Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#1
BBC reports 4 September 11:
"The frontrunner for leader of the Scottish Conservatives has said he will disband the party if he wins the leadership election next month."
Murdo Fraser makes the announcement as the Tory Party UK battles with ongoing campaigns on Dover Forum, where slogans such as "the cobbled together government", "leaderless Dave" and "the U-turn government", have left the leadership speachless.
According to our BBC correspondent, "Mr Fraser said David Cameron was aware and the idea had the support of several senior Conservatives at Westminster."
Mr. Fraser's intention is to create a new centre-right party in Scotland, that would however maintain an alliance with the Conservative Party in Westminster.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
the blues never had much support up there even though many scots have done well in the party nationally.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#3
Ah, yes. The McSpreaders?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#4
howard;
they don't have much support anywhere these days
but yep scotland they cant -breakthrough
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#5
A bit like the Labour party in Kent, Keith.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
difference is the labour party has in the past broken through in Kent
and likely to again
but the tories unlikely to breakthrough in bonny scotland
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
they will be going back to using the word "unionist" as the conservative name is toxic up there.
they always used to be known as the conservative and unionist party.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#8
when it suits howard thats correct.
i do understand the desperation of the conservative scots wantinbg to distance themnselves from cameron
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#9
central office now saying its a bad move to break away
going to be a big divide
why would anyone want to distance themselves from there wonderful party?
seems all is not well
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#10
The official reason given by Murdo Fraser, Keith, is that the Conservative Party in Scotland does not attract a large number of potential votes that a centre-right Scottish party could achieve.
I believe the clue is in the enormous success enjoyed by the Scittish National Party, many of whose voters are unionists (for Britain), but wish to see decentralisation from the traditional establishment.
The move by Murdo Fraser, if he is voted as leader of the Scottish Conservatives, would see an independent party come to light, and possibly the end of the almighty-like power enjoyed by the Cabinet in London, which, at least in my view, is an essential part of the establishment when it comes to decision making in State policies.
Basicly, there would be more democracy in it for Scotland, without going the way of separation from the rest of Britain.
I daresay "leaderless Dave" will appear 3 inches smaller (in virtual terms) if Murdo succeeds!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#11
The idea of the Scottish Conservatives becoming a separate entity to the Conservative Party is nothing new. It has been talked about for years in Conservative circles and there is a good case for it. There certainly has to be a re-alignment of the centre-right in Scotland to more effectively fight the 'left-centric' parties.
MPs elected for the new Party would then support the Conservative Party in the Commons.
There is a precedent for this in the UK, before Heath the Ulster Unionists operated this way.
Here is Murdo explaining himself.
http://playpolitical.typepad.com/uk_conservative/2011/09/video-murdo-fraser-msp-says-he-doesnt-want-to-disband-the-scottish-tories-but-he-does-want-it-to-hav.html
I did have a good laugh though at some of the comments about, particularly from Keith. Talk about a dream world!
#12
The term "unionist" always struck me as a bit of a philosophical contradiction.
BarryW - I am interested in the concept of "more democracy". I was not aware it could be weighed and measured......do tell more!!
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#13
The Conservatives in Scotland are very poor and have been for some time. But they have awful leaders. That great big heffer of a woman ( I forget her name and who wouldnt! ) who they wheel out every time a TV programme goes north of the border is the case in point, she has all the charisma and seductive appeal of a two month old mouldy haggis. You have to have visually engaging leaders nowadays, of either sex, who can engage with the audience in this age of celebrity... otherwise..who will be bothered listening.
It is not just the message, its how you deliver the message.
I think we realise that nowadays south of yon border.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#14
I fail to see what you are getting at there Bern.
PaulB - you talk about Annabel Goldie, a great character of the Ann Widdecomb mould. What a sad state of affairs it is if, taking your philosophy, someone like Winston Churchill for instance, would not be able to lead a Party to success. Is the electorate really so shallow, so stupid, these days.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#15
maybe scotland has seen the light about the torys and taken the lead for the rest of the country.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#16
Ah yes Annabel Goldie thats the one. Yes she might indeed be a character , as indeed was Ann Widdicomb but nobody in the Conservative Corridors south of the border saw dear ol Widdie Widdicomb as a future Prime Minister, or indeed as a future leader. It just doesnt happen.
I think Winston Churchill was a man of his time, but he did have charismatic appeal that appealed widely, thats the difference. The public are not at all more stupid than they once were, but are living in an age of fast everything and instant everything which has produced ever shorter attention spans. We have gismos of all kinds, gadgets like mobile phones and tablets, all very slick and fast and they the public literally dont have brain time to focus on something thats not as equally slick.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#17
i have to agree that winston churchill was a one off,since then its all gone down hill.all pms since churchill have been dregs of sociaty since then.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#18
But he was a Conservative Brian.
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#19
All this (and recent history with successive governments) just proves that there are two sets of qualities required for a politician - those required to get to the top of the greasy pole, and those required to do the job. I don't think anyone since Churchill has combined the two.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#20
roger,i know he was a tory,about the only decent leader they have had.all the rest are a bunch of losers.