Measuring up

Michael Gove’s speech to the Bow Group today was billed as the “definitive” assessment of Brown so far and a critique of what power has done to New Labour’s idealism. Both of which it was. 

But it got me thinking – how is David Cameron measuring up to the confidence that we placed in him when we elected him? Let’s take his favourite words – change, hope and optimism.

Optimism – yes there is cause for that. In the broader sense, though, his argument is that we can be optimistic about the future because there is huge potential in our country. He also rightly argues that being all doom and gloom is a) self-defeating and b) unbelievable when most people are pretty much ok most of the time. 

Hope – we as a party can hope. We have an enormous amount of work to do – but Brown has given us two, possibly three, years to get it done. We need to take 126 seats to gain a majority, which is massive, but the way that we are setting the agenda, the fumbling way that Brown is ‘governing’ (“oh let me set out my vision… Which is that I must set out my vision”. We know, he knows, they know that Brown should set out his vision – but what is it?!), and the fact that CCHQ and the Party had the threat of a snap election to show them what needed to be done mean that it is possible.

On change though – I wonder. As Benet wrote on Monday, David’s population and demography speech was a thoughtful, sensible contribution. Any government must have a long-term plan for the population. I have heard that some high-level strategists in CCHQ referred to this speech as the ‘immigration speech’. Certainly the way it was briefed out focused on immigration rather than the wider issues David discussed. While clearly part of the speech was concerned with immigration, it was only part of a much wider point, and I worry that if even senior strategists can’t stick to the long-term message, what possible chance do the rest of us stand? CCHQ needs to set the pace on issues like this – be the change, to quote another favourite phrase. I’ve said it before and will say it again: it’s not enough to have a leader who looks and sounds good and for everyone else to just rant on in the same old way. 

The change David spoke about was a change in the way we look, sound, think and act. I want to believe that everyone involved understands that the superficial changes may have happened but as Sky’s Julie Etchingham’s horrible comment showed, it will take a long time for the deeper changes to take hold. And the ONLY way those deeper, attitudinal changes will mean anything is if David, the Shadow Cabinet, CCHQ and the Party at large all continue to push the modern, liberal agenda that is right for the country, and right for the future.

I don’t want to have to go and read a 6,000 word speech to find out what was really said – I want the briefing to reflect what the speech says, not just a headline that could have come from five years ago. Consistency is key. I don’t think I’ve heard anything big from the Party on anything but tax, immigration and Europe for a while now. Zig-zagging between ‘old core’ issues with the odd tiny bit of ‘new’ stuff thrown in isn’t why I supported David Cameron in 2005, and it’s not how we will convince people that we have their future at heart.

No related posts.