Monday, April 10, 2006
Michael Portillo gives advice to David Cameron
Lefty Michael Portillo in the Blairite Sunday Times making some bizarre statements:
His careful choice of subjects makes still more surprising two mistakes that he has made. Early on, he promised that marriage would be recognised within the tax system. The pledge unhelpfully suggests a harking back to the old Tory party. It can offend single parents, people who live together without marrying, gay people and single people, for whom life is particularly expensive.
You utter sellout Michael. Marriage is the most crucial institution in sustaining the family, and if conservatives are not about family what exactly are they about? Perhaps we should take a stand for what we do stand for rather than worrying about who we "offend"? Next he will be arguing against any right wing policies for fear of "offending the left"
The Conservatives are now trying to cobble together a new grouping with fringe right-wing parties. It makes the Tories look ideological and marginal.
Ideological? As in believing something? Heaven forbid anything get in the way of spin, that would obviously be a disaster..
Observing the success of the right-wing tabloids that attract millions of readers, past leaders reasoned that if they could sound like their banner headlines and reactionary leading articles, triumph at the polls must follow. But a paper is entertainment and people enjoy reading there a reflection of their unspeakable prejudices. They expect something better from a party that aspires to govern.
What are these "unspeakable prejudices" hmmm? I agree that parties must attempt to lead while the tabloids usually follow, but the insinuation here is the views all those millions of people who do buy the sorts of newspapers Portillo imagines are not just unfit to be represented by the Conservative Party, but simply unacceptable.
If a political party is not the same as a tabloid newspaper, it is also quite different from a think tank. Brilliant intellectuals are constantly dreaming up solutions to our problems and (who knows?) they might even work. But their ideas are theories that would scare the public rigid and confirm every horrid suspicion that they still harbour about the Tory party.
This is horribly patronising, and displays Portillo's liberal establishment credentials perfectly. But I suppose here at least we get some recognition that there is a broad party consensus and reasons for it, which is better than pretending the public are fools by acting as if real choice is on offer.
Cameron must stamp on such indiscipline, just as he should have obliged his party to announce who had lent it money much faster than it did. He should have ratted on whatever promises he had given during the leadership contest to pull out of the EPP and create a married couple’s allowance. He should have dropped yesterday’s men from the shadow cabinet.
If this is truly representative of the Tory party (which I have doubts that it is), then I may be forced to leave. The party should be encouraging debate on its direction, it should respect the anomity of donors, Cameron should keep the promises he was elected on, and he definately should not drop people like David Davis and William Hague as "yesterday's men" (Portillo not one of them too?). In short, I couldn't disagree more.
Peter Hitchens was right about Michael Portillo in 1999 when he stood against him for Kensington and Chelsea - hes a wishy washy elitist through and through. I sincerely hope this advice is completely ignored, but fear, alas, it will not be.
_________________________
EDIT 11/04: The Telegraph also views Mr. Portillo's advice with great cyncism
# posted by Chris Hughes @ 12:09 am 
Comments:
<< Home
Cameron is far cleverer than the embittered Portillo. Portillos way would lead once again to Civil War within the party, whereas Cameron is sensible enough to realise that he needs all of us to win an election.
We are always going to be an uneasy coalition of different wings, the point is to believe in the Conservative way of individual freedom and not try to force people to toe the party line, like some socialist dictator.
We are always going to be an uneasy coalition of different wings, the point is to believe in the Conservative way of individual freedom and not try to force people to toe the party line, like some socialist dictator.
here here eu serf.
The fact is that we can't go chasing UKIP votes to defeat the lIb Dems by the numbers alone, we'd just be handing over to Brown a status quo ante in terms of Labour numbers.
Rather we must go for the votes and hearts and minds of the people who switched from Major to Blair in 1997 and 2001 and then gave Kenneddy a chance in 2005. We need them back if we are to form a govt.
James Ware
Post a Comment
The fact is that we can't go chasing UKIP votes to defeat the lIb Dems by the numbers alone, we'd just be handing over to Brown a status quo ante in terms of Labour numbers.
Rather we must go for the votes and hearts and minds of the people who switched from Major to Blair in 1997 and 2001 and then gave Kenneddy a chance in 2005. We need them back if we are to form a govt.
James Ware
# posted by 
: 11:56 am
: 11:56 am << Home
