Letters From A Tory

Dear Michael White,

I haven’t been particularly impressed by the Guardian’s attempt to knock the Conservatives over the past week or so, when all the other broadsheets have been praising their efforts.  Today you showed a little more humility when discussing Gordon Brown’s options over an autumn election.

Well, I say ‘options’ - it sounds as though you and me agree that his options are extremely limited.  I think your prediction that Gordon Brown will retreat to rolling his metaphorical sleeves up and ‘getting on with the job’ could well prove very accurate.  Yes, not calling an election would be a serious blow to his credibility and will make him look extremely weak.  He may also have to face the music over a downturn in our economy over the next year or so.  There were many reasons why an autumn election would have been a good option, but he simply cannot risk his premiership on some deeply concerning poll ratings.

A week is a long time in politics.  24 hours can feel like a lifetime as well.  Poor old Gordon.

Yours sincerely,

A.Tory

Dear Boris Johnson,

Whilst you had a clear theme to your Telegraph article this morning, you also scared the life out of me.  Never before have I seen the word ‘caterpillar’ used in a newspaper when discussing political matters, and your analogy of two giant hairy caterpillars mating has ensured that I will never look at Alistair Darling’s eyebrows in the same way again.

Only you could describe the indecision in Gordon Brown’s mind quite so eloquently.  The key factor yet to make an appearance in the media is of course the next poll ratings, and no doubt all the papers are full of predictions as to what kind of lead would/would not see Brown calling an early election.  My suspicion is that he will need a lead of at least five to six points before he contemplates calling an autumn election, but I believe that would still be enough for him to win with a reduced majority - which could ultimately cripple his government.  I agree that the recent poll ratings can only get worse for Brown, but all the cries for an early election announcement before the Conservatives had even had their conference were ridiculous because Brown always had to ‘wait and see’.  A small poll lead would leave him with the most uneviable decision he could ever wish for, although his natural caution will probably see him postpone an election until next year.

In short, Cameron has mounted as big a fightback as he could possibly muster in a short space of time.  If Cameron’s conference and speech cannot prevent an early election, nothing will.

Warmest regards,

A.Tory

Dear Steve Richards,

I enjoyed reading your article this morning in the Independent about Gordon Brown’s unexpected and uncomfortable position with regard to an autumn election.  You cleverly drew attention to the problems created by the incessant goading of the Prime Minister about going to the voters in the near future, as all of a sudden he finds that the tide is changing.

I have lost count of the number of times that I have read or heard someone saying that after all the hype, which the Labour Party have been more than happy to stoke, about an election in 2007 Gordon Brown must now call an election because he could lose a significant amount of credibility with politicians and voters if he ultimately decides to hold off any longer.  His party have been whipping up a media storm to try and scare off the other main parties but it is difficult to see how Gordon Brown’s reputation and perceived strength would remain in tact should he bail out.  However, with the Conservatives having a blinder of a conference there is no question that the poll ratings are about to shift towards David Cameron.  Can Brown really follow through with his threat if the Conservatives are gaining ground?

Gordon Brown might well be damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t, assuming that the Conservatives maintain their phenomenal momentum.

With respect,

A.Tory

Dear Polly Toynbee,

As a raving Leftie I’m sure your readers are used to your anti-Conservative rants.  Bizarrely enough, I sensed that you were trying to offer some kind words of advice to the Conservatives in your column this morning, but even when you try to be nice your arguments simply don’t add up due to your frequent and often deliberate bias.

Like many other people, you completely misinterpreted George Osborne’s comments to suit your own purposes.  All he was saying was that you don’t have to stop talking about immigration, taxes, etc when you start discussing more ‘recent’ topics such as the environment.  This is a very sensible viewpoint and does not indicate any rift in the party whatsoever - but nice try.  To suggest that Steve Hilton and Andy Coulson work against each other is ridiculous, seeing as Hilton works as a personal advisor whereas Coulson works on communications for the whole party.  And then, as with other columnists, you desperately try to use the conflicting proposals from Cameron’s policy groups against him, but yet again this is a shallow argument.  Is it really surprising that a pro-competitiveness policy group suggests expanding airports and an environmental group suggests halting their expansion?  Of course not!  It’s perfectly logical.  The thing that annoys me is that I wanted these policy groups to report their findings in private rather than tell the public about them and cause complete confusion as to what they were trying to say (Zac Goldsmith being a prime example of poor message management), but having lots of different ideas on how to take the party forward is a good thing.

Some people like yourself want Cameron to keep modernising, whereas others want him to stick to the core conservative issues.  Here’s my radical suggestion - do both.  Talk about immigration, crime, taxes, the EU, the environment, the economy, society - talk about everything.  Cameron needs to set out his views clearly and concisely to the public on a massive range of issues if he is to convince them he should be Prime Minister.  Sorry Polly, but saying he should only stick to the centre ground is a foolhardy strategy and will cost him the next General Election, but maybe that’s why you suggested it?….

Yours truly,

A.Tory

Dear Bruce Anderson,

I find it very hard to disagree with your analysis of Gordon Brown’s state of mind with regard to a possible autumn election.  As the title of your article suggests, he has every reason to call an election and yet he still might not take the plunge.

The polls are still behind Brown, albeit with slightly different assessments of the margin of victory he might hope for.  However, there is plenty of opportunity for the Labour boat to be rocked, with the EU referendum still on the agenda (which Cameron would stick to in the event of a General Election) and the tough times facing UK farmers remaining a possible source of further discontent.  The unions may yet give Brown a frosty reception at the conference, and yesterday’s speeches by Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling were by no means dazzling.  David Cameron and the Conservatives are going to put their policies together for the Conservative Party conference and if they are astute in picking the best policies from their six working parties they could put together a strong case to the voters, whereas Gordon Brown has little new to offer.

Calling an election before the Conservative Party conference may sound great, but it gives the opposition the first chance to draw blood in what will be an ugly and short-lived battle.  I’m not sure Brown is convinced, and the final sentence of your article sums it up quite brilliantly:

Yet the words on [Gordon Brown's] political memorial may still read: “Here lies the man who underestimated David Cameron.”

Yours with respect,

A.Tory