You Get What You Vote For

Bra-bloody-vo.

And the 25 who are campaigning for votes for wing of The Westminster Party that advocates integration into the EU Super State, (just slightly slower than that other two, but with twice as much denial and drama) are:

•Steve Baker
•Brian Binley
•Peter Bone
•Andrew Bridgen
•Douglas Carswell
•Bill Cash
•Chris Chope
•James Clappison
•Philip Davies
•David Davis
•Richard Drax
•James Gray
•Gordon Henderson
•Philip Hollobone
•Julian Lewis
•Jason McCartney
•David Nuttall
•Andrew Percy
•Dominic Raab
•Mark Reckless
•John Redwood
•Richard Shepherd
•Sir Peter Tapsell
•Andrew Turner
•Martin Vickers

Changes

From Dan Bull, the man who brought you the 4th Leaders Debate Rap.



Thanks Dan!

Where To Go Now?

Well it’s all over and done with and we are stuck with a hung Parliament. It seems the only way to break the deadlock is to win the Lib Dems over with a promise to change the voting system to one that will almost always ensure a coalition is needed. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are similar enough that they could probably find enough common ground to govern for a time.

I hope that FPTP can be preserved for the Commons, but there needs to be an urgent review of the constituency sizes and perhaps even boundaries which have benefitted Labour so greatly. This is not this first election in recent history where Labour has benefitted from the status quo. Cameron has got about the same share of the vote as Blair in 2005 and has fallen short in term seats; all parties and candidates should be on a level playing field; the electoral commission has some questions to answer on why it has not moved to take more corrective action.  We only need to look to this election where the third party is now dictating to the winner about what they want for there to be a functioning government to get a sense of how all future governments under PR would be formed.

For Cameron perhaps a wholly elected Lords using PR will allow him to seal the deal with the Lib Dems?

I am left wondering where I personally should go now? As regulars will know I am one of those disgruntled Tories who no longer wishes to support them because of the direction Mr Cameron is taking them. My objection is mostly on the Conservative position on continued membership of the EU. I do not believe the UK is benefitting from membership, in my heart I loathe the fact that 85% of our laws are made in a fashion I believe to be undemocratic. Furthermore I am tired of more and more powers being handed over.

I describe the EU as undemocratic but the truth is it is more anti-democratic in nature. One only has to look at how the EU is set up to be undemocratic despite the presence of a “parliament” which is unable to propose or initiate laws; it is a facade conceived so as to give the appearance of a democratic centre. The ruthless pursuit of it’s agenda and it’s willingness to break it’s own laws when it suits the Euro project makes the EU project a dangerous one for freedom loving democrats like myself. It is a totalitarian construct. It has achieved, or is still working to achieve every single aim it has set out for; you cannot defeat the will of the EU ruling classes; rare defeats in the past has been temporary as the EU ALWAYS eventually gets it way.

So which party does somebody of a right wing political agenda but it dead set in the idea that we must no longer participate in the EU but leave amicably but with great expedience? Well realistically the Conservatives are not an option. David Cameron will never give us a referendum on the EU, and he will likely re-ratify the Lisbon Treaty this year; he see’s Britain’s future in the EU but like all the others will not give that direction the democratic legitimacy and extend to us the voters a referendum. Had David Cameron not gone back on his Lisbon Referendum pledge last year he would likely have a majority today. A commenter on the DT Site has helpfully compiled this list showing what Dr North would describe as the UKIP effect. That is, these are the seats the Conservatives lost, where the UKIP vote is greater than the Tory losing margin.

Telford
Somerton and Frome
Plymouth Moor View
Morley & Outward
Newcastle-Under-Lyme
Bolton West
Great Grimsby
Walsall North
Walsall South
Southampton Itchen
Dorset Mid & Poole North
Wirral South
Solihull
Wells (LD gain from Con)
St Austell & Newquay
Derby North
Middlesbrough South & Cleveland East
St Ives
Dudley North

( Note: Most of this post was written yesterday, Dr North today lists 41 seats where the anti-EU vote cost the Tories )

I was one of those voices on the internet that warned that that the UKIP vote would in some seats cost the Conservatives; and it has done more it has denied them an Parliamentary majority. UKIP stood down in seats where the incumbent candidates were sufficiently vocal about the need for an EU referendum; I believe that with a commitment to a referendum on EU membership UKIP would have stood down in many more seats. When most Conservatives when polled tend to agree to either a referendum on membership or a degree of return of powers (unclear how that would happen) why have Cameron, Clarke and Osborne denied us this option?

So, I voted UKIP, but it would seem that I am one of only 3% or so that did. I have no regrets as I voted with my conscience and on the issues that I most care about; UKIP was the only option for me; in this election at least.

However, it is a little disappointing that UKIP were fairly disorganised in some areas; it seems there is little central help and candidates were left to fend for themselves – or at least that would be my assessment. Financially this is a big commitment to take on for UKIP candidates, if it were me I simply could not afford to stand. Despite some good policies and a compelling line that the three big parties are conspiring not to discuss openly how bad our debt crisis really is, it was clear that UKIP are really still a single issue party and that if only the blue team would accept that UKIP are right about EU membership they and the Tories could go back down the pub and get along together again. UKIP would probably disband if the EU membership question was finally settled. The entire UKIP campaign really came down to Buckingham with Nigel Farage being their star performer on TV not really coming close in the end to unseating the Speaker.

In my opinion, I hope UKIP do a little bit of soul searching and maybe take a look at a few things. There is a very real vacuum now on the right of the modern Conservative Party. And though the formula has clearly worked for them in terms of the EU elections, the UKIP formula does not work for UK elections; and a bigger presence in Westminster is exactly what they need to achieve their ultimate aim. I must also declare that I think their £ sign logo makes their literature and sites look dated, and reinforces the idea that they are a single issue party.

I want a party to fill this vacuum and I want that party to be able to win seats in Westminster. If UKIP in their hearts only see themselves as existing until the Conservatives change their point of view then I say we need another party in that void to cater for disenchanted Tories. If UKIP can recognise that for some they now represent more than they initially set themselves up to deliver and recognise that some minor tweaks would help sell them as an alternative to the conservatives on so much more than just Europe then I really truly believe that there is success to be had, and many, many more votes to be won.

Where exactly is my party of the right? In the next five years which party is going to raise the debate and fight for an end to the BBC tax? How about cutting welfare and socialist payments which create dependency and arguing that work should always be more rewarding than welfare? Who will speak out against the encroachment upon our civil liberties? Who on the right is advocating personal tax cuts for the coping classes? Who is going to cut through the bureaucracy and health and safety regulations which are stiffling small business start ups? Who is advocating Parliamentary oversight of judges? Where is the opposition to the new Supreme Court for the UK which cannot rule on devolved matters? Where on the right is advocating more Private Schools and Grammar schools which would allow more kids to get a better standard of education? Who is pointing out how illiberal it is to be a member of the CAP or to tell people how many hours they may work in a week? Who on the right dare question if we should continue as the United Kingdom or separate back to the component nations? Who is going to cut the cost and reach of the state? Who is arguing to an end to QUANGO’s and a minister in Parliament responsible for every penny that is spent of taxpayer’s money? I want a party who agree that life in prison means life in prison for people who commit the most vicious and serious of crimes.

The next few days it will be interesting and I will cheer from the very moment Gordon Brown is finally dragged out of Downing Street. However I am completely disenfranchised now by the major parties and struggling to find a political home and I don’t think I am alone. So what are we going to do?

DD

I have not been alone on the blogosphere in pointing out how the current electoral set up is almost criminally unfairly balanced towards Labour.  Very soon (May 7th to be precise) I think the full effect of just how unfair the electoral boundaries have become is about to come slamming home and it could be the wider electorate who are being courted like never before that will be demanding some answers when the results are being digested after the election.

With the Lib Dems polling above Labour today it would seem Labour's Plan B is working.  If the Lib Dems do well, it is the Tories that suffer more; Labour get in via the back door.

For example, if all three parties get exactly 30% of the popular vote, as a voter it would be fair for me to expect a roughly equal number of seats to be allocated to each give or take a reasonable margin of error.

Have a look at the UK Polling Report seat calculator, which is calculating seats based on a uniform swing which is admittedly is a little flawed, but paints a compelling picture none-the-less.  At 30% each, which is not beyond the realms of possibility looking at the current polls we would get the following outcome:

Labour 305 seats (-51)

Conservative 208 seats (+10)

Liberal Democrats 106 seats (+44)

Others 13 Seats (+1)

Northern Ireland 18 Seats (NC)

Do you see what I am seeing?  Not only do Labour come out massively on top despite attaining the same share of the vote as Conservatives and the Lib Dems, but even if we combined the Tory and Lib Dem vote, they could not form a minority government between them even if they wanted one with their combined tally.  Net result, Gordon clings on.

What about another scenario.  Let's give The Tories and the Lib Dems 32% each, and leave Labour on 26%.  Here's what comes out of the seat calculator:

Labour 252 seats (-104)

Conservative 243 seats (+45)

Liberal Democrats 124 seats (+62)

Others 13 Seats (+1)

Northern Ireland 18 Seats (NC)

Despite Labour potentially polling 6% less than the Tories and 6% less than the Lib Dems, they could end up with the most seats in the new Parliament. Net result, Gordon clings on.

It is the Electoral Commission who has held the responsibility for Electoral Boundary reviews can by no measure claim success for this distortion.  Such happenings are not chance occurances or accidents. 

Here's the thing, don't go knocking on their door on May 7th because they've just handed over responsibility for the boundaries to a brand new QUANGO called the Local Government Boundary Commission on 1st April 2010.  The body responsible for the stitch up will insist it is no longer anything to do with them, and this new body will rightly claim they had nothing to do with it.  We will be afforded No Questions, No Answers, No Accountability.  One body set up to provide a stitch up quietly melts away where its actions can no longer be called to account and a new QUANGO takes its place at great cost to us both financially and electorally.

Boundaries aside there is another point.  Postal Votes will be going out soon and I believe they can arrive between one to two weeks before the actual election day; so the "others" and the Conservatives had better get their arguments sharpened real quick if they are serious about kicking Brown out.    Postal voting is becoming more popular so there are some serious votes to be won and lost at this next debate because those ballots could be in the post before the last debate comes around. 

If the Tory plan is to give Nick Clegg more rope in the hope he hangs himself then they are going to lose because time is just about up and I am not convinced they understand this.  If Lib Dem support is a novelty, if it is a whim then the Tories need to know that they do not have the luxury of time. 

Cameron's term can be characterised because of his seemingly hubristic belief that when Labour fail, people will move to the Conservatives; so he moved the Tories left, in an attempt to seize the centre ground.  In the last week however, that centre ground went Orange.  Since last Thursday Brown seems to have retreated into the bunker and the Conservatives appear to have lost that little bit of momentum and confidence they had just started to get in the lead up to that first debate.  Fraser Nelson seems to be making a better case for the Conservatives and is more visible in the last few days than David Cameron.

There are plenty more twists and turns left in this campaign yet.

You Should Vote Conservative Because....

That's the question on "This Week", (now twice weekly).  It is a good question, and one that needs answering.

I say those 5 words out loud, and I can't finish the sentence.  Well I can, but not convincingly.

... Because the Conservative Party will give you a referendum on EU Membership.  No, can't use that.

... Because the Conservative Party will cut income tax so we can better provide for our families.  Nope, the two tax cuts I know of are for Inheritance and on NI for business contributions.

... Because the Conservative Party will cut fuel duty to help small businesses and families.  Nope, ditto duty on ciggies and booze.

... Because they will do away with the hated TV Licence and sell of the Left Wing BBC.  No, David Cameron long ago insisted he was a fan of the BBC.

... Because they will reduce the size of the government.  Not sure; they are talking about "Big Society" which sounds a lot like big government with a bit of out sourcing.

I will refer back to a previous post for the benefit of anyone who wants to know what I am looking for, and why I will not be voting for the three main parties.

This is not Tory bashing - I can't think of any reason to vote Lib Dem nor Labour.  But Lib Dem and Labour voters can probably finish their own sentences and that is part of the Tories problem.  Perhaps Conservative supporters can finish the sentence for themselves and help others to finish the sentence in a way that will make people want to vote for the Blues.

Monday Musing

Apologies for not posting for a few days, I have been away enjoying Conference League Football, celebrating my sisters impending birthday, recovering from some genetically modified super-virus and last night watching 24 and House all of which kept me away from the computer, and work will no doubt be competing for my attentions this week.

Along my travels there has been some conversations along the way from people regarding the election and regarding in particular the debates.  Despite what the polls are saying, I have yet to encounter anyone who is swinging their vote to the Lib Dems.  Now, that might say more about my circle of friends and family, and the encounters of the weekend, but none the less with a 14% swing in the polls, it is not matching the reality out there in Daniel World.

Which is good because I would genuinely be concerned if all of this fantasy talk of Nick Clegg becoming Prime Minister were to come true.  Mostly because of the Lib Dems fanatical support of all things EU - they would sell us down the river in a heartbeat; but also for Cleggs refusal to back the Lisbon vote despite the Lib Dem Manifesto commitment, and his intent to rid us of Trident (despite declaring publically he would not in his own leadership election, and at the cost of leaving our defence in the hands of the French).  I am actually getting annoyed hearing him refer to his opposition as the "older" parties when his party was born before Labour back in the 1800's.  (And back then the Liberal Party were for personal liberty, free markets, free trade and smaller government none of which can be charactered to Cleggy's party of today.)

What is a little alarming is that there are still people about supporting Gordon Brown, including people in my own family that really should know better.  It seems that whilst most of us are at work, Brown has done some good work in the last year on the sofa's of daytime television and at least one person I love dearly is at the moment still planning to vote for him, though she freely admits it is out of pity.  That really does not make it any better.

And with absolutely nothing to back up this or any of my claims I will move onto David Cameron who it seems has actually alienated people back home.  Whereas I thought he had just edged the debate over Clegg (despite clearly not having picked up some basic lessons from the US debates) it seems back home Cameron came across as remote and as somebody who could never understand the problems facing the coping classes and working poor.  A comment I would find difficult to make an argument against. So I won't.

And is it just me in thinking that if there really is a Clegg-bounce from a debate appearance, does that not make the case stronger for all of the parties to be involved in a TV debate at some point? If seeing and hearing Nick Clegg talk Lib Dem for his part of the 90 minute debate did him good because he was perhaps seen as new or different by some, then maybe UKIP, SNP, the Greens...et al, should be included also in future prime time debates.

So, with three weeks to go dare I make another prediction?  No, I am gonna stick with my original prediction of a wafer thin Tory majority and I think the Great British public in their infinite wisdom are collectively and subconsciously keeping the numbers in hung parliament territory because quite frankly we all have a shopping list of what we want from a perspective government, and few of us thanks to Browns busting of the bank balance are getting to hear much of what we want.  Consensus politics and record debt means there is little anyone feels able to promise.  The closer we get to polling day the more some of our shopping lists will get second and third looks from the main players.

If I were up there, as a crazy right-winger, I would be offering to sell off the BBC, and a referendum on EU membership which would save us money.  But I am not, so you can't have it.

ITV / Comres Poll

The first poll after the debates is out and there is a big twist

Conservative - 36%
Lib Dem - 35%
Labour - 24%
Others - 5%

The two big questions are, how solid is this for the Lib Dems and how would a General Election affect Parliament in terms of seats?

I think it is still hung parliament territory, but with the Lib Dems and Labour much closer together with the Conservatives way out in front.  Tellingly, Labour face a massive electoral advantage, so an 11% advantage for the Lib Dems and 12% to the Conservatives may still not be enough to relegate them to third in terms of seats.

The good news, perhaps now for as many as 76% of us is that the Socialists and Gordon Brown are now on the fast train to oblivion.

Update:  Oh Dear, the above is the "unweighted polling" and Adam Boulton on Sky says it leaked via Twitter when an ITV Journalist tweeted the raw data.

Update 2:  A lesson for us all.  Comres have rushed out the "real" results.

Conservatives - 35%
Labour - 28%
Lib Dem - 24%
Others - 13%

The weighting is done to ensure that voting weight for things like age and race samples from raw data are taken to match (or massaged) national samples... all in all, weighted polls are much more reliable than raw data (which is why the media pay for professional sampling to be done)

Overall, still in hung Parliament territory, with the Conservatives in the high 200's, Labour in Mid 200's and the Lib Dems's gaining to about the 70's. 

There are more twists and turns to come, but the story could be (with more polling) that the Lib Dems are starting to take Labour voters; it is the Conservatives that need to do this for an overall win. 

The Westminster Party

Lord Adonis was just on Sky News talking about his article in the Independent today which is worth reading in full.  The Labour Transport Secretary has attempted to wade into the sticky area of tactical voting and come out to declare that in his eyes Labour and the Liberal Democrats are virtually the same.  In fact he only quotes the Iraq War and the Lib Dem obsession of Proportional Representation Voting as their only differences. A little ironic considering Labour seem to have found a new appreciation for the voting with PR their proposed system for a wholly elected Lords and their step towards PR with their efforts to force a referendum on The AV system for the Commons.

Let's let Lord Adonis do the talking here.

Nick Clegg will spend the next month attempting to cast a "plague on both your houses". The truth is that the Lib Dems, for all their local opportunism, have national policy that is similar to Labour's. The difference is that Labour can implement its programme. The Lib Dems have no realistic chance to implement theirs without a Labour government. In Labour-Tory marginals, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote which helps the Tories against progressive policies. And in Labour-Lib Dem marginals every Labour MP returned is a seat in the Commons more likely to put Labour ahead of the Tories and therefore better placed to form a government.

So what about Conservative-Lib Dem Marginals?  Is the Transport Secretary going to finish the sentence and advocate Labour Supporters then voting Lib Dem?

The Liberals won their last election precisely a century ago. Or rather they were the governing party in a hung parliament which, with strong Labour support, introduced national insurance for the sick and unemployed, abolished the veto of the hereditary House of Lords, raised taxes on the rich, and permitted the trade unions to support political parties financially. In turn the Liberals supported the 1924, 1929 and 1977 minority Labour governments. Until recently the two parties were in coalition in Scotland. Outside wartime, the official Liberal party has never supported a Tory government. Lloyd George's decision to govern with the Tories after 1918 – even with the plea of a post-war national emergency – split his party, destroyed his own political authority, and led directly to Labour replacing the Liberals as the major party of the left within five years.

Never a truer word spoken by a Labour Minister.

Roy Jenkins told me when I was considering joining Labour after Tony Blair became Labour leader: "The only real difference is that Labour is now the larger party of social democrats, the Lib Dems are the smaller; and in our political system, it is generally wise to support the larger party if they are on the same page."

No surprises there then.

The Lib Dems have supported our investment in the public services, radical constitutional reform, equal rights, fair taxation, environmental protection and positive engagement in Europe. As his diaries reveal, Paddy Ashdown ardently sought a coalition with Labour after 1997, which might have happened had the Labour majority not been so large.

Take political reform, which is top of the Liberal agenda. It was this Labour Government that devolved power to a Scottish Parliament, a Welsh Assembly, a Northern Ireland Assembly and a directly elected Mayor of London. It was this Labour Government that introduced the Human Rights Act and that finally passed a Freedom of Information Act, giving the public the right to know. It was this Labour Government that removed most of the hereditary peers from the House of Lords – a reform the Liberals failed to implement when they had the chance in 1911. And it was the Tories who this week blocked a referendum on voting reform and our legislation to remove the remaining hereditary peers.

All these policies were supported by the Lib Dems. Yes, in some cases they were Lib Dem policy before Labour embraced them.

Well we all knew that Labour ran out of new ideas around 1998 and have been skulking around nicking other peoples ever since, but it is nice to have a Labour Minister commit to paper that they are nicking the Lib Dem's proposals.

So, it's clear that Lord Adonis has made a national acknowledgement that there is not a cigarette paper between the two parties.... hang on a second... "Not a cigarette paper between the two parties" where do I recognise that phrase from?.... hmmm.... Oh yes, that's right, that is what David Cameron reckons is all that separates HIS Conservative Party and the Lib Dems.
Let's revisit David Cameron's article entitled "A Lib-Dem-Tory Alliance will vanquish Labour" which he wrote for The Observer just last September.

In 1997, Labour cruised into power on a wave of expectation that Britain would become a more progressive country. Twelve years on, the poor have got poorer, social mobility has stalled and quality of life has gone down.

He understands Lib Dem foreplay well, let's recall what follows...

I don't believe in drawing dividing lines where they don't really exist. Politics works best when instead of hiding behind false divisions we seize opportunities to work together to get things done.

What do you mean Sir by "dividing lines where they don't really exist" ?  Surely that's the whole reason why you are in, and lead different political parties!

That's what Nick Clegg and I did with the Gurkha issue. We had different answers as to how best to repay those who had given our country so much, but we agreed the status quo was unacceptable, so we recognised it was best to work together, defeat the government and make them think again.

That same spirit should exist between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in other areas, too. That's because on so many progressive issues, there is strong agreement between our parties.

David Cameron then rolls off numerous examples of how the Conservative and Lib Dem policies are the same and subtly refers to each as "real progressives" so as to collectively group Conservatives and Lib Dems.

His last sentence begins:

There's barely a cigarette paper between us in all these areas. It's clear: the real enemy of progressive politics is not the Conservatives and I would not claim it is the Liberal Democrats.

So if Labour Ministers think that the Lib Dems and Labour supporters are essentially the same and the Conservative Leader thinks there is barely a cigarette paper between his party and the Lib Dems could it just be that is because the Parties are now too close together to warrant even pretending differently?

I find it pretty sad that in our adversarial system of democracy that has worked so well for so long, we now have most decisions and laws get handed down from a totalitarian system based in Brussels.  The areas left in which Parliament and our notional government presides over is monopolised now by what can only be described as "The Westminster Party" the amalgamation of three main existing parties who basically agree on what they will do on most things and on most policies including remaining quietly subservient to our real government in brussels.

To my mind the only way to resolve this is to force a referendum on EU Membership for the UK, whereby if we stay in we can do away with the largely unnecessary and costly Westminster and if we exit we can restore sovereignty and power to Westminster and make the decisions for ourselves with the parties willing and able to offer variety and alternatives.

Until that point, LIB/LAB/CON = Westminster Party.

Least Worst Option

I have been looking forward to this election for a long, long time.  I have been yearning for the simple pleasure of watching Gordon Brown issue a concession speech on the early hours of 7th May when it becomes clear that his beloved Labour Party has been completely wiped out in the polls with the Great British People having issued a stinging and lasting rebuke to kick the Socialists into the long grass for a decade or so.

But as time has rolled on by and as the election has drawn closer the reality of the situation and that of our politics has become more and more clear.  The three "main" Parties have all set themselves out on a course over the past year that in many ways is spectacularly similar.  Elections are no longer about people voting for what they want their MPs to do, and elections no longer provide for a democratically charged change of direction.  Elections are now used, here in this country of ours as a mandate for Governing in a way that the overwhelming majority of people do not agree with.  Manifestos are no longer adhered to, the policies are largely the same; our function as voters is reduced to changing a few of the main characters every five years or so and even then we are not exactly torn by the selection on offer, we seldom regret not electing certain individuals do we?  We are continuously picking and actively screening for the least worst candidate.  Those who are eventually deselected via ballot go on to lucrative and unelected positions either in the House of Lords or in Europe. 

Why are the political parties in the UK all offering much the same?  The answer is simple, they all must operate within the guidelines of what the EU lets them govern.  In other words, the EU makes the laws for us in the areas in which it chooses, then our Parliament and our political parties operate in the waste land that the EU does not deem important enough to already legislate on.  This election is worse, because post-Lisbon the EU controls so much more and is building the framework to seize control of our markets and our diplomatic service.  Do not kid yourselves that this decreasing sphere of legislative freedom will not get smaller and smaller as the EU expandes again in the coming years.

Look at what according to the House of Lords the EU has sole control over.

Look also at some more seized EU broad controls:

And, they were good enough to share these, though don't forget that EU law has primacy in the UK, so by "share" they mean that they are prepared to and empowered to over rule with anything they disagree with.  You will hear our home grown parties talking about these policies, but run down the list and you will understand that their similarities are based upon the extent in which they think they can manoeuvre without being over ruled by the EU.

And lastly, the these are things the EU likes to control some funding and will be seizing overall control over at a later date.

So with so much hanging in the control of the EU, and with the people we put in Westminster the only ones who can both speak up for us, and maybe, just maybe work to bring control and decision making back to our shores and place it back into the hands of voters it really does matter who we vote for - but don't let any candidate or any party tell you that this election is not about Europe or the EU because it really is.  There are Euro ID Cards, Policing, Harmonised and Centrally Collected Taxes (probably VAT), all to come from the EU before the next UK Election on top of the surrendered competencies.

The only mechanism available to us in the Post Lisbon world is a referendum of the people of the United Kingdom asking for consent to remain in the EU with our present relationship.  There is no other mandate now for withdrawal - even repeal of the 1972 European Communities  Act probably won't do now we have signed into Lisbon as it formalises a drawn out and difficult divorce scenario, one which is designed to deter exit - in keeping with the "progressive" style legislation enacted by the EU which always points in one direction.

If you, like me are completely sick of this scenario, we have one month to make our voices heard.  There are options.  Firstly, there is UKIP who are preparing to fight this election with a promise to provide a referendum on EU Membership.  UKIP are not everybodies cup of tea, but if you are voting with the EU in mind, then UKIP must be considered.  They are clearly a compatible vote for disgruntled Tories. 

There is Jury Team who are a Party of Independents, who have an over-reaching set of shared aims, and at the top of that list is a referendum on continued EU Membership.

A lot of people though will want to still consider the main parties, and for them I would recommend they take a look at the Albion Alliance Pledge Pages, and see just which candidates are prepared to undertake this very simple pledge:

I pledge to work tirelessly to give the voters of my constituency a democratic and direct voice in the United Kingdom’s continued relationship with the EU.

I pledge that I will sponsor a Private Members Bill, written in clear concise terms, calling for a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union – and/or support any motion for such a referendum – and to vote positively for any Bill that may call for such a referendum, irrespective of Party Whip, with a view to the successful outcome of this pledge within 1 year of a new Parliament or sooner.

I simply can't imagine voting for anybody who would not address this most pressing of issues. If your preferred candidate has no and will not sign up to this, can you trust them to act in your best interests in Parliament?

You can help, even though there is still time for candidates to declare there are 1,004 candidates that have yet to be contacted to see if they will pledge and a further 2,156 who have been contacted but have as yet not stated if they will or will not pledge.  The Albion Alliance is not a political party, it is a cross-party initiative that is open to all candidates - and all they have to do is sign their name up to the above pledge which is hardly asking much of them given how important and how widely popular such action would be.

There is also another option, as I mentioned there is still time to become a candidate.  Most of the seats targeted by the main parties are done and as good as closed.  This country is almost singularly brilliant in its inclusion of independent candidates in our elections, and they are often the most colourful and interesting candidates.  Independents essentially say to the main candidates that you cannot run in my constituency if you will not speak to my issues and I hope that Independent Candidates up and down the country take the fight to the LIB/LAB/CON Alliance of government only so far as the EU prescribes.

Lastly I hope what I am hearing that the new batch of Conservative Candidates being more EU Sceptic than the present bunch is true, but I hope they if elected to a majority government are prepared to act on those instincts.  [They can obviously start by signing the Albion Alliance Pledge!]  The Conservatives are driving people into the hands of UKIP and despite the threat of a Hung Parliament; they seem instead to prefer a hung parliament with a greatly reduced anti-EU vote, than an outright victory with an anti-EU membership vote.  Why is this?  I am one of those people who used to think the Conservatives were right about "being in Europe, but not run by Europe" and that "we can reform from within" but I was a sucker and more importantly I was wrong.  I want the Conservative Party to speak to Conservative issues, and at present it is not really doing that; I hope that this is a short term development and it will soon mend its ways.  But if David Cameron is to issue his "referendum lock" and if he is to renegotiate some powers back to the UK, perhaps he would be so good as to publish the legislation he intends to introduce for this referendum lock, and perhaps he will tell us how he intends to do the impossible and get certain controls back, because until he does I don't believe the Conservatives can make any claims to represent in any way the EU Sceptic and democracy loving millions of voters who still do not know for sure who they are going to vote for.

Another Cameron Gaffe?

I really did think the Conservatives were having a good day.  However, David Cameron was just on ITV News at Ten and said the Conservatives want to get rid of Regional Assemblies - at least I think that is just what he said, feel free to correct me.... (I am 99.99% certain).

This is a pledge that Eric Pickles announced in 2008 and was latterly confirmed by David Cameron.  (RDA's or Regional Development Agencies are the same as Regional Assemblies, just by another name.)

This is a welcomed move that I would support as these were foisted upon us from Brussels and are central to the EU's attempt to weaken England through regionalisation.

However, the Conservatives own website states that they aspire not to scrap or get rid of RDA's or Regional Assemblies but that they aim to reform them.

Policy Quote:

"Reforming the Regional Development Agencies to create a vibrant, business-focused force that is more responsive to local needs."

Source: The Conservative Party Website

So, which is it Mr Cameron, will you "scrap" them or is "reform" your party's agenda?

It's not like this particular contradiction has not already been pointed out, over a month ago.  I do wish the Tories would get their Policy Line in order!

Feeling The Pain

It has not been much fun working where I do in the last few years.  During the Summer of 2008 there had been a number of redundancies that had been horrible to be around, but nobody expected what was to follow in October 2008.  Of the staff in my office, about 25 of them (approx 30% of everyone) were called by name one by one over the tannoy to attend reception and one by one they were escorted off to a meeting room and informed that they had been identified as candidates for redundancy, they were to go upstairs to collect their personal belongings, turn in their laptops and phones and exit the building and they would be contacted within a few days regarding the details of the mandatory group consultation which would soon begin.

By 4pm that day the office was completely empty as we toddled off to the pub to join our fallen comrades.  I lost 4 colleagues and my manager from a team of 8 to redundancy in an afternoon.  (One colleague was lucky enough to be retained after a month of consultation, but alas was latterly let go in a later round of redundancies; just one month before his wife gave birth to their first baby.)

In February 2009 we were informed that there would be a temporary, but mandatory 10% pay reduction extending a six week period but applied to all employees worldwide.  The reasoning being that the company was forecasting that it would miss it primary targets, and though that meant it would remain profitable, it also meant that the banks that own my company through various credit agreements would exercise penalty clauses which would in turn mean there was no way we would hit the Q2 number, which would have lead to another fine which in turn meant we would never hit the Q3 number... you get the picture.  The board foresaw that if we missed the Q1 2009 number we might have a terrible year and they were clear that the company my not recover, or may have to drastically downsize further.  We took our medicine, and it was a bitter pill to swallow.  In the UK because we are salaried and receive a monthly payment it actually meant the whole reduction was applied to one months payment, so was 15% lighter than the one before and there were no promises it would be the last.  Being a newly wed of a one income house, it was not easy to endure.

Between April and August further redundancies were made but at a slower rate.

As a result of the staff sacrifice and downsizing we made that Q1 number and every subsequent target in 2009 and finished the year in profit.  Despite a drastic reduction in staff worldwide with no reduction in customer requirements nor overall workload we managed to find new ways to pick up the excess work and new ways of working.  Many of us spent much of last year arriving early and leaving late to do what we could to help.  One of my 4 colleagues that lost their job in October 2008 only managed their first day of work in a new job three weeks ago in March 2010, having not even managing to find temp work in the meantime.  This is not just my story, it is a shared experience of my friends and colleagues, and former colleagues. It is an experience that will not sound too unfamiliar with millions like me who are or were in the private sector in the past two years.  It has been horrible to endure, but despite the brutality we are in no doubt that if the company I work for had not of restructured it would not be in business today and instead of a third of us being out of work, all of us would have been.  We would not be taking on new heads today and looking at introducing new technologies and exploring new markets.

That is an unfortunate reality, and the private sector has felt the pain and companies that were not in a healthy position had to shape up or shut down.  We would all take back a Woolworth's or a Thresher's having watched them disappear, but we would have bemoaned the kinds of redundancies my company went through if they had of been announced in an effort to save those brands.

I understand the pain of redundancy, and the fear that I may soon face it - a fear that is still with me.  But, as a tax payer, I really cannot endorse the Government's inaction in not shrinking the size of the state, in fact I am angry that in the meantime, whilst the productive sector of this country, the bit that creates wealth and jobs and pays a hefty chunk of tax to the Exchequer the size and burden has increased to satisfy the political fetishes of Gordon Brown and Peter Mandelson.  The whole time the state is growing unsustainable, not only is the tax burden rising today to meet the wages and expenses of these workers, but also is the debt that must be repaid on the extra borrowing that is being extended.  Late in 2009 it looked like we would be spending more in debt payment in 2010 than we would be spending for all Armed Forces expenditure.  If we do not reverse this, now; I wouldn't mind betting that we will spend as much on debt as we will on the NHS which in a single year will far exceed £70bn.

Public Sector workers losing their jobs is inevitable, let us not stall and increase the overall cost at the expense of the economic recovery.  Where as my former colleagues could look to between 2 and 4 weeks salary to cushion the blow of losing their jobs, some junior and middle public sector roles are cushioned by 2 or 3 YEARS of redundancy payment.  My guess is that many of them are hoping for the call to come through.  It is a time-bomb waiting to explode, the people on these contracts cannot be supported on borrowed money forever, but we pay extra for not cutting now.

If there are two things I have gathered from my recent conversations with people from all ages and varied occupational backgrounds is that people want a BIG cut in the size of the state.  Secondly, people are angry at Gordon Brown and Labour for setting this whole situation up whereby we face the choice of a decade of heavy debt payments versus two decades of heavy debt repayments all mortgaged for no tangible benefits to the vast majority of people who live here, work here and pay tax here.  In more candid conversations the notion has been expressed to me more than once that we should affix to Gordon Brown a charge of criminality for his execution of the public purse.  A very popular notion that never fails to spontaneously invite participants to speculate upon suitable punishments for his crimes upon us.

Now imagine this is the lead story tomorrow morning:

Good morning. Here is the news. Because of the budget deficit, shrinking economy and untenable level of national debt, all public service salaries will be cut by an average of 13.5 per cent, with immediate effect. The charges will appear on your payslip as “government levy”, and will apply to frontline public workers in health, education, transport and local services and also to MPs, Ministers of State and the Attorney-General.

Judges will be, for the moment, exempt, but a mechanism is in place for voluntary payment of this levy. So far 72 judges have paid up. No undertaking can be given about when, or if, take-home pay will return to former levels. The severity of this measure reflects the good levels of public pay, security and pension rights compared with the private sector. Government regrets the pain this will cause, but regards it as essential. Thank you.

Source.

You don't have to imagine if you are from Ireland as this is what happened some months ago, as Libby Purves has set out tonight.  It is the remarkable but largely unreported story from across the way.  The Irish are showing us Brits the way forward.  Could you imagine if Gordon Brown sent around a communication announcing that everybody suckling from the public bosom must endure a 13.5% cut in pay - it seems pretty unimaginable, but the money has just about run out and it will not be long before the public sector stop getting paid on pay day.  Despite Ireland making the cuts, the hospitals and schools are still open, society did not collapse the sky did not fall.

It is exactly what we need here in the UK, and by not taking the lead on the matter Labour will not only leave office with the public finances in a state, they will have left the Unions well funded, highly connected and in prime position to disrupt any Conservative Government attempts to do what is needed.   Labour's first 8 years in power were funded because of the excellent state of the economy inherited from the Conservatives, but they not only drained the coffers, they drained the pension pot and indebted us for a generation.  This is their way of thanking you for electing them, and they would argue that it is what you wanted them to do.  The conservatives will be a spent force before the economy has recovered - this is not how things are supposed to be in a "free society" and it is not the background setting to a truly fair society.  

Labour, somehow, some way, must be made to pay a price for their criminal economic mismanagement.

 

Great Minds, etc...

If the Conservative Party were on solid ground I would wager that two of the big thinkers at the forefront of the Party would be Lord Tebbit and Daniel Hannan. They are not, and neither is the Conservtaive Party.  It was somewhat endearing to have had a quick look over on the Telegraphs today and see these two basically agreeing with me on some points I have recently tried to make, but they of course being much smarter and better writers put things across much better that I ever could.

Lord Tebbit first. He is saying today that basically people as individuals will generally not understand every facet of every issue in the run up to a General Election, but invariably the British public, irrespective of party political associations have usually returned the right decision in elections, including on four occasions since World War 2 a Parliament that is reliant on coalitions. In fact here is what Lord Tebbit says:

The thought of that brought back to my mind some of the studies by animal behavioural scientists of bees and ants. The brain power of a bee is pretty small and that of an ant even less, yet the hive or the nest seems to be capable of taking far more complex decisions than any of its members. The behaviourists call it “swarm intelligence” and I often wonder if electorates enjoy the same ability.

Not very many individual electors understand quantitative easing, the risks and benefits of early cuts in public expenditure or increases in taxation, or the merits of Blair’s wars. Some may say the same of Members of Parliament, of course – but, whatever the arguments, we ask the electorate to take a decision comprised of judgments on a mass of matters outside their individual competence, and time and time again that electorate delivers a reasonably sensible judgement. Looking back over the last 65 years and 17 general elections, it would be hard to say that any of those results were irrational however much one might have wished that they had gone the other way. On four occasions, 1950, 1964, February ‘74, and October ‘74, the elections led to an indecisive outcome, and it could be well argued that so too would the election of 1951, but for the quirkiness of our system.

Looking at those indecisive results, it seems to me that the swarm intelligence of the electorate was in fact telling the politicians that the choice they were being offered was not one they could be reasonably asked to make. A good example was Heath’s February 1974 question: “Who governs?”

I had said THIS about a week ago:

And it all leads up to what I have written in the past and have more polling on today that people are looking to engineer a hung Parliament because we ain't happy with what's on offer and do not wish to grant any party 5 years.

As implied, this is a recurring theme; People are not happy with what Labour has done and just as importantly the wisdom of crowds seems to me in my conversations to be pointing to the desire for a more traditional Conservative offering. On the economy people actually do want big cuts, they are fed up of paying for a bloated public sector, and want some tax relief. On the EU people are actually taking notice of what is going on, but my take is there is generally no agreed mechanism that everyone sees for which to issue a protest, other that the token offering of the EU elections which even if there were an all UKIP return to the E U Parliament would not really affect the course of how the EU controls us. And more recently I am not detecting any support for the Union and Cabin Crew actions at BA, and I work quite close to Heathrow.

The feeling is that the Private Sector (to which I earn my salary from) is that we took our medicine and made the cost savings needed over a year ago when the credit crunched. The highly Unionised Sectors have been slow and have not had to make the same cuts. The Public Sector has since grown on increased borrowing and low tax yields. So, as far as me and my chums in the productive sector are concerned, were paying for the public sector and want it reduced massively in size, because we are sick of paying for it and as far as the Cabin Crew of BA goes, it seems that you were on a very cushy deal especially looking at your industry, grow up and accept that you are damaging your company to protect an overly generous set up. If a business cannot operate in profit then there will no jobs because the company will fold. Cuts must be spread.

If Mr Tebbit were a little younger I think there would be calls for his inclusion in a Conservative or Coalition cabinet.
Then I moved along and Daniel Hannan has posted a response to his UKIP supporting readers about why he remains in the Conservative Party.

What I’d ideally like – and what I assume my UKIP readers also aspire to – is a situation where UKIP no longer needs to exist: where it can award itself a medal and retire with honour, job done. Obviously, we’re not at that point yet. But I worry that every activist who deserts the Tories for UKIP is retarding the prospects of a Euro-sceptic Conservative Party without taking his or her energies to an alternative party of government.

I realise that I won’t have convinced my UKIP critics with one short post. But I would urge you to ponder one thing. Eventually, the issue will have to be settled in a referendum. If we are to win that referendum, we shall need the support of people on the Left, people on the Right and people in the Centre. UKIP won’t win on its own. So when you come across people in other parties who believe in British independence, don’t snarl at them, or tell them that their support is worthless unless they join UKIP. Encourage them.

Which neatly brings me to… and don’t groan… the Albion Alliance.

Daniel Hannan is of course right that UKIP will not be winning this election, and that UKIP are generally a good bunch who have been driven to UKIP generally because of their understanding of the EU situation. I have been to a few marches and rallies where the turnout is predominantly UKIP, and this is a knowledgeable collection of people who hold a frankly stunning amount of EU Legalese in their heads ready to quote in any conversation. UKIP are a party borne out of an intellectual argument rather than reactionary urges. Thus UKIPers are generally quite polite and open to others opinions. I have never met a UKIPer how was not armed with wealth of information and ready to politely debate policy on any issue to help win over others to their position.

We need a referendum to exit the EU now, and with Lisbon we have passed the point where an “amicable divorce” would be available. By supporting people of others parties who are prepared to say before an election that they too will support that referendum effort we can urge people to vote for people who share the same aim on what many of us consider the greatest of electoral issues and by doing this we can get people into Parliament who are not afraid to make the EU the debate.

Hannan and Tebbit may not have said exactly what I am saying, but we would appear to be of a similar mind in terms of direction. So I only hope their views can resonate more clearly through the halls of the Tory headquarters.

Anyway. Back to the football.

As Good As Certain...

Making bold predictions can be a very unrewarding game, especially if you are a journalist.  Us bloggers can get away with it a little more, but we are still wary.  Anatole just can't resist it, he seems to make one every week; or at least he used to many years back when I read the Times.  I came to realise very quickly that whatever Anatole would predict not only would not happen, but, very often the exact opposite would happen... I was not a Times reader for very long, they were way off the mark with too much and gave New Labour too much unwarranted credit.  It was like being led up the garden path.

Anyway, it's not too often I am over on their site but I was tonight and Anatole has predicted that Labour are going to "do a 1992" and win the General Election, because the Tories have to measure the budget response right, and he feels they will not do this.  He even says:

But next week’s Budget will be a pivotal political event, not because of anything Alistair Darling may or may not say, but because of the response he will elicit from the Tory frontbench.

This could be the best news yet for David Cameron and George Osborne, they may not realise it but it really is.  Maybe in the last few years Anatole has turned it around and got a few right, and if that is the case it is I who will indeed be left with egg on my face.

His theory that the Conservatives must make more of the Budget than Labour is simply not true.  Alistair Darling is about to stand up and say how he wants to buy Labour some extra votes on money borrowed off of the future toils of the tax payer.  He wants to nudge the Conservatives into immediately replying with specifics about what they would cut after a General Election, and quite frankly even Cameron is not stupid enough to do that.  Nobody believes what labour has to say on the economy the trust is gone.  Nobody argues with crazy people in the street, they accept they are crazy and walk on... They certainly don't shout crazy back.

The Conservatives do need to shape up their policy announcements, but that does not mean they have to make specific pledges on cuts, the best weapon the Conservatives have between here and May 7th is that nobody believes Labour when they talk economics, nobody believes the numbers.  Like the mob, they would appear to have two sets of books running, one for the public when they need election promises, and the other that tracks the real cost of their profligate failures.  Talk cuts by all means, say that they will be robust and deep - people will appreciate that and take it as honest; but specific cut pledges in a budget week is not a good idea.

When Alistair Darling stands up and says he is going to add £5 to the winter fuel allowance David Cameron should throw Ed Millibands Energy Taxes back in his face, when Darling says he is raising the State Pension by £4 Cameron should remind everyone who raided the public pension purse.  When Darling remarks about borrowing to spend on investment Cameron should repeat that we are spending more on debt repayment to banks than we do on our under equipped and under supported Armed Forces.  And so on, ad nauseum.

What Cameron should not do is get dragged into a fight about numbers and projections that are probably not even true.  Labour will be setting traps.  He should insist that if the PM can't even tell if he has spend more money year on year on defence and if Liam Byrne is confused as to whether there will or will not be any new taxes there is clearly some work to be done to straighten out the books and only when after a Conservative Government has audited the books, and the bank statement, will they truly have an idea what measures are needed.  It is Labour that has created this uncertainty but that the Conservatives are ready to roll up their sleeves and give people a straight picture.

Anatole tries for an observation:

The Tories made three closely related mistakes in devising their economic and electoral strategy at the nadir of the financial crisis in the winter of 2008-09

No not quite.  The real problem is that the Conservatives, especially early in this Parliament began to believe the propaganda that was coming out of 11 Downing Street about such things as "ending boom and bust" and having developed some grand new economic platform that virtually did away with inflation.  The removal of powers from the BoE and the setting up of the FSA allowed for the debt bubble to grow unfettered and was a big part of why there was a massive recession.  It was all lies, they should have rejected the premise of Gordon Browns claims.  Their language at the time regarding economics was to the line of "sharing the proceeds of growth" - they wrongly accepted the premise that there was unlimited growth to be had.  It wasn't that they built it at the wrong time, it was that it was built on a foundation of sand. When the credit cards were being cut up and we hit our limits, the Tories were just as lost as Labour.  When it went wrong, Brown claimed that "nobody saw it coming."  With a little more Tory caution, Browns best defence line would never have been accepted.

Buying into Labours falsehoods will prove to be the Tories biggest problem.  I have been saying for some time that the Conservatives need to disassociate from Labour.  By accepting Labours lies and building their policies on those same falsehoods they not only validate the Labour Line, they set themselves up for their own failures and u-turns.  The NHS, The EU, Public Schools, Devolution and Green Taxes are all areas where the Conservatives will have to unpick their position and set a new direction after the election, and all because they have built their policies, well defined or not on the New labour reality rather than the real world reality.

So how do I know the Conservatives will win and Anatole is wrong?

Assuming that the new Budget confirms these Labour plans for long-term fiscal consolidation, how should the Tories react? The answer is simple. Instead of quibbling about Alistair Darling’s figures and forecasts, the Tories should endorse his budgetary numbers and promise to carry out essentially the same macroeconomic programme.

All David Cameron has to do now is, not do what Anatole suggests and the election is his.

Fuel Duty

Here is a graph that I hope gets some wide attention, it tracks the price of petrol at the pump over the last few years.  I saw it on Political Betting, who in turn took it from WhatGas.Com

Petrol prices are way too high because it is relentlessly taxed. The pips are squeaking because we are being pressed too hard. I understand that not everybody agrees with me on points of the environment, but nobody buys petrol who doesn’t need it, allowing the price to fall by an easing of fuel duty is not going to encourage people to go out and buy additional petrol, it is just going to make life a little easier for people who are struggling.

This graph is a little out of date, but makes the point quite nicely.

The Tories have traditionally done well when people are feeling the squeeze because they are viewed as the low tax party and have traditionally been on the side of families when it comes to tax and welfare. I suspect this will change in the next few years as the Conservatives seem to have accepted the notion of moving towards so called “green taxes” which will probably mean that fuel duties will not come down under them.

This is one of the areas I think the Conservatives could explain better. I am looking for a low tax party and despite the recession I think there are many in the Conservative Party that will push for tax cuts to bolster demand and consumer spending in a year or so once their feet are under their desks and the majority of cuts have been initiated. But, if the Tories are going green and we cannot expect relief on tax duties or tax relief on such things as flights, where will the Conservatives make things easier for their core voters? I don’t know and I want to know and it is not something that would require a concrete pledge; a nudge would suffice.

Shuffling The Deck

I linked earlier to David Blackburns piece, regarding David Camerons mini reshuffle before the election heats up.  I read it last night and was tempted to pass comment, decided against and have had another change of mind now.

David starts by claiming that James Fortsyth had three weeks earlier laid blame for the Tory downturn at the door of Osborne, Hilton, Coulson and Bridges for the incoherent and dismal message.  I had actually published two days earlier then James that the blame lies with David Cameron, and that he needed to appoint a dedicated General Election Coordinator to take charge and control the messaging.  That is after all what leaders do; they lead and establish a chain of command and have people observe it.  Having four or five people working somewhat independently was always a recipe for disaster.

So, it would seem that common sense has prevailed, and that George Osborne is taking on that exact role.  I am about as much a fan of Osborne as I am Cameron but it is the right decision and should help focus some mind and steady the ship.  I am genuinely looking forward to hearing what the Tories have to offer, and I hope this will mean they can get in control of the agenda now.

Unfortunately this also means that, quelle surprise, Cameron's other buddy Ken Clarke, who is nobodies favourite Tory will now "step up" and become the face of the Conservatives Economic Policy.  I would think that Ken Clarke will put in a better show than George Osborne who I don't think comes across too well on TV.  However, Ken Clarke is not the big hitter that he was billed to be.  He has completely failed in every way in his current remit which was to neutralise Mandelson and give him a bloody nose.  As Mandelson is delighted to remind people, in private he and Ken Clarke agree on just about everything to do with policy.  So, from a meritorious point of view, an unwarranted promotion for Ken. 

What is more worrying to me though is that I suspect Cameron is considering making the position more permanent, and installing Ken Clarke as Chancellor should he win the election. This would be, for me a great disappointment as Ken Clarke has betrayed the Conservative Party in the past over issues of the EU and he will surely do so again.  He is a regular at the Bilderberg meetings and is certainly one who see's the anti-democratic international bodies as the way forward for global governance.  Clarke as Chancellor would be a great recruiting poster for UKIP.

It also therefore begs the question of who exactly is supposed to be countering Peter Mandelson now in the run up to the election?  If the lesson has truly been learnt then tackling the economic message is in itself too much of a job on it's own, there is no way Ken Clarke can shadow the Chancellor and Peter Mandelson at the same time.  Mandelson will be the king of the campaign and we all know he is a master of electioneering, he simply can not go unchallenged.

I hope Cameron has actually thought of this, because Labour has a number of other big hitters in the background ready to step forward and electrify their core base.  Next to Mandelson will be John Prescott, Alastair Campbell, John Reid and the granddaddy of modern elections, Tony Blair.  These guys have largely kept out of sight in the last year or so from mainstream TV news and will be chomping at the bit to get on the telly and talk up "an historic labour fourth term" and they will all do what they need to to make Gordon look human.  They will sell Gordons lies a million times better than he can.  Outside of Osborne and Clarke only William Hague and Boris Johnson are fairly well known on a wide scale for the Conservatives and they need to rectify this quickly.  Boris will probably not feature too much until nearer Election Day.

My recommendation to David Cameron is to bring forward John Redwood to counter Mandelson who has torn Labour's record to shreds on his blog.  That would provide a counter-balance to swivel-eyed-right-wing-loonies like me who will bash him for the Clarke elevation.  I would ask Liam Fox to be on telly as much as possible and I would advise Cameron to make good with David Davis.  Chris Grayling, Michael Gove and Dominic Grieve should be told to raise their own profiles and join in the fight a bit more also.

Having a few Conservatives of a more traditional mould in front of the cameras will do them the world of good.  I guarantee that the Conservatives will not win this election unless there are many faces on TV proving that as a party they are willing to fight for the right to govern. 

Monday Fisk And Rant

There has been a gradual change in the tone of support for David Cameron's Conservatives, I would say it traces back to the dropping of a particular cast-iron pledge, others may care to trace it back further.  However, there is a consistent change in tone right before one gives up all together the Cameron project, I have been through it, loads of other bloggers have, Fraser has, Gerald Warner and Simon Heffer probably went about 20 minutes after Cameron assumed the leadership.  The change in tone though is important as it is about consistent through everyone who has exhibited it.

So, having noticed this, I am deducing that it is again not going to be a good week for Dave nor, his top team (if you will excuse me calling them that) as I am now detecting the same wobble from one of his closest and previously most staunchest allies in the press, Ben Brogan.

Let’s try again, shall we? Last week was mostly a write-off for the Tories. You will remember it started with Dave’s Brighton speech that was supposed to steady the blues after several weeks of wobbles. The idea was to move swiftly on to a week spent demolishing Labour’s economic record and in particular the dire state of the debt. Yet on Monday a line-drawing operation turned into an ordeal that shows little signs of abating. Labour has successfully shaped the Ashcroft business into its ’same old Tories’ narrative, and drowned out anything else the Conservative wanted to speak about. I say ‘mostly a write-off’ because the only success was Michael Gove’s series of education events and announcements that made headlines and showed that someone in the operation was still focused on making the Tory case. But the overall effect was fairly dire.

A little tetchy, one can sense the frustration of someone who has invested much personally to the Conservatives and is feeling a little let down.  There's more...

So why is it so dire? And why is there no sign of it getting any better?

Oh dear Ben, why is it not looking like it is going to get any better?

Looking back over the past eight days, it is difficult not to wonder whether the fight has gone out of this operation. The most startling thing, to my mind, has been the way Team Dave has let itself be kicked around daily by Labour.

"Let itself be kicked around daily by Labour"  Hang on Ben, that's the kind of thing you would expect myself, Heffer or Warner to be saying.  Next you will be mocking Cameron....

It’s as if they don’t have a dog in this fight, as if they have walked off the battlefield sniffling because – sob – those tewwible bullies are too wough

Ohhh, too late.  OK well welcome aboard, better late than never.  Now, what can the Conservatives, or David Cameron even to turn things around?

The best defence is a good offence, as Vince Lombardi used to say (or was it Yogi Berra?), but offence we have had none. The Tory communications machine has not been, well, communicating. Instead it has let itself be bitch slapped by Peter Mandelson, including this morning in the Guardian.

Exactly right.  And why is this?

In the past we’ve heard the whisperings that the Tory high command is directed by a sense of entitlement, but I reckon the real problem is that the leadership is not sufficiently directed by an all-consuming, nail biting desire to win.

So what next?

Like the Terminator reduced to grabbling bits of metal, he is still coming for you Dave. And what cheers him? The kind of self-satisfied complacency shown by Ed ‘Friend of Dave’ Vaizey. Another week gone and the best the Tories can do on a Sunday is suggest Sam Cam votes Labour. Nice. Team Dave needs to snap out of it and get stuck in.

Ben Brogan, welcome to the view from the outside looking in, it ain't pretty but now your out here you can understand the frustrations and the angst of watching the Cameron machine stall like the little engine that could, but just didn't.

So I would think there is a bit of a voting dilemma going on out there.  I think Ben is nearly there, and many others will be too.

Firstly, I have pledge personally not to vote for anyone who will not place country before party, as per the Albion Alliance and their pledge system.  This instantly rules out a Conservative vote for me, as when I wrote to my MP asking if she would pledge, she had the work experience staff at CCHQ copy & paste me the standard response to Albion Alliance enquiries, and of course failed to answer the question (so, I take it that the answer is no, she will not put country before party).

But what about others who have not, or not yet undertaken a voters pledge, but are in a similar predicament as I would have been.  Here's the balancing act, and the dilemma.  The country simply cannot take another 5 years of Labour, and even if they sneaked through there is no way in hell that Gordon Brown will not be challenged over and over agian much the same as he has been in his two-and-a-bit years as Prime Minister to date.  However, the Red-Toryism on offer seems very much like it has been proof-read by people resembling low-grade bank clerks in Brussels.  It is sanitised, and has been carefully revised to be EU friendly.  With Osborne and Clarke at Camerons side, we have two Bilderbergers and two EU-Philes of the highest order.  As someone who would argue that our greatest problems today stem back to our inability to legislate and govern freely because of the EU and to be able to make the tough choices necessary free from EU control, I look at team Cameron and wonder aloud if it would not be better for them to be beaten, so that the Conservative Party can be seized back from them in the ashes of their leadership ready and ready at the next opportunity to make the tough and lasting changes we really need.

It is I believe what many voters are asking themselves and is in part reason for the narrowing.  What Cameron has carefully crafted as his message is that the Conservatives with largely offer the same policies as Labour, but with tweaks around the edges and with a new team in charge.  I say "in part" in reference to the polls, the other part is because of all the gaffes, which is never a good thing this close to a ballot.  I believe in Tennis they are referred to as "unforced errors" and is the first stat seized upon when analysing a defeat.  The person or team with the least unforced errors usually wins.

So, which is better?  Labour out, with little change in Government policy from an incoming Tory Government, or Tory loss, with the potential of some real detoxification of the Heath-ites and Clark-ites and the possibility that with Parliament much closer that Labour will not make five years next term with an election perhaps possible after two or three years?  Maybe then, we would have a Conservative Party that will make the tough decisions that are needed to slash the size of the public sector, deliver on the EU and put forward a solution to the inequality of devolution.   

Either way, as Ben Brogan points out, the Tories seem to have taken a victory for granted and relied too heavily already on the notion that we can all be sure there is some great policies in the pipeline, because when push as come to shove, no matter which side of the fence you are on, this is not an attractive Conservative Party, and as far as the Cameron project is concerned anything less than an outright win and comfortable majority is not a victory for his direction and policies.  It is Gordon Brown and Labour who after bankrupting this country financially, morally and politically and yet it is the supine Tories who lay on the floor getting the snot kicked out of them.  There is no good reason at all why the Conservatives should not be miles out in front; they were when people thought they were a Conservative Party in the traditional mould, it is their own announcements, revisions and clarifications that have caused the polls to narrow.  Labour has nothing new to offer, it is convulsing under the weight of the realisation that its ideology has failed, again.

I may disagree with Cameron on much and like I said, unlike many I am not sat on the fence.  But unless the top team starts putting in a fight, like the Conservative bloggers have, like the leafleters and the grass-roots has been then it is the team at the top that will lose this election.  I believe the bloggers and I believe the tory friendly media and I believe the leafleters I know what they stand for and I agree with them on most issues.  They want an honest to god revolution in the way things are done in the UK, and I believe they are the kind of people who will not be unquestioning of the hand of Brussels.  They are, or were my political kin.  I had envisioned two years ago being on the door steps and making the argument for the Conservatives, it is Dave & Ken that drove me out, that lied to me, that insulted my beliefs and stole my party.

So, last chance saloon Mr Cameron.  Do you want to win this election or not?  If you do, get off your arse, get your bloody messaging straight and start fighting for it.  If you don't get the hell out of the way for a proper Tory who is chomping at the bit to rip Labour and Gordon Brown to shreds.

EOR

No Need For A Conservative Panic

There has been a sharpening in the polls in recent weeks and at one point last week a poll which seems to be a rogue had the lead down to two points and things seem to be averaging out at about 5 to 6 points. For now, it looks like hung-parliament territory but I personally do not think it will last. There are lots of things that have not happened yet, and I actually think that despite the narrowing it is still the Conservatives election to lose.

Here are my 10 things that have not happened yet that might happen or will happen that will benefit the Conservatives as we get nearer to the election.

1. The Election Has Not Actually Been Called Yet
There are millions of people in the country whose involvement and interest in politics does not extend beyond election time. Many of these people are who David Cameron has been busiest courting and positioning hiself for when they do start taking notice. When we know for sure when the election is, the polls and public debate will I think move to firmer Conservative territory.  Until the election proper is called there is much that will not happen.  The real business in sport is when all the players are on the same field and the whistle has been blown and this election will be no different.  Get the election going and a lot of the narrative will change and people's minds will focus on Labours record versus Conservative promise.  Labours record this time around hands the Conservatives a head start with undecideds who are yet to start considering things from a political point of view.

2. The TV Debates
This is obviously new and may yet prove to have a phenomenonal effect on the outcome (or not). The leaders of the three factions of the Westminster Party will go on TV and discuss the fag paper that separates them.  For me this may not reveal much, but for others it may well competely and radically change their voting intentions.  Expectations will be spun low for Gordon Brown but David Cameron and Nick Clegg will be expected to come across better and more in touch. It will represent a move away from speaking in front of Labour audiences and Parliament for Brown, something Clegg and Cameron are more accustomed to.

Gordon Brown was typically reluctant to accept and will view not losing ground as a win.  Cameron and Clegg have ground they can seize.

3. The TV Debates
No, I am not repeating myself.  I think there is a chance of a fourth debate being added as the other parties are rightly upset that the Westminster three are going to get three prominent slots on Prime Time. I would expect now the deal is done and the rules announced for the SNP and/or UKIP to get busy and organise a competing debate or debates that will exclude the other three, possibly on a smaller news or TV channel, or maybe over internet broadcast which is certainly possible in the Internet age and would even perhaps appear to put the others in a more modern setting.  If the debate gets going, the primary focus will be on Labour’s record with no one from Labour there to defend it and attacks on Labour's record from any source will benefit the Conservatives.

4. The Sun
The Sun threw its weight behind the Conservatives during the conference season last year, but this support has been a little lukewarm since. They, like many are not fully convinced about Cameron, and I am not so sure that will change this opinion. However, having drawn a line in the sand, I fully expect that they have been quietly digging the dirt and have a few headliner stories ready to break once the election is called. I am expecting at least a couple of sleaze stories, and with MPs expenses having blown open this past year there is a near endless supply of material for a red top to use in its lampooning efforts. The Sun understands what to say to people whose interest in politics does not extend much beyond Election Day.

5. The Crunch
Every day, every week and every month things are getting tighter and tighter for families up and down the country. Few actually believe Labour when it comes to the economy. In 1979 the country was completely and utterly ruined, and everyone knew it. People took a look at two clear alternatives, more of the same or the Conservatives. In 2010, Labour have recognised this and are literally just trying to cover up how bad things really are and have applied a few band-aids to hide the wounds rather than to heal them. The economy is in many ways much worse than in 1979 and that is a message every party other than Labour will be repeating. People are feeling the pinch anyway, so Brown and Labour cannot spin this forever. Inflation is starting to kick in and prices are going up. The longer we wait, the more people will see more and more of the turmoil our economy is in and be feeling it more and more for themselves. The choice will again be for more of the same or a change.

6. Europe
The Conservatives are not well placed to talk about the EU, but Labour and the Lib Dems are in an even worse position. David Cameron and his shadow cabinet will be able to point to something EU Sceptic, even if people like me think it is a load of old pony. What they can also do is put out in front Daniel Hannan and William Hague who are still considered as people within the Tory Party who will somehow and some way eventually steer the party right. Europe will not go unmentioned during the election and though they will be taken to task here on the blogosphere, for those more inclined to make their decision from info gained from GMTV and This Morning the Conservatives will be seen as something of an EU Sceptic party.

7. Straw Poll
I did a straw poll in the office today, I asked my co-workers to imagine it was election day and they had the ballot paper in hand… who will you vote for? The resounding answer was “not Labour” all the people I asked have voted Labour in the General Election in recent years… The Conservative need to just show they are “Not Labour” to people who swung to Labour and now regret it and they are onto a winner.

8. The Phwoar Factor!
Apparently David Cameron is the most attractive of the three leaders to women. (Extracted as an unexpected answer to the aforementioned straw poll). The least unattractive candidate has some opportunities that the others will not with a dialogue to women when actually on a campaign trail. This has not yet been a major factor, but who knows.  Brown definately isn't going to do well if things ultimately become a beauty contest.

9. People Just Don’t Know
People are genuinely confused about Cameron and the Conservatives, but this has not translated to mistrust or dislike. Well, not yet. So, with a clear and concise message, they can still win many battles, if not the war. The flip side of course is that everybody knows what Labour is about, and there is a tangible and shoddy record that can be pointed to. Even if the battle is between the definitely incompetent party and the not quite sure party the Conservatives will not necessarily do so bad and are still, just about in a position to build on this.  Dave, better late than never but get yourself a dedicated general Election Co-ordinator!

10. Gordon Brown
Well Gordon Brown has “happened” but in terms of the campaign he is not in it properly yet; he is the Prime Minister and there are many who will not view him any differently yet. Clegg and Cameron can easily be described as campaigning whereas Gordon Brown will be described as governing. But, I think Gordon Brown is a liability to the Labour Party, we know he is disliked by people that have been appointed to work alongside him and in cabinet. Not even just disliked, but seemingly judged by those working closely with him as not up to the Job. Be it resigning the minute after a national election has taken place, or clear references to his incompetence in the national press, or the various plots against him which have all come from those who know him and have worked with him or even being on the unfortunate end of his office bullying. There is a clear verdict here from the people most closet to him, and it isn’t a positive one.

The UK population usually gets the decision right in General Elections, at least in terms of votes cast though that does not always translate across in terms of seats. It has almost be forgotten in recent weeks that Gordon Brown is the least competent, least liked, least trusted Prime Minister of recent times, if not in fact of all time; and he has got to be Prime Minister, and destroyed our economy without facing a national election and when it comes down to it and people focus their minds on it they will not like it one bit.



All of the above is my way of saying that I do not think an outright win is out of scope for the Conservatives yet, and that of the conceivable things that are going to happen between now and the election it is Labour who have more of an up hill battle, providing the Conservatives get themselves and their message straight.