Fear and Loathing on the 2010 Tory Campaign Trail...

Harold Wilson once perfectly defined the British political landscape with his truism that a "week is a long time in politics", and for David Cameron the last week has possibly felt more like an epoch rather than just a long time. The only other person that can truly relate to this incredible sense of time distortion is the Chinese tanker Captain who crashed into the (not so insignificant) Great Barrier Reef, after sailing through illegal shipping lanes, causing untold environmental damage. He knew the outcome a long time before the accident happened, but he still tried in vain to turn the ship around, but those tankers take a lot of turning and the crash was inevitable.

This general election has already thrown up a few surprises (the Lib Dems second in YouGov latest opinion poll, anyone?), but the biggest surprise of the whole election campaign is the Tories inability to gain any significant political momentum. Given the economic conditions and the unpopularity of the incumbent government, the Tories must have believed that the election would be an easier fight than it has been...

The constant media references to the similarities between David Cameron and Tony Blair, have been somewhat misleading - giving the impression that the 2010 general election was going to be an inverse repeat of 1997, in which Labour swept to power on a popular tide of goodwill and hope. Probably a more insightful comparison would be to compare this election with 1992: the opposition in both examples are trying to reinvent themselves, attempting to throw off the shackles of negative public opinion and a lack of trust. Plus the rising spectre of increasing tough economic conditions, in which the harsh realities of a global recession will come to bear - the public may just be comforted by the devil they know.

There are several key factors which are impacting upon the Conservatives inability to gain a significant lead in the opinion polls:

• The Shadow Cabinet is weak and unable to connect with the public - in 1997 the Labour Shadow Cabinet was a significant strength of Tony Blair's election strategy, whether it was Robin Cook, Mo Mowlam, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw or David Blunkett; the Cabinet was prompted as a 'Cabinet of Talent'. Currently the Conservatives are appearing to focus solely on David Cameron and George Osborne, sidelining the poor(!) Chris Grayling for fear of costly gaffes. Even John Prescott was given meaningful airtime in comparison.

• Lack of a coherent message - the main focus of the Conservatives' election manifesto is the 'Big Society' in which the public can effect the running and management of many public institutions. The issues for most people are rooted in real problems, employment, transport or education, but the Tories have proposed an abstract concept that generates few pragmatic solutions for real issues. The Labour Party in 1997 offered a tangible response to the genuine concerns of the nation. The 'Big Society' is perceived as empty rhetoric, from the party that once claimed that "there is no such thing as society".

• Whilst other parties are weak on the topic of Europe, the Conservatives can not exploit their advantage - in the public's opinion the European Union is at a particularly low point, the rise of UKIP is testimony to this fact. The Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats are potentially committed to further European integration, but David Cameron is wary of using the populist EU stick to beat his opponents for fear that it may open old wounds, in the Conservative Party, that have only been plastered over - not healed. Witness the undercurrent of discontent at the 2009 Conservative Party conference, with David Cameron's pledge that if the Lisbon Treaty was ratified the next Tory government would work within its parameters.

• David Cameron's inability to connect with many of the electorate - whether this is due to old fashion class prejudice or the perception that he is style over substance, David Cameron has struggled to find a voice that speaks to a majority of people. This is not helped by an advertising campaign, organised by Andy Coulson, that appears to be confused and artificial. Most elections that are fought on the concept of 'change' have their vanguard amongst a section of the population that have been under-represented in previous regimes; youth, working class or ethnic sections of the community. It is difficult for the general public to believe that a privileged and wealthy white man is sincere about significant change - also it is not a typical election pledge by a party that is perceived to be more concerned with the conservation of society rather than its radical overhaul.

• The inability of the Conservative Party to reassure the public that the recession would have been better under their guidance - even though there are significant differences between Labour and Tory economic policy, it would have been impossible for the Conservative Party to have claimed that they would have avoided the recession with tighter regulations of the banking sector. After all it was the Conservative Party that actively encouraged deregulation of the finance sector allowing 'bankers' the freedom to recklessly gamble the country's economic stability by chasing larger profits.

 The Chinese tanker Captain and David Cameron have both discovered something important in the last fortnight - big ships take a long time to turn so it's vital to make sure that you have plotted correct course before you sail.

Wales leading the Way?

If a week is a long time in politics, then a month must be akin to an epoch. On June 3rd a draft timetable was being constructed by rebel Labour MPs to usurp Gordon Brown from his position as Prime Minister. A combination of dire predictions concerning EU and local elections results, combined with the lack of leadership shown over MPs' expenses, led most political commentators to agreed that Mr Brown had one reshuffle to save his career.

How swiftly the press focus can be distracted by a new speaker and the promise of "serious reform", to the extent that all that remains in the public consciousness is bitter taste and a significant distrust of all politicians.

However, the National Assembly of Wales has quickly learnt the lessons from its Westminster colleague and produced a list of proposals that will potentially negate a similar scandal. These proposals include:

• Assembly Members (AM) to rent not buy second homes
• Second homes for 25 instead of 51 out of the 60 AMs
• Receipt for every claim
• £30.65 overnight (food) allowance scrapped
• No employment of AMs' family members in future
• No more claims for furniture or fittings on second homes
• Independent valuation of office rent payments by AMs to political parties
• AMs' pay linked to average earnings not MPs' salaries

Whether these proposals have been developed with a spirit of competition between two competing legislatures or whether it is a genuine attempt by the National Assembly to demonstrate that there is 'clear blue water' (to borrow a phrase) between London and Cardiff, does not matter.

What matters is that a new standard in public service can be discovered by Parliament from the regions; and hopefully a new trust can be developed between the public and their elected representatives.

Order, Order!

Today, the House of Commons elects its new Speaker. With a short list of ten candidates Parliament hopes that a new Speaker and a summer recess will placate the public's demand for true reform; or better still most people forget the expenses debacle.

Rather than this being an auspicious event, ushering in a new order and a new style of politics, this election signifies a victory for the status quo. The list of candidates offer little in the way of reformers and will be decided by party feuds or allegiances, an old style of politics that has cursed Westminster for a considerable time.

In the opening rounds the Conservative Party will vote to stop John Bercow assuming the role, probably by voting for the ex-Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett. Conversely, the Labour Party will vote for John Bercow to stop Margaret Beckett winning. The person most likely to benefit from this playgroundesque voting will be Sir George Young.

In a time when Parliament is deemed to be out of touch with the disenfranchised electorate, a straight forward debate and election should be held; this needs to be transparent and above party bickering.

For the public to reconnect to Parliament and in particular the politicians that reside within
there must be an honest review of reforms required. Not a sham of a Speaker's election in which the new Speaker will be chosen through party loyalty and personality, rather than commitment to reform and real change.

It is disappointing that Parliament is wasting chance after chance to prove it can understand what the public is demanding.

Is it Tetris? No, it is an MP's Expense Form.

The MPs' expenses debate still rumbles on. Today the Parliament published the "full" list of expenses of all MPs in Parliament.

Notable by the vast swathes of blacked out information on the expenses claim form, the list reveals nothing that the public did not expect. Even the CIA would be embarrassed by the amount of content obscured from the public gaze.

This tactless editing will only infuriate the general public more, since all party leaders promised a more open and transparent system. The result is a perception that the MPs are still obscuring and blurring the lines of accountability for their own expenses. The declaration at the end of each of these expenses has now become obsolete:

"I confirm that the payments requested are in respect of costs incurred wholly, exclusively and necessarily in the performance of my parliamentary duties."

It is a shame that, at their lowest ebb, Parliament still attempts to protect itself from the scrutiny of the public and the media; instead it hides behind black squares and rectangles in the vain hope that it can collectively salvage some dignity.

This was the perfect opportunity for MPs to show that they had learnt the lessons of the past few months, but the public perception of ivory towers and gentleman's clubs still remains.

It is now obvious why Parliament wished for this list to be published in its entirety in July 2009. With Parliament in recess and most of the top political journalists on holiday, July would have provided a perfect opportunity to brush the scandal firmly under the carpet.

They would have got away with it, if it had not been for those pesky kids at the Telegraph...

The Night of the Long Knives

With a humiliating defeat in the European and Council elections on the cards for the Labour party, pressure is going to increase exponentially on Gordon Brown to call a General Election. The calls will almost be deafening. How will Gordon Brown survive?

He will stave off press speculation and public opinion like many of his predecessors by a cabinet reshuffle. Thus almost blaming the cabinet for the failures of the current government. That's wonderfully called 'collective responsibility'.

Gordon Brown's enemies are surrounding him, slowly but surely in the dark corners of the PLP, Labour is still crucially split along old divisions. Not divisions such as Old and New Labour, that one has been laid to rest long ago, but the Brownites and Blairites. Mr Brown will want all his allies close, in important positions, this is not the time for heeding the Godfather's advice about keeping you enemies closer, in this current climate the PM will form a 'Kitchen Cabinet' with his closest political allies.

It is obvious that Gordon Brown will purge his Cabinet of ministers that could threaten his leadership, with the exception of the poison chalices of the Home Office and Justice Ministry which it is possible to expect James Purnell and David Miliband to fall on their swords at. Also a possibility is that Mr Brown could use the re-shuffle to follow the populist route and exercise the ghost of the Bliarite era; Hazel Blears, Alan Johnson and John Hutton.

With Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper being promoted to senior positions in Mr Brown's 'Kitchen Cabinet' the purge will be complete and Gordon Brown might survive until next year, but a week is a long time in politics, let alone a year.

It will be interesting which story the Daily Telegraph chooses to publish on Thursday morning, it could provide an intriguing insight into the paper's motives and agenda. But it should be easy to guess.

Shock, Horror: MPs stay until next Pay Day!

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the MPs that have been forced to stand down, due to public opinion, have decided to remain in their positions until the next election. These MPs have defined themselves by their arrogant money grabbing actions.

Douglas Hogg, Peter Viggers, Anthony Steen, Andrew McKay, Nicholas Winterton, Ben Chapman, Ian McCarthney, Julie Kirkbride and Margaret Moran have all committed themselves to stepping down at the next general election, with most claiming that they are staying for continuity reasons.

But it is a very decent bet that if these MPs were allowed to claim all the benefits that they would receive for stepping down at a general election, for stepping down and forcing a by-election, the public would not see them for dust.

For a leopard to change its spots is like asking Boris Johnson to be quiet and not offend a nation, city, religious or ethnic group every time he opens his mouth. Impossible...

At the risk of sounding repetitious, most of these MPs are 'career politicians' who have been placed into constituencies due to the safe nature of the seat. They act as a party spokesperson in the constituency, as opposed to representing the people of constituency.

With seven out of ten constituencies being considered 'safe', there needs to be considerable reform of the selection process.

Nadine Dorries Manufactures Discontent.

It is surprising that in the current political climate, in which MPs are the focus of much media scrutiny, that any Member of Parliament would attempt to attract any unnecessary attention by making indefensible and rash statements. By claiming that certain MPs are 'suicidal' and that there is a McCarthyite 'witch-hunt' in progress, Nadine Dorries (Member of Parliament for the lucky constituency of Mid Bedfordshire) has seemingly achieved the impossible. She has managed to create even less sympathy for plight of our harassed MPs.

It is possible to attempt to draw two conflicting conclusions from Ms Dorries' actions, firstly it was a naive attempt to garner sympathy amongst the her constituency and the general public for our beleaguered MPs. Or it was a masterful Machiavellian manoeuvre designed to throw the media off the scent by claiming something so outrageous that it would baffle and confuse. Thankfully, neither worked.

In future to attract similar levels of media attention, Ms Dorries will have to make bigger and bolder claims. Personally, I can not wait for the claim of a Stalinist Purge or the allegation that the media are attempting to 'restart civilisation'.

However, I am going to heed my mother's valuable advice, if you can not say anything good about a person, then do not say anything at all. So with regards to Nadine Dorries...

"







."