I had to turn off the interview with David Cameron on Radio 4's Today programme to prevent me from throwing it across the room in disgust. Here is a man in denial. The party is remarkably united on Europe, we're told. Oh really, Mr. Cameron? Some of your party want a referendum now and want out. You want to stay in, and don't want a referendum until 2017.
He was at least more honest in acknowledging the divisions that exist in his party over gay marriage, but this raises the question as to why he pushed this bill forward at all. Why not let sleeping dogs lie? It was BOUND to cause division, and its only result has been to increase the flow of activists from his party to UKIP.
However, it is absurd, as many commentators are doing, to lay the blame for the latest round of Tory in-fighting on the "rebels". They know that under David Cameron, the Tories are heading for defeat in 2015. The voters that switched to UKIP last month may well not return in sufficient numbers to save their skins, They may not be coalescing round an alternative leader yet, but to suggest, as Alan Cochrane does in the DailyTelegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10070608/The-headless-chicken-Tories-need-to-realise-that-David-Cameron-is-the-best-option-they-have.html that Cameron is their best option is absurd. He failed to win an outright majority in 2010 and under his leadership, the party is still behind Labour in the opinion polls. Bearing in mind that Labour is actually as much consumed by in-fighting as the Tories (although this isn't so widely reported by the media) and their leader has about as much charisma as a bag of soggy cement, it is understandable that there is a strong desire among many Tory activists and the so-called "rebels" to find a replacement. After all, they are only looking for someone who does what it says on the tin. Shouldn't a Conservative leader be keen to conserve marriage and keep it as the preserve of one man and one woman, as it has been for hundreds of years? Shouldn't a Conservative leader recognise the value of conserving the nation state, particularly our own country, which has worked so well over the last 300 years? Shouldn't a Conservative leader be pushing his Chancellor to cut spending if he wants to get rid of our deficit in order to start cutting taxes ASAP? I'm afraid that Cameron fails to tick any of these important boxes. I can't claim to know the "rebel" MPs to any degree, although I have exchanged e-mails with one or two of them in my capacity as editor of Freedom Today. They strike me not as "swivel-eyed" but sensible people who happen to have strong principles. They need to find a leader of the same ilk - and quickly. I was reminded of the urgency of this when I switched off the radio for the second time yesterday. There isn't much that can wind me up more than Cameron going on about Europe or Gay Marriage, but Ed Miliband going on about anything at all (as he was on the 6 o'clock news) does achieve this. Come on, chaps, get your act together and find a new Tory leader, or disaster looms for our country, as it surely will in 2015 if this man ends up anywhere near No. 10.
He was at least more honest in acknowledging the divisions that exist in his party over gay marriage, but this raises the question as to why he pushed this bill forward at all. Why not let sleeping dogs lie? It was BOUND to cause division, and its only result has been to increase the flow of activists from his party to UKIP.
However, it is absurd, as many commentators are doing, to lay the blame for the latest round of Tory in-fighting on the "rebels". They know that under David Cameron, the Tories are heading for defeat in 2015. The voters that switched to UKIP last month may well not return in sufficient numbers to save their skins, They may not be coalescing round an alternative leader yet, but to suggest, as Alan Cochrane does in the DailyTelegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10070608/The-headless-chicken-Tories-need-to-realise-that-David-Cameron-is-the-best-option-they-have.html that Cameron is their best option is absurd. He failed to win an outright majority in 2010 and under his leadership, the party is still behind Labour in the opinion polls. Bearing in mind that Labour is actually as much consumed by in-fighting as the Tories (although this isn't so widely reported by the media) and their leader has about as much charisma as a bag of soggy cement, it is understandable that there is a strong desire among many Tory activists and the so-called "rebels" to find a replacement. After all, they are only looking for someone who does what it says on the tin. Shouldn't a Conservative leader be keen to conserve marriage and keep it as the preserve of one man and one woman, as it has been for hundreds of years? Shouldn't a Conservative leader recognise the value of conserving the nation state, particularly our own country, which has worked so well over the last 300 years? Shouldn't a Conservative leader be pushing his Chancellor to cut spending if he wants to get rid of our deficit in order to start cutting taxes ASAP? I'm afraid that Cameron fails to tick any of these important boxes. I can't claim to know the "rebel" MPs to any degree, although I have exchanged e-mails with one or two of them in my capacity as editor of Freedom Today. They strike me not as "swivel-eyed" but sensible people who happen to have strong principles. They need to find a leader of the same ilk - and quickly. I was reminded of the urgency of this when I switched off the radio for the second time yesterday. There isn't much that can wind me up more than Cameron going on about Europe or Gay Marriage, but Ed Miliband going on about anything at all (as he was on the 6 o'clock news) does achieve this. Come on, chaps, get your act together and find a new Tory leader, or disaster looms for our country, as it surely will in 2015 if this man ends up anywhere near No. 10.