Two Secrets

Another day, another statement from David Cameron, unveiling another 3% of the reality about his tax and investment arrangements. With more information promised, DC today admitted he could have handled things better. Being in public life is tough, you don't get to choose which bits of yourself or your life to present to the public. But the dribble of information, rather than a full and frank disclosure, looks like an attempt to conceal a secret, even if it isn't.

Justin Welby recently learnt, and today revealed, that his biological father is not the person he'd always thought it was. It's a deeply gracious statement, and I love the restatement of the core of his identity - I find who I am in Jesus Christ, not in genetics, and my identity in him never changes. God can turn a mistake into an Archbishop, and death into resurrection. 

I've no idea how you think straight, let alone come up with the right thing to say in public, when you and your family are being sifted in the national media. My response would probably be closer to David Camerons than Justin Welbys - though the ABC has had a bit longer to digest the news and work out what to say about it. Under pressure, many of us are hedgehogs - curl up into a ball and wait for it to go away. Like Justin Welby's mum, a remarkable woman, we need a power greater than ourselves to help us face reality and overcome our weaknesses.  

Sunday Trading: Is It a Consultation If Nobody Listens?

Update: the government has published its response to the consultation. You can hardly see for the smoke and mirrors. It state that a majority of medium and large businesses wanted more Sunday trading (there's a surprise) as did a majority of local authorities (not a surprise, as the Conservatives run a majority of local councils). The words 'majority' don't appear anywhere else, so from that we can infer that a majority of small businesses, other organisations, and individuals, were against the proposals. There's no summary of these stats anywhere of course, the only bits of responses quoted are those supportive of the policy the government already has. There are surveys and statistics which show it has negative economic and social effect, but none of these are mentioned. The response is just as skewed as the initial consultation. CofE official response to the government response here.


Visit this page today, and here's what you see

The Conservative government issued a one-sided consultation document, took feedback, and according to their website, are still analysing it. That would explain why, after one aborted attempt to railroad a change to Sunday trading laws through Parliament, David Cameron is trying again. This time, the change in law is being brought in under a sack through the most obscure back door the government can find:

What do you do when you want to change a law but Parliament won’t allow it? Simple: you smuggle it back as a late amendment to another Bill which has already been debated by the House of Commons and scrutinised by the House of Lords. That way, there’s no prospect of a vote and so no embarrassing defeat.

So the amendment won't be debated in the Lords at all. Democracy, who needs it?

David Cameron made an explicit promise on this on April 20th 2015: “I can assure you that we have no current plans to relax the Sunday trading laws. We believe that the current system provides a reasonable balance between those who wish to see more opportunity to shop in large stores on a Sunday, and those who would like to see further restrictions.” 

The Church of Englands response to this latest manoevre points out that the changes will damage family and community life, and lead to a net loss of jobs in the retail sector, mostly in smaller businesses. That probably won't bother the bosses of Next, or the Westfield centre, major donors to the Conservative party, who would be among those who stand to benefit from the changes. If taxation practice is made by deals with the biggest taxpayers, then sadly it wouldn't be a surprise if retail practice is worked out by deals with the biggest retailers.

Here's a number of reasons why the changes are wrong, which I sent in to the consultation. I'm still waiting to hear what the government will do when it has actually analysed our feedback, rather than ignoring it. What is the point of consulting us Mr Cameron? I'd rather you saved everyone the time and were honest. Better still, pull the amendment now. 

Poverty and Life Chances: Camerons Third Way?

"....There are 4 vital, social insights that I believe must anchor our plan for extending life chances.

First, when neuroscience shows us the pivotal importance of the first few years of life in determining the adults we become, we must think much more radically about improving family life and the early years.

Second, when we know the importance not just acquiring knowledge, but also developing character and resilience there can be no let-up in our mission to create an education system that is genuinely fit for the 21st century.

Third, it’s now so clear that social connections and experiences are vitally important in helping people get on.

So when we know about the power of the informal mentors, the mixing of communities, the broadened horizons, the art and culture that adolescents are exposed to, it’s time to build a more level playing field with opportunity for everyone, regardless of their background.

And fourth, when we know that so many of those in poverty have specific, treatable problems such as alcoholism, drug addiction, poor mental health we’ve got to offer the right support, including to those in crisis.

This is what I would call a life cycle approach – one that takes people from their earliest years, through schooling, adolescence and adult life.

And I believe if we take the right action in each of these 4 areas combined, with all we are doing to bring our economy back to health, we can make a significant impact on poverty and on disadvantage in our country."

Once everyone has recovered from David Bowie's death, it might be worth paying a little more attention to another David, the Prime Minister, and his speech today. The remarks above were prefaced by a brief critique of left and right 'solutions' to poverty based on economics. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the speech & strategy was written by the Centre for Social Justice (beware, slow website). 

Some of the policy announcements include:

• extension of relationship support
• financial education in schools, expanding a pilot CofE scheme designed to help children develop a positive attitude to saving and a responsible attitude to debt. 
• expanding the 'Troubled Families' programme to another 400,000 families
• a stronger focus on parenting skills in early years, incentivising the take up of parenting classes and trying to make it a normal part of becoming a parent: "I believe if we are going to extend life chances in our country, it’s time to begin talking properly about parenting and babies and reinforcing what a huge choice having a child is in the first place, as well as what a big responsibility parents face in getting these early years right." (I remember being stunned that, on a parents ante-natal course lasting several weeks, there was not a single bit of input about parenting skills, it was all about the mechanics of late pregnancy, birth, feeding etc. Ante-natal classes and health visitors have a massive opportunity to support parents and to help us learn good habits very early on. Children are too precious and vulnerable to leave this to chance.)
• a clearer focus on character development in education, alongside the acquisition of knowledge and skills
• expand the National Citizens Service to cover 60% of 16 year olds
• targetted mentoring for those most at risk of dropping out of GCSEs
• the much trailed demolition of ugly housing estates (this is fraught with risk - it will be very easy for this not to serve the people who live there, if the estate is anywhere in or around London then developer can make more money by pricing the poor out of the replacement housing built on the site. Judging by the successive waves of housing built around Yeovil, we are getting worse at building low-crime aesthetically good environments, not better, and building regulations and pressure on housing density are driving this, alongside house prices and affordability)
• mental health: continued promotion of an open culture around talking about mental illness, support for new mothers, mental health units in A&E, waiting targets for severe illness
• funding for more research and programmes to treat addiction

If it's done well, this could be one of the most important things this government does. There's evidence here of more in-depth thinking about the causes of poverty than we've seen before. What's interesting is that it goes further than Labour ever dared, in terms of the state taking on more parenting functions (developing character, mentoring). 

The proof will be action, rather than words - mental health spending has fallen under the coalition, and Camerons Conservatives have a poor record on housing policy and the vulnerable. They have a life-threatening blind spot on food banks, and the planned cuts to tax credits would have been a punch in the face to anyone earning below £30,000, though thankfully these were reversed. 

Whatever the flaws, this policy at last reckons with one of the big social facts of modern Britain, that the family unit in many places no longer does the job it once did, of transmitting value, values, skills and role models from one generation to the next. We have been avoiding the uncomfortable truths for a while,  I hope there can be a new political consensus that we need a mixed economy of social and economic policy to tackle poverty, and some of this new thinking could be vital. But it will count for very little if Cameron continues to dismantle the welfare state.

update: good piece from Tim Montgomerie on what Cameron missed out

Oh Dave, Make Haste to Help Us?

Given the patchy record of foreign interventions in recent decades - an Iraq for every Kosovo - it makes no sense that only 1 day of debate is being allowed for the decision to bomb Syria. Why the rush? If it's the right decision, then taking longer over it will reveal the rightness. It's hard to make a good decision in a hurry. 

I'm bemused that we have a majority of MPs prepared to vote in favour of this: we have Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq as cautionary tales of military action taken without an exit strategy or planning for what happens afterwards. Every bomb dropped will mean millions in reconstruction costs further down the tracks, but the government isn't even offering a promise of rebuilding to the civilians of Syria who will have to live with the mess after Daesh are history. 

"We don’t really know what we want to achieve other than to hear the sound of bombs falling on Raqqa, thus satisfying the need to do something. We can’t win if we don’t know what winning looks like." (Giles Fraser)

Ian Paul offers 7 good reasons to really take our time over this, and consider if there is a less sexy, but more effective, way to tackle Daesh. 

Cameron has been itching to bomb Syria for a while, and the Paris attacks have given him the reason/excuse/pretext he needs. But the Paris attacks don't really change any of the military logic. If, as is frequently announced, 7 similar attacks have been foiled on the UK this year, then the threat has always been there, it's just that this time they weren't caught by the security services. The fact that one attack was successful, instead of joining with the other failures, doesn't change any of the maths around ISIS in Syria. If it didn't make sense a month ago, it doesn't make sense now. 

Moral Austerity: Steep Government Cuts to Promise Keeping

I'm starting to lose count of the number of promises the Conservatives made before the election that they have ripped up in the last 5 months. Forget the budget deficit, there is a widening trust deficit:

“I can assure you that we have no current plans to relax the Sunday trading laws. We believe that the current system provides a reasonable balance between those who wish to see more opportunity to shop in large stores on a Sunday, and those who would like to see further restrictions.”  Instead the government launched a hideously skewed 'consultation' on changes to the law, and plans to introduce back-door reforms have been headed off this week by rebel MPs. 

We will invest a record £13 billion in transport for the North....on top of our £50 billion commitment to build High Speed 2 – the new North-South railway linking up London with the West Midlands, Leeds and Manchester – and develop High Speed 3 to join up the North. (Manifesto p12)...electrifying the Midland Main Line from St Pancras to Sheffield.....electrification of the Great Western Main Line –bringing new fast trains on the route. (p12) 'frozen' in June 2015, with plenty of evidence that the Conservatives knew this wasn't a promise they would keep.

We will increase NHS spending every year. (Conservative Manifesto p9). All depends how you measure it. Rising in cash terms, but falling as a % of GDP.

we will back British businesses (p18)  (unless they make solar panels, steel....)

we will freeze working age benefits for 2 years from April 2016 (p29). I.e. they won't fall. A pledge Cameron repeated in the election campaign on a specific question about tax credits. 

Both promises broken.

I'm posting this not because I'm a standard lefty Anglican, but because I think trust is vital, and people who break trust, especially those who have specifically asked for it, need to be called out. If we get to a stage where words mean nothing, where they are said for effect (to get votes) rather than for meaning or truth content (i.e. you actually mean them) then we're stuffed. We can't afford to get used to a situation where we are routinely misled, and accept it as a fact of life, whether it's politicians, phone salesmen or advertisers.

It's hard to avoid the conclusion that Cameron is a serial promise breaker. This is not one or two incidents, where there's an understandable train of events that has derailed best intentions. Its systematic, habitual, deliberate, and seemingly done without shame or apology. If he suggests to Samantha that they renew their wedding vows, she should be seriously worried.

Conservative Election Strategy - the final fortnight

Do you find yourself yearning for the phrase 'long term economic plan?' I know I do. From the day of its manifesto launch, the Conservative party has changed tack to a two-pronged electoral strategy

 - offering public assets (or in the case of social housing, the assets of charities) for sale at a discount. The ideas so far are all remixes of policies tried in the 1980s.
 - blood curdling threats about the SNP and what will happen if they get into power.

Confidential strategy documents found on a disused husky sled in a Witney garage show us David Camerons key messages from now until election day:

Weds 22 April  Warn that if the SNP get more MPs all school children will be forced to eat porridge and wear kilts.

Thurs 23 April  Proposals to sell off the whole of the East coast to private ownership, in the 'Shares for Shores' scheme. Politically astute, since that's where all the UKIP voters are, and allows border controls to be put into the hands of competent private operators like, um SERCO.

Fri 24th April  Propose to ban all Scottish MPs from parliament during any 'English Votes for English Laws' sessions, and use the savings in expenses and train fairs to install border checks at Hadrians wall, or wherever it is in the North the border with Scotland is.

Sat 25th April chillax with Sam

Sun 26th April Find a big church somewhere with some cameras. Canterbury Cathedral? No those lefties at the CofE wouldn't let me into the pulpit.

Mon 27th New poster: picture of Andy Murray looking grumpy 'Always coming second to a European, do you want people like this running the country?'  (Small print at the bottom reminds people that when he wins a major trophy, Murray still counts as one of ours)

Tue 28th  Remind the nation that the Scots used to fight and kill the English 'and given half the chance they'll do it again'. New poster of Nicola Sturgeon with a Rosa Klebb style shoe blade and blue face paint. Journalists point out Braveheart was set 700 years ago.

Wed 29th With the polls showing Labour inching ahead, time to remix another hit from 1980s. Memories are hazy about both about the spelling, whether it was a good idea or not first time around. Time to relaunch the Pole Tax, a levy on immigrants from Eastern Europe and suggestive dancing. Proceeds to be used to fund an unnecessary reorganisation of the NHS, because we haven't had one for 4 years.

Thu 30th  Trident to be outsourced to a consortium headed up by Rupert Murdoch, with shares sold at a discount to hard working families. 'Now every family can be a nuclear family'

Fri May 1st Warnings that for every vote cast for the SNP, a fairy dies. Pictures of sad children splashed across the Daily Mail.

Sat May 2nd Warnings that for every vote cast for Ed Miliband, a banker has to sell his yacht. Pictures of sad bankers splashed across the Daily Telegraph.

Sun May 3rd leave this day free for a random policy announcement not in the manifesto, like the Lloyds one.

Mon May 4th Get Eric Pickles to visit the one remaining coal mine and provoke a miners strike. That worked well last time.

Tues May 5th Get Jeremy Clarkson to visit Argentina and provoke an international incident, then we can invade the Falklands, that worked well last time.

Weds May 6th Last minute changes to voting rules: anyone eating shortbread, wearing a sporran, with red hair, or singing Auld Lang Syne to be banned from voting. Or being elected. Or saying anything.

Thurs May 7th  Kick back with a bottle of Scotch and a plate of smoked salmon. Job done.

Conservative Manifesto: The Longest Coalition Document in History?

Hot on the heels of Labour, David Cameron published the Conservative manifesto yesterday. What was most immediately striking, apart from proposals to create social housing ghettoes (see below), was how much overlap the headline policies had with someone else:

 - no tax on people earning the minimum wage (UKIP)
 - raise bottom tax threshold to £12.5k (libdems)
 - extra £8bn on the nhs (Libdems, except it isn't, Clegg is promising £8bn per year, the Conservatives promise 'a minimum of £8bn over the next 5 years', which isn't the same thing)
 - freeze rail fares (Labour)
 - 30 hours free childcare for 3 and 4 year olds (Labour, though they only offer 25)
 - build more houses (everyone)
 - Right to Buy (Mrs Thatcher)

With the exception of the SNP, there are bones thrown in all directions, which either highlights political consensus, or flags up the scope for coalition discussions, depending on how you look at it.

Compared to Labour, it was a much easier document to work through, with some pretty detailed policy sections, and what looked like a comprehensive programme in a lot of areas. Here's what stood out for me:

1. Of the £30bn needed to reduce the deficit - it's 'fiscal consolidation', not cuts folks - £25bn is coming from public services, roughly half from welfare and half from other departments. There's no detail of where most of the welfare cuts will come from, apart from a reduced cap on total welfare income and scrapping Job seekers allowance for under-21s. There'll be a temporary Youth Allowance instead which stops if you don't take one of the 3m apprenticeships or a job.

2. There's a lot of specific regional and infrastructure spending, which makes me wonder why we couldn't have done some of it in the last 5 years. This is a bit of a dividing line with Labour, who despite talking about using borrowing to invest more, don't have the same commitments on infrastructure investment. Curious. However, it does allow them to name drop pretty much every region in the UK, which is politically clever.

3. A lot of devolution - more powers for all the bits of the UK, and for anywhere that chooses to have an elected mayor (and not if you don't!).

4. Tony Blairs Labour had a reputation as the champions of reannouncement, repeating declarations of new spending on several different occasions as though it wasn't the same cash over and over again. The Conservatives go one better, repeating the same announcement within the same paragraph. The pledge not to tax the minimum wage is basically the same as the pledge to raise the income tax threshold to £12,500 per year. At the moment, if you work on the minimum wage for 30 hours a week you earn £10, 452. And the threshold is 10.6k. How convenient! The Tories pledge to get the minimum wage up to £8 an hour, which will earn you £20 per year shy of the £12.5k threshold. So effectively it's the same policy, but announced in two different ways.

5. The married couples allowance stays, and rises marginally, and this is what qualifies as supporting relationships. There's passing mention of the 'troubled families' programme, but no indication of whether it will be renewed, expanded or scaled back. No mention of epidemic rates of relationship breakdown, fatherless families, and the effect all this has on the mental and emotional health of the adults and children involved. There is almost a conspiracy of silence around the family and how to support and invest in it.

6. On education, it looks like things will get a bit quieter - more of the same, rather than revolution. Worryingly for students, there is no mention of the level of the tuition fee cap, so it's left open for this to be increased. Watch this space. There'll also be loans for postgraduate degrees. The education budget is 'protected' - which means that if the number of pupils rises, so will the amount of money. It's not protected against inflation. So there will be a real terms cut in money going into schools under the Conservatives if inflation ever rises above 0%. So the word 'protected' actually means 'cut'. Again and again I was frustrated at the slippery way things were presented in this document, which then made it harder to give credit where it was due. Interesting that they keep the two flagship Libdem policies, free school meals for infants and the pupil premium.

7. The NHS - I really struggled to get my head round how politicians think about this. There's no point recruiting extra doctors and nurses if they're leaving as quickly as they arrive. 5000 nurses are leaving the NHS each year, mid-career. But responding to that entails accepting there's a problem, and like every other section, the bit on the NHS starts with a section on how poorly Labour did and how well the Conservatives have done. Sorry, but there needs to be more reality here. The section on mental health, apart from supporting mums during and after pregnancy (good) had very little. No specific targets, money, or policies. Not good enough.

8. The Big Society is back! All quiet for 3 years, whilst most of us got on with staffing food banks, there's now the new initiative to encourage volunteering (you'll need those extra 3 days a year if you're a governor of an academy, it's a couple of leagues up from being governor of a normal school, and that was demanding enough). I wonder what the Italian paymaster of Westlands, whose workers here in Yeovil will all be entitled to 3 days a year off, will think of that! It's an odd policy, but I think I like it. What I didn't like was the manifesto taking credit for £8bn a year going into heritage art and sport. It claimed this was 'public and lottery funding', but since the lottery puts in £1.6bn a year, that doesn't leave much for the government! In fact, it gets a tax from the lottery, so it makes a profit. Better controls on online pornography are welcome, but I'd have liked to see something on gambling and payday loans.

9. Not many people have picked up on the plan to cut the number of MPs to 600 and revise parliamentary boundaries. That could be quite significant in the long run.

10. Sorry but the Right To Buy plans are like the AV referendum (remember that?) a potentially ok plan scuppered by dreadful delivery. The AV option put to the vote was probably the worst form of proportional representation, and there are a lot of things wrong with the RtB format. Forcing the most expensive properties to be sold off? Well lets have a think. They'll either be the biggest ones (which Housing Associations have previously pulled down to build more, smaller units), or those in the nicest neighbourhoods. Smaller dwellings, and poorer neighbourhoods, will remain social housing. The long term effect is obvious: nicer areas will become almost 100% owner-occupied, and social housing will become more concentrated in areas of lower value. Around here, house prices in Sherborne were recently shown to be £100k higher on average than those in Yeovil. So if you applied the policy locally, all the social housing tenants would end up in Yeovil.

There's also an inevitable time-lag. It takes 10-20 years round here to find and buy land, get planning permission, and build new houses. Without being able to take out big loans, the housing associations won't have the money to buy land and build houses until the RtB units are sold, you can't replace them like tins on a shelf. So RtB will build in an extra shortage on top of the 1.4m that currently exists, around the time it takes to build the replacement properties.

11. Goodbye wind turbines. Subsidies for onshore wind will be scrapped, and they will 'change the law so that local people have the final say on windfarm applications'. Giving local people 'the final say' is a nimbys charter, nobody is campaigning for wind farms to be built on their skyline. What will Eric Pickles do with his time now that he hasn't got all those wind farms to veto? Words about 'cost effective' green technology suggest that economics, rather than carbon emissions, will be the deciding factor for any Tory greenery.

12. I'm worried about propsals to ban 'extremists' from working with children. We all know they mean ISIS sympathisers and the like,  but the way the cultural wind is blowing, anyone like me who takes the 'traditional' line on marriage is seen as a phobe and an extremist. Will there be unintended consequences?

13. The manifesto alludes to 'space for resentment to fester' over Scottish MPs voting on English laws. As I recall, this wasn't that much of an issue until Cameron stoked it up after the referendum last year. Standard marketing practice, create a demand ex nihilo then produce a product that meets the manufactured need. Shabby.

14. I was glad to see the case being made for keeping overseas aid at 0.7% of GDP, with some stats on lives saved, children immunised, access to clean water etc. This needs to keep being said. Well done.

There is a lot more to get your teeth into here than the Labour manifesto, but aside from the economy and infrastructure, where there seems to be a fair bit of thinking, other areas of policy get a token nod. There's nowhere near enough on climate change, family support, and mental health. The loud silences in some areas (food banks, details of welfare cuts) the slippery presentation in others (tax on minimum wage, EVEL, school and NHS funding) and the awful ideas around Right to Buy, don't inspire me with confidence. There's a programme of action, but true to Cameron there isn't much of an underlying philosophy.

Despite the levels of detail in some areas, it just doesn't leave me with a sense of a party which has really got to grips with all the issues we face. It's not just about the economy. The Bishops call for an 'attractive vision' of a society has fallen on deaf ears. The most eye-catching policies are of the 'retail politics' variety - vote for us and we'll give you this. There isn't much here, aside from the aid target and the volunteering scheme, that calls on us to put others first, to think of 'us' rather than 'I'.

David Cameron does what Rowan Williams says shock.

The outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury was encouraging people a few days ago to read the Gospel of John. I'm not aware that David Cameron makes a habit of this, but he seems to have followed Rowans advice and done exactly that, quoting Johns gospel in his Christmas message.

Nearly every media source headlines on the Christian content of Camerons words e.g.
'David Cameron cites Gospel of John' (Guardian)
David Cameron quotes from Bible (Huffington Post)
Camerons' olive branch to the church in Christian Christmas message (Telegraph)

here's the full text of the speech and this is a much quoted snippet

"But Christmas also gives us the opportunity to remember the Christmas story - the story about the birth of Jesus Christ and the hope that he brings to the countless millions who follow him."

Mr Cameron added: "The Gospel of John tells us that in this man was life, and that his life was the light of all mankind, and that he came with grace, truth and love. Indeed, God's word reminds us that Jesus was the Prince of Peace.

It's striking that, in a fairly short message, DC touches on only three things - the 2012 celebrations (Olympics, Jubilee), the Christian message, and support for the troops. Am I the only one to jar slightly at the link he makes between Jesus the Prince of Peace and the troops? Or, more amusingly, that he uses the image of 'punching above our weight' before talking about peace.... 

I'm not sure whether it reflects on David Cameron, or on us, or both, that people aren't sounding very convinced, and wondering whether this is politics, rather than personal conviction. Cameron makes regular references to his faith - e.g. at the anniversary of the King James Bible earlier this year - but it's hard to see how the dots are joined between his faith and his actions. Perhaps that's wise on his part, it was used as a stick to beat Tony Blair with even when he wasn't open about it.

Anyway, happy Christmas to Dave and to all our politicians. And remember, Jesus is for life, not just for Christmas.

David Cameron is Praying for You

David Camerons Easter message.

“Easter week is a very important moment in the Christian calendar, so I would like to extend my best wishes to everyone here in the United Kingdom, and across the world, at this special time of year.

“This is the time when, as Christians, we remember the life, sacrifice and living legacy of Christ. The New Testament tells us so much about the character of Jesus; a man of incomparable compassion, generosity, grace, humility and love. These are the values that Jesus embraced, and I believe these are values people of any faith, or no faith, can also share in, and admire.

“It is values like these that make our country what it is – a place which is tolerant, generous and caring. A nation which has an established faith, that together is most content when we are defined by what we are for, rather than defined by what we are against. In the book of Luke, we are told that Jesus said, “Do to others as you would have them do to you” – advice that when followed makes for a happier, and better society for everyone.

“So as families and friends get together this week, I would like to send my best wishes to you all, and I hope and pray you have a very happy and peaceful Easter.”

Thanks Dave, we're praying for you too. This comes alongside a reception for Christian reps at 10 Downing Street, reported from various angles by the Telegraph (gay marriage), Guardian (the ghost of Alastair Campbell) and Rupert Murdochs Panzer Division (fuel prices). God and Politics has the full text of Cameron's speech at this event, and it's a fascinating read.

For the moment, I'll resist the temptation to dissect the theology, and be pleased that a PM is unashamedly celebrating Easter, in his own inclusive multiculturally-sensisitve way. Though I hope that in private DC gets that Jesus is not merely a living legacy, he's a living person.

David Cameron Speech Wordle: the Cat Version. Is 'Leadership' Enough?

this shape seemed somehow appropriate.

What struck me most was Camerons continued references to leadership. The word crops up 19 times, both in terms of national government, and in fleshing out some of the 'Big Society' stuff - leadership as the bottom-up response to social challenges, schooling, health, citizenship, business growth, jobs etc.

But..... I agree with Cameron on the importance of leadership, and have said many times on this blog how important leadership is within the church. But leadership on its own isn't enough. It has to go together with character. Colonel Gadaffi, Fred Goodwin and Alan Sugar are all leaders, and in their own way have been very effective. But leaders characterised by brutality, greed and the unscrupulous pursuit of money aren't the kind of leaders we need.

It's having the right mix of competence and character, leaders with integrity. And right now if you look in politics, media, business, sport, pretty much every high profile area of national life, where are the leaders of good character? And how are we going to raise up a generation of leaders who see integrity and compassion as more valuable than riches or fame?

Pros and Cons (and Libdems)

I'm still not quite sure what to make of the amazing events of the last few days, but a few thoughts:

1. I'm delighted that the Conservatives and Libdems are aiming high: a coalition rather than a laissez fair 'understanding', coupled with a fixed term parliament that will lock them into it for 5 years. There appears to have been some genuine give and take over policy. For a floating voter like me, who supported roughly 30-40% of each parties policies, this only way of getting a government which delivers a majority of stuff I agree with. Of course, it could go the other way and end up with all the policies I'd oppose, but early signs are ok: no Euro, no ID cards, progressive taxation, though I did think the immigration amnesty idea had something going for it.

2. This could be good news for Labour: as the only major opposition party left, if anything does go wrong then they get 100% of the benefits, as well as plenty of time to rebuild after the end of the Blair/Brown years. It is much more high stakes for the Libdems: this kind of coalition would be the norm under PR, so if they can't make it work, any argument for PR would be holed below the waterline.

3. There are a lot of cynical voices about the coalition, and maybe it's just my optimistic temperament, but I'm not one of them. In our parish there are 2 clergy, we're quite different from each other in many ways, but know that the best way to run it is to talk things through, agree a common approach, and run things as a team. This kind of thing happens all over the place. For politicians it will be a massive culture change, but the two leaders are themselves both quite new to all this (both entered Parliament this century), and perhaps a wholesale culture change is possible. If they manage it, great.

4. Will the 'New Politics' involve the rebuilding of the House of Commons? The chamber is organised for adversarial politics, unlike many more recently built chambers which are circular or multi-sided. Maybe they should move across the road to the circular Church House synod chamber - might generate some much needed rental income for the CofE.

5. Will the spirit of co-operation infect the media too? Like the House chamber, the press is based on adversarial politics. Come to think of it, not just the press: the spirit of Paxman lurks over everything from the Apprentice to Dragons Den to the X Factor, we love our bear pits. What happens if politics tries to move out of the bear pit and refuses to offer routine bloodletting for public entertainment? Will it be allowed to? Can journalists act like grown ups too? I would love to see a change of political culture - and culture in general - to something less adversarial. Perhaps that's enough to hope for. As Simon Parke puts it in his cracker of a book Desert Child

"The message... is that we turn our attention to the Great Possibility, the Grand Miracle, the Massive Moment, the Huge Resurrection"

"And what is that?"

"That we might actually do what we're doing with a little more kindness."

Pause

"That we might actually do what we're doing with a little more kindess?" Musselly was checking that he had heard aright. Peter, however, confirmed the astounding declaration.

"Indeed. That we might do what we're doing, only with a little more kindness."

The earth stopped revolving for a moment in shock as the two men considered the implications of the words just spoken; as the two men felt the fall-out from the bombshell just lobbed into the conversation. The visitor spoke first.

"Now that is a very revolutionary thought, my friend."

6. It's a good way to bury bad policies: there are a few duffers and vote-losers in there which can be quietly shelved in the name of compromise, on both sides. If both sides of an argument are represented within a government, then someone somewhere is right, and hopefully no party is arrogant enough to think it has all the answers.

7. It's important not to get carried away. Tony Blair wasn't the Messiah, at times he was just a very naughty boy, and neither are these two. There are some things that politicians can't fix: I was in a meeting recently over a local trouble spot, and the overwhelming feeling was one of impotence over the ability of local government, agencies, etc. to do anything significant to change things. Bill Hybels writes:

"For 8 years during the '90s I went to Washington DC every month to meet in the foremost centres of power with some of the highest elected officials in our country. What I discovered was not how powerful those people are, but how limited their power really is. All they can actually do is rearrange the yard markers on the playing field of life (I'm guessing that's an Americanism). They can't change a human heart. They can't heal a wounded soul. They can't turn hatred into love. They can't bring about repentance, forgiveness, reconciliation, peace. They can't get to the core problem of the kid I saw in the airport (an 8 year old boy punching his 5 year old brother in the face then bashing his head into the floor) and millions of others like him.

I scrolled through every other option I could think of, considering what they have to offer. Businessmen can provide sorely needed jobs. Wise educators can teach useful knowledge of the world. Self-help programs can offer effective methods of behaviour modification. Psychology can aid self-understanding. And all of this is good. But can any of it truly transform the human heart?"

So we carry on praying for our leaders, and I'll be praying that it works - that's partly the optimist in me that likes to see people trying something new, and partly the knowledge that if it doesn't work then that won't really do anyone any good.

A new year message from our 'leaders'

From Miranda Harts superb retrospective on 2009, Clegg and Brown also recieved a makeover, see them here.

Cameron "I believe in God and I'm a Christian" Songs of Praise interview

Following his evening standard interview a couple of weeks back, David Cameron will be talking about his faith on Songs of Praise this afternoon.

He said: "I believe in God and I'm a Christian and I worship - not as regularly as I should - but I go to church.
"Do I drop to my knees and ask for guidance whenever an issue comes up? No, I don't. But it's part of who I am.
"For me, and I suspect for lots of other people too, bad things actually sometimes make you think more about faith and the fact that you're not facing these things on your own."

full report on the Beeb here.

David Cameron: doing God, but no hotline.

Interesting interview in the Evening Standard with David Cameron, with his clearest statement to date about his faith. In practical terms, it may not be far off Gordon Browns 'Presbyterian conscience', valuing altruism, service, etc. Here's the section on faith:

Is faith in God important to him? "If you are asking, do I drop to my knees and pray for guidance, no. But do I have faith and is it important, yes. My own faith is there, it's not always the rock that perhaps it should be.

"I've a sort of fairly classic Church of England faith, a faith that grows hotter and colder by moments but...I suppose I sort of started life believing that one's individual faith was important, but actually the institutions of the church were less important.

"I do think that organised religion can get things wrong but the Church of England and the other churches do play a very important role in society."

Cameron waited until he was 18 years old to be confirmed to make sure it was what he really believed.

"I was a good, sceptical, questioning Christian when I was younger. I liked to think it through, thinking am I really sure about this? But I don't feel I have a direct line [to God].

"I think that it's perfectly possible to live a good life without having faith, by which I mean a positive and altruistic life, but I think the teachings of Jesus just as the teachings of other religions are a good guide to help us through.

"Do unto others as you would have them do to you; don't walk on by. These are good and thoughtful ideas to bring to life." Unlike Blair, Cameron clearly does do God.

It's nice to see him being open about his beliefs, and I imagine most people (apart from a few who jump to mind) will accept this as ok. I was interested to read the annual report of one of the secular organisations this week, who are concerned that a Conservative government will mean no change to 'increasing religious influence' on policy. Once I'd picked myself up off the floor and stopped laughing, my guess was that they're worried that Cameron recognises the benefits provided by faith groups in the same way as Gordon Brown, and most MP's, and most of the population.

David Cameron's speech: the Moral Compass Edit

Just to be even handed, here's a filletted version of David Camerons speech to the Conservative Conference today, having done Gordon Brown's last week. For the full text go here, video here.

1. Moral themes
- Responsibility, which was a repeated refrain for family, economics, government, society at all levels.

- Defending the poor and vulnerable. Social justice was mentioned from a Conservative platform, which for those of us born before 1980 is quite remarkable in itself.

- Family and community as the core of society, not government.

- Standard Conservative stuff on mistrust of big government, and trust of individuals. But there was more on responsibility too: everyone's question will be how this commitment to 'freedom' and 'trust' won't just end up with the greed and division of the 1980's all over again.

- Family, marriage, & childrens need for love, security and discipline, and the need for a change of culture around children. I personally was thrilled to find a political leader willing to say 'we've got our culture wrong', whilst recognising that you can't just change culture from the top down.

- Generosity: interesting to find Cameron using the line 'to be British is to be generous', and applying that to ring-fencing of the aid budget. There was also a nod to fair trade.

- A green economy and society, led by scientific innovation.


2. Spiritual reference points
Cranmer and Paul Woolley have already commented on this, but here's a brief summary:

- Martin Luther Kings 'I have a dream' speech, which is a pretty audacious reference point. The speech kicked off with talk of 'the view from the summit', and ended with Cameron telling us 'what I can see' from the summit.

- Lau Tzu: Cameron's final flourish was "when we look back we will not say that the government made it happen.. but that the businesswoman, the teacher, the father made it happen - you made it happen." Compare and contrast the Tao:
with the best leaders,
When the task is accomplished,
The work completed,
The people all remark:
We have done it ourselves.

- The wisdom literature and prophets: which insist 'defend the rights of the poor and needy'. DC's version "it falls to us, the modern Conservative party to fight for the poorest"

- Jesus. Cameron said "the insatiable consumption and materialism of the past decade, has it made us happier or more fulfilled?" This hints at Mark 8 on gaining the world and losing your soul, and Woolley notes that this picks up on the Sermon on the Mount.

- Ian Dury 'there aren't many reasons to be cheerful'. It's a bit bizarre to find Dury and High School Musical referenced in the same speech (yes, we are still all in this together) but hey, that's the modern Conservative party.


3. Thoughts:
Another serious speech, when Cameron had a go at Labour it wasn't knockabout, but an angry denunciation of Labour's failure of the poor. Whether enough of us have forgotten about the Conservatives failures in the same department is another issue. The closest we got to a reference to Thatcher was some words about Margaret Tebbitt.

I thought there was a lot of moral and ethical language in Browns speech last week, but Cameron has outstripped that, and there was a lot of vision and values on display today. It struck a balance between grim reality and realistic hope, though whether the 'I have a dream' references will be seized on - 'You're no Martin Luther King' - may be a hostage to fortune. But what would you rather have, optimism or cynicism?

Of the three speeches, this one outscored the others on recognising that there aren't just issues of law, economics and politics, but issue of culture too. However we still don't know how much Camerons 'character, temperament and judgement' have really been tested. Yes he's had a horrendous year in his family life, and to be deliving a speech like this just a few months later is an achievement in itself. But, like any vote for an untested government, a vote for Cameron will be a step of faith.

David Cameron '09, The Moral Compass Edit.
We will be tested. I will be tested...

...The view from the summit will be worth it....

...When such a big part of your life suddenly ends nothing else — nothing outside — matters. It's like the world has stopped turning and the clocks have stopped ticking. And as they slowly start again, weeks later, you ask yourself all over again: do I really want to do this? You think about what you really believe and what sustains you....

...My beliefs. I am not a complicated person. I love this country and the things it stands for.

That the state is your servant, never your master. Common sense and decency. The British sense of community.

I have some simple beliefs. That there is such a thing as society, it's just not the same thing as the state. That there is a 'we' in politics, and not just a 'me.'

Above all, the importance of family. That fierce sense of loyalty you feel for each other. The unconditional love you give and receive, especially when things go wrong or when you get it wrong. That powerful sense you have when you hold your children and there's nothing, absolutely nothing — you wouldn't do to protect them.

This is my DNA: family, community, country. These are the things I care about. They are what made me. They are what I'm in public service to protect, promote and defend....

...we are not going to solve our problems with bigger government. We are going to solve our problems with a stronger society. Stronger families. Stronger communities. A stronger country. All by rebuilding responsibility....

...it means showing that the rich will pay their share ...

...Self-belief is infectious and I want it to spread again throughout our country especially through the poorest places where Labour let hope fade away.

...the personal and social responsibility that should be the lifeblood of a strong society....

...the man who has dedicated himself to the cause of social justice and shown great courage in standing up for those least able to stand up for themselves...

...(Labour) you have failed and it falls to us, the modern Conservative party to fight for the poorest who you have let down....

...We'll start with what is most important to me – and what I believe is most important for the country — families.

I believe that a stable, loving home is the most precious thing a child can have. Society begins at home. Responsibility starts at home. That's why we cannot be neutral on this.

Now I don't live in some fantasy land where every family is happily married with 2.4 kids. Nor am I going to stand here and pretend that family life is always easy.

But by recognising marriage and civil partnerships in the tax system and abolishing the couple penalty in the benefits system, we'll help make it that little bit easier....


...Why aren't we building homes with enough room for a family to sit round a table and actually eat a meal together?...

...It's about our culture. Why do so many magazines and websites and music videos make children insecure about the way they look or the experiences they haven't even had?

And it's about our society. We give our children more and more rights, and we trust our teachers less and less. We've got to stop treating children like adults and adults like children...

...A breakdown of morality in the minds of those thugs a total absence of feeling or conscience. A breakdown in community where a neighbour is left to reach a pitch of utter misery....

...We cannot rebuild social responsibility from on high. But the least we can do the least we can do is pledge to all the people who are scared, who live their lives in fear and who can't protect themselves, … We will be there to protect you...


....To be British is to be open-minded. We don't care who you are or where you're from, if you've got something to offer then this is a place you can call home.

To be British is to be generous.

To be British is to be sceptical of authority and the powers-that-be.

And to be British is to have an instinctive love of the countryside and the natural world....


...Yes, we need to change the way we live. But is that such a bad thing? The insatiable consumption and materialism of the past decade, has it made us happier or more fulfilled?

Yes, we have to put our faith in technologies. But that is not a giant leap. Just around the corner are new green technologies, unimaginable a decade ago, that can change the way we live, travel, work....

...Let's work together on the things where the EU can really help, like combating climate change, fighting global poverty and spreading free and fair trade.

...what holds society together is responsibility, and that the good society is a responsible society. That's what I'm about – that's what any government I lead will be about.

...I know that whatever plans you make in Opposition, it's the unpredictable events that come to dominate a government. And it's your character, your temperament and your judgment, not your policies and your manifesto – that really make the difference.


...there aren't many reasons to be cheerful. But there are reasons to believe. Yes it will be a steep climb. But the view from the summit will be worth it. Let me tell you what I can see.

I see a country where more children grow up with security and love because family life comes first. I see a country where you choose the most important things in life — the school your child goes to and the healthcare you get. I see a country where communities govern themselves — organising local services, independent of Whitehall, a great handing back of power to people.

I see a country with entrepreneurs everywhere, bringing their ideas to life — and life to our great towns and cities. I see a country where it's not just about the quantity of money, but the quality of life — where we lead the world in saving our planet. I see a country where you're not so afraid to walk home alone, where you're safe in the knowledge that right and wrong is restored to law and order.

I see a country where the poorest children go to the best schools not the worst, where birth is never a barrier.

...And when we look back we will say not that the government made it happen … not that the minister made it happen … but the businesswoman made it happen … the police officer made it happen … the father made it happen …the teacher made it happen.

You made it happen.

Grace Under Pressure?

“What a man is on his knees, that he is and nothing more.” (Robert Murray McCheyne)*

The Toothpaste Test: what comes out when the pressure is on? It’s easy to put on a facade when everything is fine, but there’s nothing like a tight squeeze for revealing what we’re really like:

- Gordon Brown has displayed a spectacular level of resilience (or desperation?). Both James Purnell and Caroline Flint may have thought they were delivering the ‘Geoffrey Howe moment’, but Brown has clung on. Most people would have ended up in the Priory after the sort of week he’s had. You have to admit his toughness, even if you’d rather he wasn’t there. I rather admire his dutiful refusal to give up and walk away.

- Caroline Flint’s resignation letter sadly comes across as a petulant response to not being promoted in the reshuffle, rather than a principled refusal to be ‘window dressing’. It reflects badly both on Brown, but also on Ms Flint herself.

- Brown has also displayed, again, his misjudgment of character. On one day Brown talks about his ‘Presbyterian conscience’, then the next he appoints Alan Sugar to a top government role. In one week, the PM has gone from Simon Cowell to Alan Sugar: you wonder if he put together his Cabinet by browsing the Radio Times.

As the public clamours for honest MPs in the wake of the expenses scandal, Sugar is a man who awarded the Apprentice crown last year to a man who was found out for lying in his CV. His public persona is a mixture of grouchiness and greed - you might argue that this is only a persona, but frankly I’m sick and tired of people who put on an act for the cameras, but behave differently in private. Dizzy also notes that Sugar has a bit of history with Gordon Brown.

Squeezing Dave
For an observer, its certainly been an exciting few days, but I’m glad Brown is staying. Why? Because his rivals haven’t yet had the Toothpaste Test. We don’t really know what David Cameron is like under pressure. The Tories have floated to the top of the polls without, as yet, serious scrutiny of their policies, their character, or their principles. Cameron’s calls for an election have been irresponsible - how can we possibly have a sensible election in the midst of the current mess? What kind of mandate would it give to whoever won?

Britain’s Got Talent reminded us that the spotlight can reveal our frailties, as well as our gifts (and whilst we’re on the subject, any show that hospitalises its contestants needs to be taken off air, no matter how popular it is). Brown used to have a reputation for rising to challenges - remember summer 2007? In a years time his response to the economic crisis may be judged more kindly too, as we remember that the Conservatives failed in their Opposition duty to blow the whistle on a debt-fuelled boom.

The media seems to enjoy bringing people to its knees - Tony Blair once famously called them a pack of feral beasts. There’s a fine line to tread between vigorous scrutiny, and respecting the human dignity of those you are calling to account. Brown needs to be given the chance to stand up and get on with his job.

Meanwhile I wouldn’t want to see Cameron brought to his knees, but I still don’t believe we’ve really seen him tested, and that worries me.

*The full quote is “What a man is on his knees before God, that he is and nothing more.” McCheyne was a missionary, but I’m not sure if he was a Presbyterian. By way of contrast, I'm currently reading a biography of the missionary Hudson Taylor, and one thing which stands out is his constancy of character, rooted in prayer and dependence on God.

This is a cross-post from 'Touching Base', a weekly column hosted at the Wardman Wire.

Today I Will Be Mostly Voting.....

Euro Elections: Green. Climate Change is the biggest issue facing the planet (bigger than the debt crunch), and if we don't sort it out soon there will be hell to pay for those who are too poor to insulate themselves against its effects. Needs to be continental co-ordination on this.

Local Elections: Libdem. It's them vs Conservatives (mixed track record in Somerset, plus a nearby delivery of horse manure) or communists. The Libdem councillor seeking re-election has been very supportive of Street Pastors, someone we can do business with.

General Election: there isn't one (at time of writing), despite David Cameron's desparation to get one called. Why is he in such a hurry? Are there expenses secrets about his front bench that he's afraid will get out if he leaves it too long? A couple of thoughts about this:

1. If there were a General Election, I would probably vote Conservative, because I think they've got the Broken Britain stuff about right, and are the only party who are prepared to take social breakdown seriously. But....

Cameron's team impress me more than Cameron, who (it seems) can't see a bandwagon without jumping on it. The seeds of the debt crunch were there - he did nothing. MP's were fiddling expenses - he did nothing. Electoral reform was always an option - he did nothing. Yet as soon as these become issues he is jumping up and down at the despatch box, projecting himself as the man of action.

I'm struggling to think of a distinctive Cameron policy - most of the best ideas have come from his team (and he does seem to be better and buildling, and getting the best out of, a leadership team). I'm not parroting Labour lines here, it's just that Cameron is quicker out of the blocks than Brown, and that looks like decisiveness. Appearances are deceptive. Not a single Tory MP has actually stood down over the expenses scandal, though several of them should. If Cameron were really as angry as he says he is, he would have thrown some of them out by now.

Clearly, Cameron is a much better communicator than Brown, but how much more to him is there?

2. I find myself praying for Gordon Brown more than usual. Why?
- The Bible tells me to (Romans 15)

- I'm praying that he doesn't get distracted. His line at PMQ's today was spot on - there are major national and international issues going on, thousands are losing their jobs every day, and all the other parties can do is talk about expenses, electoral reforms, and calling an election. There is too much important stuff at stake for the PM to take his eye off the ball. Yes the expenses scandal is serious, but so are a lot of other things.

- In Browns early days, he seemed rather good in a crisis. He's done reasonably well over the debt crunch too, though we won't be able to judge that until we're out of it.

- If you're a leader under pressure, you need all the encouragement you can get. We probably get the political leaders we deserve: everyone knows that praise gets more out of people than criticism, yet we repeatedly whinge about our politicians, never give them credit for getting things right, and then complain when they under-perform.

- Patience is under-rated. It's easy to grab headlines, but some things need some thinking time to come up with the best solution. Brown looks indecisive, when perhaps it's just that he (like Rowan Williams), likes to take his time to think things through. Wisdom is knowing when to act immediately, and when to bide your time and get it right. And wisdom is granted in answer to prayer (James 1).

- If I had as much responsibility as the PM, I'd want people praying for me too. I only co-lead a church of 120 and I ask people to pray for me in that, so goodness knows how much prayer you need to run one of the most powerful and prosperous countries in the world.

and having said all that, I reserve the right to change my mind between here and the ballot box....

Update: good election day coverage at Andrew Sparrows rolling blog at the Guardian

'People Want to Know What Values You Bring': Grave Dave Cameron's Vision and Values

What makes Cameron tick? Last week I looked at the vision and values of Gordon Browns speech, now its 'Dave's turn. Except this was more grave than Dave. When Nick Clegg compared David Cameron to an Andrex puppy, he was partly right. Camerons speech to the Tory conference was certainly very long (65 minutes), but it certainly wasn't soft.

(Full text of the speech is here, quotes below are in italics. )

Strangely, in pragmatic political times, we've had two strong 'values' speeches. Brown was heavy on duty, service, and especially 'fairness'. Cameron was even more explicit:

(people) want to know whether our politics, and let's be frank, whether our politicians - are up to it. In the end, that's not really about your policies and your plans. Of course your plans are important… so people want to know what values you bring to big situations and big decisions that can crop up on your watch.

and so he told us. There were some clear inconsistencies between his stated values, and what he actually proposed to do, but we'll come to that later. But lets look at those values:

1. Responsibility:
For me, the most important word is responsibility, not a libertarian free for all, but personal, civic and corporate responsibility to others 'that's what this party is all about'. There was a superb section where he nailed Miliband (interesting that he went after Miliband and Johnson, the 2 Labour pretenders, as well as Brown), turning 'there's no such thing as society' back on Labour:

David Miliband said that "unless government is on your side you end up on your own."
"On your own" - without the government.
I thought it was one of the most arrogant things I've heard a politician say.
For Labour there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between.
No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on.
No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in.
No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
You cannot run our country like this.

Responsibility and society go hand in hand: " we will only be a strong society if we are a responsible society." Responsibility recognises that there are other factors than just what I want, or what suits me.

That was cashed out later on in terms of benefit reform, the behaviour of politicians, and being able to admit to failure. Irresponsible bankers were fingered for the economic crisis, and 'fiscal responsibility' was put at the core of economic policy.

2. Family:
"I'm a forty-one year old father of three who thinks that family is the most important thing there is." That line came early on, and family featured at the top of the Broken Society section, and how we fix it. Cameron was clear "If you want to know where the change will be greatest from what has gone before. It is our plan for social reform. be as radical in social reform as Margaret Thatcher was in economic reform." So the biggest change the Tories will bring is social change, and at the centre of that is family policy.

Why? Because "family is the best welfare system there is (and)... commitment is something we should cherish as a society." There was a hint at other things too - the broken family structure in the background story of those in prison, so hopefully Cameron has more to say than just this. His 3 proposals to strengthen families were: flexible working, backing marriage in the tax system, and 4,000 more health visitors.

I'm sorry, but if that is the engine room of the most radical social reform since Roy Jenkins, then then that's a bit weak. Very weak. Health visitors are fine so far as they go, but there is so much more that can be done to support families in terms of relationships support, parenting skills etc. (though see this).

At least at the core of this there is a vision of a "stronger society". Whether 'conservative means' can achieve 'progressive ends', is another question.

3. "Leadership, character, judgement"
In a full frontal attack on Browns 'this is no time for a novice' jibe, Cameron spend a long time spelling out an alternative view of leadership. I couldn't work out whether "thinking before deciding is good" and "go with your conviction, not calculation" (said within 4 sentences of each other) were mutually contradictory. But Camerons argument was that it's what you've got, not what you've been through, that makes you a good leader. Experience, if you've not learned from it, is a hindrance not a help.

Part of Cameron's leadership is a commitment to teamwork - he carefully namechecked all the major players in his team (even David Davis, remember him?), and it's striking to note that the shadow cabinet currently looks like a better team than the real thing, with several of the most talented Labour MP's on the back benches (Clarke, Milburn, Blair), or having done so much to annoy people that they're damaged goods (Balls, Byers, Mandelson, Reid, Blair again, etc.). There is a strength in depth to this opposition team, and Cameron does seem able to bring the best out of them. To have bound the notoriously independent IDS into part of a cohesive unit is an achievement in itself.

4. Within this there was a lot of talk about right and wrong.
"The popular thing may look good for a while. The right thing will be right all the time." Cameron applied this to Afghanistan, law and order and family policy. Someone commented afterwards that it was a bit of a Daily Mail speech, and perhaps that's right.

Cameron's rights and wrongs were a fascinating blend of old and new Conservative: sound defence, patriotism, the Union and fiscal conservatism, alongside gender equality, social justice, green politics and international development. Though the Tory tree logo gets its share of bashing, it's quite a good image for where the Tories find themselves: strong roots in one tradition of thinking, but trying to draw on them for something leafy and fruitful in the present.

5. Religion (not)
As if to prove Theos wrong, all the leaders have avoided religious references: Brown made a fleeting allusion to the Good Samaritan, Clegg made a joke, and Cameron invoked God only to show us how angry he was. Aside from the reference to faith in the Miliband attack, that was it.

6. Walking the Talk
Early in the speech Cameron said "it's not just about your values... the best you can do is tell people...how you make decisions" and he went on to set out 14 statements which were, basically, value statements. He seems a little confused about what 'values' are, but at least he's got some.

However, how he applied those values was a little confusing. Family policy, as I've noted, looks rather weak, and Tory solutions on both the NHS and schools were pure free market: publish information, reduce regulation, and open the thing up to more competition. Cameron stated that for the NHS people want an 'informed choice'. No David, we want a good doctor at our local hospital. When you're ill, you don't want to excercise your right of choice, you just want to get better. There has to come a time when we stop being consumers, but it didn't sound like it would happen under this leader.

On hearing the speech, it came across as a strong statement of the kind of leader Cameron would be. On reading it, I'm slightly more confused. There are so many value statements here, and so many vying for top spot: responsiblity, family, leadership, change, "Conservative values", mending the broken society, deciding on the basis of thought-through process, deciding on the basis of gut instinct, and so on.

Earlier in the conference Cameron went for a jog, slowed to a walk as he neared the hotel, then speeded up again when he saw the media. His speech was an attempt to portray himself as a man who wouldn't stop running, even when it got painful, even when it didn't look good to the media. There seems to be a gap between Camerons values, and how they work themselves out.


And finally....
And despite the occasional nod to 'quality of life', none of the leaders yet has gone after the big issue: is a consumer society powered by credit a sustainable one? In fact, can it be a 'society' if it's based on consumption? This lies at the core of green issues, banking, social justice, international development, mental health, social cohesion and so much else. There's no point in fixing the roof whilst the sun is shining if the foundations are built on sand.