Well Duh Polly
According to Dizzy, Polly Toynbee thinks that all Tory Blogs are all funded by Tories.
Tell us something we don’t know Polly. My blog costs money to run. I pay for it with my money. I am a Tory. Therefore my blog is paid for by a Tory. What, you expected my blog to be funded by the Labour party?
In all honesty though, why on earth shouldn’t Tory bloggers be paid? She has made millions from her writing. She has no right to complain about others being paid for their writings.
If there is actually a Tory fund to pay bloggers, could they please let me know as I could do with a bit more money what with the recession and so on.
Sphere: Related ContentConference Report
Having vaguely paid off my debts to the much-absent phenomenon at conferences called sleep, I am now in something of a state to give an account of those two days.
After an inauspicious start due to a technical error with the train, I travelled up to Birmingham and got settled into my hotel. From there a brief ride to the ICC and an attempt to navigate through a sea of leaflets. Being what has now been termed a “conference virgin“, I failed to keep my wits about me and suddenly found myself burdened with tonnes of them.
I have always wondered if M.C. Escher’s work could ever be made into a reality, and, as Niall Paterson noted, the ICC has managed to come very close to achieving it. Continuing this artistic theme were a series of posters on a soviet theme. The traditional messages one would expect of such posters were instead inverted with conservative themes of the importance of civil society, personal responsibility and the rejection of the overwhelming state.
My morning was spent floating between the various stalls I had noticed in my conference guide, accumulating a modest amount of freebies. Of particular note was the stand run by Total Politics, distributing free copies of the Guide to Political Blogging 2008 (look in the back to find me listed), and the must-have UK Politics Top Trumps cards.
The internet cafe was distinctly disappointing. For a conference of thousands of representatives we had access to five computers. This was part of the reason why my intention to live blog consistently was significantly curtailed, and I can’t have been the only blogger to have felt let down. Despite the prominence of the centre-right on the blogosphere, it was a significant failure to not make our job easier and ensure regular, favourable coverage. It is distinctly inconvenient to have to drag a laptop all over the ICC, let alone find somewhere quiet to sit and write. The sight of Tim Montgomerie and Dan Hannan hunched over their laptops in a corner of the Freedom Zone was amusing, but not ideal. Something to consider in subsequent years will be the provision of blogging facilities similar to those provided to mainstream media outlets: a place to plug in your laptop and type away from the distractions of the main hall.
Following this was a lunch at the Salisbury Club. A useful opportunity to meet with friends and newcomers alike. As this was what had brought many Conservative Future types to conference, it became a vital way of working out how to plan the rest of one’s time and navigate the dizzying array of fringe and social events.
For the rest of the afternoon I managed to get into the main hall to watch Boris Johnson’s speech and the Armed Forces session. Boris was, as one would expect, on good form. He made a witty riposte to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s criticism last year, before moving on to his traditional humourous territory. The Armed Forces session had an impressive array of speakers, featuring Liam Fox, Frederick Forsyth, Simon Weston, Col. Stuart Tootal and two former Majors. The tone was distinctly angry, with Forsyth claiming that around sixty soldiers had died as a direct result of the “blithering incompetence” of a government that had failed to adequately fund a war on two fronts while “frittering billions away on trivia”. Weston and Tootal made particularly impassioned personal pleas, particularly over the issue of dedicated military hospitals and the fractured civil-military relationship in some quarters. The reception of the audience was largely one of restrained outrage: were the panel not all on the same side, a Cherie Blair moment could have ensued.
After that I went over to a meeting of senior members of CF, where I gave a speech that, while not to everyone’s taste, was nonetheless well-received. Given that it was something of a maiden speech, I may have got a little carried away with myself though. Much discussion followed adjacent to a rather heated debate, as prior to that I had been something of an unknown. Accusations of being a plant of the leadership were subsequently thrown round, which was a rather flattering idea. The rest of Sunday evening was given over to drinking in an entirely serious and non-celebratory manner. Of particular amusement was encountering Alex Hilton, author of Recess Monkey and joint owner of LabourHome, who one can only conclude had either undergone a Damascene conversion, or suffered some immense traumatic brain injury. He seemed to think that not only was he a Tory, but an investment banker as well. He gave the impression to several leading figures that he was a Tory candidate. I do hope someone’s informed his CLP.
Sunday had an early start attempting to get into a fringe event run by Tories in DC over whether a Conservative ought to vote for Obama or McCain, with representatives from both campaigns. Despite arriving reasonably early the event had already filled far beyond capacity; the US elections are by far a settled question within the party. Forced to forage for food elsewhere, I headed back to the ICC once more. This day was centred more around the Freedom Zone, an off-site fringe marathon organised by the Freedom Association. The first event I attended was a session by Dan Hannan and Douglas Carswell promoting their new book The Plan, an articulation of ideas of Direct Democracy, Parliamentary Sovereignty and Euroscepticism condensed into a series of legislative instruments supposedly achievable within a single twelve-month session of Parliament. Having bought a copy and had it signed, I started to read but have yet to get beyond the diagnostic and into the prescriptive. What it has offered so far is interesting, although it gives the impression of overstating the case as a means of opening gambit.
Bumping in to Iain Dale and David Davis on my way out, your intrepid author then wandered back to the main conference area to watch George Osborne’s speech on one of the TVs. I had said earlier on my Twitter feed that he was going to have a significantly more important role than had otherwise been predicted, and in that I was correct. He struck the right tone: he made no attempt to defend the crass amorality of some in the financial services sector, and called for a return to traditional fiscal conservatism. While there has been some dissection of his proposals on freezing council taxes, particularly the issue over it being voluntary, there is nonetheless an argument that it is still achievable. By being elected on the back of such a promise a Conservative government would have a sufficient mandate and influence to be able to pressure councils into adopting such measures, appealing to popular authority over what looks to become a key proposal from the conference.
Lunch was taken at a fringe event organised by the Electoral Reform Society’s Votes at 16 campaign. This was poorly chaired: he did not even bother to hide his partiality, and despite having my hand up for almost the entirety of the event, I only got called on to speak at the very end. A little attempt to keep one’s biases to a minimum or at least acknowledge the chap with a pageful of notes who was first to raise his hand would have been enough to mollify me. Votes at 16 presented, as per usual the best argument against their own case: dogmatic, uncompromising, unsophisticated and hectoring, sticking to the usual lies about being able to fight in wars and likening themselves to the suffragettes. They were rather amusingly countered by Donal Blaney, who turned their own arguments against them. Despite these pitfalls the debate was nonetheless rigorous, and enjoyable.
After this I ended up getting collared by the Chairman of Conservative Future, Michael Rock, who decided that I was “sound” and thus thrust a business card into my hand. I then got to establish my vastly impressive leadership skills by showing an assortment of representatives the way to the Freedom Zone once more for a discussion entitled Freedom and the Internet, chaired by Iain Dale, and involving Guido Fawkes, the Devil, Nadine Dorries and Dizzy. A sensible discussion over the implications of this relatively new medium ensued, with numerous other bloggers including Mike Rouse and Tory Bear in the audience. I made a slightly rambling point about Derek Draper’s attempts at a “rapid rebuttal unit” being likely to fail (something I intend to write about at a later date), and was subsequently accused by Guido of reading Dale’s blog “500 times a day”. This of course is a completely false allegation: I only read his blog 400 times a day.
My time at conference rapidly drawing to a close I then moved over to the pub with several of the audience before getting sidetracked into a rather vigorous discussion regarding the relationship between morality and the state. I fear that my case may have been somewhat less good than I thought it was at the time. Suddenly on full alcohol-fuelled speech mode, I ended up giving an impromptu tirade on the care system, before catching up with myself and realising that this was probably not appropriate conversation given that the pub was acting as something of a safe haven from the oratory of the ICC. Moving back to the Freedom Zone once more I ended up discussing the Russia-Georgia conflict over a cup of tea and sandwiches, before moving round the room collecting as many assorted freebies as possible.
Having stashed my bag with as many freebies as possible, I did one last lap of the ICC and had a quick chat with the local CF Branch, before heading home. Thanks to a bizarre number of taxis refusing to pull over, I had to run to the station, and in a moment of pure drama (if one does not own a TV), jumped onto the train as it started moving off the platform. Doubtless in violation of some Health and Safety regulation, but “it didn’t do me any harm”.
Conference was overall a rather enjoyable experience and an excellent source of debate and centre-right ideas. While there have been some suggesting that we should get rid of them, away from the pageantry of the main hall a lot of the debate, discussion and networking that is vital to modern politics goes on, and doing away with a means of meeting people of a centre-right persuasion from all over Britain would only be bad for conservatism as a whole. Despite the rather fast pace of events affecting conference, making the slogan “Plan for Change” rather prophetic, it was nonetheless able to respond well. How it plays out in the media in the next few weeks will be very interesting indeed.
UPDATE: I have been informed by Mr. Hilton via the comments section that at no time did he actually consider himself an investment banker or give that impression, and have updated the article accordingly. I apologise for any distress this may have caused him and his political career.
Sphere: Related ContentIn Support of the New Blog
Scorn and derision have arisen from the attempt from CCHQ to establish a new blog. A blatant piece of propaganda, acting as little more than the sanitised mouthpiece of the Party is the opnion of Guido Fawkes, who has taken to exhorting his readers to calling it “Pravda 2.0″.
There is an element of truth to these accusations. The new Conservative Party blog is unlikely to be a source of candour, or the hotbed of debate and exchange of ideas that ConservativeHome is at present. Nor is it likely to undermine that blog’s readership or influence. That being said, this does not render it useless.
An official mouthpiece for a political party is no bad thing, provided that it is honest about it being such. Something that allows voters to discover what the party line is on an issue without having to go through the intermediary of the press is no bad thing. If one is an optimist, it could even be argued that such forms of direct engagement undermine the PR and spin games that have weakened the health of our political culture.
Providing editorial balance to ConservativeHome is necessary. This is not because of any particular disagreement with their editorial line, but because it s necessary to differentiate between the opinions of an independent publication and the official position of the Conservative Party. During the debate on 42-day detention Gordon Brown attempted to pass off a dissenting ConservativeHome editorial as an official party press release. Having an official party publication, however anodyne, at least prevents such confusion from arising in future. It may also do ConservativeHome a service by demonstrating that it is not a CCHQ mouthpiece to the casual reader.
At a time when people are complaining that politicians are out of touch and failing to communicate properly with the electorate, surely a party getting an official blog should be celebrated? It was not that long ago that Guido was complaining that the Tories were not web 2.0 enough.
Sphere: Related ContentThe SNP Must Not Gain Glasgow East
The Glasgow East by-election on Thursday has been considered by some commentators to be the point of no return for Gordon Brown’s premiership. Depending on which poll you believe, Labour are set to either hold the seat with a vastly reduced majority, or lose it in a dramatic swing towards the Scottish Nationalist Party.
That Labour’s third-safest seat (their equivalent of Kensington & Chelsea) is so threatened speaks volumes about the disillusionment of traditional Labour voters with the government. Far from the promise of being lifted out of deprivation, they have been taken for granted and left to flounder in their own misery.
Notwithstanding some miraculous transformation of fortune the Conservatives are not going to win this seat: the party is polling at 7%. In such a context, one has to look at the outcome of the by-election not in terms of victory, but the least-worst option. Short-term tactical victories have to be balanced against long-term interests. Which is better: a Labour hold, or an SNP gain?
Much though many would enjoy seeing another humiliation visited upon Brown’s government, it is not worth an SNP victory. Labour holding what ought to be a very safe seat is not likely to affect their fortunes: the battering they will receive with their slashed majority will see to that.
Their winning would be portrayed as a vote of confidence in a largely wasted first year in the Scottish Executive that has consisted of stirring up resentment between England and Scotland. Sending the petty, divisive hardliner John Mason to Westminster will be spun as a sign of approval for the exclusive and narrow nationalism that the SNP represents. For short-term advantage it risks the long-term goal of preserving the union.
Moreover, an SNP victory risks solidifying their status as the anti-Labour party north of the border. Efforts being made by the Scottish Conservatives to re-establish themselves as a leading force in the nation are undermined every time a disaffected Labour vote goes to the Scottish Nationalists.
Although a surprise Conservative gain would be the ideal outcome on Thursday, a Labour loss to the SNP could only be considered a pyrrhic victory.
Sphere: Related ContentBravo David Davis
David Davis’ resignation as an MP last night is a move that ought to be welcomed by all who favour good government and the protection of the rights of the citizen. The arguments presented in the House of Commons throughout yesterday in favour of extending pre-charge detention were notable by their absence. Much like the justifications printed in The Sun, on close inspection the case is much weaker than one would believe (of their much-touted “42 reasons for 42 days, 34 were not reasons but simply statements of “Look! There’s a shifty man with a beard over there!”) They boiled down to the following:
- The police want it so they must get it;
- We might need longer in the future;
- It’s popular.
The first argument I have addressed rather exhaustively in a previous post on this blog, so I will not repeat it unnecessarily. The second has also been addressed, but I will add two extra points: first, there is no reason why legislating if the need arises in the future need be “knee jerk”. The only reason such legislation has been in the past is because the government has a tendency of acting like headless chickens in a crisis. It is perfectly conceivable that the Commons could introduce good legislation on the issue if it were not unduly pressured by the government to chase the relevant Daily Mail headline. This point is tantamount to an admission by Gordon Brown that the image he cultivated last year of being calm and firm in a crisis is a myth.
The third argument however is far more deceitful. Certainly, on the face of it, the polls do suggest that an extension of pre-charge detention is popular. However this is because the public have been misled by the government as to the alternatives. When faced with the two options of “do something” or “do nothing” in regards to terrorism, the public will naturally (and correctly) favour doing something. Nevertheless this does not equate to a mandate for draconianism. The polling presents a false choice where the only means of “doing something” is to extend pre-charge detention. Numerous alternatives exist, ranging from the admission of intercept evidence to allowing greater post-charge questioning. Any curtailing of Habeas Corpus should only occur after the alternatives have been exhausted. In this case it is clear that they have not. Were the public to be polled on the issue presented with the alternatives, the level of support for the government would no doubt drop. Were they to be informed of much of the practice of this current measure likewise, the level of support would further decrease. Gordon Brown however seems insistent on presenting 42-day detention as the only means of combating terrorism, and weakening our capability to effectively counter it by shutting down reasoned debate on the problem.
The comment by Gordon Brown in Prime Minister’s Questions that something “cannot be both draconian and useless” is also rather ill-informed. Draconian measures often prove in the end to be useless by undermining the support for the underlying aims of the policy they are meant to advance. Sir Robert Peel’s reforms of the death penalty acknowledged this, as did Michel Foucault in Discipline and Punish. The draconianism of policies ultimately evokes popular opposition that undermines the effectiveness and legitimacy of the law. They become useless because their unpopularity means that people are unwilling to support it. The present measure combines both a draconian message that will alienate the very people the government needs to get on board to combat terrorism, and will be a useless weapon because of it.
The government won by the worst combination of pork-barrel politics, bribery and factionalism. Debate was replaced by MPs voting for self-interest. Gordon Brown sold any claim to statesmanship he had last night with this desperate series of bribes to various sectional interest groups. He then insulted the intelligence of the electorate by insisting that no such deals had been made. To invoke the Parliament Act subsequently to ram it through potential opposition in the Lords would further undermine the constitutional settlement of the United Kingdom.
I met David Davis during the Conservative leadership campaign. He is a man of principle and conviction. This decision will not have been an easy one for him to make, but nonetheless it is the right one. A victory in the resulting by-election will undermine the claim to a popular mandate that is tacitly required for invoking the Parliament Act. It will also commit the Conservative Party to the side of liberty over the worst sort of creeping authoritarianism that has characterised the Home Office in recent years. It will also open the debate on liberty and security to the public at large, hopefully undermining the simplistic and false dichotomy newspapers such as The Sun have presented.
He is right to challenge the attitude in government that the rights of the British people should be trampled on, ranging from ID cards to the right to a trial by jury, and the arrogant attitude that one is guilty until proven otherwise. The government has placed itself on the opposing side of freedom on nearly every issue imaginable. This principled stand against the erosion of the traditional rights and liberties of the British is long overdue. Bravo to David Davis and good luck.
Sphere: Related ContentA Vindication of Modern Conservatism
The truly remarkable aspect of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election was the level of support for the Conservative Party from quarters traditionally thought of as safe havens for Labour. Every activist has a story of someone voting Tory for the first time in their life. Notwithstanding the viciousness of some campaigners, the attitude from voters was largely respectful. Loyal Labour supporters were willing to listen to the Conservatives, even if they were not going to vote for them.
The Conservative philosophy had a new resonance. Faced with a divisive Labour campaign, the Tory message was brought into sharp contrast. Jealousy was pitted against aspiration, class warfare against One Nation Conservatism, and prosperity against a taxation fiasco. Edward Timpson, typified this progressive Conservative idea. Coming from a self-made family with a strong philanthropic tradition, he forged a career concerned with the disadvantaged. Attacks on his background only served to highlight this.
The election demonstrated a new receptiveness to the modern Conservative philosophy. Even if not everyone was convinced, people were still willing to listen to what the Conservatives had to say in a manner that has not occurred in almost a generation. The victories in London and Crewe and Nantwich are evidence of a public that is willing to give the Party the benefit of the doubt and provide an opportunity for its philosophy to be put into action. Modern Conservatism has begun to capture the popular imagination, and the progressive vision articulated is now being taken seriously by people of all political persuasions and none.
There is however a danger of complacency. Some commentators are already predicting a possible Conservative landslide victory at the next general election. Nobody should be under the illusion that Crewe and Nantwich represents an irreversible ideological swing towards the Conservatives. Many Tory votes were cast either against Gordon Brown or as a means od testing the waters without the risk inherent in a general election. The Party has to use the opportunity it has been granted to prove that modern Conservatism is more than rhetoric. It has to work har to meet voters’ expectations. It has to make good on its One Nation message of being the party of all, not just a particular class or interest. Above all, it has to demonstrate that it is worthy of the task of forming the next government, and turn those tentative Tory votes into positive Conservative support.
Crewe and Nantwich was a significant victory for the Conservative Party and is evidence of the change in the political mood that Peter Riddell wrote about. The Party now has to meet the hopes and aspirations people have placed in it if is to form the next government.
Sphere: Related ContentCrewe and Nantwich Diary: Days 3-4
VICTORY!
Conservatives win Crewe in Landslide: 59% turnout; 20,539 votes; 7,860 majority (greater than Gwyneth Dunwoody’s); 49% of vote; 17.6% swing.
Apologies for not putting a post out last night, but I didn’t get back to my hotel until 5 this morning.
I decided against doing the “dawn raid” of leafleting at 4.30 yesterday morning. By the time I’d finished writing up the previous day’s efforts and uploading photos it was already half past ten. Knowing that it would be a long day, prudence took priority, and I opted to get a good night’s sleep instead.
Despite having a rather leisurely sleep, the first campaign office I went to on polling day was working at an even more leisurely pace. I had to wait an hour before it opened, before finding out that there was little to be tasked with. Nonetheless I did manage to grab a bit of internet access to find that ConservativeHome used my photo (with attribution) of Nick Clegg looking less than optimistic. I was promptly re-assigned to the Victoria Street office in Crewe, where I’d been working most of the week. A few of us were quickly assigned with “knock-ups”: going round to known Conservative supporters and giving them a letter in person. We did this several times throughout the day. Overall a positive response until later in the day, when Bluechip started to get very quickly out of synch with who’d already voted. After five households in a row going “we’ve voted Tory, go away”, we came up with a clever idea to go straight to the tellers to get the polling numbers and strike off those who’d already voted. Moving to the more non-confrontational line of “we’d like to confirm that you voted” was also much more successful. Despite the number of letters we had to deliver, we got through them surprisingly quickly.
Although I had observed in the past few days a dearth of Labour activists, this changed on polling day. Labour was supposed to have brought in a train of activists, and there were a few out and about. I spotted four in total, but their hearts weren’t in it. A lot of their activists stayed at home, fed up with the tactics their party had used. I also met a couple of LibDem campaigners, one of whom I had tea with who turned out to have formerly lived in my area. A slightly surreal conversation about change and continuity over the last fifty years followed. Nice chap though.
Between rounds of knock-ups I worked as a teller for about four hours. Tellers are party workers who stand outside polling stations taking down poll card numbers. These are then used to cross those that have voted off our database to ensure that they do not get any more leaflets, calls or canvassers. Unfortunately not everyone realises what the tellers are for, and several of us got berated by voters who thought we were there to find out how they voted. Once they saw the telling slips and our briefings for themselves, they promptly gave up and left. I worked three different polling stations. The first was out in the sun with only a few voters coming in; a good opportunity to rest. The second was a tiny polling station for a few voters, and I got to enjoy a complimentary pack of wine gums from the party. The final one was at a bowling green, which was much more busy. I managed also to get a drink and some food from the bar, and on a break from telling talk to the people who had already cast their vote. The level of working class Conservative support is amazing.
The fact that the only tellers were from the Conservative Party gave the first hint that we might be winning. The LibDems had given up and gone home, and Labour were so short-staffed that they simply didn’t have the manpower to spare to have tellers. A good sign came at about 2pm. A local Conservative councillor came to where I was telling and gave some great news: hardcore Labour voters were staying at home and activists were unable to get them out to vote. We already knew that the postal vote had favoured us, and that we had been very successful at getting our own vote out. The Labour hardcore had decided not to vote because they were fed up of the tactics their party were using: they didn’t want to betray their party, but at the same time they hadn’t been given a single good reason to vote by their party. When you insult the intelligence of the electorate, they throw it back in your face.
After the last round of knock-ups at 9pm, we returned to the Victoria Street office. We put in the last pieces of telling data then closed up. I got my hands on a party T-shirt that makes me look like a tree surgeon, and we moved on to Nantwich. There was a party mood in the air at the Nantwich Conservative Working Men’s club: the question wasn’t whether or not we’d won, but by how much. Labour were predicting a Conservative majority of around 7000, which meant that they expected us to win by about 3000. Cheers whenever Eric Pickles or Edward Timpson appeared on the TV, and the good news kept on coming in: turnout at 60%, and the level of majority kept climbing.
Jolly nice chap he is too
At 2am we were told the result was ready to be declared and headed down to the town hall, placard and baloons in hand. We then had a long wait for the result to be called, followed by a number of interviews with the media before Timpson finally came out. Fortunately the waiting was interspersed with the party’s other favourite candidates: both The Flying Brick (Monster Raving Loony) and Miss Great Britain came out to have a chat, and got a good round of cheers. I’d kept missing The Flying Brick when out campaigning, much to my disappointment, but finally got to meet him this morning. He even recited a poem he had composed.
Someone managed to get their hands on a radio as we heard the result live. It was better than we’d expected. A gigantic swing, a great turnout, a huge number of votes, and a majority greater than Gwyneth Dunwoody’s was. All that was needed then was for our new MP to come out. This took a bit longer than expected thanks to the previously-mentioned interviews with the media. The message coming out from the Conservative team was “we’ve waited 20 years, what was another hour”? A few activists quipped that they were under 20. The campaign team came out first to big cheers and thunderous applause: Eric Pickles MP and Donald Potter, the local association chair, got a great reception. When Timpson came out there was jubilation: the noise was almost deafening. We then had a little victory parade back to the constituency association, where champagne was laid on.
The atmosphere inside the association was electrifying. Many activists had been up over 24 hours, and the champagne laid on ensured high spirits. A few of us found flyers saying “meet your candidate Edward Timpson PPS”, and promptly edited them to reflect the new reality. Bloggers swapped details, and I managed to put in a shameless plug for this blog (and if you’re reading this as a result, thank you). All the long hours and campaigning had been worth it. The hours of walking around, map in hand, trying to track down that last address and get a few more votes had been vindicated, and we were ecstatic. The campaign had the good national effect of being an extremely good bit of campaigning experience for activists all over the country, and a lot of us will be going back to our local associations to report on what went well and what could have been improved. This will give us a good footing for the next election. It was also healthy: several activists reported losing weight from all the walking around, and my legs now feel like they are made of steel. In 3 days I easily covered at least 30 miles on foot.
The last of us peeled off from the association at about 5am, shattered but thrilled. Now to translate this into a national result.
Bring on Henley.
Sphere: Related ContentCrewe and Nantwich Diary: Day 2
This morning I jumped out of bed and into the shower like a bolt of lightning. In that groggy immediate post-sleep state I believed that I had slept through my alarm call and was now running late for the day’s campaigning. I threw my hayfever pills down my throat and turned the TV on to BBC News.
It was 4:30 am.
The problem here is that I tend to suffer from bad hayfever towards the end of spring and the begninning of summer. The symptoms start about one hour after I wake up, subside a further hour after I’ve taken my pills, and then return with a vengeance nine hours later. Having now firmly woken up and taken my pills far too early in the day, I was condemned to spending the rest of the night sleeping badly and suffering the onset of more symptoms earlier in the afternoon than I had hoped. Fortunately it meant that I was up and out of the hotel in time to be the first Conservative activist to be in the Crewe Office. As a result I was rewarded with the vital task of making the tea. The Conservatives are the party of custom, tradition and great British institutions. There is no greater British institution than drinking of tea, and no greater custom or tradition either. As a result drinking Tea has a central place in the Conservative philosophy: the party can’t function without it. Far from being a menial task, being invited to brew tea for senior staff in the Conservative Party is a great honour, a vital task, and a sign of great trust. Or at least that’s what I was telling myself.
Following a cup of tea to wake up, I was sent on my way leafleting around 200 houses. This was a largely logistical challenge, trying to make sure that the leaflets were delivered in the target area with as little double-backing as possible. As the leaflets are all individually addressed, one has to spend a significant amount of time planning your route, and sorting the leaflets into the right order to minimise rummaging. Nonetheless it still took nigh on three hours to deliver all the leaflets. The area I covered had a roughly even number of Tory and Labour posters, but leaning slightly towards the Conservatives (although this might be my own bias). One thing is certain though: Cats are Tories, Dogs are not. Cats can’t seem to get enough of me and other Tory canvassers, and at one point I ended up getting shadowed by a tabby when delivering leaflets on her street. The dogs however were universally hostile, even in Tory houses. Nonetheless the attitude of most people there was friendly: I even had “Vote Timpson” shouted at me from a car driving by. The only voter I encountered today who was hostile was a disaffected chap who was angry that none of the parties were promising to bring back caning in schools.
After a rather long morning in Crewe I then went over to the sector office in Nantwich. This place has a much more visible Conservative presence. The area is much more developed and affluent, and (on the face of things) overwhelmingly Tory. I don’t think I saw more than two Labour posters in the entire area, and there wasn’t a single Labour activist to be seen. By comparison, the Conservatives are out in force. The Nantwich office was brimming with activists and volunteers from all over the country, all pitching in to help where they could. Being more central today I got to witness the level of activity, and it’s even greater than I thought it was yesterday. The high profile of our campaign is evident in that there were two media vans outside our offices today, and there is going to be a swarm of journos, hacks, onlookers and so forth tomorrow. Locals were coming in to get rosettes and baloons, to ask questions and to inform us as to what the other parties are up to. Kids came in to trade the paraphenalia the other parties gave them for our blue rosettes and baloons. Of particular pride have been the number of requests for posters to be displayed. There was a target of 500 properties displaying Conservative posters throughout the campaign. The level of support however has been so great that we now have posters displayed on three times that number of properties. People have been approaching our canvassers asking us to provide giant posters to be displayed on their premises. A particular coup was when a businessman offered to display a gigantic poster on property facing a main road. This occurred within a few hours.
The voters are still more receptive than I ever could have imagined. Notwithstanding the “bring back caning” fellow, there has been an overwhelming level of receptiveness. When delivering a pile of flyers to a retirement home I expected to be thrown out and unwelcome as any other mass mailer. To my surprise I was welcomed in by the staff, who were extremely keen on “making sure Brown gets the message”. The owner did all the delivery for me, and said that she would ensure that every resident knew that we would be able to drive them to the polling station tomorrow. People are keen to hear what the Tories have to say, and nobody is buying in to the nasty little campaign Labour is running.
Although there is some coverage of the depths of Labour’s current electoral strategy, it does not demonstrate how far they have sunk. They are running an entirely negative and vicious campaign revolving entirely around class. The latest pamphlets portray Timpson in a massive top hat and bow tie, and describe him as having a “silver spoon in his mouth”. They’ve moved away from making claims that the Wales-inhabiting Dunwoody-Kneafsey is “one of us”, and the general mood is that the rubbish they are spouting has backfired tremendously. The sort of dog-whistle politics may appeal to hardcore Labour activists, but they are absolutely useless to the undecided voter who wants to know what their policies are. The emphasis of Timpson’s background has actually helped him: people recognise the link to the philanthropic family he belongs to, and claims that he has “spent his whole life being waited on”, despite the having 80 adopted siblings from underprivileged backgrounds, smacks of petty jealousy. Crewe and Nantwich are turning on a party that penalises the successful: they want to better their lot, and are switching to a Conservative message of support for such efforts.
The Times also picked up on the class issue today. Their People section has published what has been circulating round the internet: that Moyra Tamsin Dunwoody-Kneafsey is listed in Burke’s Peerage, describing her as part of the “landed gentry”, making her the real toff in the election. Daniel Finkelstein also decries the class war strategy as electoral stupidity that ’signals the end of new Labour’. Of particular interest was the following:
Since the days of the industrial revolution there has always been something of an alliance between the working class and the aristocracy… When the fighting broke out in the streets of Leeds over the amelioration of factory conditions, radicals and workers’ leaders such as Richard Oastler saw themselves as allies of Tories such as the Earl of Shaftesbury. To be portrayed as a top-hatted toff actually represents an improvement in the Tory image
There is a long tradition of aristocratic and Conservative support for the working classes. Benjamin Disraeli, a founder of the One Nation Conservative tradition, in his days as a young radical was part of the “Young England Quartet”; a group of thinkers possessed of a romantic notion of the working classes and aristocracy united to confront the industrial revolution. Their ideas may have been little more than hopeless romanticism and unrefined radicalism, but some of the ideas their group represented formed the nucleus of the One Nation tradition. Now that the Conservatives have rediscovered this side to their identity and politics, people are starting to take the message seriously again. The message that privilege comes with duties has actually benefited from Labour’s emphasis on Timpson’s privileged background.
The other parties were barely visible. UKIP trundled round in their jeep and ranted to a few people, and the English Democrats made an attempt in Crewe to win support, but largely failed when the media showed little interest in them. They moved, muttering into their loudhailers. When the Liberal Democrats, complete with posters, placards, baloons and a significant section of their front bench arrived to walk through Nantwich, their reception was poorly received. They talked to a few bemused locals who insisted that they would not vote for a third party in such a close race, before moving swiftly on after getting heckled by a group of schoolchildren who couldn’t make their mind up whether or not they supported the Tories or Labour.
The campaign has been so efficient and well-managed that we’ve been able to finish all our tasks by around five or six, several hours before expected. Crewe and Nantwich Conservatives have always been very good at their campaigning. Now that this is no longer a safe seat they have been able to press this advantage. For example: normally the first days of a Tory campaign consist of sorting all the maps and routes. The party branch here had that already prepared before the election was announced. Nobody is kept idle and tasking has been extremely effective. We’ve been receptive to local demands, and able to adjust our strategy accordingly: those who don’t want any more attention are swiftly removed from the mailing lists, and comments and concerns by residents are relayed back to campaign headquarters.
That’s about as much as I can write for today. I’m sorry if it’s rambling but I’ve had a long and tiring day. Tomorrow I actually do have to wake up at 4, as we prepare for the “morning raid”: a last-ditch effort at sending round the last bits of electoral literature. After that I’ll be working as a teller at a local polling station.
Sphere: Related ContentThank You
I want to personally thank every left-wing activist who helped Boris into office this morning.
First, I’d like to thank the tireless smear campaigners in Compass and elsewhere for their continued misrepresentations of BoJo. You set expectations so low among some that all Boris had to do was turn up somewhere and smile and immediately his impression among voters would improve. You made him out to be so stupid that when he actually said something intelligent, the contrast was such that it made him appear doubly clever. The contrast between expectation and reality was so great that it probably generated more votes than it lost. Thank you for the inadvertent boost to his image that you gave him.
Thanks for lying so hard. It backfired marvellously when exposed.
Big thanks to every activist who tried to make this a negative campaign. It allowed us to dominate the positive agenda, resulting in the Tories being the only party with a clear and achievable set of policies and the demonstration that Labour is a spent force. We came up with so many policies that both Ken and Brian felt obliged to steal some of them. I would like to congratulate every negative campaigner who got out the Tory vote and turned people off Labour with misrepresentations. They galvanised all those who discovered the extent of the deceit involved, and ensured they endured the elements to get out and vote. Well done.
Thank you for making Boris out to be a clown. Your refusal to take him seriously meant that we had an easier time promoting our agenda. Promoting him as a bumbling charming fool one minute neutralised your claims to his being a demonic Machiavellian schemer the next.
And really big thanks to all those with the eminently mature “fuck Boris” facebook photos. When viewed in the facebook mini-format they were virtually indistinguishable from the “back Boris” photos. This helped us appear to have even more support on facebook.
Finally, thank you to all who promised to leave London if he won, as well as all the other apocalyptic rhetoric. Crying “racist” soon turned to crying wolf (especially when there’s now a real racist in the London Assembly). By decrying Boris as Satan incarnate you made sure that many voters didn’t take you seriously. Thank you for doing the job for us.
So thank you anti-Boris activists everywhere. We couldn’t have done it without your help.
Sphere: Related Content
