Empty Threats
I've highlighted a paragraph from Rachel Sylvester's piece in The Times which aptly describes the behaviour of the No campaign in Scotland's independence referendum:
“It (Better Together) sounds like a man whose wife is leaving him, but instead of trying to win her back by talking about all the wonderful things they have done together, and telling her how much he loves her, he is shouting about how she won’t get any money or see the children if they get divorced.”
Now that hit the nail on the head - 'you won't get any money and you won't get to see the children if you keep behaving this way'.
Rachel's piece was written a full two days before Scotland went to the polls, but I haven't heard a better or more accurate turn of phrase throughout the referendum campaign.
Cocky Cameron surrenders keys to the kingdom
By Rachel Sylvester - The Times
The prime minister’s naive short-termism and arrogant refusal to listen to women will come back to haunt him
A few weeks ago the subject of Scotland came up at a meeting for Conservative strategists and special advisers at No 10. Although the Downing Street machine was at that point quite relaxed about the impending referendum on independence, some Tories outside the inner circle — particularly the women — were beginning to worry about the tone and direction of the No campaign.
One of those present told her colleagues: “It sounds like a man whose wife is leaving him, but instead of trying to win her back by talking about all the wonderful things they have done together, and telling her how much he loves her, he is shouting about how she won’t get any money or see the children if they get divorced.”
With the polls too close to call, and the finger of blame pointed at the negativity of the pro-Union campaign, that analysis now seems remarkably prescient. At the time, though, David Cameron and his aides refused to listen.
Whatever the result of Thursday’s vote, Alex Salmond is already the big winner of this contest. The unionists have been outwitted, outmanoeuvred and outcampaigned at every turn by the nationalists. Although Labour must share some of the responsibility, it is the prime minister who should shoulder most of the blame. It was he who caved in to the SNP leader over the date of the referendum, giving the independence cause time to build momentum, and it was he who refused to include a third compromise option on the ballot paper, offering the “devo-max” option that he has now been forced to concede. From the start he misjudged the mood in Scotland, assuming “no” would win, ignoring the warnings from those who anticipated the strength of nationalist feeling.
Complacency, cockiness and cliquiness: senior Tories fear that the Scottish referendum campaign has exposed the underlying flaws in the Downing Street operation that will become ever more pronounced as the general election nears. They point to a trademark tendency to put tactics before strategy that will also be a huge issue for the country and the Conservative party if a renegotiation and referendum on Europe ever go ahead.
“It’s ‘essay crisis’ politics,” says one former minister. “This is the worst example but it’s part of a pattern. The whole thing has been a total shambles.”
Certainly, there has been an extraordinary combination of naivety and arrogance in Downing Street. Not long ago one senior figure from No 10 gloated to me that the date of the referendum meant the Lib Dem party conference would have to be delayed until after the Conservative one — and so, unlike last year, the Tories would be able to grab all the popular policy announcements. It was a strange priority. The spin doctor’s “grid” and coalition point-scoring seem rather irrelevant now as the country teeters on the brink of breaking apart.
Only in the past two weeks has Mr Cameron focused on Scotland after a poll showing the Yes camp ahead made him realise that he might be about to become the prime minister who presided over the break-up of the United Kingdom. Once he understood quite how high the stakes had become, he panicked, cancelling prime minister’s questions to rush north and talk about how heart-broken he would be by separation, while promising new powers if the Scots agreed to stay.
None of this had been properly thought through. Tory MPs predict a huge rebellion if legislation is introduced to give greater powers to Scotland without also devolving rights to England. “Even if there’s a ‘no’ vote, Cameron has ended up giving away the keys to the kingdom on the basis of one opinion poll,” says a senior backbencher. “That is just wrong. The whole attitude has been ‘let’s get through today and worry about the details later’.”
This is not, insiders say, a momentary aberration but symbolic of a mindset that is entrenched in No 10. There are examples from across Whitehall — and the fact that they are discussed with increasing openness is itself an indication of a loss of authority at the centre.
On one occasion, I am told, Theresa May got into an argument with No 10 over the timing of a policy announcement. She wanted to reveal the government’s plans in the House of Commons, observing parliamentary propriety, but the prime minister’s office pressed her to give an interview to Radio 4’s Today programme instead. If she did not do so, she was told: “We will lose the next three hours.” As with Scotland, short-term advantage was prioritised over long-term credibility. “Never mind the next three hours,” one senior Tory says. “They could be about to lose us the last 300 years.”
There are also concerns on the Conservative benches that the tone of the campaign north of the border is a precursor to an angry and aggressive general election campaign. Just as the No camp has sought to foster anxiety about independence, particularly on the economy, so the Tories intend to play on voters’ fears between now and May 2015.
Yet what has emerged in recent months is that people in Scotland and elsewhere are increasingly disillusioned with such negative politics. Women voters, who will be as critical at the next general election as they are in the referendum, are particularly alienated by “nasty” campaigns. As one former minister puts it: “Tone matters. You can appoint as many female ministers as you like but if you sound like grumpy old men, then educated women won’t be attracted to you.”
It may be no coincidence that the prime minister is surrounded almost entirely by male advisers, many of whom were either at school or university with him. Although he has been warned repeatedly that he needs to widen his circle, he refuses to do so. In meetings, women find themselves talked over or ignored.
A group of three bright and politically savvy Tory women recently approached Downing Street offering to give a different perspective on general election strategy. “We said, ‘if you need a female voice we will sit down and help you’,” according to one. “We got no response.” The bunker is closing in on itself.
This week Scotland decides. The referendum campaign is drawing to an end. But — “yes” or “no” — that is only the start of the problems for Mr Cameron.
The prime minister’s naive short-termism and arrogant refusal to listen to women will come back to haunt him
A few weeks ago the subject of Scotland came up at a meeting for Conservative strategists and special advisers at No 10. Although the Downing Street machine was at that point quite relaxed about the impending referendum on independence, some Tories outside the inner circle — particularly the women — were beginning to worry about the tone and direction of the No campaign.
One of those present told her colleagues: “It sounds like a man whose wife is leaving him, but instead of trying to win her back by talking about all the wonderful things they have done together, and telling her how much he loves her, he is shouting about how she won’t get any money or see the children if they get divorced.”
With the polls too close to call, and the finger of blame pointed at the negativity of the pro-Union campaign, that analysis now seems remarkably prescient. At the time, though, David Cameron and his aides refused to listen.
Whatever the result of Thursday’s vote, Alex Salmond is already the big winner of this contest. The unionists have been outwitted, outmanoeuvred and outcampaigned at every turn by the nationalists. Although Labour must share some of the responsibility, it is the prime minister who should shoulder most of the blame. It was he who caved in to the SNP leader over the date of the referendum, giving the independence cause time to build momentum, and it was he who refused to include a third compromise option on the ballot paper, offering the “devo-max” option that he has now been forced to concede. From the start he misjudged the mood in Scotland, assuming “no” would win, ignoring the warnings from those who anticipated the strength of nationalist feeling.
Complacency, cockiness and cliquiness: senior Tories fear that the Scottish referendum campaign has exposed the underlying flaws in the Downing Street operation that will become ever more pronounced as the general election nears. They point to a trademark tendency to put tactics before strategy that will also be a huge issue for the country and the Conservative party if a renegotiation and referendum on Europe ever go ahead.
“It’s ‘essay crisis’ politics,” says one former minister. “This is the worst example but it’s part of a pattern. The whole thing has been a total shambles.”
Certainly, there has been an extraordinary combination of naivety and arrogance in Downing Street. Not long ago one senior figure from No 10 gloated to me that the date of the referendum meant the Lib Dem party conference would have to be delayed until after the Conservative one — and so, unlike last year, the Tories would be able to grab all the popular policy announcements. It was a strange priority. The spin doctor’s “grid” and coalition point-scoring seem rather irrelevant now as the country teeters on the brink of breaking apart.
Only in the past two weeks has Mr Cameron focused on Scotland after a poll showing the Yes camp ahead made him realise that he might be about to become the prime minister who presided over the break-up of the United Kingdom. Once he understood quite how high the stakes had become, he panicked, cancelling prime minister’s questions to rush north and talk about how heart-broken he would be by separation, while promising new powers if the Scots agreed to stay.
None of this had been properly thought through. Tory MPs predict a huge rebellion if legislation is introduced to give greater powers to Scotland without also devolving rights to England. “Even if there’s a ‘no’ vote, Cameron has ended up giving away the keys to the kingdom on the basis of one opinion poll,” says a senior backbencher. “That is just wrong. The whole attitude has been ‘let’s get through today and worry about the details later’.”
This is not, insiders say, a momentary aberration but symbolic of a mindset that is entrenched in No 10. There are examples from across Whitehall — and the fact that they are discussed with increasing openness is itself an indication of a loss of authority at the centre.
On one occasion, I am told, Theresa May got into an argument with No 10 over the timing of a policy announcement. She wanted to reveal the government’s plans in the House of Commons, observing parliamentary propriety, but the prime minister’s office pressed her to give an interview to Radio 4’s Today programme instead. If she did not do so, she was told: “We will lose the next three hours.” As with Scotland, short-term advantage was prioritised over long-term credibility. “Never mind the next three hours,” one senior Tory says. “They could be about to lose us the last 300 years.”
There are also concerns on the Conservative benches that the tone of the campaign north of the border is a precursor to an angry and aggressive general election campaign. Just as the No camp has sought to foster anxiety about independence, particularly on the economy, so the Tories intend to play on voters’ fears between now and May 2015.
Yet what has emerged in recent months is that people in Scotland and elsewhere are increasingly disillusioned with such negative politics. Women voters, who will be as critical at the next general election as they are in the referendum, are particularly alienated by “nasty” campaigns. As one former minister puts it: “Tone matters. You can appoint as many female ministers as you like but if you sound like grumpy old men, then educated women won’t be attracted to you.”
It may be no coincidence that the prime minister is surrounded almost entirely by male advisers, many of whom were either at school or university with him. Although he has been warned repeatedly that he needs to widen his circle, he refuses to do so. In meetings, women find themselves talked over or ignored.
A group of three bright and politically savvy Tory women recently approached Downing Street offering to give a different perspective on general election strategy. “We said, ‘if you need a female voice we will sit down and help you’,” according to one. “We got no response.” The bunker is closing in on itself.
This week Scotland decides. The referendum campaign is drawing to an end. But — “yes” or “no” — that is only the start of the problems for Mr Cameron.
