at standing by.

Tiberius

Brown says the manifesto contains all the same old Tory stuff we had to get rid of in 1997, and leaves you on your own rather than being helped.

The latter, micro-manager's remark defines the difference between government interference and freedom very well if only the Mentalist knew it. The former; well Gordon, will that be the golden inheritance you squandered, which was so golden that you stuck to the spending plans for the first two years?

Labour never has offered anything worthwhile, but under Brown it manages to offer less than even that.

Yosemite Sam

Fraser, I watched the launch and was impressed by the passion and sincerity demonstrated by Cameron. But can he change the psychology of a large number of people who, by instinct, turn to the state for every little bit of support they need in their lives? I hope he can because only then will we regain the self respect and confidence that we once knew as a great people. Given this ambition, I felt your comments were a bit niggly to be honest. As a subsidiary comment to your piece, I would say you are wrong about the NHS. In my opinion, politicians have not sought to look at what the NHS should do totally free at the point of delivery, what should be done with copayments, and what should not be done at all by the NHS but left to the free market. For example BUPA deal exclusively with charged for elective procedures, they do not do A and E. How to deal with chronic conditions, emergencies, primary care, medical education, medical research, public health, rare specialities, cosmetic surgery etc, etc, etc. One funding model does not fit all.

Peter From Maidstone

Dean, you say...

Fraser - you say that for the amount we spend on the NHS we could provide everyone with BUPA cover and have a much better system. But who would treat the "pre-existing conditions" that no private, insurance-based health care provider, including BUPA, will ever agree to cover?

When my company switched from BUPA to AXA-PPP we had a contract that accepted all pre-existing conditions. With private health-care there are certainly limits, but generally we found that BUPA and then AXA-PPP were well worth the money for non-critical and non-chronic illnesses. My wife had a series of issues which were generally treated well under private health care over many years, and certainly better than they would generally have been under the NHS. I could well believe that for many sectors of health care the private system would be best for all.

inigojones

The Tory presentation was not up to their usual polished standard. If Lord Ashcroft was paying for it he must have been hopping mad. The TV interludes were a complete waste of time for those of us outside the venue, which detracted from the quality of the speeches. I hope lessons will be learned for next time. [ Did anybody catch the Sky presenter's reference to the Battersea rats running about before the big event? Just how impartial are these guys?]

Nicholas

Tiberius, it amused me to note, in between bouts of nausea, how Brown slyly claimed the first two years spending restraint as his own creation in his "interview" with Jon Snow yesterday. Not a mention of him conforming to Conservative spending plans - and Snow let him get away with it of course.

I watched and listened to him thinking what a repulsively conniving and manipulative man he is. Hubris and not an iota of humility or real compassion (plenty of the usual socialist "holier than thou" pretend stuff though). A thoroughly disgusting specimen who has been given an undeservedly soft ride.

Ian Walker

Grayling will be OK, he's just been sin-binned for the election to stop the Labour scum taking him out permanently.

Woody

What a refreshing change from the usual Labour dogma.
Listened to RadioFiveLive at work but was appalled at the 'labour slant' afterwards. That heavyweight John Inverdale (rugby man) was the programme host and the words 'airey fairy', well-heeled', wholly impractical and John Pinear added his bit, saying the comparison between Cameron and Brown was slick against 'not flash, just Gordon', etc. etc.
This manifesto is for those 'who can be bothered' but not for those 'who can't be bothered'.
Those that can't be bothered, are those that have got used to being spoon fed by this government and haven't got the energy, will power or brain cells to 'be bothered' and there you have it - that's the choice we have.
Let's hope the 'can be bothered' win!

Greenslime

And not a peep, yet, from Dipstick Dick of the North!

What impressed me was the lack of negativity. No constant referral to what this or that party is going to do, just a "this is what we would like to do, are you going to join us message".

Brown's response: "the Tories are proposing to give a tax break to the 3,000 richest people in the country". PATHETIC!

Richard of York

Back by pop demand..Thanks Greenslime!

The big Idea....well it sounds like the big we have no idea....roll back the state and get on with it yourself while we the Toffs head for the nearest walled community and hunker down until the next idea comes along.
For many people it will feel like being cut adrift in a lifeboat while the liner heads south for the winter.

Any Colour but Brown

"Richard of York
....For many people it will feel like being cut adrift in a lifeboat while the liner heads south for the winter."

You can, either, join in and help get Britain back on its feet or you can join the rest of the workshy and feckless in Captain Bligh's, errr, sorry Brown's open lifeboat.

The choice is yours.

Simon Stephenson

Richard of York : 3.42pm

"The big Idea....well it sounds like the big we have no idea

Is this a serious comment, or just a classroom soundbyte? The manifesto, just as Labour's was yesterday, is full of ideas. You may or may not agree with them, but they're ideas, nevertheless.

"roll back the state and get on with it yourself while we the Toffs head for the nearest walled community and hunker down until the next idea comes along."

Is this really the best you can do to question the thought that the State:individual relationship has become too heavily weighted in favour of the State? That the only purpose the Conservatives have for decentralising power is to improve the wellbeing of the "I'm alright, Jack" brigade? That it is quite impossible for decent society to be composed from voluntary co-operation of independent individuals - it has to be done by preventing people from being independent?

"For many people it will feel like being cut adrift in a lifeboat while the liner heads south for the winter."

Many? How many?

For some, I hope many, it will feel like control of the liner has been taken away from those who see bliss only as being eternally stuck in the gales of the deep Antarctic, and given back to those to whom a fortnight in the tropics every now and again is an essential part of dealing with the trials of everyday life. We're not all aficionados of collectivist morals and endless conformity, you know.

Richard of York

@any colour but pink,

Well if the lunatics ever do get back into power, I shall lower my drawbridge and watch from the Battlements as all those tory busybodies try to marshall the troops of the hapless into a cohesive organised fighting force to build the "Big Society"

I am just picturing a blue rinsed do-gooder from Chipping cum-lately shooing a bunch of hoodies away from her new found moral compass while manning the barriers to keep the pound...lol
Thank God I have no mortgage anymore and a safe job.
Cheap flights and a hide-away in the sun.

AJR

The choice of Battersea was the most revealing things about the launch - the regeneration of the building and the area has failed to date because of a lack of public investment to catalyse private investment. Even now the Mayor of London's plans are contingent on public investment in an extension to the Northern Line. Handing people power to run their parks and schools is great, but people power is not going to bring regeneration to Battersea, nor is it going to address other forms of market failure. That's why the state grew in the first place - because only the state can tackle market failure. Surely the banking bail out taught you that? Nothing in the manifesto says to me that the modern Conservatives understand this, and the use of a site in need of public intervention to launch a political manifesto opposed to an active state was at best a bad joke, at worst cynical posturing.

Nicholas

Richard the Dork: "I shall lower my drawbridge and watch from the Battlements"

Why not do us all a favour and instead piss off back to the failed Republic you came from, taking your ridiculous class war stereotypes with you.

In any case your precious New Labour government destroyed for ever the notion that the Englishman's home is his castle. And you have the nerve to talk of "tory busybodies". Give me strength.

logdon

Verity
April 13th, 2010 3:32pm

I think the backlash is well on its way. Muslims, by their incalcitrence are digging a huge hole and it's people, not government who will finally shake it all up.

The first MRS case caused by this scandalous capitulation to the ever shifting sands of taqiyya over islamic demand will create headlines which no-one will ignore.

Refusal to be treated by anyone who will not bare their arms I'm sure will ensue.

After all isn't it a human right to be treated in an NHS hospital which conforms to basic hygene standards?

Victor Southern

Verity and his/her soulmate Vulture mistake pure rudeness for wit. They also believe that unbridled and continuous criticism of Cameron [a la Heffer] can substitute for reasoned argument.

Simon Stephenson

Richard of York

It strikes me that your discussion technique is confined either to making Labour-good slogans, or to responding to assertions made against you with counter-assertions. You rarely, to my knowledge, repond to a serious question at all, and if you do, it's never with a constructive answer.

You may have read on Tom Bradby's blog his comment about interviewing Gordon Brown. He writes:-

"He doesn't seen to understand that we are here to ask difficult questions and test his arguments by establishing contrary positions".

Do you think you suffer from a similar lack of understanding?

TGF UKIP

Fraser, despite not being featured among Guido's six runners a couple of weeks ago, it seems you are making a determined run for the Alastair Campbell job after all.

logdon

"I am just picturing a blue rinsed do-gooder from Chipping cum-lately"

And thus the ancient cliche ridden intelligence of Richard is exposed. Once again.

I wonder, does he even dream in Labour soundbites?

Here's one. No more boom and bust. That worked well, didn't it?

No doubt the verbally challenged Yorky also thinks, 'it's the right thing to do', when posting his idiocy.

Simon Stephenson

AJR : 5.15pm

"... but people power is not going to bring regeneration to Battersea, nor is it going to address other forms of market failure. That's why the state grew in the first place - because only the state can tackle market failure. Surely the banking bail out taught you that?"

Do you accept that there's a difference between political authority policing the market and the same authority working on the basis that it is better that it directs and controls every significant thing that the market does?

I ask because this is, in essence, the difference between the two major parties, and it is quite wrong for those of the socialist persuasion to infer that Conservatism means complete abandonment of any authoritative position over the market.

Also, it's at least arguable that the bank bail-out would never have been necessary had it not been for the passing of the Community Reinvestment Act in the USA, and the transfer of regulatory power to the (intentionally) toothless Financial Services Authority in the UK. Both, may I remind you, decisions of State politicians, not the market.

Norman

My family of three adults, me mywife and my son are all insured with both BUPA ( Me and my son) and PPP ( my wife and my son). I am pensioner earning about 20K, and we are able to do it becuase we sacrified yearly holidays abroad, eating out and large house and mortgagea as we rightly decided that becuase of my son's medical problem health insurance comes first. For all of us, the pre-existing conditions were waived and we get excellent service and we see the best specialists. When my son was ill and the hospital beds were not available under NHS, he got the private bed in the best section of the same hospital. One need not be rich to get the BUPA/PPP cover and if joined at the right time pre-existing conditions are waived. It is nseered at by my colleague a Labour party member,has two horses, live in a large house with 2 cars and takes holidays abroad. Yes, downsize this monolith called NHS which employs more people than Indian Railways and as efficient.

Chuck Unsworth

@ Richard

" I shall lower my drawbridge and watch from the Battlements"

So tell us - do you have the slightest idea of what a drawbridge is and how it works, or are you another vitim of State Education?

Minnie Ovens

You're impressed?
I just think Cameron, a leftish light Conservative, lies as well as Brown except in a more impressive accent.
"Power to the people". So original. Where have I heard that before?
I would love to be impressed but the boy has cried wolf too many times.
I'll vote but not for Labour and, unless Edmund Burke appears for the Tories, it will not be for the Conservatives.

Sevo

I just watched the Sky News "coverage" of this. Exactly 23 words, followed by a supremely quote by Mandelson, followed by 12 minutes' interview with some hapless twit MEP from UKip. What is with Sky News? Why do they go out of their way to damage the conservatives and bolster everyone else???

daniel maris

Tory lead down to 3%. Perhaps I'm a better analyst than some others around here.

I think a narrowing gap reflects the factors I have aleady identified:

1. Fear of the Tories perceived attack on conditions of employment.

2. Disillusion among core voters about the Tories position on the EU, mass immigration and PC culture.

3. The attractiveness of the Lib Dems to younger and undecided voters - a dithering mass of several million.

Nicholas

AJR: The choice of Battersea, blah, blah, etc.

Your proposition only works if a cartoon characterisation of the Tory policies as peddled by socialist propagandists is accepted and the legitimisation of the real cartoon policies of the socialist state which, thoroughly discredited in fact, are not discredited in public perception because the MSM and chumps like you peddle preposterous tosh about it and bolster them up. A level playing field it ain't.

When can we expect some honesty and self-critical scrutiny from socialists? When will they attempt to make an argument with logic and evidence instead of just smearing those who disagree? Yes, I know, but when do you expect Hell to freeze over?

daniel maris

I think AJR makes some fair points. For the younger contributors here, the redevelopment of the Battersea Power Station site by the private sector was promised by Mrs. Thatcher back in the early 80s, before that first initiative fell on its face.

Many of the big problems that society faces do require big solutions steered by the state e.g. mass immigration, youth crime on estates, housing provision, a modern health service (if you want it kept free as the Tories wish) and so on.

If you want to involve people in government you need to give them real power. There are some areas where the Tories may be on the right track e.g. with schools.

Verity

Norman, your post was interesting, but your closing jab at Indian Railways was silly and tells us you've never travelled by train in India. It's excellent. You in Britain should be so lucky. And the system is unbelievably vast and caters to one bn peeps.

When the Indians put their minds to something, they do it extremely well.

Sterence

The "Richard of York" who commented on this post is clearly a different person from the one who usually trolls this site. Examine the vocabulary. It's been suggested before that this is a bot or some such: I don't think so but more likely a shared logon within Labour HQ.

Simon Stephenson

daniel maris : 11.13pm

"Many of the big problems that society faces do require big solutions steered by the state"

Maybe, but you'ld do well to recognise that many of these big problems of today are the direct result of the State "solutions" to the problems of the past. The chief failing of modern politics is that it sees no virtue in dealing with situations on a "sum of the consequences" basis. The reason for this is that there's an irrational asymmetry in the untrained mind between valuing things in the present, and in the very short-term, and valuing them further in the future.

As politics becomes more populist and more direct, the tendency will be to design and favour policy that front-ends the benefits, and pushes all the costs into the long grass of the future. And so, as we go further and further into the future we will find ourselves increasingly having to deal not only with the random problems that life holds for us, but also with a great array of nonsenses caused by the teenage thinking of the past.

So, in answer to your point, I would say that we should be very careful about going gung-ho into State intervention, because at the present time the thinking that goes into policy determination is so flawed that it is causing bigger problems than the ones it is "solving".

Bide awhile. There will come a time when societies re-realise that by far the best known way to run big nation-states is by a representative democracy in which high-quality intellects are elected and their judgement is then deferred to.

daniel maris

Simon S. -

Politics is not about leisurely reflection.
And our politics is anything but populist. If it was populist we'd be out of the EU, for one thing.

I agree we can't rely on the state to deliver on everything, but that in turn means you have to create alternative power structures - particularly in our most damaged communities.

At the same time we need to change the mindset of people so we move away from welfare dependency.

But I just feel the Tories are not connecting in a real way with people. We won't get much until we reconnect at the most basic level and I fully support the UKIP proposal to bring in a referendum system to ensure we never have again a state of affairs where the political elite take us into fundamental changes in our society without the support of people.

David Bouvier

Re BUPA vs NHS - Fraser's quip is fine so far as it goes, but (I hope) he was not actually proposing that any current BUPA policy is a direct substitute for the NHS's scope of service however poorly delivered.

The difference include: Primary care, Trauma/A&E;, maternity, chronic conditions, rehab, forensic/secure/long-term psych care (much now NHS purchased, privately provided), genetic/congenital conditions, etc etc

But Fraser is correct that a system where one or many free-standing but regulated health insurance funds (with dues subsidized for the poor or unemployed), with care provided by a competing set of public, private or charitable hospitals and clinics, provides superior care and patient experience. Look at France, Germany, or other Western European countries for many examples.

By disconnecting quality and availability of care from funding, then hospitals compete to treat patients well, and the insurance funds and regulators have to deal transparently with issues of what care is covered, and the financial viability of the system.

Instead we have the NHS fudge where covert denial or delay of the best care is used to avoid tough financial and scope of care decisions, and incumbent hospitals know that operational incompetence as a demand limiter that keeps them afloat financially.

A broken system that needs fixing.

Ghengis

Verity: might I respectfully suggest that you revisit the history regarding Indian railways.

Simone

I'm personally impressed by the manifesto, but I've just listened to David Cameron on the radio and I can see a problem in communicating this manifesto.

For David Cameron, and those from his background, community service is second nature. I think, however, that he's going to frighten a lot of people.

For instance, many people are tired of government control and interference. They are tired of being spied on and told how to think. But, they don't especially want to be involved in the community themselves.

So the Conservative message could easily be misunderstood. Suddenly it sounds like community service is going to become compulsory.

On the radio, DC kept repeating the line that: "Everyone wants to get involved in their children's schools".
I can imagine that many people were thinking, "Well I don't. I want good teachers, I want choice, I want freedom from the state, but I don't want to be involved myself"

So I think that a part of the manifesto that could have wide appeal if it was communicated well, is actually starting to appeal to only a narrow middle class audience of those who are community minded.

Insted, the Conservatives should major on choice and freedom.

Ghengis

Sterence: This is clearly computer generated propaganda, it can easily recognised by the lack of conclusion., computers do not do logic

Simon Stephenson

It's certainly true that there are some areas of policy where the political elite are holding out in opposition to popular opinion. But the entire social momentum is heading towards a more direct democracy and away from the more representative variety. This is the direction in which we are going, with greater numbers of people expecting MPs to be no more than transmitters of popular sympathy, fewer and fewer people of true intellectual weight being prepared to serve on this basis, and parliament becoming a worthless and expensive irrelevance.

You seem to believe that the whims, the illogicality and the double-standards of the masses should be the driving force behind social decision-making. I can't myself imagine anything more likely to bring about the end of mankind than following this course. We've spent thousands of years trying to come up with a political system that is acceptable to the masses, yet doesn't involve surrendering to mob rule and the tyranny of the majority.

Richard of York

@ Chuck
I redesigned the drawbridge at home to lower into the moat. as the local planning commitee said it blocked the view of the gas works for Lord toffee probosis who lives in the valley.
Still Chuck proves that with some innovation it is possible to over-come the Nimby classes.

S Ferguson

Fraser do you think you can nail the lie currently on the lips of Labourites that there are 1 million Britons "working" in the EU. I seem to remember you posted on this before and the figure was actually 25,000ish working but 1 million resident.

It appears in their manifesto
labour.org.uk/policies/fair-rules-for-the-immigration-system

Chris

BUPA is so great, as it doesn't have many ill people at the same time.

I assure you. They'd charge twice as much, if they had to take care of 5 million cancer sufferers at any time.

NHS is very cheap for what it offers.

Chris

Cameron is actually campaigning "not to lose" now. He really is.

His manifesto is about suring up core tory support. Not winning new voters.

He's campaigning to people who would vote tory through hell and high water. It's plainly obvious.

Christopher Mooney

Said this a million times to friends.

The tory parties problems over the last 20 years is the simple fact that they really don't listen to the electorate.

They spend far too much time trying to please party members, back benchers, and core party support (as in people who are going to vote tory no matter what the policies are) and offer little more than a collective snub to 50% of the country.

This is a manifesto for party members, and core vote. A huge error. A long suicide note.

What the tories, never take into account is that the majority of the country actually want a strong state, and want good public services.

"Good Public Services" ranks as number 1, for importance, on nearly every poll done in the last 2 years.

I'd suggest Cameron basically telling people:

"We are going to stop taking responsibility for providing good public services, and you have to do it yourself"

Won't go down too well.

What he fails to understand is that people living in cities have neither the time, or the will power, to be watching over schools and police stations.

They expect a government to provide these services. And to make sure they function.

You may get retired colonels, and housewives, in rural Barkshire, chomping at the bit to start a school, but the vast majority of people will find it ridiculous.

Make no mistake. Cameron could lose the entire election on this.

The last thing a leader who isn't trusted, and is seen as a risk, needed to do, with 3 weeks to go before an election is basically put people's public services at risk
I

daniel maris

Simone -

That's right. It is a problem. Again, we have to realise just how much pressure there is on the minority who do work. Work can be very demanding in teh modern age and lots of people, especially those who do night shifts don't have time to spend on serving on community groups.

I think the Tories are on the right track with schools in saying that parents can set up schools, but what people really want is their first choice to be honoured. I think tehre are ways of doing that but unfortunately that has not been pursued (it would involve I think splitting the state system into academic and vocational schools - which in many areas has already happened de facto - but then giving people an absoluted right to choose the school for their child...too complicated to explain everything here, but that should be pursued).

Simon Stephenson

Chris : 1.00pm

"NHS is very cheap for what it offers."

Thanks. Shall I take your word for it? Or have you something to substantiate this claim?

Let's put it like this. For comparable outcomes, the NHS should be cheap compared with the likes of BUPA, because it's only offering a state-of-the-art health-specific service. It's not supposed to offer club-class in-hospital arrangements like BUPA does - it's about health, and health alone, and this is the basis of its justification as a public service.

My guess is that if we put the entire NHS out to tender, we'd get every single benefit the NHS currently provides, and far fewer of the failings, for no more than 2/3 of what it's currently costing.

daniel maris

Simon -

Any such tender proposal would have to be looked at long and hard.

WE have the Railtrack proposal to show what could go wrong.

Remember also that thanks to TUPE regulations, there is much less opportunity for contractors to simply impoverishing staff in order to produce a "saving". Remember also that the any such proposal would result in huge official and unofficial strikes.