Self Destruct

We need a leader of the opposition to counter Tony Blur - the sooner the better.
Martin

quote:

---

Originally posted by garyi:
Have the tories insured they won't with the next election?

---

They have no chance of winning the next election, just as they had no chance of winning the previous two.

When Labour got into power, the nature of their majority required utterly titanic swings for the Tories to get in. They realised that at the time, hence no credible leader emerged - Haig's job was to take the party on for a few years until they could get within some sort of striking distance and then someone proper would step in to take them the last step - probably Chris Patten.

Unfortunately for the Tories Haig was sooooo faceless and IDS even more so that they still haven't got close enough. They're left with no really credible leadership candidates and are totally stuffed unless Labour really cock it up or the Tories get so desperate that they start adopting a radically right-wing platform that will attract the sort of pond-life that sometimes surfaces from time to time....you know who they are.

nick.lees at btinternet.com

To be honest I am one of the dis-interested people that mingles with the other 60% or so of Britons.

Thing is it would be good if there was some genuine competition to stir things up a bit.

Nevermind

Hmmm

I think that the problems for the Tories are a bit deeper than that.

IDS was elected by the membership at large, whereas he was removed as leader by the MP's alone. This will cause huge divisions in the party. So the party faces a tough choice - a lengthy/divisive leadership challenge or a quick and easy cake walk where no challenge is issued and a new leader undergoes a coronation. Rank and file Tories having been given the power to elect will not really go for either.

Also, the balance of votes by MP's was very marginal - 90 voted against, 70 for. Which means that however faceless and ineffectual he was, not everyone saw it that way.

Finally, the Tories have scored a monumental own goal with this. At Conference, they unleashed a whole swathe of policies designed to attack the government and provide a real opposition. Now, the media and public attention will be drawn away from issues of policy to issues of leadership. All in the year before an election.

Whatever happens, at the time when a real opposition is actually needed (Hutton, Iraq, foundation hospitals, University fees, two tier health service, failing economy, striking public services), the 'Labour' Party will be sitting back and thinking of the next TWO elections that it will undoubtedly win, virtually unopposed.

ag

quote:

---

Also, the balance of votes by MP's was very marginal - 90 voted against, 70 for. Which means that however faceless and ineffectual he was, not everyone saw it that way.

---

No, that's true. But I feel that there could be a significant number of parliamentary members who want to try and wrest power by supporting more radical policies and were'nt prepared to wait for the "wait until Labour cock it up badly enough for us to win" ideas to bear fruit.

After all, Labour have taken most of the Tory ground that used to be Major's, leaving the Tories with nothing much to differentiate them from Labour. There are bound to be those in the party who believe that the only way to get into power is to adopt policies that are clearly recognisable by the public as different. The only place I see that coming from is from the right of right-centre.

I would agree that the country needs a credible opposition party, I just worry about what form that might take.

nick.lees at btinternet.com

quote:

---

I would agree that the country needs a credible opposition party, I just worry about what form that might take.

---

I agree.

I think that Charles Kennedy would be a fine PM, but I suspect that many other voters can't think beyond the bi-party system.

If it's not too late, I might stick a tenner on Michael Howard being the new Tory leader.

ag

I quite like the idea of that geezer with the mop of blond hair. He's funny at least.

quote:

---

After all, Labour have taken most of the Tory ground that used to be Major's

---

I don't think that's true. What Labour have actually done is raise tax and spend more on the public sector while acting againt wealth creation. (I saw the other day that the UK Civil Service grew an EC last year) That's very old Labour. And very Lib Dem.

So creating Tory policy is easy. And doesn't have to be overtly 'right wing', just 'conservative'.

What is necessary is to have a row of credible people in opposition. Iain Duncan Smith wasn't one of them. The danger is that the next grey suit isn't serious Prime Minister material either.

(Every time I hear William Hague I think he sounds quite sensible. What's going on there then?)

Paul

Garyi

quote:

---

I quite like the idea of that geezer with the mop of blond hair. He's funny at least.

---

Are you now a Guardian reader....

That bloke with the blond hair

ag

As long as that dreadfully scary Michael Howard doesn't become leader

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

quote:

---

As long as that dreadfully scary Michael Howard doesn't become leader

---

Tom

It is really looking like he will stand unopposed in the leadership contest.

ag

I'm leaving the country. Scotland seems a lot saner

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

Chaps

Hopefully the Tories have cottoned on that unity is essential in order to appear creditable to the Electorate.

Fortunately socialism is dying, Blair and his cabinet are no more of a socialist than say Anne Widdecombe.

The best recent Tory leader was Maggie and Michael Howard is in her mould. I expect that he will become the next leader and that at the next election he will severely reduce the New Labour parties majority in the house. It will take two elections to topple Blair, for whom it as to be said, is a very competent politician.

Regards

Mick
Rega

Once upon a time when Michael Howard was Home Secretary I heard him talking about some transiently popular measure (unfortunately I don't recall what it was...) anyway he was opposed to it because of its civil liberties implications. I have way more respect for him than for the ultra-authoritarian incumbent.

Paul

Michael Howard was the Home Secretary who removed the automatic right to silence. Enough said.

Then there is that whole lying to parliament thing and sacking the prefectly competant and decent Derek Lewis to save his own skin.

Did you threaten to sack Derek Lewis?
(Repeat 14 times)

Matthew

Politician should do nice things, like water plants.

Whatever they do, they seem to affect something they clearly don't understand, the economy!

Mick said "Blair and his cabinet are no more of a socialist than say Anne Widdecombe"

I think you need to pay more attention Mick -- that nice man Gordon Brown keeps putting up your taxes to pay for poor people's education and healthcare. He's about as "socialist" (in your seemingly simplistic terms) as it gets.

Matthew

Despite the waffle, even the previous Tory administration increased taxation levels on middle England.

The point I am making is that both of the two main parties are slowing shifting to the right.

Regards

Mick

quote:

---

Despite the waffle, even the previous Tory administration increased taxation levels on middle England.

The point I am making is that both of the two main parties are slowing shifting to the right.

---

Sorry to be thick (I don't have much time for politics or politicians), but doesn't that mean they're both slowly shifting to the left?

This Govt has no problem mixing elements of traditional socialist policy (such as taxation, NHS funding and re-nationalising the railways) with 'right wing' views on immigration and law and order. New Labour probably suceeded partly because it ditched ideology for populism. The Tories lost some of their traditional policy 'strengths' because Blair nicked them!

Bruce

Both parties are slowing shifting to the centre-left. Unfettered capitalism is as dead as socialism except the Labour party (or at least the bulk of it) has been adjusted to these facts for over 10 years but the Tories are struggling with the idea.

The Tories do still have a chance to implode by trying to move to the right. If they do they will need some kind of economic disaster to get re-elected and, failing that, the LibDems have some chance to surpass them. The Tories also need to do somehting to address the issue that they have virtually no supporters under 45. Amongst the young, the centre-left attracts lots of nice well balanced, intelligent and ordinary decent people in much the same way the Tory party did historically. The Tories meanwhile seem stuck with the odd electronic engineering student who goes to college in a sports jacket and briefcase and wants to take out his anger at not getting laid on those less fortunate than himself.



In much of the discussion in the papers and above there has been an assumption that the Tories remain the natural party of government and at the next election Labour's majority will reduce and the Tories will get in the time after that. This is false IMO. Labour's record majority will inevitably go down in 2005 but if you look at the issues the Tories are stuffed unless they can radically re-invent themselves (essentially as social democrats) and find an inspirational leader from somewhere. I wouldn't hold your breath on either count.

Their core policy problem as I see it comes from the fact that all polling indicates that the great majority of the UK population views the important issues as follows:

1) Health
2) Education

Big gap

3) Law & Order

*HUGE* gap

4) Asylum Seekers
5) The EU and the Euro
6) What to have for dinner
7) The European Parliament, THE EU constitution, CAP reform, etrc.

The Tories spend have two problems here. Firstly they spend most of their time talking about Issues #4 and below which are really not that important (in terms of who people will actually vote for). Secondly they have no remotely convincing answer to Labour's policy on Health and Education as when push comes to shove they will seek to improve these core services despite making major cuts in funding to pay for tax cuts. Nobody will beleive them or trust them and the majority of the country (even in middle England) will not vote to feather their own nests at the expense of the sick, the poor and the young.

Matthew

"This Govt has no problem mixing elements of traditional socialist policy (such as taxation, NHS funding and re-nationalising the railways) with 'right wing' views on immigration and law and order"

Yes its called social democracy or the "Third Way".

The right wing nature of the New Labour Home Secretaries is becuase Labour knows its big weakness with respect to the Tories is Law & Order. One of their big failings is that they are scared into being extremist on many of these issues. That are starting illegal wars of course.

Matthew

quote:

---

Michael Howard was the Home Secretary who removed the automatic right to silence. Enough said.

---

Well apart from it not being 'Michael Howard' alone, and, judging from The Bill', it not being reinstated in the last 7 years and numerous Criminal Justice Bills, I don't understand what 'automatic right to silence' I've lost.

The way that misleading phrase rolls off your keyboard after all this time, it's a great example of spinning via slogan. Something that the Conservatives need to start inventing.

Paul

Extraordinary that the Tories get into trouble because the general public get sick of their arrogance and dismissive manner, want a change etc, so blast the Tories into near extinction - so what do they do?? Re-form (sic) with Tory Kid surrounding himself with Thatcherite leftovers, IDS doing the same, and now Michael Sodding Howard - possibly the most fanatical right winger leftover of times past, (bills overturned in courts because of violations to human rights during the Major years,) is FAVORITE to become leader!!!!
Do they not understand why they were booted out in the first place???
It really is beyond belief.

quote:

---

One of their big failings is that they are scared into being extremist on many of these issues. That are starting illegal wars of course.

Matthew

---

This for me is the big disappointment with Labour. Huge majority. Chance to really make changes. What do they do? Worry about what the Lords say and worry about the opinions of people who will never vote for them.

Stephen