We are currently planning other events and would appreciate your thoughts on topics and speakers you would like featured. My email address is tim@conservativehome.com if you have any thoughts.

THE NHS BILL: Some of you may have noticed that I caused a bit of a media fuss ten days ago when I argued that the Coalition should drop the Health and Social Care Bill (http://conho.me/wB4Gij). I certainly wasn’t expecting my advice to be heeded and it hasn’t been. The Government ploughs on in the teeth of public opposition, holding seminars on the reforms which exclude the major representatives of NHS staff. Anyway I’m not wanting to continue my mini-campaign here. What is notable is that large numbers of MPs, ministers and of course journalists contacted me after my intervention by txt, email and phone. Number 10 hasn’t contacted me once since the morning of my blog. This is not unusual, even when I’m not causing trouble. Number 10’s default setting is to give the silent treatment to nearly all people except lobby journalists. As a way of building support and understanding across the party it’s not a winning strategy. Cameron desperately needs an external relations function so that it doesn’t lose touch with key columnists, bloggers, think tank chiefs and other third parties that help shape opinion. His shaky support within the Tory Party is a relational as much as a policy failing.

THE BLUE HALF OF THE TUG-O-WAR: In the Mail on Sunday James Forsyth revealed (http://conho.me/xJx9X7) that Cameron’s 17 top advisers went to Chequers last week to discuss, among other things, a game plan if the Lib Dems left the Coalition early – say next year. The Lib Dems are in no position to want an early election but the danger is they might leave the Coalition and the Conservatives would have to govern as a minority administration on confidence and supply. The smart money is still on the Coalition lasting until full term or close to full term but Numbers 10 and 11 have been concerned at the way the Lib Dems have been pushing a more aggressive differentiation strategy. This has been particularly evident on tax policy with Nick Clegg publicly warning the Chancellor and the Conservative Party to cut taxes for low income people or, alternatively, guard the interests of the wealthy. Nice. Tugged hard one way by the Lib Dems the Conservative leadership has been encouraging Conservative MPs to tug from the other direction. The recent letter signed by more than 100 Tory MPs against windfarm subsidies was very much encouraged by Number 11. It, goes the strategy, will reinforce George Osborne’s hands over climate change policy in negotiations with, now, Ed Davey. Tory MPs were also encouraged to kick up a fuss over university access tsar Les Ebdon. Vince Cable may have prevailed against Michael Gove on that appointment but aides to Cameron calculate that they are more likely to get concessions from Lib Dems in other areas if Cameron is seen to have to keep his party happy.

DIVISIONS IN THE PARLIAMENTARY PARTY: In last week’s Intelligence Letter Paul Goodman previewed what might be contentious elections to the backbench 1922 Committee in May. These elections will be used by ‘Cameroons’ and more mainstream Tories to dilute the so-called Old Right’s control of the ’22. Paul writes more about this on ConHome today (http://conho.me/AwMgHc). My guess is, like Paul, the loyalists will attempt to topple the biggest critics of David Cameron on the Cttee (e.g. Brian Binley, Mark Pritchard and possibly Chris Chope) but will leave Graham Brady and other officers in place. Trying to completely replace the existing leadership could be a lose-lose strategy for the loyalists. If an attempt to remove Graham Brady is unsuccessful the risk is the Cameroons will create an emboldened centre of opposition to Number 10. Topple Graham Brady and the defeated minority will stop being team players and organise in new and potentially more aggressive ways. Adjusting rather than transforming the composition of the ’22 is probably the best strategy for ‘friends of the Prime Minister’.

DANNY ALEXANDER AND THE QUAD: Last week on ConHome I profiled (http://conho.me/xsxaOd) ‘The Quad’ – the group of four that is the Coalition’s sovereign body. I noted how Danny Alexander had come under the spell of George Osborne. One Intelligence subscriber sent me an interesting reaction that I’d like to share with you. “The observation of Alexander’s peculiar loyalty is accurate, but the analysis of why isn’t quite right. It’s not the svengali like powers of Osborne. You have to understand that Danny has always been like this. To an almost absurd degree he is a naturally loyal number two to whoever he works for, whether Stephen Woodard at the European Movement, Simon Buckby at Britain in Europe or Nick and now George. I assume, but do not know he had another strong patron who he served devotedly at the Cairngorms National Park.”

By Tim Montgomerie

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK FROM CONSERVATIVEHOME

OSBORNE GIVES TO BUSINESS WITH ONE HAND BUT TAKES WITH THE OTHER: “If George Osborne is doing the right thing on the deficit (and like most Tory members we wish he’d cut harder and faster and have avoided tax rises) he still lacks a competitiveness agenda. For every tax cut (eg corporation tax) there are bigger tax rises (VAT, CGT, bank levy). For every reduction in red tape (eg health and safety) more regulations are being imposed (eg the Agency Workers Directive). For every good initiative (planning reform) there’s a bad one (big policy-induced increases in the cost of energy).” More via http://conho.me/wAriBQ

THE TAXING CHANCELLOR: “George Osborne’s plan is to bring the government finances back into balance in the medium term and reduce government spending to just below 40% of national income. This is very worrying. By the Chancellor’s own admission, the UK government has never been able to tax its citizens more than 40% of national income. The limit of the ambitions of a Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer appears to be to tax the British population at the maximum taxable capacity.” More from the IEA’s Philip Booth via http://conho.me/xcltNE

THE POWER OF THE QUAD AT THE HEART OF GOVERNMENT: “The Quad isn’t just half blue/ half yellow but also half Treasury. “The Treasury,” concludes James Forsyth, “is an even greater force in the land than it was in Gordon Brown’s day.” Wow. He continues: “The Treasury fought for decades to get a second Cabinet post, finally succeeding in 1961, and even then remained vastly outnumbered in Cabinet by ministers from spending departments. Now it has half the people in the room whenever a major decision is taken.” Nine more observations can be read via http://conho.me/xsxaOd

NEW TORY-LED EURO-ENTHUSIAST GROUP ESTABLISHED: “The group, which has offices in London and Brussels, provides daily bulletins – written by David Gow, formerly of the Guardian, and David Seymour, formerly of the Daily Mirror, and bulletins for MPs “of all parties”. Starting in April, Nucleus will also be providing briefings for MPs, journalists, think-tankers, business figures, and in March, they will start hosting quarterly visits to Brussels.” More via http://conho.me/yNPQyf

STUDENT MIGRANTS SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM IMMIGRATION TARGETS: “The government says it wants a more diverse higher education sector with new entrants driving down tuition fees – a laudable aim. Yet its student visa controls are destroying private sector HE colleges that can offer fee rates for degrees which are over a third less than those offered by public universities. Where is the sense in that? The Conservative Party’s wish to curtail net migration to the tens of thousands is clear. But it makes no sense to include student migrants in this total. Doing so is harming economic growth and risks destroying a highly successful part of the UK economy.” More from Centre Forum via http://conho.me/wSgAhJ

.

David Cameron has a famously tense relationship with his backbenchers – and with the committee that represents their interests: very simply, he sees its leadership as being in the hands of Conservative right-wingers who have never been reconciled to his leadership and would bring him down if they had a half-workable excuse to do so.

Fear of this prospect explains his gambit after the last election – effectively to close down the ’22 as an independent instrument by his frontbenchers gaining the right to vote in its elections.  The Prime Minister was worried by the prospect of the election as its chairman of Graham Brady, a former Europe spokesman who had resigned over education policy.

The move caused such a row that Cameron was warned that Brady would probably win the contest anyway, even if the front bench did vote.  He quickly backed down and Brady was duly elected – making him one of the very few Tory MPs who have been seen to outwit the Prime Minister.  The other elections to its committee were also a triumph for the right.

The veteran MP Nicholas Soames is now its sole representative of the old left of the party.  The officers include one of the party’s leading Thatcherites – such as John Whittingdale, a Vice-Chairman and her former private secretary – and some of the leadership’s most outspoken critics – such as Christopher Chope and Mark Pritchard, the two Secretaries.

Cameron’s relationship with the ’22 is thus best described as minimalist: the courtesies are observed, but that’s about it.  In the wake of the revolt of 81 backbenchers over an EU referendum, for example, he didn’t consult the executive about a response.  However, the Prime Minister is far from being the only critic of the executive.

The 2010 Conservative intake is now almost 50 per cent of the Parliamentary Party – and, given its minimal presence on the Government payroll to date, represents a majority on the backbenches.  It voted in the elections for ’22 executive members before it had found its feet in the Commons.  And many of its members are exasperated by what they see as its fusty character.

There are signs that Downing Street wants to exploit this mood.  David Cameron has taken a personal interest in a new group called “the forty” – a body of Tory MPs representing the forty most marginal seats.  Greg Barker, one of Cameron’s most loyal Ministerial backers, helped to oversee a “green chips” group during the last Parliament.

This has now metamorphosed into a “2020 group”.  The formation of a new “301 group” – named after the number of seats the party will have to win at the next election to form a majority Government – was reported as a challenge to the right of the party.  Kris Hopkins, speaking on behalf of this group, intimated that the party is in danger of retreating to a right-wing comfort zone.

There is a strong sense at Westminster that Number 10 and senior Whips are encouraging these initiatives, and took a keen interest in last week’s by-election.  Hollingberry was seen as the candidate of the left and Kelly as that of the right – although the result may have had as much to do with the former’s gregarious character as with ideology.

None the less, his win can be seen as the first move in a surreptitious fight back by the party establishment.  However, there will be no definitive Downing Street plan at this stage for the next round of ’22 elections – which will come soon at the start of the new Parliamentary session – not least because trying to control 307 Tory MPs is like trying to herd cats, only more difficult.

The consensus of the sources that I’ve spoken to is that a direct challenge to Brady is unlikely.  However, the leadership has Chope and Pritchard in its sights.  It would also like to see Peter Bone, perhaps Cameron’s most outspoken backbench critic, off the executive.  If all three were voted off Number 10 would have a new narrative for the lobby.

Namely, that the right is a paper tiger and that the backbenches are now onside.  It would be hard to argue with this in the event of such an outcome – especially if Bone, Philip Hollobone and Philip Davies, two other independent-minded right-wingers, are voted off the pivotal backbench business committee by their Conservative backbench colleagues.

However, the party’s centre-left is now better represented in the Government than on the backbenches – and some of its most able new intake members, such as Mary Macleod and Anna Soubry, are already Parliamentary Private Secretaries: that’s to say, MPs with their feet on the lowest rung of the Government ladder, and thus traditionally barred from voting in  ’22 elections.

It’s worth noting that a by-election for a Tory place on the public accounts committee also took place this week.  It was won by Stewart Jackson, a right-wing MP who resigned as a PPS over the Europe referendum vote.  One shouldn’t need a reminder that the result of the coming ’22 elections is impossible to predict.  But Jackson’s win serves as one none the less.

By Paul Goodman

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK FROM CONSERVATIVEHOME

Tim Montgomerie: The unnecessary and unpopular NHS Bill could cost the Conservative Party the next election. Cameron must kill it.     “ConservativeHome supports the Government’s radicalism on schools, welfare and the deficit. We’d like to see much more ambition on competitiveness and changing Britain’s relationship with Europe. The NHS Bill is not just a distraction from all of this but potentially fatal to the Conservative Party’s electoral prospects. It must be stopped before it’s too late.” Read more: http://is.gd/mguzZn

Paul Goodman: Tax breaks for childcare is a bad idea.   “Some better-off women are already set to lose out from the removal of child benefit from higher-rate taxpayers…Tax breaks for childcare would simply create a new set of complainants. The best course the Chancellor could take would be to look at radical ways of improving childcare supply – and forget about demand-side initiatives that are fraught with political perils and unfair consequences.” Read more: http://is.gd/VWALEi

Samuel Kasumu: The Conservative Party must do much, much more to become a party for ethnic communities.      The Party still suffers from a very low level of support amongst ethnic communities. If anyone thinks this is an insignificant issue, we need only look at the last general election. Conservatives received 16% of the overall votes of Black and Asian voters, and Boris Johnson is currently having some tense times in his quest for re-election.” Read more: http://is.gd/ibgYer

Stephan Shakespeare: We enjoy our fantasies of bold leaders but comforting, pragmatic governments tend to be re-elected.    “We enjoy our fantasies of traditional leadership – captains on the bridge of the ship seeing further than anyone else – but no one in a position of public decision-making feels comfortable being seriously out of tune with the public. The most secure way to stay in Numbers 10 and 11 is to make comforting noises and have a slightly better economic policy than the other guys. It’s profoundly uninspiring, anti-romantic and grindingly dull, but it’s probably sensible.” Read more: http://is.gd/rycC1b

Chris Pincher MP: Wind farms are expensive, unreliable, damage local environments and subsidise foreign industry.   “But fundamentally, the problem with on-shore wind is that it cannot be relied upon to deliver the energy we need, when we need it…Concentrating on on-shore wind simply because it is the most “mature” technology fails to provide us with a secure energy supply which benefits British companies and which is supported by the public.  We must shift our focus and be prepared to cut its subsidy.” Read more: http://is.gd/YqOamr

David Binder: Introducing transferable allowances for married couples would be more progressive than taking people out of tax.“   The LibDem flagship tax policy of increasing the personal income tax threshold would have the highly regressive effect of helping better off families disproportionately in comparison to poorer ones. The progressive transferrable tax allowance on the other hand would do the opposite. It would also begin to reform our system in the right way, laying down the foundations toward move to a system that recognises not just individual income but also family responsibilities.” Read more: http://is.gd/zxjask

Tim Montgomerie: Tory members say deregulation should be top growth priority.   “In the latest ConservativeHome readers’ survey we asked respondents to rate a list of measures in terms of their importance for the competitiveness of the British economy. A zero rating equalled of no importance and ten equalled top importance. The table below summarises the results.

Radical pruning of red tape for small businesses: 9.07

Getting out of expensive EU policies like the Common Agricultural Policy: 8.29

New generation of nuclear power stations: 8.0

Delay of policies that are increasing energy prices: 7.94
End of national pay bargaining: 7.13

A no strike deal in essential public services: 6.97

A no strike deal in essential public services: 6.97

Sacking of bad teachers: 6.95

New airport capacity: 6.9

Break up of the Eurozone: 6.87

The abolition of the 50p tax rate: 6.46

Linking the retirement age to life expectancy: 6.02

Profit-making schools: 5.14

A regional minimum wage: 4.98

Lower tax on income and investment, paid for, if necessary, by higher taxes on pollution and expensive properties: 4.93

High speed rail: 4.0

Toll roads: 3.59″.          Read More: http://is.gd/YhAvZ0

“What is doing that is the war on the City (rather than sensible reform); constant attacks on success; an absurd belief that fixed pay is a better system than variable pay and that politicians can determine what a “fair” wage is; the government’s failure to deregulate labour markets; high income and other taxes; an energy policy which is killing manufacturing; the tax raid on the North Sea; an inefficient and bloated public sector; inadequate airports; a gargantuan budget deficit and excessive private and public debt; an inadequate education system.”

Cameron and Osborne need to wake up to this and I think they might be beginning to. Normally when I complain about the Government’s lack of a growth agenda my ears are met with a recital of policy initiatives that have been taken by the Coalition (sadly, most of them Gordon Brownian in complexity). This week when I raised the same question with a very senior minister I didn’t get that list. I was met with a pregnant silence. At least I’m assuming and hoping that it was pregnant.

I’m not going to get into the substance of what a growth agenda might include. On the pages of ConHome and in these Letters I’ve done that many times – new airport capacity… a green light for new nuclear power stations… road privatization and toll roads… profit-making schools… retirement age linked to life expectancy… radical pruning of red tape for small and start up businesses… an end of national pay bargaining… a regional minimum wage… end of 50p… a restructuring of the tax system so that income and investment are taxed relatively less and pollution and property more… delay of climate change measures until clean technologies have advanced… Enough, you say! What I want to emphasise today is the politics of this for both the Conservatives and the business community.

First, the Conservatives. Although the Tories cannot ignore the public mood (and if you look at thinks like the rise in CGT, retention of 50p and bank levy they haven’t) they should and do know that they can’t win a political contest if the winner is the party that most bashes bankers, creative tax accountants and the wealthy in general. The Left is always better at redistribution of wealth and the Tories better at encouraging its creation. The political contest that the Tories can win is the one they are always best at – the party that takes the long-term decisions for the good of the British economy. George Osborne understands this. On debt he is portraying the Coalition as the party acting in the national economic interest while Labour plays politics. That’s as good as far as it goes (and Cameron is trouncing Ed Miliband’s ‘toughness’ rating) but it’s too narrow. Yes, Conservatives have taken the tough decisions to ensure the country lives within its means but the Government has not taken the tough decisions to prove to the world that Britain is open for business. Because supply-side reforms are slow to have an effect the Government is running out of parliamentary time to deliver growth-enhancers but they should still try. And soon. There’s mounting evidence (http://conho.me/z9mLZe) that it will be hard for the Tories to win an overall majority at the next election. The Government needs a game changer and, perversely, embracing unpopular individual measures probably won’t add up to unpopularity if voters begin to see the Conservatives as THE party with the answer to Britain’s long-term prosperity.

To succeed in all of this, however, the business community needs to be radically reorganised. Ministers complain with some justification that they don’t get much media savvy support from business when difficult issues like planning reform come up. On one side of the debate is the NGO For Protection Of Fluffy Bunnies and on the other side is the Association Of Plutocratic MegaCorps In Pinstripe Suits. Business doesn’t need any more spokesmen for individual sectors like the airline industry or the banking sector (as good as job as they do on individual pieces of legislation) but it needs to create a MOVEMENT for the kind of job-creating friendly economy that is in the whole nation’s interest and not just in the interest of the already haves. When BBC or Sky wants a business representative for an interview the person who turns up should represent an organisation called something like TwoMillionJobs.com. They will be there to argue for the kind of reforms that will create jobs (and yes, in the process, those very same reforms just happen to be business-friendly too).

By Tim Montgomerie

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK FROM CONSERVATIVEHOME

MARK PRISK MP ON CUTTING RED TAPE: “More than 1,200 regulations have been considered so far, and we have agreed to scrap or substantially improve over half.  Changes include replacing 12 pieces of legislation on consumer protection and information with a single Consumer Rights Bill; scrapping the paper counterpart to the driving licence, saving motorists up to £8m; and streamlining procedures for manufacturing export control. Many arcane and obsolete regulations have also been scrapped, including the 98 Trading with the Enemy regulations (restricting companies’ dealings with such threats to national security as Belgium and the USSR), regulations dictating the location and design of no smoking signs, or guidelines specifying the roads on which dogs must be held on a lead.” More via http://conho.me/y7uvFW

IMPLICATIONS OF HUHNE’S DEPARTURE: “Huhne’s energy policies have been hurting UK manufacturing. His replacement will still be a Liberal Democrat but Treasury sources hope he might be a little bit more pragmatic. We will see but George Osborne will certainly see the change as an opportunity to kick some green policies into the longer grass.” More via http://conho.me/zLKN4G

GOVERNMENT SIGNALS IT WANTS TO FURTHER INCREASE IMF CONTRIBUTION: “We had a further sign that George Osborne is minded to send more money into Christine Lagarde’s warchest when, [Wednesday] night, the Government’s Whips Office circulated an article from Andrew Tyrie (see Paul Goodman’s tweet). The article by the Chairman of the Commons Treasury Select Committee made a very strong case for increasing Britain’s contribution.” More via http://conho.me/w8oQXO

BRITAIN’S NEW UNIVERSITY SECTOR TAKES SHAPE: “The Government certainly has no alternative to the tuition fees policy itself if Britain’s universities are to be good quality and student numbers are to remain high (since the taxpayer simply can’t afford to fund their fees).  “Those institutions that succeed are likely to be those that are more accountable to their students”, Willetts writes today.  This is suggesting directly that market pressures are going to have their way.” More via http://conho.me/xWBs1b

DON’T UNDER ESTIMATE LABOUR’S CHANCES AT THE NEXT ELECTION: “Labour may have only won 29% of the vote at the last election but they start their time in opposition with nearly 100 more MPs than Hague. More significantly they received a windfall gain of 5% to 8% the moment the Liberal Democrats joined with the Conservatives. Many Left wing supporters of the Lib Dem party defected – probably permanently – into the red column when Nick Clegg put a Tory into Number 10. Labour therefore go into the next campaign with more like 34% to 37% of the vote already pretty committed. Where Margaret Thatcher had the great benefit of a divided opposition, Cameron has the great disadvantage of a united Left.” More via http://conho.me/z9mLZe

CHRIS KELLY MP ADVOCATES A NEW EUROSCEPTIC BUSINESS CAMPAIGN: “Paul Goodman recently wrote that “Euro-sceptics won’t win an EU referendum without a Business for Britain campaign“. He was absolutely right that the vast bulk of business opinion is firmly Euro-sceptic and that that scepticism now needs to be cultivated, harnessed and focused. I would warmly welcome the formation, in 2012, of a “Business for Britain” campaign of the sort Paul has called for.” More via http://conho.me/xXquvX

The Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP was guest of honour at the ConservativeHome/ConservativeIntelligence New Year Reception last night. Nearly one hundred Conservative MPs mixed with journalists and clients at the St Stephen’s Constitutional Club in Westminster to hear the Culture Secretary preview the 2012 Olympic Games.

After being introduced by Mark Field MP, Chairman of ConHome’s Accountability Board, Mr Hunt said the Coalition had taken the bold decision to ensure London’s third Olympics were not a cut-price, austerity-era Games but that they would show Britain at its best. Mr Hunt said that the opening ceremony would celebrate the scientific inventiveness of Britain and the fact we had invented or codified most of the world’s major sports. With the biggest TV audience ever he hoped the world would see a dynamic, confident and proud nation and that the Games would be the best in history. Over the next few years he hoped that the spotlight on Britain would attract an extra four-and-a-half million tourists to our country’s hotels and attractions. The government was actively seeking to seize every marketing opportunity that the Games represented. He wanted 2012 to end with holidaymakers and global investors viewing Britain in a more positive light.

If the deficit reduction programme was the supreme test of the Coalition’s toughness and resolve the Games would be the supreme test of the Coalition’s competence, a bold Mr Hunt predicted. ‘We will remember that’, joked a heckling Justin Webb from within the reception throng. The Culture Secretary smiled and said that he wouldn’t just be worried about the Today programme. 40,000 journalists would be covering the Olympics and they’ll all be ready to praise or bury London, depending upon how the Olympics went.

A few facilities were still to be completed but everything was nearly in place. Britain’s Olympians like Sir Chris Hoy, Rebecca Adlington and Tom Daley wanted to make their fellow countrymen proud, said Mr Hunt. So, too, did Britain’s Government.

Some Cabinet Ministers like to grab publicity themselves.  Others are willing to give their junior Ministers a chance to shine.  The Work and Pensions Secretary is regarded as more willing to delegate than the Home Secretary – his attention is fixed on the new Universal Credit rather than other parts of his department’s work – but whatever the background to the piece its publication served a useful purpose.

This is to remind readers that the Government contains several very senior Conservative Ministers who don’t hold Cabinet rank, are gifted politicians and are jostling for promotion.  While it isn’t certain that there will be a Cabinet reshuffle this year – David Cameron hates changing his team, rightly believing that shuffles cause more pain than gain – a refreshment of the Government is more likely than not.

Such change may take place in the early spring, or be delayed until after the Olympics.  (Jeremy Hunt, the promotable Culture Secretary, would be unwilling to move before his work has come to fruition.)  But if it does happen, who is in line for promotion?  I think that the best way of approaching the question is to consider the way in which the Prime Minister likes to build a team.

As I say, he dislikes the hype, fuss and drama of reshuffles, believing in a straightforward way that the best way of forming a frontbench is to find able people, match them to the right job and then let them get on with it: he is also well aware that to sack people is to make enemies.  In his last Opposition reshuffle, he fired one person only from a front bench team of over 50 people.

The presence of Nick Gibb as Minister responsible for schools or Charles Hendry as an energy Minister or Tim Loughton as Minister responsible for adoption or Gerald Howarth at defence are reminders of Cameron’s preference for continuity and expertise.  Had the Conservatives won the election outright this would have been demonstrated to an even greater extent.

The repetition of Prime Minister’s commitment to seek to ensure that a third of Ministers are women by 2015 has been seized upon, not least to calculate how many Government places are likely to be available for Tory men once the 15 or so slots that must be available for Liberal Democrats have been allocated.  I recently did a calculation on ConservativeHome and came up with the miniscule figure of three.

But Cameron will begin with the bias for predictability and stability to which I alluded earlier.  He is bound to ask himself which Ministers of non-Cabinet rank have served as full Shadow Cabinet members – but didn’t make the transition to Cabinet itself.  Although he may look outside this rank of names, this is the best place to start – and end – any guesswork about who is likely to be promoted.

I can find, beside Grayling and Green – who served in Iain Duncan Smith’s Shadow Cabinet – the following:

* Alan Duncan - an International Development Minister, formerly Shadow Transport Secretary, Shadow Business Secretary and Shadow Commons leader under Cameron.

* John Hayes - a Business and Education Minister, previously Shadow Agriculture and Fisheries Secretary under Iain Duncan Smith.

* Nick Herbert  – a Home Office and Justice Minister, formerly Shadow Justice Secretary under Cameron.

* David Lidington – Europe Minister, formerly Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary under Cameron and Michael Howard.

* Grant Shapps – Housing Minister, formerly Shadow Housing Minister under Cameron.

* Hugo Swire – Northern Ireland Minster, formerly Shadow Culture Secretary under Cameron.

* Theresa Villiers – a Transport Minister, formerly Shadow Transport Secretary under Cameron.

The Prime Minister will have to reconcile, from these names and others, the need to recognise seniority; reward merit; promote women; balance the different wings of his party and not to make too many enemies.

I suspect that Shapps, Grayling and Green are among the better placed, and that Duncan and Swire’s time at the top table has probably been and gone – but one never knows.  Certainly, seniority will be an important factor when the reshuffle eventually comes.

by Paul Goodman

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE WEEK ON CONSERVATIVEHOME

Bruce Anderson: Put Abu Qatada on a plane and send him to Jordan. If that provokes a political crisis, bring it on.  “There is no need to wait: put Abu Qatada on a plane and send him to Jordan. If that provokes a political crisis, bring it on. Let those who oppose the Government’s decision explain why they believe that the British people are unfit to govern themselves; why they believe that a legal system and a democracy which have endured and evolved over the centuries should now be treated with contempt.” Read more: http://is.gd/qKmTCV

Kwasi Kwarteng MP: Aviation – In the short term, expand current airports. In the long term, build Boris Island: “The so-called “Boris Island” looks like a long term solution…So what is the short to medium term solution to this problem? In a new paper released today by the Free Enterprise Group, I argue that expanding current airports is the only viable option in the short to medium term. Airport operators should be allowed to build at least one more runway by 2020 at Gatwick, Stansted, or even Heathrow.” Read more: http://is.gd/gYWz1G

Roger Helmer MEP: I am not prepared to stand aside for some A-List Cameron protégée from St. John’s Wood:  “I have always argued that when a Conservative MEP is out of sympathy with Party policy, and unable to defend it, he should resign to make way for another Conservative…

I have also made it clear to the Party Chairman that I believe that my obligations on this point have been fully and finally discharged by my offer, made in good faith, to resign. Accordingly, if I am obliged to stay in place until 2014, I shall feel no further sense of obligation or responsibility to the Party.” Read more: http://is.gd/IZkcTl

Peter Duncan: Ten Tartan Rules to win the referendum for the Union: “The people of Scotland overwhelmingly want more powers for their Parliament, and we Conservatives have been behind the curve on their expectations since 1975. Essentially, they support localism, which is totally consistent with the aims and values of the Conservative Party. The Scotland Bill does not meet that expectation, and we should make it clear that we do not see it as a line in the sand.  Our aim should be to move towards something like Devolution Plus, as espoused by Reform Scotland.” Read more: http://is.gd/HzrvqX

Paul Goodman: Difficult, hazardous and right – the Government’s push to reform disability benefits: “DLA is based largely on form filling. No conditional benefit can escape this. But there is sense in altering a paper-based system to include more face to face interviews and regular reviews. This leads to the replacement of DLA by PIP, or something like it. Even were there no deficit to reduce, ministers would be required to provide value for money, focus payments on those most in need, and reduce mistakes in the system. They cannot evade this obligation in the case of disability benefits.” Read more: http://is.gd/TdazIR

Matthew Barrett: Boris declares the end of the beginning of the beginning of campaigning against HS2: “There are no significant political benefits to giving HS2 the go-ahead. If we imagine the post-2015 political environment will return to normality and Parliaments sit for four, rather than five, years, then a Conservative-led administration will have to have won the 2010, 2015, 2019, 2023, and 2027 general elections in order to reap any real rewards from increased business in the Midlands (assuming HS2 is even completed by 2026, which is probably optimistic).” Read more: http://is.gd/qy9Qo2

Andrea Leadsom MP: You should be able to switch your bank account at the touch of a button: “I think the government should be more ambitious than this.  The banks should be required to develop a shared infrastructure for bank accounts that would mean switching your bank would be at the touch of a button, and you could keep your account number and all payments if you chose to do so. Such a single clearing system could be owned by the Bank of England, and a series of “unique identifiers”: could be all that’s needed to show where your account is held.” Read more: http://is.gd/Lse8U1