8am: (Nick) One of the most difficult things to do at Conference is going to bed. At every turn someone you will know – or met for the first time a couple of hours previously – will wander by and say “hello”. I first tried to leave around 9pm but didn’t return to my hotel room until gone midnight.

As I said yesterday the atmosphere is good, and very friendly. Unlike most normal evenings out people’s eyes don’t glaze over if you talk about the difference between the deficit and debt, or how to fund ambitious IT infrastructure. Heaven.

Andrew Pierce in the Daily Mail mentions that the yellow tree on Conference passes is proof that the Tories have been consumed by the Lib Dems. The thing is the yellow colour is being used as a warning siren for us members as it denotes journalists. (We have green trees, lobbyists purple). There is very little moaning about the Lib Dems. Everyone agrees that the biggest obstacle to their ideas is economics.

10am: (Nick) - Can the Conservative Party represent everyone in Britain? Do we have a situation where people can judge political parties purely their policy, forgetting what class, race, religion or sexual orientation you are? The general answer to this question is not a unanimous yes yet, but there are many Conservatives who want to change this. Yesterday at the launch of the book “Tory Pride & Prejudice” Alan Duncan talked about the irrelevance of his sexuality in the Party. There are now more openly gay MPs in the Conservative Party than there is in all other parties put together.

At this mornings policy breakfast on racial justice, hosted by Max Wind-Cowie, Gavin Barwell said that he would like to see Cameron tackle Tebbit’s ‘Cricket Test’ in the same way DC has tried to consign to history the “there is no such thing as society” quote.

It is not enough for Conservatives to just critique Labour’s policy on race, we need a coherent alternative. The discussion seemed to suggest that this alternative is understanding that equality is about providing genuine opportunity to succeed, not diluting what success means. A quote that will stick with me is “quotas help white people feel better about themselves but they help everyone to ignore the deeper issues.”

11.45am: (Nick) I’m going to revisit a theme in yesterday’s blog; that the Conservative Conference is a Glastonbury for political geeks. Inside the secure area there are loads of fun happenings in every corner. For example, InHouse have created this funky gazebo where you can relax, chat or surf net, while drinking complimentary (thank you Total Politics) Starbucks coffee. There are stalls selling food, suit accessories (useful for those who may have left their cuff links at home…) and political books.

The queue to get into the secure area takes about 15min to navigate. On one side there are the protesters, hurling good natured abuse and giving out union sponsored leaflets. On the other side of the queue are people trying to get you to go to their fringe event.* By the time you enter the Conference center you are clutching a small forest’s worth of leaflets; half of them chastising you while the rest invite you.

Now, to join the rush to hear George. One of the top conversations in Manchester is about how to achieve growth. There is a lot of interest in what the Chancellor will say.

4.20pm: (Nick) - The economy. The economy. The economy. Everything is fundamentally about the economy. How we can get growth? (ummm lots of wide range ideas on this) How important is it to cut the deficit? (very very) What level of debt is acceptable? (depends how much pressure our economy comes under) How is it best to communicate complex financial matters to the busy majority? (credit card analogies are being maxed out).

George Osborne clearly stated that resolving the deficit/debt issue is his top priority. There is no point in cutting taxes in the short-term if all you are doing is loading up pain for later. He pointed out that the economic mess was caused by human error, before optimistically concluding that it is within our power to put things right; for the long-term. The hall seemed to accept his macro message.

Around the fringe there are many events with an economy focused theme, and many micro suggestions: The government should make child care tax deductible,
Deregulation is – to quote John Redwood – the tax cut that costs Government no money,
lowering the rate of corporate tax (and the 50p tax) will encourage entrepreneurs,
more transparent procurement processes will give innovators opportunity.

Finding ideas is not a problem. The hard thing is working out which option is best.

A delegate sat next to me at an Adam Smith Institute event made the great point that very few of the conversations deal with how the electorate/or Lib Dems would react.

This is a space for us to jot down thoughts, observations and what we have heard at the Conservative Party Conference 2011. If you have any thoughts leave a comment below or e-mail me at nckpost@hotmail.com. (ps, The rumours are that Wi-Fi and mobile phone coverage are not particularly great).

9.15am: (Nick) – Conference reminds me of Glastonbury (Dave Skelton vehemently disagrees with this comparison, but stick with me). Thousands of people descend onto what is a foreign land, you have a main stage containing headline performers and lots of smaller stages featuring a wide selection of entertainment, the BBC presence is massive, the venue is surrounded by a cordon of steel manned by fluorescently grumpy security guards, you need to beware of people pushing mind altering policy ideas…

The shirts are ironed and folded, the multiple ties are packed, cuff-links – check, conference pass (including pasty photo) – check. Now I’m off to catch that train which will take me to a better future.

11.30am: (Nick) - Euston Station contained what I suspect was an unusually high percentage of suites, slacks and jackets for a Sunday morning. The queue in WH Smiths snaked out of the shop and everyone had at least two papers under their arm. Some had the whole Sunday spread.

The 10.20 to the better future, via Milton Keynes, is a lively mix of politicos and residents of Greater Manchester. Your intrepid correspondent had to perform a body swerve reminiscent of what we’ve seen in the Rugby World Cup to bag the last seat in carriage B. Apologies to the lady who was charging down the aisle, but on this train Darwinism rules. (I exaggerate. Three Conference goers gave up their table seat for a family with a baby so it’s all good spirits).

The announcement: “We apologize for the technical difficulties at the buffet” brought a collective groan as people struggled to get the coffee they want – nay need. Does everyone remember the cold turkey scene from Trainspotting?

5pm: (Nick) The atmosphere in Conference is positive but curious. Positive because there is feeling that we are in government and governing. The stories in this mornings papers were generally well received.

Curious in the sense that everyone knows that there are some issues that need to be resolved (Europe, how to fix ‘broken Britain’, what the slogan means in practice). There is also a lot of talk on how Boris should tackle Ken, and about boundaries as well.

9pm: (Nick) Conference is a whirlwind of activity, and background noise is constant chatter. You have to plan your schedule carefully and even then you miss out on much that seems good.

In no particular order here are some memories. Francis Maude said you can be a One Nation Tory and a Thatcherite as the party needs to constantly modernise,
Philip Blond wants to strengthen the PMs Big Society backbone,
to fulfill the Governments technological vision it will cost £30 and no-one knows where this money will come from,
Conservatives are completely comfortable with modern world issues such as gay rights,
China is looking for a Western country to be a center point when it floats it’s currency,
Grant Shapps likes Twitter because he can get ideas out before they become ‘civil service-ised’
And the number one priority is deficit reduction, otherwise there is no point in doing anything else.

The big ideas that excite people are tempered by the reality that cash is scarce.

No offence to our great cities, but I much prefer a conference in a seaside resort.   Sadly, after years of losing competitive advantage against cities investing heavily in tourism infrastructure and bed spaces, the seaside has been all but abandoned by the main parties.  UKIP did Eastbourne this year but, well, it’s UKIP.  Not that I have anything against Eastbourne, far from it (UKIP on the other hand…). 

Of course, seaside resorts like Eastbourne or Blackpool suffer from the Skoda problem. Some people simply refuse to see them as they are now rather than as they were 25 years ago.  But our seaside resorts (or coastal towns as tourism professionals prefer to call them these days) are, like Skoda, resurgent and much improved.  They are winning back the tourist trade – a trend that started before the credit crunch.  And I’m confident conferences will soon head back to the seaside – and not because of political calculations, nor even mere grassroots pressure (though @ConHome is right to apply it)but simple economics .  Conferences are money-spinners and the Coalition’s enthusiasm for localism will be the key driver in seaside boroughs upping their game and winning them back.

Consider this.  In the 1920s seaside boroughs were among the very richest in the country.  Now more often they are among the poorest.  Losing party conferences might have seemed to some the final nail in their coffin.  But seaside towns have been reinventing themselves around a timeless formula: Health, Happiness and Horseplay. 

The coast has always attracted Brits when it’s offered us bracing sea air and exercise (the first seaside resort, Scarborough, was a health spa; Newquay has reinvented itself as a surfers’ dream – thanks to much improved water quality and the wetsuit).  The seaside is (should be) a happy place to be too: quirky, fun architecture, a place to make you smile.  Until 60s and 70s architecture came along of course, degenerating once exotic places into grey soulless boxes as the years went by (the Brighton Centre?  Yuck.)  Now we’re seeing a revival in seaside ambition – the Turner in Margate, East Beach Cafe in Littlehampton, Rock Walk in Torquay – and the scheduling for demolition of the worst of the 60s and 70s crud.  Finally, it is ok to enjoy yourself too.  Horseplay is not hooliganism (a la the mods and rockers who clashed in seaside towns) but nor is it sandwiches in silence in a retirement centre.  Resorts had been in danger of falling into the trap of letting themselves slide from places of life literally to places of death.  There is now much greater focus on balancing age profiles in seaside towns.  I’m told the average age of residents in Eastbourne, for example, is 43. When Bournemouth consulted on building an artificial surf reef one of the findings was that older residents loved that it would attract young people (not least their own grandchildren) back to the town.   The children of the 60s are now in their 60s.  As they retire to the seaside in pretty much full health so the seaside is changing to embrace life on the edge again.  It will make it richer.

 Importantly, resorts have embraced local differences – unique selling points and points of difference (or whatever the current marketing babble may be): Brighton is bohemian and ‘resort’ is a banned word in its marketing whereas Southport markets itself as ‘England’s classic resort’.  And thinking locally is attractive globally.  When you can travel anywhere in the world, you tend to prefer somewhere that is like nowhere else on Earth.  Seaside towns knew this when they developed.  Being at the very height of architectural fashion attracted Coco Chanel and Hollywood movie stars to Morecambe, whatever the weather.   And budget hotels – the fastest growing suppliers of bed spaces in UK tourism – are revolutionising value for money in accommodation and driving up standards elsewhere as small B&Bs compete with their own points of difference in customer care.  The classic, bossy, customer unfriendly Blackpool landlady of myth (and, in some cases, truth) simply cannot work as a business model today.

Of course, in the old days of the Blackpool Corporation et al attracting tourists and other travellers made financial sense to the Town Hall.  More economic activity meant more business rates, which meant more for investment and so on in a virtuous circle.  Cutting that link was a huge mistake. So the welcome moves from DCLG bringing business rates retention ever closer will ensure it makes sense again to invest in leisure and business tourism and compete for conferences on grounds of product quality, not pity or political calculations of there being a few votes in it (moving conference to Birmingham didn’t win us Edgbaston after all).  There is a long way to go but Blackpool and the seaside conference will be back – and better than before.  And we’ll all be better off because of the localist economic competition driving it.  Please join me, @graemearcher and @torypride in showing them we’re looking forward to being back.  #BackToBlackpool

The aspiration set for us by David Cameron and the Coalition Government of a ‘Big Society’ is exciting. For Conservatives it is a natural one—societies and communities empowered to do more for themselves, with less dependency on a centralised, command and control state.

The initiative presents us with enormous opportunities, some challenges, and some questions:

• How do you engage and empower communities?
• There is already a lot of ‘stuff’ that could be described as ‘Big Society’ going but what works and how do we share it?
• What does the ‘Big Society’ mean for the future of local government?

Other questions arise. Does embracing the ‘Big Society’ mean by-passing local government or does it present a new and important role for councillors.  If so, how do we encourage talented local people to come forward to play a more active role, not just in their communities, but also in the democratic process?

To discuss these issues in a packed room three were three exceptionally well qualified contributors. They were Tony Hawkhead, the energetic CEO of Groundwork UK. Next was Cllr Sir Merrick Cockell, Chairman of the Conservative Councillors Association and champion of the Local Government Leadership ‘Be A Councillor’ project which aims to interest people who might otherwise not think about doing so, in getting involved in local politics.  The other panel member was Baroness Sandip Verma, who is the Government Spokesperson in the Lords for a number of briefs including women and equalities. She is doing a great deal to encourage community and democratic involvement.

All in all it was a lively discussion, with some challenges advanced to the new government from Groundwork to ensure that the Big Society is about setting people free, not adrift.  Sir Merrick pointed out that one of the best descriptions of ‘Big Society’ was that it was about ‘helping individuals feel less small.’ Baroness Verma persuasively put the case that government must allow people to take individual responsibility for their communities and reinvigorate the concept of ‘service to others’.

Today, yesterday morning’s announcement seems like a terrible piece of politics. There is no doubt that this policy change has overshadowed everything else that happens in Birmingham this week; it is most damaging because the chorus of disapproval has come not just from our opponents but also from inside the Party. Journalists have descended on this disunity like a flock of seagulls following a trawler into port.

But notwithstanding the political mess, I still approve of the policy itself. It is true that the mechanism for removing the benefit will create iniquities. I regret that – but I believe that those iniquities are a price worth paying for the establishment of a principle.

It is clearly not ideal that families in which both parents earn below £44,000 but their combined salary is above this amount should still receive the benefit; it would be better if we could find a way to also remove it from them. Perhaps by 2013 we will have done. But the principle is established that the relatively wealthy should not, must not get hand outs from the state.

Cabinet must have understood the problems but resolved to go ahead anyway. They were right to. The universality of child benefit (and other benefits such as winter fuel allowance) is clearly wrong, but the barrier to its removal is the need to establish a system of means testing. This has always meant a level of complexity and cost (civil servants love those two “C”s) which has put it into the ‘too difficult’ pile. The solution, inelegant as it might be, is to act. Not to get caught up in reviews and costings but to drawn a line in the sand. If you are a higher rate tax payer you have no need for state handouts. Full stop.

The metropolitan liberal media are quick to point out that earning £44,000 doesn’t mean you’re rich – no of course not. If you work for the BBC the only person you ever meet who earns less than that is the person you buy your coffee from in the morning. But it does mean you should not receive redistributed benefits; redistributed from the childless (who are less of a burden to the state in any case) to the relatively well off parent.

Within the party, we also hear angst that the people affected will be our voters. They may well be, but that does not alter the principle. The Conservative Party’s strength is that it is a national Party not tied to any vested interest. The Labour Party exists to further the lot of the worker, particularly with Ed beholden to the Unions, but the Conservative Party exists for the good of the nation. We really are all in this together.

Those 7 or 8 years of intense political activity (my now ex-wife, but then wife, also stood for Parliament in 2001 and 2005) were carried on not just while we were in opposition at Westminster, but when hope of victory at a General Election seemed impossible. People spoke of the end of the Party, of a permanent realignment to the left in British politics. Many believed that Conservatives could never win again.

Yet, four years on from my retirement, we have a Conservative Prime Minister, a Conservative Chancellor, a Conservative government. Yes, we share that government with the Liberal Democrats, and it is a coalition, but anyone who doubts that this is a radical government on the centre right is a fool. It has been miserable being on the right since Black Wednesday in 1992, an entire generation ago. Now, finally, it is a good time to be a Conservative; finally we have government that doesn’t believe that the State has the answers, finally we have a fiscally responsible Treasury.

Conservatives should gather in Birmingham, jubilant, buoyant, strong. They should be determined to carry through their plans for government, united in a belief that they have a chance to recast the agreement between state and individual, and that they have the ability to fix the financial mess bequeathed by Labour. But from my position, now very much on the outside of Conservative politics, I have a sense that as Conference begins Conservatives are disgruntled, grumbling, miserable. They have a list of complaints; why didn’t we win an outright majority? Why aren’t we supporting the armed forces more strongly? Why is Vince Cable in a position of power? Why is Labour ahead in the polls?

To those people I ask, have you forgotten so soon, is your memory so short, and are your expectations so unrealistic? We won; not as clearly as we might have liked, but we won. Our government is on the right, not as much on the right as we might like, but on the right. Our policies are sound, not as sound as we might dream, but sound nevertheless. Today George Osbourne announces an end to universal child benefit; Thatcher didn’t dare, Lamont didn’t do it.

The moody blues should get real and realise how good things are. Last time I attended Party conference it mattered little what was said on stage or at fringe meetings. Policy pamphlets were pointless. In 2010 what goes on at Conference matters, Conservatives have power. So unite, be strong, rejoice – we’re winning.

I’m here with Peter because I run a small company which supplies services to his organisation and I wanted to find out from people here what they think about this week’s Conservative conference. While people like Peter are interested in talking about the political landscape and how it impacts on their area, they wouldn’t be brave enough to put their views on record for this kind of article.

“Would you ever go to the conference?” elicited a response from Dan that I wasn’t expecting. “Why would I want to spend a week with a bunch of stuck up Tory boys on tour?” came the initial response followed by a momentary pause as he shifted in his chair, looking around the room to see who else was listening in.

“It’s a great opportunity to hear policy positions, network and socialise” I tried to convince him, but had clearly failed to win him over when he met me back with, “Look. We all know that Tories are out on some ideological mission to shrink the size of the state and slash services. Why would I want to hang around with a bunch of small-minded tax-cutting loons? Why would you?”

Skipping over the loaded parts of his question I tried again to share my enthusiasm, but I wonder where his perception has come from. This part of the public sector will certainly feel the effects of cuts, but I think it has responded very well. No front-line services have been cut, and yet there’s a hostility in the voices around me that Conservatives are all on a war march against the public sector.

If the perception is true then the Right to Work demonstration that is to be held as the conference opens must certainly have the aim to meet the so-called ideological campaign head-on in the streets of Birmingham. Before any words have been spoken from the podium and even before most delegates have entered the gates there will be a swarm of protestors who have taken apparent pride in “storming” the spring conference in February, according to their website.

Such intense and emotional ‘resistance’, which to me seems based on class prejudices and sweeping assumptions, makes it difficult for a party like the Conservatives to make its voice heard.

However, this conference needs to make its voice heard. It needs to set out the policy arguments with confidence and it needs to be equally confident in the way it sells itself to the nation.

We need to be clear, concise and use our platform over the next few days to show the public outside of the conference bubble that the Conservatives are serious about their concerns and that, like Ed Miliband, we understand where the Labour government got things wrong, but unlike Ed Miliband we are focused on the task of putting it right with real and credible plans.

This is what we look like:

Fiona

Dave

That’s the reactionary theory anyway. Personally I see a carefully constructed and balanced characterisation of our leading politicians. Think of it like a pantomime. The big bad Tories are wielding the axe (played superbly by George Osborne); the progressive Prime Minister; the calm and placating Nick Clegg and Cable: the man in touch with his party roots.

Nick Clegg’s speech was perfectly crafted to calm the grumbles of the Lib Dem’s – appealing to the reason and logic that party members are always flattered by, to convince them that the party did not sell out and indeed are working for the benefit of Britain. Compromises needed to be made and ‘not losing the nerve’ is the key message for Lib Dem’s to take away. But this message was, understandably, carefully crafted and even purportedly cleared by Cameron. I have absolutely no problem with two colleagues sharing ideas – but if this is true, then Clegg truly is compromising at least some of his ideals.

But why is Clegg doing this? Let’s not forget that he is the Deputy PM – he has power, and a level of responsibility that demands that he calms rather than rabble rouses. He is being perceived as being, at best, incredibly adept at compromising his beliefs for the benefit of the nation and at worst he is stabbing many party faithful in the back. So damage control is needed. The Lib Dems need an out-and-out liberal, possibly even a ‘socialist’, to reinstate faith in the Lib Dem leadership. This is where Cable comes in.

Cable is acting as the foil not just to the Coalitions cuts, but also to his own party leader. And he is playing the part very well indeed.

All eyes now turn to the Conservative Party conference to see our constructed reaction to the Coalition. David Cameron will have to calm the impatient right of the party – so which senior Tory will be the counterbalance to Cable? Osborne the Axe-wielder? Gove the child-punisher? Only time will tell.

But this afternoon in Brighton, it seems to all be coming together. William Hague’s speech was a classic tour de force. He set out the very stark choice we face: change or ruin.

Audible gasps of shock in the audience accompanied his revelation that Britain was 4^th in the world for tax and regulation – and now is 84^th and 86^th. This is not something people can vote for.

But crucially, instead of merely bashing Brown and setting out the dire state we are in and the dire measures needed to fix the problems, William, Andrew Lansley, Oliver Letwin, Phillip Hammond, Ken Clarke and most convincingly George Osborne then laid out just why those measures are needed – because there is a point to all the pain. There will be an end to it. And when we are at the end, we will have a far better country. One where life will be improved, where our NHS can do its best, where our schools can beat the world, where our environment can be saved, where our government does its job properly and gives people value for the money that they hand over to it, where the energy, resourceful inventiveness and essential good nature of our fellow countrymen can flourish.

No-one would want to vote for a party that simply gives up and says ‘all is lost’. People want to vote for something, and the only way to persuade people to vote for the frankly unpleasant task ahead is to give them a reason to do so. That message of hope is what David Cameron does best.

It will not be easy. But the message coming out from this weekend is simple: we are a country worth fighting for. The party that has the ideas to change the country is the Conservative Party. It is not going to be easy but the change will come, and the effort is worth it.