Tories

Here’s a surprise: a rather good speech on civil liberties and the government’s (English) DNA database from Chris Grayling. Later in the debate, however, David Davies, Tory MP for Monmouth and a man who really should not be confused with David Davis MP, made this contribution: “Most of the Bill’s provisions ultimately come down to a simple argument about the price of civil liberties as against the price of security. While travelling into London on the tube this morning, I was reading the dreadful stories of what is going on in Haiti. I suppose that at present the people in that country have the ultimate in civil liberties, in that

Iain Dale says he has absolutely no idea why the Scottish Tories have failed to make as much headway as their Welsh counterparts. A new opinion poll puts the Conservatives on 32% on Wales, only 3% behind Labour, and a massive 11% up on the last general election. However, in Scotland, the Conservative ratings are only marginally up on 2005, Why is this? Why are Welsh Conservatives so much more successful than their counterparts north of Hadrian’s Wall? We’ve ridden these marches here before, but another trip can’t do any harm. The first and most obvious answer is that the SNP is a much stronger beast than Plaid Cymri for

It’s a curious feature of British politics these days that an ex-army, ex-FCO hand educated at Eton and Oxford can reasonably considered a “new” kind of politician. Then again, Rory Stewart isn’t your average Old Etonian. Assuming, as seems likely, he wins Penrith and the Border he seems likely to be the new member of parliament who will be the subject of more envy and perhaps jealousy than any of his peers. So be it. I rather enjoyed his account, published in the Sunday Times today, of the walking tour he’s made of his prospective constituency. There’s much good sense in it and, frankly, one approves of the idea of

A few weeks ago Michael Heseltine wiped the floor with the rest of the Question Time panel. Last night it was Paddy Ashdown’s turn to do the same. It helped, of course, that much of the programme concentrated on defence issues, about which Ashdown really does know something. But it was still an impressive performance, not least since the Tory representative was William Hague and not some minor nonentity from the lower reaches of the Shadow Cabinet. Hague was fine and will, should the Tories be elected, be a perfectly reaosnable Foreign Secretary. But Ashdown was the star. All this was a reminder that, freed from the grubby business of

James argues, quite correctly in my view, that it is now clear that Gordon Brown is preparing to run a campaign arguing that, as Brother Forsyth puts it, “a Cameron government will be a government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.” Ben Brogan makes the same point in his column today:  In a fight to the death, there is no longer any point pretending to govern in the national interest. As it was in the beginning for Labour, so shall it be in the end: class war, plain and simple. Soak the rich, crow about it, and damn the consequences. It’s true that this is red meat

My excellent chum Iain Martin observes that seven of the ten most recent polls have put the Tories below the “magic figure” of 40% support. The latest ComRes survey has them on 37%. Perhaps, he wonders, some of the core vote has been scunnered by the Lisbon Treaty shenanigans or perhaps some floating voters are concerned by a perceived Tory zeal for cutting public spending and, hence, they feel, services. A bit of both, I’d hazard. But, as I’ve argued before, there’s something more than just these elements. Frankly, if you were to take Tory rhetoric at face value the only sensible course, for those with the means to take

Ochone, ochone! The plight of the Scottish Tories has been receiving attention again this week. As Pete pointed out, the latest Tartan poll puts the Tories at just 18% north of the Tweed. This means, 12 years on from the 1997 disaster, that, in Iain Martin’s words, “They’re getting absolutely nowhere, slowly.”  True. In 1979, Scottish Conservatives won 22 seats and comprised 6.5% of the UK parliamentary party. It’s fair to say they’ll get nowhere near that next year. But look at this list of some of the seats the Tories won thirty years ago: Aberdeenshire East, Angus South, Argyll, Banff, Galloway, Moray &Nairn, Perth & East Perthshire. Most were

Brother Liddle asks “Why is it unravelling for Dave?” and, while this may be a mild exaggeration, it’s true that, in as much as he can ever look jaunty, there’s a spring in Gordon’s step right now. Perhaps, Labourites dare to dream, the worst is over? Maybe. One poll showing the Tory lead cut to just six points is a pretty shoogly nail upon which to hang your hopes. Nevertheless, the story of the day is this alleged mini-revival. In the end it may be no more than a dead cat bounce, but, just for a moment, let’s assume it’s not. So, how to explain it? Firstly, Labour’s core vote

David Cameron’s response to the Queen’s Speech was, of course, dictated by both convention and political nit-picking. Nonetheless, I agree with Sunder Katwala that it’s rum to see a Conservative leader complaining that the government isn’t proposing enough legislation. A useful reminder that whatever else they may be, Dave’s Conservatives do not take an especially modest or reatrained view of government. On the contrary: if there is a problem there must be a bill and damn the consequences. So Cameron, correctly, identified Labour’s approach as believing that “The answer to every problem is more big government and spending” at the same time as he demanded that the government do more,

Chris Dillow estimates that there are more heroin users in Glasgow North East than Tory voters*. For that matter, there are probably four heroin users in Springburn for every plucky citizen prepared to vote Liberal Democrat. I suspect Labour won’t want to use this factoid for fear it foster the impression that heroin use is much more widespread than it really is. *In, admittedly, a by-election with a 33% turnout.