Manifesto writing time

Behind the scenes work is advancing quickly on what should be in the manifesto for 2015. The Conservative leadership will want to have a good idea of what the party will be offering by this autumn. The Prime Minister will want his speech to conference to set the scene for the manifesto to follow. Doubtless Labour and the Lib dems are also well into the work on their proposals.

Central to the Conservative approach will be the renegotiation and the referendum on our membership of the EU. The other two main parties in Parliament think they can avoid discussion and much action on EU matters, offering a passive acceptance of all the powers that have already passed to the EU. Their line on a referndum is they will offer one only if there is a new Treaty transferring yet more powers. They say this knowing no such Treaty is currently planned. They will fail to set out how they think the UK can remain a full member of the EU when most of the EU is busily completing a political union to back its currency union.

Central also to the Conservative approach must be further measures to build on the economic recovery now underway, and to complete the task of eliminating the deficit. This is also likely to be distinctive as an approach, as both Labour and Lib Dems are likely to want to spend and borrow more despite the very high levels of borrowing already undertaken.

Today I would be interested to hear youtr ideas on what should go into the manifesto.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

133 Comments

  1. Mark B
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:34 am | Permalink

    John Redwood MP wrote;

    “Today I would be interested to hear youtr ideas on what should go into the manifesto.”

    Why ?

    Nothing here will go in. Nothing you put in can ever be guaranteed, as manifesto’s are now known, not to be worth the paper they are written on. Anything that is an EU competence (power) has to be done, or not done, even if you disagree with it. Anything you promise will cost us more. And anything you will not be in power post 2015 GE, so why bother ?

    You are slowly but surely, beginning to show up your own irrelevance.

    • Graham
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:29 am | Permalink

      Couldn’t agree more.

      Thought most of the important stuff came from Brussels anyway including tax onplastic bags and more harassment of motorists

      A joke blog this one

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

        The kind of manifesto I’d like to see is illegal under EU law and and risky with no-win-no-fee litigation.

        • Hope
          Posted June 13, 2014 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

          If Daniel Hanan is correct in his article today there can be no negotiation with the EU and therefore no need to wait three years. JR, you and the othe Eurosceptics need to take action while you can as you are very unlikely to win the next general election.

    • Richard1
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

      This is not a sensible post. The UK is a democracy, public debate is what generates ideas. Look how opinion has shifted on so many issues, including in particular the EU. There is every point in MPs canvassing public opinion and in manifestos being formulated through such public discussion.

      • alan jutson,
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

        Richard 1

        Agreed.

        Makes a change to be asked.

      • JoeSoap
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

        The primary requirement should be that what is promised in the manifesto is put into practice, under threat of imprisonment or worse for fraud of those elected on the basis of the manifesto.
        Without that today’s post is irrelevant.

      • Dom1
        Posted June 13, 2014 at 10:21 am | Permalink

        The UK is not a democracy, it is a parliamentary dictatorship.

    • Hefner
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

      And the irrelevance of MPs, even the most “talkative” ones will be reinforced when the TTIP is signed, whether by the USA and the EU, or as a bilateral agreement between the USA and the UK.

  2. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:48 am | Permalink

    Fully transferable married couples tax allowance please.

    I have to compete for housing and food with couples earning gross the same together as I earn singly but they take home over three hundred pounds a month more than me by having two tax allowances to my one (plus any child benefit that they are allowed to keep that I am not). A smilar sized family to mine with two earners earning the same as me is over £500 a month better off than me. How do I compete with those who have that much more than me even though we earn (gross) the same?

    This will be exacerbated when the universal credit rolls out and a minimum wage earner will be able to keep sufficient amounts of their benefit to take home £36K per year. I have to compete with them too for the limited housing and food stock. Truly a war on aspiration.

    • StevenL
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:43 am | Permalink

      Limited food stock? While we still pay farmers not to grow crops / raise livestock?

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

        If it were not limited then demand would not increase price which is evidently not the case. So it is limited if only by design.

  3. Mike Stallard
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:57 am | Permalink

    EU: The EU is, as you say, deliberately becoming one unitary state. The choice is no longer “in” or “out”. It is now, do we want to become a region – or set of regions – within what I can only call the EUSSR? (Two differences: no Joe Stalin – yet. Still several political parties, even if they are all saying exactly the same thing.) It also means dropping our Common Law with those important ancient rules that protect our safety and dignity.

    We need – and fast – to start negotiating fairly robustly to leave the EU and join EFTA instead. It is not perfect. There are, of course, disadvantages. But we are faced with a really nasty tumble if we just drift towards the falls. that should be at the top of the Manifesto. Join EFTA.

    • Hope
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

      Cameron could have put the EU referendum in the Queen’s Speech, he CHOSE not to. It would have been a good indicator to gauge how the public thought of the LibLabCon cartel. It might have shown the difference between them.

      Gay marriage was not in a Queen’s speech and Tories down-played the importance of it and that of the manifesto. Plastic bags important enough to be in though. Shows how ridiculous the Tories have become.

      Why is it important now, to help their spin for election?

      • APL
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

        Hope: “Plastic bags important enough to be in though.”

        Wasn’t ‘plastic bags’ tax an obsession of our previous ‘prime minister’?

        Odd, no? How two parties, that are supposedly ideologically at opposite ends of the political spectrum, produce similar policies.

        One might draw the conclusion that someone was pulling their strings.

    • Hefner
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

      Yes, if not the EFTA, the TTIP/TAFTA …

  4. Andyvan
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 6:24 am | Permalink

    Does it matter what goes into the manifesto? It will be fudged and U turned and evaded anyway. The only promises that are carried out are the ones that prove to be misguided, badly thought out and counterproductive. Lets take a leaf out of Belgium’s book and not have a government for a while, their economy benefited from the lack of meddling, ours would too.

    • Hope
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

      About 37 U turns and failed promises to date I read today.

  5. Timaction
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 6:36 am | Permalink

    The only reason that the EU has become important is because it has finally been addressed by the other mainstream party that has yet to gain seats in Westminster. I believe the Liberal Party will cease to exist as a mainstream Party post election and the two other Parties will cease to have the dominance that they previously enjoyed. The public are aware of what has been done to them by LabCon and are reaping the benefits in London and our other major Cities. Who wants overcrowding, growing waiting lists on the worlds health service and education to support the free movement of people in the legacy parties beloved EU? All at huge costs for no benefit. What’s to be believed in a manifesto when it is ignored and other prioritises emerge?
    We never asked or wanted mass migration and there is only one party who will address it. The same applies to the EU, the rest just apply a sticking plaster, waffle and talk.
    Einstein said the first sign of madness is doing the same things and expecting change!

    • Hope
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

      Ah, but Cameron told the 1922 committee yesterday that your type of voter will come back to him. You make sure you do as he tells you!

      • Timaction
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

        Yes, there is a touch of “God Syndrome” about Mr Cameron. He thinks if he says it, it must be true. It’s just none of the people I know and speak to who won’t be voting for him! Period.

  6. John E
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:02 am | Permalink

    Stronger defences. Specifically a well equipped full time Army and planes for both aircraft carriers.
    It seems odd to have to suggest having a credible defence force consistent with our UN obligations to a Conservative government, but there we are.

  7. formula57
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    1. Even Harold Wilson knew it was sheer folly to allow the UK to join in wars led by the Americans (although it is permissible to allow them to join our wars). A commitment to avoiding wars and similar adventures (of the like of the prevented Syrian debacle) as a matter of guiding principle and also to always seeking parliamentary prior approval would be welcome.

    2. Dealing with proper representation within the Union for England, as you have described. Included within that should be implementation of the Westminster constituencies boundary changes to equalize the numbers of voters per constituency and dealing with the fraud-enabling system for postal votes. It should also address the alleged largesse enjoyed by Scotland under the Barnet formula or any other arrangements.

    3. Managing the NHS – to prevent such occurrences as sub-standard contractors performing clinical procedures in an effort to reduce waiting lists etc.. I acknowledge this is a huge task that has been attempted and failed at many times.

    4. Get Chilcot to publish his enquiry report and then act on any appropriate recommendations (to the extent not done hitherto anyway), sparing no war criminals in the process.

    5. Formulate a Citizens’ Right to Privacy charter that includes preventing government and other official bodies selling to third parties or otherwise disclosing data that facilitates exposure of personal information.

    6. Scrap the BBC licence fee (decriminalizing its non-payment meanwhile) and oblige the BBC to take its funding only from those who use its service, not also anyone who receives live broadcasts from other sources.

    7. Where flat rate (or based other than on income) taxes are levied on what can be considered necessities, (Council Tax and Vehicle Excise Duty being prime examples), shift to an income or extent of usage base (as fairness dictates) to assist those on lower incomes.

    8. Tackle the looming problems in energy supply (and it will be necessary but helpful to explain what these are to an unknowing public). If required, include a willingness to defy the EU, seeking a mandate to withhold any fines it imposes from the UK’s net contribution.

    I have omitted the suggestion (out of sensitivity to the politics of the Coalition) that you should include a repeat of Nick Clegg’s pledge on student fees.

  8. John E
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    Oh, and please fix our roads. They are so bad that car manufacturers now have special sections in their test tracks to replicate our terrible potholed surfaces.
    For example, Honda. http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4921/japan-recreates-rough-uk-roads-in-test-track-for-new-cars

  9. The PrangWizard
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    There must be a manifesto specifically for England, if there is a fudge on national identity by wording which implies that policies apply outside England when they can be applied only in England, the manifesto will be fraudulent. There must also be a renaming of ministerial titles to identify those whose departmental responsibilities exist only in England.

  10. A.Sedgwick
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:16 am | Permalink

    No coalition with Libdems under any circumstances.

    Repeal of Five Year Fixed Term Parliament Act.

    2015 in/out EU Referendum.

    Chances nil.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 14, 2014 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

      @A.Sedgwick “Repeal of Five Year Fixed Term Parliament Act.”

      I though that Act had a built-in sunset clause?

  11. Bob
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:17 am | Permalink


    “Central to the Conservative approach will be the renegotiation and the referendum on our membership of the EU.”

    There will be no renegotiation. This is a Cameron con trick designed to delay the issue of our membership until they can import another 3 million or so EU migrants to guarantee an “in” vote in any referendum that follows.


    “I would be interested to hear youtr ideas on what should go into the manifesto.”

    Most of it is already outlined on ukip’s website, including the total abolition of IHT.

    • Hope
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

      He has his chance to include in the Queen’s speech. Why did he not take up the chance to win over voters?

  12. Richard1
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:23 am | Permalink

    Renegotiate with the EU using the referendum as a backstop and in order to give the UK negotiating clout. English votes for English issues in Parliament to match the devolution to Scotland – which will have to be extended following the failure of Samonds independence vote (likewise for wales and N Ireland). Continue with the long term economic plan but accelerate the cut in wasteful areas that that have been protected by the LibDems. Continue with the education reforms but allow profit making companies to get into the schools sector, as they do in other areas of education. Aim to give state school parents and children the same access to choice and competition as exists in the private sector. Continue with welfare reform to make sure work always pays. Massively simplify the tax system, cut loopholes, flatten rates and cut taxes for the low paid. Avoid overseas military adventures unless the UK or our allies are clearly under threat. Review the regime of green subsidies in the light of increasing doubt as to how serious the problem of global warming is and the strong evidence that green subsidies are an expensive way of doing nothing about it anyway. That should do it.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 14, 2014 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

      @Richard1 “English votes for English issues in Parliament to match the devolution to Scotland – which will have to be extended following the failure of Samonds independence vote”

      A failed Scottish independence vote might actually mean a rowing back on devolution, after all the SNP will be dead in the water, their whole reason for being gone – which is one reason the SNP wanted, but didn’t get, a third option of ‘Devomax’ on the referendum ballot paper…

  13. Lifelogic
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    What should go into the Tory Manifesto? Well would they ever do what it said this time anyway? In the very remote chance they get a full Majority?

    It should say we will withdraw from the free movement of people within the EU and introduce controlled, selective immigration from around the World, on a point system. We will withdraw from the free movement of people within the EU. Immigration will be mainly aimed at high earners or the wealthy who can pay for themselves in full or provide selective high skills that we are short of.

    We will withdraw from all the many aspects of the EU that are totally bonkers and also attack the UK’s London based democracy. Better still just withdraw and become a far richer Greater Switzerland on Sea.

    We will decide on our own human rights and give it a far better name that “human rights”.

    We will combine national insurance and income tax rates. The top rate with never exceed 30%. Employers’ NI will be scrapped. Stamp duty and inheritance taxes will be abolished as such taxes are very damaging.

    We will abolish the criminal injuries compensation scheme and no win no fee actions.

    We will simplify the tax and legal systems with the aim of reducing mainly parasitic activity in the government & the tax and legal professions. A cut of about nine out of ten Lawyers would still leave us with far more than Japan and make us much more productive.

    Regulation will be cut all round the aim will be to remove parasitic activity in the state sector and the private sector in lawyers, HR, Heath and Safety, Planning, tax admin ……

    We will scrap nearly all employment laws, they do not even help employees. The best protection for employees is clearly the ready availability of another job.

    Government expenditure will decline to no more than 20% of GDP (what will be a much higher GDP anyway).

    We will scrap HS2, green crap subsidies, the climate change act & Cameron’s moronic gender pensions and insurance rules.

    We will have cheap energy mainly from coal, nuclear, gas, fracking and oil. We will increase our spending in real science and engineering by a factor in excess of 100 and give more tax incentive for it.

    We will get rid of the subsidy for the 70% of courses at University that are pretty daft, valueless or just pointless. The students can pay for these themselves if they want to.

    We will have a voucher system for schools and encourage more private competition in the sector.

    We will get religion out of schools as far as possible, it is divisive and damaging. It also causes huge problems and cleavages in society, as we saw in Northern Ireland.

    We will breakup the NHS, encourage more competition and charge for it with a safety net for those who really cannot pay.

    We will fire the 50% of the state sector that does nothing useful or just harasses/inconveniences the public. We will cut the pay/pensions of all the state sector so it is not 50% higher than the private sector worker who pay for it all.

    We will introduce some real and regular democracy so voters can have some input to the system every week or even day rather than once every five years. That vote only for a party person who will not do what they promised anyway.

    We will never go to pointless, damaging, vastly expensive wars on the basis or complete. blatant lies or for any other daft reason.

    We will introduce a pension equalisation tax to ensure that pensions in the state sector are no longer about 6 times those in the private sector. The ones that Brown and Osborne have mugged. Or address it in some other manner.

    We will have GDP per capita growth of at least 5% PA for the five year term. So we will be 27% richer at the end of the five year term.

    We will get more real competition in banking and energy supply.

    We will have a sound currency and raise enough in tax to cover the smaller government expenditure.

    We with have a justice system that actually deters crime, rather than encourages it as now. We will not release violent criminal who clearly have a high chance or re-offending just to save money, as is done now. It is clearly a false economy.

    We will not pay politicians at all as we would then get far better ones.

    We with restrict charities tax breaks to genuine charitable activity about 30% of what they do now I suspect.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 14, 2014 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

      @Lifelogic “We with have a justice system that actually deters crime, rather than encourages it as now. We will not release violent criminal who clearly have a high chance or re-offending just to save money, as is done now. It is clearly a false economy.”

      We could start by not allowing violent criminals anywhere near open prisons, and a life sentence should mean life. If these people are fit to be in an open prison then just parole and tagged them, at least the police might then have an idea where they are, unlike what is happening now with dangerous prisoners simply walking out the gate never to be seen in months or years if ever again…

    • David Price
      Posted June 14, 2014 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

      So you wish to increase tax on pensioners by at least 50%. Haven’t you heard that the combined tax & NI has been quietly removed from the UKIP website?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 15, 2014 at 6:36 am | Permalink

        One can have different rates for pensioner where appropriate. I just said the top rate should be no higher than 30%.

        • David Price
          Posted June 16, 2014 at 8:35 am | Permalink

          “We will combine national insurance and income tax rates The top rate with never exceed 30%. …”

          There is no NI on pension payments so cobining the two taxes while stating a max of 30% already increases taxes for pensions in payment.

          Like you, UKIP had an item in their now dissappeared national manefesto (circa 2010) that stated an intention to combine NI and Income Tax. There was never any mention of the hit on pensioners, savers nor different tax rates then either.

  14. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    Please tell Mr Cameron that despite his statement to you and your colleagues reported in the Telegraph: “Former Conservatives voters who now back the UK Independence Party will come back to the party, David Cameron has assured his MPs”, I can assure him that he has converted me from voting Conservative to, not just voting for but, joining UKIP and I have no intention of voting for him or your party at the next general election.
    As for your manifesto, I want to see details of the proposed ‘renegotiation’ of our membership of the EU but according to the Sun: “THE Tories will wait until AFTER the 2015 Election before revealing EU renegotiation demands – William Hague has signalled.” Further evidence of the duplicity of your party’s approach to this issue.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

      Why on earth should UKIP supporters even think about switching their support to the Tory party, when Cameron couldn’t care less if they or any other innocent Britons were carted off to languish in a foreign prison without any need for prima facie evidence of their guilt to be presented in a court in this country?

      http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/06/david-cameron-acknowledges-that-some-tory-mps-want-to-leave-the-eu/

      “Cameron defended opting back into the European Arrest Warrant, saying it was part of being touch on terrorism.”

      Eh, no, it’s part of setting up a European federal superstate, a putative new country called “Europe”, which Cameron keeps saying he doesn’t want.

      • Hope
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

        Well said Dennis. This shows his true colours. To use terrorism as an excuse makes him look stupid. How do other countries manage? How did the auK manage before? What happens if Scotland gets independence nd does not Jon the EU. How does the US get to whisk UK citizens off so quickly, no arrest warrant needed for them. You simply cannot believe a word he says. If Major is supporting his stance you know there cannot be a lot in it.

    • Richard1
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

      Well there are bound to be some who like you will continue to vote UKIP at the general election despite being eurosceptic. It will be unfortunate if too many do it though because then we will have a Labour or lib lab govt, no referendum, and probably PR to make sure there will never be any future referendum either. Rather a case of the nose being cut off to spite the face.

      • JoeSoap
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

        Not at all
        Build for the future when these things can be reversed.
        Success isn’t always a one way street

      • Hope
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

        If you believe Cameron more fool you. He could have put it in the Queeen’s speech to test the water and show the difference between him and the Lib Dems. He CHOSE not as he CHOSE to opt back in the EU arrest warrant. Different system of justice and laws that have served this country very well.

      • Brian Tomkinson
        Posted June 13, 2014 at 8:01 am | Permalink

        Richard,
        I see, you have bought the line vote UKIP get Labour. I haven’t and prefer to vote for a party that represents my views rather than one which I see as pretending to be something that it isn’t. I can clearly remember the Wilson charade leading to the 1975 referendum, which Cameron is cynically trying to emulate.

        • Richard1
          Posted June 13, 2014 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

          I haven’t bought into any line. It is self evident that if the Eurosceptic vote on the right of centre side (it hardly now exists on the left) is split, the Conservatives will lose seats, and the only possible alternative, Labour, will gain office.

          • Brian Tomkinson
            Posted June 13, 2014 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

            The Conservative party is not Eurosceptic – a minority of its MPs may be but when it comes to loyalty they put party before country every time.

          • Anonymous
            Posted June 13, 2014 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

            I’m heartily fed up with voting tactically, Richard.

            It didn’t work last time and it won’t work next time.

            Always vote for the party that you want or don’t vote at all. It’s the only way.

            I want out of the EU and to vote for a PM who wants to stay in the EU is madness.

      • Hope
        Posted June 13, 2014 at 8:22 am | Permalink

        Nonsense. There is no difference between the cartel parties. As. Oat law, policy and regulation comes from the he EU there is only a little leeway for local changes. This week it was demonstrated how the structural deficit was in line with Darling’s plan ie the Treasury plan. No 80 percent spending cuts as promised. Taxed to the hilt with a greater number very day. What for, poor public services, build over very piece of green land to help mass immigration? 20 percent of school children do not speak English as their first language, police in Sheffield being taught to speak Roma to help quell the civil unrest that we were told before the European elections did not exist. Cameron thought there was reasonable number for Romanians and Bulgarians coming to the UK, but he did not know the number! Even the MSM tried to claim the figures were down when they were clearly up for the year and since the transition period started. There w a minor blip and it was seized upon by Tories to claim the number was lower than expected. What a falsehood.

        • Richard1
          Posted June 13, 2014 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

          As it happens the numbers of Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants to date is low. The point is if you want a referendum there needs to be a Conservative govt. It doesn’t get much simpler than that.

  15. Douglas Carter
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    A check on a specific (and now becoming wide-ranging) abuse of the consumer by custodians of electronic subscriber services. To qualify in advance, I’m well aware you do not favour interference in the market, however, what I’m going to highlight is not ‘the market’ – it is plain corporatism used essentially as a licence to print money.

    A Customer Subscriptions Communications bill.

    Legislation which will oblige companies which draw regular payments from customers to provide an on-going service or product must communicate – and must receive communications – by means the customer themselves prefer or specify. So, if a customer wishes to use written means to communicate, then a company must provide a recogniseable address at which written communications must be processed properly. Where relevant, the communications be awarded proper consideration to the matters the customer may raise.

    It’s almost invariable now that electronic subscriber service provider – including, but not limited to, Phone, broadband, mobile phone services – will actively and aggressively attempt to block subscribers from closing any accounts extant. I suspect even if you haven’t been contacted by a constituent on this kind of problem, you will have many colleagues in the HoC who have experience of it. The scope of the problems are too numerous to highlight in this posting so I’ll assume most people are now aware of the wider problems this matter is exposing. It pertains almost wholly to the use of telephone communications where the Company operators are very obviously trained to prevent the customer closing their subscription.

    Large companies of this sort are culturally, wilfully evading equitable communications with unwilling customers to ensure they never need to acknowledge unwelcome information. It begins to resemble a licence to print money. Not so much ‘Caveat Emptor’ more ‘Hotel California’ – ‘You can subscribe any time you like but you can never leave’….

    To qualify, I used to work closely with the Trades Union in my ex-workplace where this phenomenon arose very frequently – in some remarkable cases the Union was prepared to enlist their own Solicitors to assist in closing accounts, for example, to ‘Sky’. It may well be that customers might look at the small print with regard to a subscription, but by the same token, it’s certainly not acceptable for such Companies to regard unwilling customers with contemptuous disdain.

    This is a widespread and increasing problem. An applied protection for the customer is now appropriate for such misuse of process.

    So as I say. Not ‘interference’. Just ‘protection’. That may seem an unremarkable manifesto consideration, but it will touch a lot of lives and pockets.

  16. Colin
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:59 am | Permalink

    “Today I would be interested to hear your ideas on what should go into the manifesto.”

    It’s nice that you’re interested, John, but of course the reality is that we of the lower orders will have no input into the manifesto whatsoever. Some might connect this to the party’s ever-dwindling membership.

  17. Old Albion
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    Equality and Democracy for England by the creation of an English parliament with powers at least equal to the Scottish parliament (assuming they do not secede) under a federal (dis)UK Gov.

  18. alan jutson,
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    The most obvious is to simplify the tax and benefits system.

    Both need to be fair to both the users, payers and Government.

    The Tax free allowance should be raised further until it eventually matches the minimum wage rate.
    No one on the minimum wage should be paying income tax.

    Capital gains tax should be 20% have taper relief starting after two years, reducing the rate each year until after 10 years it is zero.
    No one should be paying tax on inflation.

    Inheritance tax should start at £1,000,000 per person as originally proposed 5 years ago.
    Average families should not be paying any inheritance tax, which is often determined on where you live (house prices) or have a lower rate but exclude totally the value of the primary residence.

    There should be no income tax on savings interest.
    We need to encourage some reward for thrift

    Scrap the Road Fund Licence, add a small charge to fuel duty, and thus charge people for road use in that manner, instead of the complex arrangements presently in place.
    Thus reducing the staffing of a government department.

    House purchase stamp duty rate should be a simple rate of 2% on all purchases, no upper or lower limit.
    We need to get some sense back into house purchase where the asking price depends upon perceived value, not some arbitary tax band.

    Can we please have a more simple tax code system, that is logical to all, at present few understand the complex range of numbers and letters that are issued by HMRC.

    Benefits should reflect actual contributions paid, and not simply be entitlement for all for ever.
    Jobseeker allowance should be far more flexible in its signing on and off so that taking on temporary work is rewarded instead of being penalised through delay of payment.

    The State pension should be the same rate for all (depending on contributions) and should match the minimum wage rate for a full contribution record.

    There should be a time limit for any benefit claimants who are deemed fit for work, (after completing a proper and full state medical assessment).
    We simply cannot afford to pay people for ever to choose not to work, when they are fit to do so.

    The cap on benefits should relate to the minimum wage at the time.

    Child allowance should be limited to one child, who must live with their parents at the time,
    thus the father is entitled to one allowance, as is the mother, so two children per couple.
    Children living abroad do not count.
    If you want children, then you should recognise that you should pay for them yourself.

    Care Home fees.
    No one should be paying for medical care in a care home which should come under the NHS (free at the point of use)
    Basic Residential care (Board and lodging for a better word) could be charged for on a national/regional scale which could be topped up should the resident want extras.

    End the post code lottery of treatment and drugs available to patients, we all pay into the scheme depending on earnings we should all have access to the same treatment and drugs.

    Could carry on, but it would be delayed in publication due to length.

    • John Hill & Co
      Posted June 13, 2014 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

      There are a lot of sensible proposals here.

      I would highlight the previous manifesto promise to raise the Inheritance Tax threshold to £1million. This was dropped as part of the price of coalition, but there is no excuse not to include it in the manifesto for a Conservative government – if it could be afforded in 2010, then it can certainly be afforded in 2015 with the public finances in better shape.

      Also the Capital Gains Tax proposal is excellent and would probably raise revenue.

  19. JoolsB
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    Can we assume you and hopefully some (if there are any) of your like minded colleagues will be persuading Cameron of the need for an English manifesto John? That’s the only thing (along with addressing the English Question) which could persuade this lifelong Conservative voter/activist to consider voting Conservative again but then I guess Cameron would rather the likes of people like me carry on voting UKIP before he’s going to let that happen wouldn’t he?

  20. oldtimer
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    On Europe: a statement that the current membership status is unacceptable; an indication of the direction of travel in respect of return of powers; ending of UK commitment to “ever closer union”.

    On taxation: a pledge to greater simplification of taxes; a pledge to make tax rates more efficient by reducing inefficient high tax rates (such as the 45% rates and 28% CGT rate).

    On national debt and the deficit: a pledge to eliminate the deficit and to reduce the national debt through policies aimed at promoting economic growth not by raising tax rates.

    On energy: a pledge to suspend or repeal the Climate Change Act and related measures which require subsidies for inefficient means of energy generation (the Australian government provides a benchmark on what needs to be done).

    On standards in public life: a pledge to introduce right to recall triggered by voters; a pledge to reform the postal voting system which currently is open to manipulation and corruption.

  21. Lifelogic
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    We all know what we will get from Cameron though. A list that is pretending to move slightly towards UKIP but with escape clauses and vacuous modernising, greencrap, equality guff everywhere. Destined to have the UKIP bits torn up post election and ignored for 5 more years.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

      Meanwhile Blair’s Iraq starts to fall into the hands of terrorists, after all those hundreds of thousands of pointless deaths.

      • Richard1
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

        The latest in the long catalogue of disaster in Iraq makes publication of the Chilcott report ever more urgent. It is an outrage that an unelected civil servant is apparently in a position to negotiate its contents and timing of publication.

  22. Iain Gill
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    Manifesto?
    Do you want to win? Do you really care what happens to the UK? Do you want simple winning messages easily understood?
    Firstly to neutralise UKIP you need proper non-negotiable (if you enter another coalition) core policies that you will not compromise.
    You need radical action on immigration and quality of political candidates.
    Immigration:
    1 No more than 6 intra company transfer visas per organisation per year. Intra company transfer entrants must have genuine specific knowledge unique to their organisation and not be generic cheap staff.
    2 Ban intra company transfer visa entrants from being subcontracted into any other organisation than the company that brought them in.
    3 All work visa entrants to pay full employers and employees national insurance from day one in this country.
    4 All work visa entrants to have their tax allowance pro rata with the amount of the tax year they are allowed to be in the country.
    5 No tax free payments for supposed expenses that Brits could not claim when working away from home within the UK for work visa entrants.
    6 All work visa entrants from countries which do not give reciprocal healthcare to Brits in their home country must buy medical insurance before being granted a visa. Special measures so that it is still possible for those with conditions where the NHS is the only realistic provider, such as diabetics, can enter the country and maintain their condition at least as cheaply as they could at home.
    7 Spouses entering with work visa holders to have no rights to work.
    8 All work visa entrants from countries which do not give reciprocal schooling to children of British families to have free state schooling withdrawn, they can pay school fees like British families in their home country do.
    9 No one to gain indefinite leave to remain simply for being here on work visas a long time, including those supposedly already on the “path to settlement”.
    10 Countries which make it hard for Brits to gain work visas to have their work visas restricted.
    11 All work visas to be issued to nationals of poorer countries only where there is a genuine shortage of British workers with those skills, and force sponsors to train a Brit in parallel.
    12 Ban marriages between couples who have not met randomly. If they get married abroad don’t issue visas to the spouse.
    13 Punitive taxes on outsourcers in the prime business of importing cheap staff, avoiding taxes, and moving British intellectual property abroad. Tackle tax avoidance and use of off shore tax arrangements.
    14 Student visas to give no rights to work part time. No rights for spouse to work. No rights to free medical care if from a country which does not provide reciprocal care to Brits, make them pay medical insurance before issuing a visa. No free schooling for children unless their home country provides reciprocal for Brits, they can pay school fees or no visa.
    15 Remove the right to vote from Commonwealth citizens without indefinite leave to remain in this country.
    16 Genuine apologies needed for not meeting the reduction in net immigration target and other radical action needed to reduce immigration.
    17 Anyone entering on a short term work visa to be banned from re-entry on a similar visa within 5 years.
    18 More resources into policing the outsourcing organisation. Police the immigration rules much more. Police the employment laws much more. Police the discrimination laws much more. Real active multi-dimensional state enforcement action against all aspects of regulation that are easy for outsourcers to undercut decent British businesses by bending the rules.
    19 Any couple in the country both on a temporary visa falling pregnant to have their visa revoked.
    20 Stop issuing visas to domestic staff.
    21 All driving laws to be enforced strictly on foreign licence holders. Impound their car/vehicle until they pay the fine etc. as happens to Brits abroad.
    22 Illegal immigrants to be arrested when found by the authorities.
    23 Increase price of work visas significantly.
    24 A planned move towards zero net immigration, recognising that the country is already full, we need to incentivise employers to hire and train Brits, and that quality of life is as important as economic metrics.
    25 Stop issuing visas to the restaurant trade.
    Quality of political candidates:
    1 Simplify the equality agenda so that equality applies equally to those with working class accents, regional accents, and different parts of British society as it does to different ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation. In all aspects of life. No discrimination on anything but merit. Reflect this in candidate selection and changes to equality laws.
    2 Reform political candidate selection to favour those who have done a “proper” job for at least 5 years, or the majority of their adult life.
    3 Reform political candidate selection to favour those with genuine local connections.
    4 Royal commission into the quality of PPE courses.
    5 Get some decent candidates with working class and regional accents front and centre of the TV election campaign.
    Gender equality:
    1 Royal commission into father rights over their children on divorce to be led by Bob Geldof. This is a reasonable request from “fathers for justice”.
    2 Change divorce laws so that woman does not get to “keep the house”, rather the house can be sold and the equity split.
    3 Change divorce laws so that the man gets a much fairer deal.
    Persecution of drivers:
    1 Adopt the policies of the alliance of British drivers, http://www.abd.org.uk/
    2 Negative points for every 3 years of safe driving.
    Tax and benefits:
    1 Radical simplification agenda
    2 Roll tax and benefits into the same simple integrated system
    3 Pay benefits as negative tax through simple payroll software
    Housing:
    1 Increase size of rooms in houses gaining planning permission
    2 Release plots of land for 3 bed semis to be built on government land to individuals. Government to build roads and provide services to these plots. Sell them cheap to folk who have a clean criminal record for 5 years. Indeed roll out perks to having a clean criminal record to all aspects of life.
    3 All land within walking distance of a main line train station to have green belt status removed.
    4 All housing subsidy to be controlled by the individual to spend as they wish. And all housing providers to charge full commercial rents.
    5 Remove link between address and school and GP you can use.
    6 Punitive taxes on anyone with more than one empty property.
    7 Capital gains tax to apply to foreign owned property.
    8 Stop selling old folks homes to pay for their care.
    9 Ban mortgages of more than 3 times earnings.
    10 Disband council planning departments. Take planning into control of national government and move planning staff into a central department. Radical efficiencies and cost reductions.
    11 Action against bad private landlords.
    12 Tenancies can only be ended in childrens summer break from school.
    Education:
    1 If you are in the top 10 % of exam passes in your school then you get free college fees.
    2 Show your mark relative to those in your school on your exam certificate.
    3 Buying power to parents.
    4 Religion out of schools thanks.
    Health:
    1 Buying power to patients.
    The economy:
    1 Radical action to protect the national intellectual property.
    2 Closer ties and reciprocal arrangements with Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
    3 Authorities to be much more cynical in dealing with those countries known to have high levels of corruption.
    4 Popular tax increases, increase price of using work visa holders, disincentivise moving British intellectual property abroad, punitive taxes on those found breaking immigration and other laws, etc.
    The budget:
    1 Reduce the “aid” budget to about a tenth.
    2 Stop HS2
    3 Punitive taxes on companies importing large amounts of foreign workers
    4 Remove the power from the chancellor to increase borrowing except in times of war
    5 Stop QE
    6 Increase interest rates
    …..
    Is this enough to be going on with John?
    This could be simplified down to an easy message, something like
    Simplify the rules and the public sector, and get cost savings out from simplification
    Perks for being law abiding
    Perks for being a British citizen or holder of indefinite leave
    Proper equality for all
    Etc
    Good luck…

    • a-tracy
      Posted June 18, 2014 at 9:34 am | Permalink

      Well said Iain.

  23. Bob Dixon
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:23 am | Permalink

    The annual personal allowance should be at a level where those on the minimum wage pay no income tax

  24. DaveL
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    A move to Swiss style direct democracy, as megaphoned by Douglas Carswell.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:12 am | Permalink

      Indeed.

      I would also add measures to counteract credit reverence agencies which can in effect prevent you shopping for the best rates and can publish duff or irrelevant information about you and charging you to boot.

      Also measures to combat the intentional “confusion marketing” in energy, loans, mortgages, credit card charges, cash deposits, insurance policies and very many other products that clearly prevent proper price benefit comparisons for consumers and are clearly designed to deceive the public.

  25. Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    The argument about how many UK laws come from abroad is not the point.

    The point is that even 1% is too many.

    The Conservative manifesto will need to ensure that the UK is 100% independent and our Parliament is supreme. Nothing less will do in my opinion.

    That means reducing the power of the eu and foreign courts over the UK to zero.

    If the Conservatives do not include this in the manifesto I will not for them.

    • Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:00 am | Permalink

      Correction: If the Conservatives do not include this in the manifesto I will not vote for them

  26. Bert Young
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    The lead off in the speech should be ” I come before you and admit my failure ; failure to listen , failure to climb down off my hobby horse , failure to come to a deal with UKIP and , failure to lead this country out of the EU . I now offer you my resignation and stand down immediately “. The manifesto that had been constructed but turned down by DC could now be put for acceptance by conference . Such a situation – even so late in the day , might influence the election result . I have absolutely no doubt that the election outcome will depend on keeping the EU out of our laws and dominating our lives ; our independence and identity are paramount .

  27. Iain Gill
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    Oh yea on education I missed out…
    Give headmasters the freedom to kick out the most disruptive pupils.
    Proper well planned provision for the most disruptive pupils in each town away from the main student body. Don’t let them ruin the education for everybody else.
    And shut the sink schools that have been sink schools for decades!

  28. steve
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    Hi John,

    Here are a few things to get you started. if you need more you have my email address.

    Get the basics right. We need to redesign from the bottom to the top. Good healthy food must be at the heart of everyones lives. Clean water and air is a must. PERMACULTURE. no to GMO’s.

    End corporations. Collect unpaid taxes from Corporations.

    Stop fracking. remove flouride from drinking water. stop chemicals being sprayed via planes(geo Engineering). stop “vacination” programs.

    remove oath of allegiance to the queen. have the armed forces, police and all other public funded organisations make oath of allegiance to the people.

    End party politics, out law lobbying. end trail by precedent. remove maritime law and reinstate common law.

    Pull us out of NATO. Stop the Industrial War Machine.

    Cheers john.

    • Mark
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:51 am | Permalink

      Perhaps you might feel more comfortable if you emigrated to North Korea?

      • zorro
        Posted June 13, 2014 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

        Why? Do they have common law in North Korea?

        zorro

    • APL
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:14 pm | Permalink

      Steve: “End party politics, ”

      We don’t have party politics in this country. We have a political cartel that makes a pretence of being different from the other mob.

      http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/feb/29/greenpolitics.plasticbags

      And now, as if by magic, David Cameron, of the pretend Conservative party has put a plastic bag tax into the Queens speech.

      Coincidence? Nah! it’s the end of party politics.

  29. David
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    I would like to see council tax raised to get rid of stamp duty.
    Stamp duty is :-
    a) unfair people often have to move rather than the want to
    b) bad for the economy because it makes harder for people to move for work
    c) bad for the economy because it makes the housing market less liquid which makes it more likely to crash/surge
    d) bad as it discourages people downsizing when they live in a home bigger than they need.

    Also please steal a UKIP policy – no tax on the minimum wage.

    • JoolsB
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:57 am | Permalink

      Council tax is every bit as unfair as stamp duty. It doesn’t need to be raised, it needs to be abolished and replaced with a system which takes accounts of someone’s income and ability to pay not the the size of the house they may have lived in for umpteen years.

      P.s. I also agree stamp duty is unfair.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

        Last purchase price of their house is a fair measure. This will make newly purchased buy to lets less attractive to tennants too so may dampen the hideously out of control rental market.

      • David
        Posted June 13, 2014 at 7:43 am | Permalink

        Council tax is not unfair, taxing land is a good idea. (It could be done better of course).

        In an ideal world we would have zero income tax and only tax property.

  30. MickC
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    See what’s in the UKIP manifesto, copy and paste!

    • David Price
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

      UKIP still don’t have a manefesto – there’s a local one and a EU election one but no national manefesto in sight (I just checked)

      Who knows what policies they are commited to, as opposed to promises made in circumstances they don’t have to keep them.

  31. Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    “Re-negotiation” can cover all or nothing.
    Unless the manifesto gives some details of what is expected from the EU re-negotiations the electors won’t be able assess whether the Tories are proposing to re-negotiate on matters which they find of particular concern.
    I would like to see the manifesto address the issue of Human Rights, particularly where criminals are using the legislation to avoid deportation. I would suggest that the legislation needs to be modified to ensure that no-one can claim their human rights when in doing so it would adversely affect the human rights of other citizens.
    The Tories need to address the “green” issues. I’m not only thinking of the windmills which are blighting the countryside, but also waste disposal where recycling can cost more than the benefits. This country has plenty of landfill sites and it is frequently a cheaper solution to use these than trying to recycle with the extra collection and sorting costs making it uneconomic.

  32. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    I’ll not mention the same old, same old. What I will mention is the IHT problem though and its impact on inherited estate distribution via an Executor of the legal trade.

    DWP has the function of investigating elderly peoples benefits upon death. Ok. A small estate…not fatcat.

    Why does it take 12 months or more to examine 10 years worth of bank statements? Something I can do without a calculator/PC in less than 2 days.

    Why is it that the DWP will not respond to letters requesting progress of an investigation from an heir. Yet have done at an early stage after relatives death.

    Thats a couple of questions that I will shortly be putting to the office of IDS (directly) fairly shortly. I know about the Social Security Act in this context.

    Just Google the web and see this BS in action….sorry non action!

    • bigneil
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:13 pm | Permalink

      Good luck contacting the dept of IDS – -more chance of an answer being picked up on SETI.

  33. John Bracewell
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:58 am | Permalink

    My manifesto proposals would be:
    1. A commitment to recommend an OUT vote in the 2017 EU Referendum if a stated minimum is not gained in the renegotiations.
    2. Highest rate tax to be set at the rate which brings in the most tax return i.e. somewhere between 35 and 45p in the pound. Tax bands to be reset to reflect current salary levels.
    3. All firms to be faced on their UK trading, regardless of where their HQs are located and are rigorously pursued for those payments.
    4. UK borders to be controlled strictly so we know who has entered, who should leave and when, in the UK. This to include EU countries.
    5. Immigration to be on a points basis like in Australia.
    6. A British Bill of Rights should be introduced which replaces the ECHR Human Rights.
    7. No ring fencing of any departmental budgets, if further cuts are necessary, they should be made fairly across all departments.
    8. A review of what should be included in free NHS treatment, e.g. fertility treatment should not be on the NHS, alcohol related accident patients should be charged a fee, missed GP appointments should be charged etc.

    • John Bracewell
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:02 am | Permalink

      In point 3 ‘faced’ should read taxed.

  34. Lifelogic
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:17 am | Permalink

    It seems the mess at the UK passport office is far, far worse that thought. Many of the lower paid (hard working families as Cameron might say) might well have to use a full weeks take home pay just to afford passports for all their families yet the incompetently organised and run state sector cannot even stick a photo, and a chip, on a piece of horrid purple cardboard for nearly £80 each. Can they not get a credit card supply company to run it all for them, at about 10% of the cost and with 10% of the number of people?

    • APL
      Posted June 13, 2014 at 10:00 am | Permalink

      Lifelogic: “It seems the mess at the UK passport office is far, far worse that thought.”

      Not again. It hardly seems any time has passed since the last public sector farce involving the Passport office. It seems the summer takes them by surprise every year!

  35. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    I could offer many suggestions for the Tory manifesto, but as in the past it is unlikely that any of them would appeal to those leading the Tory party.

    So I will restrict myself to the one which seems most important because it relates to whether we even want to have our own country in the future, let alone be able to govern it, and that is:

    An immediate referendum on whether the British people wish to proceed further with the process of “ever closer union” prescribed by the present EU treaties, a “mandate” referendum to be held BEFORE any attempt is made to renegotiate the terms of our treaty relationships with the other countries that are in the EU.

    Which “mandate” referendum would be held by November 1st 2015 at the latest, and with the entitlement to vote being restricted to those who are a) UK citizens and b) aged at least 18 years on polling day.

    Cameron has repeatedly said that he doesn’t want the UK to remain committed to that fundamental principle of “ever closer union”, and recently when he said it again on the Andrew Marr Show he added that he didn’t think the British people wanted it either; so what possible objection could he have to asking us about it directly in a referendum, when if he was proved right that would immeasurably strengthen his hand in the subsequent negotiations with the other EU member state governments?

    From May 21st:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/201411051.pdf

    “We achieve those negotiation changes. Perhaps the most important is getting Britain out of the clause that says the European Union must be committed to an ever closer union.”

    “I don’t accept that. I don’t think the British people want to accept that.”

    Well, he doesn’t have to guess what we want about that, he could ask us.

    In fact couldn’t he have insisted on the Bill for that “mandate” referendum being in the Queen’s Speech, and told the Liberal Democrats that if they didn’t like it then they could either lump it or they could agree to bring forward the general election to this year, when they could expect to get severely battered?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:26 am | Permalink

      Correction, May 11th.

  36. Paul
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    EU referendum in 2015; No tax on minimum wage; Immigration frozen (temporarily); Human Rights Act scrapped; HS2 scrapped; Wind farms scrapped; Reintroduction of grammar schools; Tougher university entry requirements; Greater public involvement, i.e. referendums on local/social issues (such as capital punishment); Tougher criminal penalties – life means life, 10 years means 10 years, etc; MPs required to have had a proper job for at least 10 years before entering parliament; MPs expenses scrapped – increase salary to around £80,000; Reduce number of MPs

    I could go on, but many people would like to see these ideas enacted upon. Of course, none of these will make it into the Conservative manifesto because, despite the fact most or all of them could be considered Conservative ideas, the Cameron-led Conservative Party is not Conservative. That is why membership has halved since 2005 and many of us are flocking to UKIP and will stick with them until he is voted out.

  37. Mactheknife
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    When drawing up a new manifesto it would be wise to look at the recent local and EU election results and various polls taken in the last couple of years. I realise that there will always be people who say we should ignore the likes of Farage and UKIP, but what is undeniable is that they touched a nerve with the electorate and were popular even in northern working class areas. Something which Labour constantly deny. With this in mind and the polls on various issues the manefesto should focus on welfare, immigration, EU legislation and membership, ECHR reform etc etc.

    For me it should not be beyond the wit of a government and its legal advisors to find alternative avenues to stem immigration from outside of the EU and within the EU. The immigration and asylum system is being abused and the endless appeals should be stopped. Illegal immigrants should be held in detention until such time as their case is decided. Allowing them freedom to roam and disapear within the UK is ludicrous.

    Teresa May should stop talking about a British Bill of Rights and get on with it. We’ve heard it for 4 years and still nothing done. If it means unilaterally pulling out of the ECHR then we should do it.

    Welfare still needs massive reform. I dont see why people who are long term unemployed should not work for benefits. They should be allocated to their local authority for work purposes. Councils are always complaining about cuts, so give them extra bodies to carry out their tasks.

    Taxation is still way too high, particularly for the middle income earners who proportionally are bearing the brunt of the tax burden. Whilst its good that tax allowances have gone up, the rise has been primarily paid for by the “squeezed middle”. These are the traditional Conservative voters.

    I could go on and on, but I guess you get the picture. Labour is burying its head in the sand on virtually all of the issues and the Conservative manaifesto should seek to exploit Labours reluctance to tackle issues.

  38. Roy Grainger
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Tax cuts at all levels. Tax simplification – merging of tax and NI. Parliamentary boundary review and reduction in number of MPs. Some sort of explanation of how Scottish MPs will be excluded from voting on English matters after the expected NO referendum vote and the MaxDevo lolly they will apparently be given to suck after that.

  39. Neil Craig
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    I would suggest saying you will cut back the regulatory burden on both shale and nuclear so that it is no higher than in China/15% of total cost, since the correlation between growth in energy use and gdp is 1:1; repeal the Climate Change Act; support technology X-Prizes, particularly to make Britain the world leader in space; allow affordable (modular) housing; steps to move to allow automated cars and to immediately allow automated trains; cut corporation tax and other business taxes; yes the referendum promise, but how do you make it credible – maybe draft the Bill now; promise a referendum on PR; as for immigration – I have no idea what to do to top the “10s not hundreds of thousands” promise.

    I do, as a member, hope UKIP make those promises too & have considerably more expectation they will.

  40. Thomas
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:33 am | Permalink

    I would like to see the DECC, becoming just DE, how those two got lumped together i don’t know. Ed Daveys proclamations that the lights won’t go out and that we will pay industry not to produce at peak times is very worrying. We have shut power stations without adequate replacement. I would be quite happy if no more turbines are erected, and they would not be if erected the subsidies were removed . The Green part of the energy bill is much more than the 13% tax, as the cost of intermitant energy on the Grid has upped costs as well as connecting offshore, but more than that expensive energy is felt in everything you spend, as supermarkets pass on their bills to your shopping.

    I voted UKIP not because of immigration, but because they had a much more sensible energy policy, and irrespective of anything else they do, that would have an overriding beneficial effect on the economy.

  41. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Off-topic, I see that LibDem MPs have got the top two positions in the ballot for Private Members’ Bills, followed by the Tory MP Robert Neill:

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2014/june/private-members-bill-ballot-12-june-2014/

    Obviously neither of the two LibDem MPs will be re-introducing the Wharton Bill for an in-out EU referendum in 2017, and the chance that the third-placed Robert Neill would get enough time to progress it through the Commons is slim, and if it wasn’t passed by the Commons for a second time there would be no question of using the Parliament Acts to by-pass the Lords; so doesn’t this mean that the Wharton Bill is effectively dead?

  42. Mark
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    The manifesto should set out the policies that Conservatives would like to implement – on managing the economy, immigration, energy, education, defence, health, welfare reform, transportation, etc. and then show a summary of where these policies are in conflict with EU regulation, thus explaining exactly what areas of renegotiation are required. Mr Hague’s idea that this can be left until after the election is wrong.

    I would hope that the immigration policy reflects Mrs May’s zeal to achieve the “tens of thousands” target; that energy policy moves away from subsidising expensive energy and promotes cheap and reliable sources that will give the economy a boost; that Mr Gove’s efforts to improve standards in schools are echoed into tertiary education through offering remedial education to those cheated by the dumbed down school system, restoring rigour to degrees, and expanding vocational education through apprenticeships and sandwich courses while cutting university places accordingly; that transport policy should favour roads and air rather than white elephant rail; that health should concentrate on patients and tackle PFI costs and excess “management”; that we revert to proper provision for defence as we see instabilities and wars increasingly encircle us; that housing policy be aimed at make all homes more affordable rather than building a small number of inadequate hovels labelled as “affordable homes”.

    • Graham
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:41 am | Permalink

      Mark

      Para 1 would send shivers down the spine of any mainstream politico but as you say would be a positive contribution to illustrating where the real control lies

  43. alan jutson,
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:53 am | Permalink

    Clearly my earlier list is too long !

  44. BobE
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:54 am | Permalink

    John you will be ignored I am afraid. Cameron will not win the next election. We will get another hung parliment. But maybe by the 2020 election both the Conservatives and UKIP will be big enough to form a pact to get us out of Europe. Clegg and Cameron will both be long gone by then, and will probably be EU commisioners. (As Kinock did). The Lib Dems will vanish as a viable party, that must be obvious.
    Isn’t there another by-election soon?

  45. Paul Saysell
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    John,
    Abolish NI
    Flat 30% tax rate with £10k starting rate.
    Transferable married tax allowance
    Reintroduce Primary Purpose Rule and exit checks.
    Abolish HRA
    Introduce British Bill of Rights
    English Parliament if Scotland gets Devomax.
    New name for Scottish Conservative Party to help build on 20% Tory vote.
    In / Out EU referendum May 2016.

  46. Peter Lloyd
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    As someone who believes that the Conservative Party failed to win in 2010 against a weak and discredited Labour Party because it wasn’t bold and confident enough in its own Conservative values and principles, I think a differentiating re-iteration of those is both right and most likely to get UKIP supporters to back the Conservatives and create an overall majority.

    There should be a promise to look at all spending including departmental spending again from first principles to halt the relentless drift up in Public Expenditure and work out how to deliver public services in new and less centralised ways. This would help eradicate some of the unfairness of the ring fencing in place since 2010.
    Spending should be re-assessed and concentrated where it is most needed. Equally, there should be a promise to re-analyse and assess barriers to the economic growth which is crucial to returning to a balanced budget through higher tax and other income.

    DIFID should be subject to the same financial regime as other departments and its budget cut to match similar aid budgets in other countries

    The Local Authorities should not be squeeezed further in relative terms and could even see some rises in central government allocation as their ability to carry out essential services is compromised

    There should be review of the impact of the legal aid cuts which appear to be damaging access to justice, a key requirement for an equitable society

    HS2 should be abandoned and a proportion of that planned expenditure re-allocated to a large number of small projects to tackle transport infrastructure problems across the whole country, especially in the road network

    There should be a promise of a radical re-appraisal of our energy policies with the aim of phasing out expensive subsidies and building power plants that deliver the cheapest possible energy so that bills fall in value

  47. cosmic
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    Why not issue a manifesto in the form of one of those letters where you delete the parts which don’t apply?

    Let’s face it, no one is going to take seriously a manifesto from any party, because they don’t do things they say they will without good reason, and do things that weren’t in the manifesto.

    You’ve got a particular problem with Mr. Cameron in that no one believes a word he says.

  48. margaret brandreth-j
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    Someone has briefly mentioned the fact that single people are penalised for being single.
    After divorce 30 years ago I have been single, not out of choice. I could be poor without a house, and live on benefits and have time to find another partner.
    The fact is that single people ,usually with children have to be housewives, pay a large amount of tax, are not seen as equal in society, cannot get good jobs despite qualifications, pay for their own degrees , do twice and three times as much work as any other, need to get many P/T jobs and zero hours to fit in with child minding, cannot afford holidays, get up in the early hours of the morning , retiring late at night to fit everything in during the day and when we have achieved all the things we need to do without any time for a social life referred to as MRS ..cheek!

    Singles are on their own out there . The governments need to get used to it.

  49. Matt
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

    Excellent. Thank you. My priorities in order of importance.

    1. The complete abandonment of all electricity production from means other than burning things that we dig up. Things we dig up does include nuclear.
    2. Clear assertion of sovereignty and an unqualified commitment to meaningful return of powers from the EU and ECHR. Detail will be required here.
    3. A commitment to earnestly start reducing the size of the state. Mostly by privatisation and welfare/tax reform.

  50. outsider
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr Redwood: Party manifestos are one-sided commitments. The party’s leaders are quite evidently
    not committed to anything (eg your own party’s commitment on Heathrow). But voters for that party are deemed to have sanctioned every jot and title of it, MPs elected on it are deemed to have committed themselves to vote for any proposal contained in it and the House of Lords is deemed to have a constitutional obligation to accept any policy contained in it. Manifestos also seem to be designed to enable candidates to offer something to anyone they encounter on the doorstep or in TV debates.
    Having undergone the self-imposed discipline of actually reading through the manifestos of the three main parties, UKIP at the Greens in 2010, I can state that they are designed not to be read by electors.
    Oddly, however, they do seem to be designed to comfort some persons outside the UK. Why else, for instance, would all three main parties have gone out of their way to support Turkey’s entry into the EU, a seemingly unpopular stance of little immediate relevance even then?
    So, although there are many proposals, visions and negative commitments that I would like to see in a party’s manifesto, my only realistic wish is that your party’s manifesto should contain as little as possible so as to minimise the constraints on principled, thinking MPs such as yourself.

    • matthu
      Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

      Why else, for instance, would all three main parties have gone out of their way to support Turkey’s entry into the EU, a seemingly unpopular stance of little immediate relevance even then?

      For the simple reason that ahh three mainstream parties
      (1) realised togther that Turkey’s entry was likely to be unpopular with the electorate
      (2) realised that this was inevitable because the EU was committed to it
      (3) by putting it in all three manifestos, they could all claim that the measure had very wide support from the UK electorate

      I am sure we can all list several other mainfesto commitments that do absolutely nothing to differentiate between the three main political parties (think green crap, HS2, gender neutral legislation) because all realise they can do nothing to influence whether those commitments happen or not.

      But real commitments, such as safeguarding our freedoms (not the same as legislating to procure them), safeguarding our democracy, smaller government … you can search for these in vain.

  51. ian wrgg
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    John,
    Whatever is in the manifesto will be ignored by CMD. Ukip supporters are not going to return to your party and for CMD to think we will wait till after the GE for details of negotiations is laughable.
    Cameron will deliberately lose this election so as not to upset his Brussels masters taking you all down with him.

    Ian Wragg at sea on MV Arcadia en-route Gibraltar.

  52. A different Simon
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

    “…. and to complete the task of eliminating the deficit.
    This is also likely to be distinctive as an approach, as both Labour and Lib Dems are likely to want to spend and borrow more despite the very high levels of borrowing already undertaken.”

    There is no need for a Govt which can issue it’s own money to borrow in order to spend .

    The 4 main parties could also admit that the purpose of taxation is to control inflation and stop pushing this myth that it is to pay for public services .

  53. Brigham
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    1 Redraw the constituency boundaries so that elections are much fairer.
    2 Stay clear of the poisonous liberals.
    3 Not only an in/out referendum but a promise to abide by the result.

  54. ian
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    Make your own manifesto. Block chain is coming, give you legal tile to your house,shares,car, every thing. Keep your money on block chain not in the bank. Solar batteries no more ele bills, household gas for your car, pennies, wood burners, If you a bit of land veg, fruit, pig, sheep. 3D printers, p2p, rent your car parking space your house while on holiday, rent your car, lend money to companies not banks. If you cannot do this close your pockets, buy as much as you can from aboard. Shop at foreign shops. All the young people catching on, your going to be left behind. The revolution has arrived. Open your sees. Forget them, they will soon come to you and you will get what you want from them. They are a spent force. The hippies in wales have been at it for years.

    I handed them a bang up plan 24 million people out of tax, 132 billion pounds paid back first year, they did not get to see phase two and three. They just threw it in HIM”s face. My thought”s I”m forever blowing bubbles pretty bubbles in the air they fly so high they reach the sky then when they do they power strait through, fortune never hiding they are right under your nostril, I”m forever blowing bubbles pretty bubbles in the air.

  55. Rod
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    Technology is changing society and making it more efficient with reduced costs and increased productivity for all. The consumer wins as things get cheaper. Many of our laws were written in distant times, when such technologies were unthinkable, so the UK government needs to bring them into the 21st century.

    Here are 4 areas that are on the edge of profound changes and will not be the same by 2020.

    1. Uber and alike are showing the way to reduce taxi fares by introducing new cheaper ways of getting us from A to B. There is doubt whether it is legal or not with current legislation?

    2. Driverless vehicles will be become normal by 2020 (legislation permitting) where the technology is now being proven on roads. This has massive improved safety implications to reduce road deaths and injuries, so should not be delayed by legislative restrictions. Once the Unions realise that all commercial vehicles and taxis will no longer require drivers, with the associated cost reductions they will like taxi drivers put up a fight, but a reduction in injuries and deaths on our roads must be seen as more important. With driverless cars on the horizon, we need driverless trains. With a typical train driver earning £50,000 a year, this will substantially reduce subsidies and fare prices.

    3. Television will move over to an Internet on demand system in the next 5 years, with the US currently (like with so many things) leading the way on this. This will make the TV licence irrelevant and unenforceable. How can you enforce this tax on people directly consuming programs from abroad on their smartphone for example. The only sensible way forward will be to scrap the licence fee and find other ways to fund the BBC. Again the UK should not be held back by this when there will be opportunities for UK companies to do well, where content will be king.

    4. Biotechnology is making many advances, so we can grow organs, extend lifespans etc. and we are going to need a changes to our legislative framework as new things become feasible.

    UK Government’s have a better record than most in making changes to current legislation and creating new legislation to meet the needs of these emerging and changing technologies, but there is no room for complacency, if we are to keep at the forefront of changes.

  56. Nick Wood
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

    OK. Don’t know if the circle can be squared fiscally on all of these, but I suggest we need.
    1) Continued deficit reduction steps
    2) Increased defence spending – probably achieved by reducing overseas aid (or renaming part of the monies allocated to defence), and scrapping the ring fence on NHS spending.
    3) An English votes on English matters in the Westminster parliament.
    4) Renegotiation of our EU membership, including border controls, with the threat of withdrawal if these negotiations fail to achieve a satisfactory (whatever that is) result. Hopefully this is already factored in.

    Personally I would also like the smoking ban to be revisited to allow publicans to choose whether they wish to be a smoking establishment, if necessary with the proviso that they install adequate ventilation / extractor units (as happens in Portugal), and generally far less nanny state. We’re grown-ups for God’s sake.

  57. Duyfken
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

    Repeal the European Communities Act 1972 (as unsuccessfully tried last year by Philip Hollobone) in the first parliament, and then hold an IN/OUT referendum in which the Conservative element of government will recommend OUT.

    I believe in fairies.

  58. acorn
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    You wouldn’t believe it! The government has only just managed to steer around a nasty incident last week. Remember; an Education juggernaut smashed into a Home Office juggernaut. Now a couple of miles down the road and boom; an Executive Agency explodes right in front of the Home Office juggernaut; again!!!

    Punch and Judy at it again. Hyperbole that were left over from last week bouncing off the walls again. Mr Vaz, pops up again,demanding yet another be slayed by his Select Committee. Mr Vaz knows a lot about passports as our host can testify.

    Anyway, my wish list. Primary elections for MPs “Washington State Top Two system”. Executive out of the legislature. Prime Minister elected by national vote not just a few people in a single constituency. The Cabinet appointed by the PM from non-elected persons who will serve at his pleasure.

    This would enable the management of the country to be run by professional with a greater understanding of how the economy works. Once the economy works properly, you will be amazed how many other worries and concerns would fade away.

  59. The PrangWizard
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    I’d like to see a promise to abandon the minimum wage. I doubt if its removal would make any difference to what is paid, in other words wages won’t fall off a cliff, and it will remove all the bad ‘get round it’ schemes and it is thus failing. Mr Cameron is all for keeping it and has said he’d like to see the main rate up to £7.00 as soon as possible. He clearly likes socialist ideology with state controlled wages, and maybe hasn’t heard of strikes years back about restoring ‘differentials’.

  60. John
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    An English parliament with at least the same powers as the Scottish one. We do not want British MPs deciding what is right for England because they will always have to take the Celtic fringe into consideration and, therefore, will not do what is right for our great country of England.

  61. Max Dunbar
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

    Presume this is for England and retained UK powers only. How many manifestos will be required and will Cameron have the final say on issues concerning only Scotland and Wales?

  62. Ludgater
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

    1.. EU referendum.
    2. Abolish the EU and USA Arrest Warrants.
    3. Make public sector pensions on a par with the private sector.
    4. Advise every state sector manager to cut their staff by ten per cent. It works well in the real world.
    5. As the state sector reduces, so taxation will be reduced.
    6. Get rid of the green stuff.
    7. Make the changes in property Stamp Duty levels ‘gradual’.

  63. bigneil
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    by asking what we want to see in the manifesto – -do you really mean – -what lies and false promises can Cameron tell them this time?

  64. Peter Davies
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

    Given the well documented history of manifestos are they really worth the paper they are written on any more?

    Many people will remember education, education, education in 97 and we slipped down the OECD rankings. Then u have the EU/Lisbon referendums and when the power comes the parties find a way out of it.

    Whatever all 3 or 4 main parties put in above all else they need to get the message that they are going to do what they intend rather than come up with something that appeals to the public whilst planning something they dont behind closed doors.

  65. Mark Conway
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 10:52 pm | Permalink

    What will the ‘red lines’ be on our renegotiations? What would force Dave into campaigning for Brexit? I think we need to know this rather than be led into another fudge (that I suspect you don’t want either). It’s time to go unless things change fundamentally, and they almost certainly won’t.

  66. Excalibur
    Posted June 12, 2014 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    Thank you for the invitation, John. In an increasingly dangerous world our defence capabilities are inadequate. Introduce compulsory conscription for all 17.5 to 24 year olds. Period of service two years.
    2. Increase regular army and navy pay to attract talent for specialised defence roles.
    3. Increase penalties for drug use with compulsory rehabilitation.
    4. Pare back excessive legislation governing driving and owning a road vehicle.
    5. Eliminate the deficit, defray the national debt.
    6. Increase penalties for proven abuse of care home and NHS patients.
    7. Reset electoral boundaries.
    8. Cancel HS2, and review all expenditure by Government.
    9. Exit EU unconditionally
    10. Root and branch examination and reorganisation of border controls.

    Needless to say, I am not hopeful.

    • APL
      Posted June 14, 2014 at 9:47 am | Permalink

      Excalibur: “Introduce compulsory conscription for all 17.5 to 24 year olds.”

      In their current debilitated state, introducing the obligation to civilise the hordes the state system has just produced is a ‘Good way to destroy the armed forces’(TM). Let’s see if Labour adopt this proposal.

      What we do need, is a decimation of higher ranks in the armed forces. There is far too many sitting in plush offices in Whitehall doing nothing but adding grit to the machine.

      Excalibur: “3. Increase penalties for drug use with compulsory rehabilitation.”

      No. Abolish all laws related to drug possession. Much of our Police state is built on these laws.

      Abolish the ACPO it is a self serving organisation. Why do CPOs need a union? They are some of the best paid civil servants in the public sector.

  67. ian
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 12:43 am | Permalink

    Three blind mice, POLITICIAN, MEDIA, BANKERS,
    Three blind mice, three blind mice.
    See now they run, see how they run.
    They all run after the farmer”s wife
    who cut off their tails with a carving knife,
    Did you ever see such a thing in all your life’
    As three blind mice.

  68. Dom Wynn
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 12:44 am | Permalink

    John – thanks for asking the question, and shame on the naysayers for an entirely negative attitude when a senior MP offers an open opportunity to feedback, to resort to ‘it doesn’t matter, I’ll be voting UKIP, damn the liblabcon’ is a lost opportunity.

    My tuppence worth;

    1) obviously Europe. The only comment I would make on this is that I would like to see something materially committed to in terms of repatriation or reform so that when it is not achieved it becomes material to an in/out vote.

    However the rest can be easily written by just applying sound conservative principles to most of the key issues of the day;

    1) Defence – the primary responsibility of the state is security. A real terms increase in spending after the last parliament is critical.

    2) Taxation – as noted above, the tax system is stupidly complicated. Move to flat tax and for income and likewise incinerate the vast majority of the tax code – it’s exacerbating avoidance and evasion

    3) housebuilding; address the chronic problem of house price inflation by committing the gov to 2 million new homes in the next 5 years. Use localism and housing association to drive through with targeted tax relief on construction of housing along M1 and M4 corridors as well as a fundamental look at stamp duty and its current effect on sclerotisising the housing market.

    4) education; state that the UK will aim to align the education system with the needs of the 21st century knowledge economy. IT literacy to be
    Compulsory course after 15. Reduce funding for non IT based courses while expanding gcse and alevel courses to have specific programming and coding qualifications.

    5) scrap HS2 and focus effort on wholesale upgrade of main lines and arterial London routes; eg 8 lane m25

    6) British bill of rights explicitly stating freedom trammelled by clauses as opposed to clauses defining the boundaries of freedom.

    7) removal of licence fee from BBC

    Amongst other things..

  69. Posted June 13, 2014 at 3:19 am | Permalink

    ” ….complete the task of eliminating the deficit.”

    Mrs Thatcher’s government “managed” , just once, to do this. It happened at the height of the Lawson boom of the late 80′s when there was a surplus of 0.8%.

    A surplus , by definition, means Government removes more money from the economy than it issues back in. An external deficit , caused by the country buying more imports than exports, also removes money from the economy. So the end result, in a net importing country, is always a recession. Exactly as happened in the early 90′s.

    It is different for Germany. There is a net inflow of money from exports. So they can safely run a government budget surplus or something very close to it.

  70. Posted June 13, 2014 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    Dr. Redwood,

    Manifestos are a symptom of dishonest and discredited politics. We do not need any repetition of unlikely aspirations offered by those seeking power as inducements to those who are easily deceived.

    What is required is not more words, more bribes, more easily discarded promises. What is required is actions.

    We have a Constitution which encapsulates protection of the individual from exploitation by the powerful, gives us the right to choose who governs us and how, upholds the Common Law based on the Christian Faith, which provides the only equality which counts – all equal under the Law.

    Rather than writing new manifestos, it is time that all political parties in this country started to ACT in accordance with the Constitution.

    John Wrake.

  71. Dom1
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    Suggestion for manifesto – immediate and full implementation of the Harrogate Agenda.

  72. Iain Moore
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    Why bother with this sham exercise, last time I voted for a resolution to the English Question but got Homosexual marriage.

  73. Kenneth R Moore
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    Stop propping up corrupt and brutal third world dictators by giving them my tax money, ignore EU rules on migration and limit entry to the Uk, cut spending by reducing non-jobs in the public service, introduce a new law that 90% of expenditure must go to the front line of services.

  74. matthu
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    In your manifesto, simply do one thing: highlight those areas over which you have no control i.e. because they are EU competencies and explain that this is why you cannot make manifesto promises in those areas.

  75. Kenneth R Moore
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

    A blank sheet of paper with a promise to leave us all alone would be preferable to the rubbish that George Osborne and his team will come up with. Just empty the bins, teach the three R’s in schools ,turn back the clock so that yobbos can be clipped around the ear by policeman once more, let me see a GP without waiting until the end of time….. recognise it’s getting crowded here lately and actually do something about it, stop child benefit after the 2nd child, abolish tax credits altogether, stop trying to be trendy and modern and respect the past more. Oh and stop pretending that the economy is all hunky dory ….tell the do gooders the party is over, the money tree is broken and that you won’t be blackmailed any more.

  76. Iain Gill
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    The other thing I would like to see in a manifesto is a real commitment to get those sleeping rough in our big cities some proper help.
    Get them off the streets.
    It could easily be done by the sweep of a minister’s pen.
    If the Conservatives had proper proposals along these lines the other parties would have to follow.

  77. boffin
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 7:53 pm | Permalink

    (Sorry for late comment, and commendations to Mr. Carter & Mr. Jutson preceding).

    There being no money for largesse, and if politics be ‘the art of the possible’, manifesto pledges must be cheap to be credible … here are the very popular cheap ones:

    End the limp-wristed fibrillation over the issue of assisted suicide – dump our cruel, mediaeval law on suicide and facilitate voluntary euthanasia. This will prevent untold unnecessary agony, and save the NHS a fortune.

    ( The Lords Spiritual would squeal – so dump them first – they are arguably the very least worthy of their seats given our (ahem!) ‘multicultural society’ … and in the public view).

    The electorate is profoundly cheesed off by the progressive loss of personal accountablity in both public and private sectors, which has the consequence of endless frustration when attempting to overcome problems of maladministration and dishonesty in goverment agencies, privatised utilities, banks and other bodies corporate. This has arisen because, in all cases, the statutory regulators have failed to perform as intended, and some have failed very badly indeed – and every voter is by now a victim of this! It’s the ‘quis custodiet?’ problem again … how to regulate costly but ineffectual regulatory quangoes without yet another tier of bureaucracy?
    - Well, for generations the lay magistracy has done a pretty passable job at low cost. Perhaps the most cost-effective pledge ever would be to promise lay tribunals (tribuni plebes??) with power to act swiftly to punish errant corporations … and regulators … with penalties applicable to the individual culprits within.

    ‘Life imprisonment’ is inordinately expensive; the electorate seems to remain generally in favour of capital punishment, though with some misgivings over the – spurious – ‘miscarriage of justice’ argument. However, the ‘points system’ which now seems quite accepted for traffic offences, avoids the devastating effect of a single such miscarriage.
    Pledge to reintroduce the death penalty, once we leave the EU, on a points system basis, for incorrigible serial violent offenders. Hugely popular! (and some of the money saved might well be used to support effective rehabilitatation of the non-incorrigibles).

    Everyone is fed up with junk mail. TAX JUNK MAIL! – the one new tax a Chancellor could introduce with universal voter blessing.

    All cheap, popular and plausible ….. but with no chance under the present totally-detached people in power. Unless Cast-iron is replaced very swiftly, the Conservative Party will lose the next general election …. but if only he were, the winning manifesto pledge would be:
    - No more stuffing of the Cabinet with Old Etonian *chums!

  78. Stevie
    Posted June 13, 2014 at 10:44 pm | Permalink

    Come on John wake up, every other day we hear of a whistle blower getting suspended or sacked because they have dared to report a problem, what has any government done to prevent this, have you brought in new laws protecting the reporter, no not that has been published as it still happens why is the minister responsible not prosecuting the public service manager for a failure in their duty.

  79. a-tracy
    Posted June 14, 2014 at 11:28 am | Permalink

    A promise of English MPs voting on English devolved services NHS, Schools, Universities, are the police and fire services devolved? The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish not voting on anything that only affects us!

    Some new rules on parliamentary privilege, there should be total transparency.

    Better funding for post graduate gifted and talented English students who have been the only students ripped off consistently in the UK for the last decade.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College, and has a DPhil from All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.
  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page