Posts Tagged ‘cameron’

As you all know, we are running a survey into MPs’ and politicos’ use of twitter. Part of the survey asks why are there so few Tory MPs tweeting in comparison to Labour and Lib-Dem MPs. We also ask which party gets social media.

I’m sure anyone who follows politics through social media may have seen or heard about the interview with David Cameron on Absolute Radio this morning, essentially making a jibe at twitter and having a good joke with Chris O’Connell on the breakfast show.

Essentially Mr Cameron was asked if he used twitter and his reply was “politicians have to think about what we say” and the instantaneous nature of twitter can lead to a problem of keeping on message and not being able to get a message across in 140 characters. This is a reasonable and legitimate argument against the use of twitter as a political engagement tool, albeit one I disagree with.

But these perfectly reasonable points led to a bit of a gaffe when Mr Cameron said “too many twits might make a twat.” Oh dear.

Funny at the time maybe and I’m sure absolutely no offence intended -he clearly didn’t call people who use twitter twats, but in the blogosphere and twitterverse, eyebrows have been raised. If you search for Cameron on the Twitter search engine today, most of the tweets are focusing on this. I personally feel it shows a lack of awarness of the medium by the Tory Leader. The fact that this message has spread well-past normal Absolute FM listeners shows the power of social media. Even if you aren’t on twitter yourself, the message is still instantaneously released as Mr Cameron found out. He has since apologised for his slip up.

It also shows an inherent lack of understanding of the medium by UK politicians generally. Tools like twitter should be used to create calls-to-action for public engagement. Examples include asking followers to come to rallies or events, calling for support on specific issues, making people aware of campaigns.

Twitter, politically speaking, isn’t just for stating what you are having for breakfast or with marked frustration, tweeting how many letters you have opened today, as one MP did I noticed, although tweets like these do personalise the user, so they should be interspersed with the calls to action.

News outlets have jumped on the Cameron interview. The Guardian, the Telegraph, the Times, Sky, Reuters, the Press Association to name but a few, have all made comment on Mr Cameron’s choice of words and Labour List are currently having a field day.

The slip up won’t lose Cameron too many votes, but the question remains, does Mr Cameron and the team not get social media, or do they just not get breakfast radio?

Below is the video of the interview embedded from the Absolute Radio YouTube site - let me know your thoughts

David Cameron has announced a mid-term reshuffle that seems likely to take the Conservative Party into the next General Election.

How important will the reshuffle be to the fortunes of the Conservative Party and what is the point of them?

Reshuffles are seen by many Prime Ministers as a necessary evil and by the public as a total irrelevance.

Although this is a big issue for Westminster and the party involved, it will have little impact on a public whose knowledge of the members of the Shadow Cabinet and their positions is next to nothing and whose interest is even less.

If pressed, most people will be able to name two maybe three members of the Shadow Cabinet but beyond that they would struggle. The enlightened age, the age of online Parliament, of 24 hour news channels, of immediate news and information gathering appears to do little to improve political recognition.

Polls have shown (and let’s be kind and listen to them this one time) that reshuffles are unlikely to change the public’s views of a political party whether they are in power or not. Not really surprising when the public have little or no interest in the changes.

If the public have problems, reshuffles can cause untold damage to the parties themselves.

History is rife with resentment from those who have been dropped or those who have been overlooked and the media is always quick to rub the Prime Ministerial nose in it when yet another disaffected ex-Minister votes against the Government on a key issue.

In 1962, towards the end of his ministry Harold MacMillan felt challenged enough by the Porfumo affair to cull seven Cabinet Ministers in an attempt to freshen up his Government, in what was dubbed the night of the long knives.

Whether this would have made any difference to the result of the general election if MacMillan had stayed in charge it’s impossible to say but Prime Ministers in this situation run the risk of being accused of making the mistake of appointing the wrong people to the Cabinet in the first place.

Jeremy Thorpe, the Liberal leader said of MacMillan:

“Greater love hath no man than this, that he should lay down his friends for his life”

So, Cameron brings Ken Clarke back into front line politics.

At least the public will remember him but what effect will he have on Tory fortunes?

Clarke is 68 years old and in his own words, is “still ambitious” and that is the real test for the Conservatives - where does Clarke’s ambition place him and the party?

Clarke is certainly a heavyweight politician and a very effective performer but how much is this simply a response to the return of another political heavyweight in Peter Mandelson?

Some may see this as a panic measure - even the present economy is not bringing Gordon Brown down and how will his appointment affect Cameron’s position on Europe?

We know that Clarke will not budge on a referendum on the Lisbon treaty and that he remains implacably opposed to it but with no position needed to be taken on this by any party until after the next general election, Cameron can afford to take that chance in the short term.

He states that there are no issues likely to arise between him and Cameron this side of the election.

Well, that’s all right then.

Or is it?

The thing is, many other issues on Europe are now likely to arise, not because the Government has any desire to debate them before the election but because they wish to drive division within the Tory ranks ahead of the election to reopen old wounds and demonstrate that a divided Tory party is unfit to govern.

Will the reshuffle work? Who knows, only time will tell if it is a masterstroke or doomed by its own ambition.

So, Gordon Brown and Labour are apparently rising from the dead after the Glenrothes by-election. Pre-election favourites, the SNP, failed to pick up another seat in a Scottish constituency Labour used to think of as safe.

However, it was only a couple of months ago that we were all discussing when Gordon Brown would be replaced rather than if. After taking hit after hit in the polls, the loss of the Crew and Nantwich by-election in May and the disastrous defeat in Glasgow East, one of the safest Labour seats in Britain, Brown’s days seemed numbered.

Then came his speech at the Labour Party Conference, then the spectre of a global meltdown loomed heavily over Wall St and the City.

Without doubt, the financial crisis, has taken its toll on some members of the British Parliament. However, it has been David Cameron’s Conservatives that are on the backfoot. Brown however, seems invigorated and has even been seen to crack a smile.

Brown and Chancellor Darling’s bail out of the British Banks have been credited as the most decisive move by any Government globally and the results are beginning to show judging by the by-election result and Labour’s forward momentum in the polls.

Cameron however, has been left in Brown’s wake, is grasping at policy straws and was left seemingly helpless in the wake of the Shadow Chancellor George Osborne‘s misguided attempts to attack Lord Mandelson in what has now become the infamous Yachtgate Scandal.

Now, if I was Gordon Brown and if I was a betting man, I would be seriously thinking about calling a snap election in the spring of 2009. His poll numbers are firming, gone is Mr Bean and his Iron Chancellor persona is slowly peeking out from behind the curtain in the face of a looming recession. Most importantly, his own party appear to be no longer waiting in the shadows for the next slip-up. Nevertheless, this can only last so long.

No matter how strong Brown appears, there is a looming spectre of increased unemployment, upwards inflation, higher bills and nation wide budget cuts – not issues that make for a happy constituency and incumbent governments should be wary.

Should the election be called in 2010, Britain may only just be coming out of a recession that would have taken its toll on the voting public. If Brown calls the election soon, there may not be such a huge backlash and he may be able to benefit from his current momentum.

This is all very clearly hypothetical and as shown the dilly-dallying around the prospect of an early election in late 2007, Brown plays it safe, maybe too safe when it comes to his own fortunes.

Thankfully, I’m not a gambling man because neither is Brown.