The Conservatives have won the argument but not the election

The Conservatives have won the argument but not the election

It seems like an age ago that George Osborne was under assault from all fronts for his economic policy, the IMF singled him out for criticism, the ratings agencies downgraded the UK’s credit rating, and he was seen as a hapless Chancellor.  His fortunes have had a revival and there are whispers of him becoming the next leader of the Conservative party.  Just like the Chancellor, the Conservative party has started to win the big arguments, with Labour now promising to be tough on welfare and to allow parents to open free schools, as well as the popular sale of Royal mail.  So by this logic the Conservatives should be set to coast to a majority in 2015, however it seems unlikely that it will be so easy.

Ed Miliband has highlighted a key issue, which has the potential to decide the next election in his conference speech, the cost of living.  Although you can easily argue that Labours policy to tackle the rising cost of energy is counterproductive.  Sadly for the Conservatives that is not their only idea, and as Labour slowly start to fill their policy void the cost of living will become a greater issue for Cameron and Osborne.  Labour’s other idea has received endorsements for rightward leaning think tanks and it is a logical idea that worked well for Alistair Darling and Conservative back benchers have also called for it.  It’s a cut to VAT , unless it is a substantial cut it will still be a token gesture but Darling’s own small cut in VAT did lead to economic growth.  But the Chancellor in his position of increased confidence says any savings made from cuts will be used to pay off government debts and there will be no VAT cut. 

The Chancellor may just be waiting until it is closer to the election before he starts to dish out goodies such as tax cuts or he might be plotting a different way to tackle the cost of living.  One such way cut be a cut to Green taxes which are damaging industry by increasing the cost of production which is being passed on to consumers, and it is severely damaging energy intensive industries such as the chemical and steel industries.  Moreover, for all the damage green taxes do to the economy and the cost of living they have a minimal effect on climate change.  Although Vince Cable has ruled out a cut to green taxes under the coalition this does not mean that a Conservative manifesto will not include such a policy and it would be a move of political genius that Osborne is known for.  It would some red meat for the right of the party and it would tackle the issue of the cost of living as well as showing that the Conservatives are on the side of UK industry.  Whatever Cameron and Osborne decide to do they will need a policy to tackle the cost of living problem in the UK or risk helping Ed Miliband into Number 10 after all very few people feel better off now than they did in 2010.

Cameron can’t justify a second vote on Syria…. Yet.

Cameron can’t justify a second vote on Syria….  Yet.

The Prime Minister is facing mounting pressure from senior political figures such as former Home Secretary and Conservative Party leader Michael Howard, former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind and the former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown.  Even Boris Johnson has got in on the act saying there could be a second vote on military intervention in Syria.  Even Labour are starting to increase the pressure on the Prime Minister as Labour MP’s are starting to say they would support a second vote.  And as the Prime Minister knows many Conservative rebels and Labour MP’s voted against the government because they thought the Prime Minister was acting over Syria to soon before all the information was in.  So it is actually likely the government would win a second vote over Syria and this would please David Cameron because he has made it quite clear he would like to intervene in Syria to send a message that the use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated.

As much as David Cameron probably wants another vote over Syria he must wait, calling another vote so soon after losing the last one will damage David Cameron.  After all, he did say he would respect the will of Parliament, calling another vote so soon after the last one with no new compelling evidence, would not be seen as respecting the will of Parliament.  In fact the only way a second vote could be justified is if something new happens on the ground in Syria something like another chemical weapons attack.  The Prime Minister must be aware he is not respecting the authority of Parliament is he asks the same question to Parliament again and again until he gets the result he wants.

A final reason not to call a second vote over Syria, is that the idea of intervening in Syria is unpopular and on the whole people were happy to see Parliament vote not to intervene.  A second vote will only damage the Prime Minister, if he loses which is unlikely his position would be so badly weakened I think he would be forced to resign.  If he wins his reputation amongst the voting public will be damaged, not only because he went against his word when he said he would respect the will of Parliament but also because he would have committed the UK to unpopular military action, arguably not an outright war but unpopular nevertheless.  For me calling a second vote over Syria without new compelling evidence would be a lose lose situation for the Prime Minister. 

Stick With Dave

Stick With Dave

Recent polls have shown that David Cameron is less popular than his party, now should he get the boot?  Many right wingers in the Tory party have been itching to get rid of the Prime Minister and up until now the PM has had the advantage of being an electoral asset to the party, but at long last he is a liability.  There is an argument to remove him, the public move seems to be swaying to the right UKIP’s popularity shows this but who would replace Cameron, Gove? May? Both these potential front-runners for the leadership are also modernisers.  And to be honest the party wants a moderniser in charge when the party fought the 2001 and 2005 elections with a right wing message we were comprehensively beaten.  Plus the Tory modernising project has not really shifted the party to the left David Cameron and the mods still believe in tax cuts and free enterprise, they have just tried to make the party more compassionate, although since coming into government they have dropped the compassionate message.  It is still fair to say that the modernising agenda is more likely to win the party a majority than running a more right wing agenda and actually, the right of the party has plenty to be pleased about.  Dave has cut immigration by a third, he has cut the top rate of tax from 50% to 45%, he has increased the personal allowance which is essentially a tax cut (it also shows some compassionate conservatism), he is tackling welfare and he is promising a referendum on the EU.  The right of the party has been well looked after under David Cameron. 

Forgetting about what Dave has and has not done policy wise removing him now at this stage of the Parliament would be damaging.  The party will have to go into a leadership contest when they should be governing, the leadership contest may well be a bloody affair revealing all the rifts in the party.  And if a moderniser wins the right may not necessarily back them and if a right winger wins the modernisers are unlikely to support him.  A Michael Gove or William Hague may well unite the party however rifts will probably appear again when the European election goes badly and the party will have had two consecutive years of infighting.  I personally think a leadership challenge would be disastrous for the party at this stage of the Parliament and it will make us look divided come election time which could be sooner than 2015 if the new leader did not hit it off with Nick Cleg.  We should stick with Dave and if he loses in 2015 let the leadership battle commence, there are plenty of quality candidates to lead us back to number 10.