Initially his performance gained a grudging respect. Poll ratings improved, although it has to be said they rose from an abysmally low level. But I fear it will not be enough. Why ?
Without doubt on a personal level he is a good performer. He initially much troubled Blair and the Labour party. Nevertheless, Labour is good at waiting things out and keeping their heads down. As I said two years ago, never in living memory has there been a Government that has performed so badly,
laid itself open to crticism and defeat nationally, but also never in living memory has there been an opposition party so inept at cashing in on this.
Tactically the Tories have never taken control of the chance they were given, particularly after Blair's most recent troubles. It has to be said that most around Howard are of little merit and quality and they are fighting the battle using old-fashioned tactics. They show little signs of winning the hearts and minds of the voters. Howard is always reacting, he is not setting the agenda. Blair is. The back office staff at Labour headquarters have done their job well. They have a fix on Howard and one knows how to handle him. A pity the Tories do not have the same sort of back-up. Blair has taken the initiative again and again. and will win the next general election, unless indeed Brown is chosen to lead the party. That would be welcomed by the rank and file of the Labour Party and could spell even worse news for the Tories.
Howard's mistake is quite simply that he takes Blair seriously He should deride the man and his acolytes, mock them, pour scorn on them, after all they give hi, enough opportunity, but no, these opportunities are not seized. I fear they are not even recognised. Howard still discusses politics on a level footing - a battle Blair will always win. He IS in power. Labour are too good at taking Tory policies on board, as if they were their own. Where does that leave Howard? The most recent example is Labour's 5 year plan to come down on anything from serious crime to yobbishness. Hardly a whimper was heard from the opposition, yet listening to Blair and Blunkett (who can't see the wood fro the trees) their speeches offered Howard so very many put-downs of both these men, but.....
The Tories have but one chance of winning the next election, assuming a total meltdown of the Labour Government will not happen, and that is to get out that vast swathe of the population that does not vote. I don't. Mr Howard is Jewish, so he should not spend to much time courting the Muslim vote. Labour and the Lib-Dems will take most of that. He is Jewish, so he may well get a significant amount of that vote.
He has to tackle the problems that preoccupy much of the nation, that is Immigration, the poor quality of the Health and other public services, the war in Iraq, to name perhaps the most important. But these issues have to be addressed forcefully, in radical terms. He should also pledge specifically that he will UNDO much of what Labour have done, or should I sau undone. This takes courage and I fear neither Mr Howard or his merry men and women have enough to take a monumental step.
I know that Blair and his cronies are liars, time pleasers, of no substance, but they are getting away with it. They are getting away with it because there is no alternative leader who will speak out radically and with authority. Mr Howard, if you need some sound-bytes, some one-liners, some specific advice on how to unsettle Blair, do let me know. I am always willing to help. So - are you tought enough? Do you have that political killer instinct? Somehow I doubt it.
I never cease to be amazed. Our man in Kenya's recent outburst about corruption in the higher echelons of that country! That has been known by me since the early 1970s. Why bring this to our attention only now? And if you argue it was stated before, then why was nothing done before? And then, why not take action against Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia and, and, and.... Surely the major problem is that our Government ought not to criticise any other, when it is among the most corrupt.
So the CIA and British secret Services state that there are not enough operatives on the ground ! You don't say guys. I think INTELLIGENCE Service is somewhat of a misnomer. I did actually tell Dickie Dear Love that some four years ago. Somehow I think he appreciated it..
I read with some concern in the press that there are people suggesting that Michael Howard should be replaced as leader of the Conservative party. I think this would be a grave nistake right now. Perhaps he may well yet prove himself, perhaps not, buth either way we are too near to a general election for any change in leadership.
One speaks of Malcolm Rifkind being an able successor. Indeed he is able, but why not have him as an extremely able right hand. As I stated before, there are few of qualiy and merit on the benches, let alone the front bench. It has been suggested that certain backbenchers should stepd down. An excellent idea. It has also been said that politics within cities should be viewed as more important as what happens in the shires. The shirearchy are in my opinion much to blame for the current malaise affecting the party.