Today Parris joins the debate on how the Conservatives should respond to the collapse of Labour's Big Lie - that Gordon Brown is anything other than a basketcase. See HERE.
Iain Dale yesterday was up for a full-on attack joining in with popular anger about the loss of the 10p in the GBP income tax band, rushing in for the political kill on that very narrow front. Parris' comments are more nuanced, but amount to much the same thing - stating that the Conservatives need to advance - to position themselves for government, and no longer as permanent opposition, moving up not just on a pin-head but right along the whole of the front line simultaneously.
Dale is right that the message needs to appeal as much to the emotions as the intellect, but is wrong to focus in on a tiny detail. Parris is right that the overall manifesto needs coherence, but avoids the issue of emotional appeal. Somewhere between the two lies the answer.
Ideas are needed to package the message, that is for sure. The key to the story for voters, and to any future decision that they will be required to take, to my mind is this - 'how low do we want to go?'
Britain was in 1997 the world's 4th largest economy, and the fourth most competitive in international league tables. See HERE. Today after 11 years with Gordon Brown's hand on the tiller, Britain is in the crawler lane, lying sixth in size behind China and Italy, and 16th in competitiveness tables.
Living standards are collapsing. Peoples' lives are harder than they should be, and hopes of improvement are distant.
Any Conservative message should (in the traditional way) be packaged around the concept of failure/success, hope/despair, loss/gain. 'How Low Do We Want To Go?' gives the essence of the message, and 'How soon can something be done to rescue the situiation?'. It's not Thatcherism re-heated. It's chilled anti-Brownism.
PICTURED - General Montgomery in North Africa....what strategy would he have gone for?