Question for Cameron: how much do you want to lead a Conservative government?
Thursday, May 15, 2014 at 16:13 Well, we always said plain packaging had more to do with politics than public health.
According to the Daily Telegraph's chief political commentator Peter Oborne, the issue is currently a topic of hot debate behind the scenes in Westminster:
See: Plain cigarette packaging is the coming issue that could split the Coalition (Telegraph)
Personally I find it remarkable that Oborne should have to ask that question. Perhaps, in the first year or two of the Coalition, the politics of the situation may have forced the PM to bend on issues like this.
But now?
With a year to go before the General Election, why should Cameron give the Lib Dems anything, especially if it means upsetting a substantial number of Tory backbenchers and creating unnecessary division within the party?
A firm refusal to implement plain packaging is such an obvious opportunity to put clear blue water between the Conservatives and the more nanny state minded parties I can't believe Cameron won't grab it with both hands.
This is no longer about keeping the Coalition together – a perfectly honourable ambition in 2010 – it's about winning the next General Election.
The question I would put to Cameron is this: it's all very well being the leader of a Coalition government, but how much do you want to be the leader of a Conservative government?
Plain packaging may not seem a big deal to many people but what it represents speaks volumes about the politicians who support it.
Reader Comments (6)
#WeSmokeWeVote
Cameron could of course try listening to the people. Even those people I know who are quite anti-smoking are suspicious of government dictating packaging of any retail product. The slippery slope and capitulation to the Marxist public health lobby are obvious to everybody apart from the alleged socialists in the Labour party and, it appears, Mr Cameron's front bench. Perhaps senior Tories have been spending too much time talking to DoH activists? As for the LibDems, they are neither Liberal nor Democratic and might as well rename themselves Social Democrats.
So the left wants a measure that is extremely authoritarian, has massive potential for unintended consequences, is not considered likely to have a major impact by any sane person, is a vanity project for healthist extremists and should it go ahead will show Cameron to be a weak appeaser. You can see why they might but it is hard to see why Cameron has allowed things to go this far.
Outside the Westminster bubble most people would be delighted to see extreme measures such as this kicked into touch along with those who support them. Apart from Nick Triggle at the BBC of course. Could it be that Cameron is afraid of the BBCs inappropriately named health expert ?
Social Democrats?? I think you mean Social Extremists. Hopefully they'll be history soon. It's clear their aim is to give us a good kicking before they get kicked out for good.
I would suggest that Cameron worries rather less about what Nick Clegg is concerned with, and rather more with what the millions of voters who are deserting him for people like UKIP are concerned with.
Clegg is weak, has failed and is political toast. Cameron needs to feed the concerns of the electorate, and this policy is nowhere on most people's lists of issues, I can assure you.
You’re assuming here, Simon, that Cameron is a true Conservative who is against unnecessary State control – as true Conservatives tend generally to be. Alas, you’re wrong. The question is not why doesn’t he seize this opportunity to mark himself and his party out as different from the other, more overtly authoritarian, parties, but how does he take exactly the same measures as they would without showing his party (and the rest of the world) that, deep down inside, he’s no different from them. The three main party leaders all sing most devotedly from the same song sheet – Cameron just doesn’t feel able to sing quite as loudly and enthusiastically as the others for the sake of his party’s erstwhile image.
We all know that Cameron isn't a 'true blue'. If he was, he'd have had a majority at the last election which (let's face it) should have been a land-side.
We saw the cracks in the tories before the last GE; potential candidates supporting our cause; turning to the 'other side' once elected.
In this current climate the Tories are either not strong enough, or have to admit that they can no longer stand up for their true beliefs and grass-roots. The choice is theirs, but they have lost my vote over this matter.