Cameron tells the Tories: we must "exude a confidence that we can win"

PM tells 1922 Committee reception that "boundaries or no boundaries", the Tories can win.

David Cameron was the surprise guest at tonight's 1922 Committee/ConservativeHome reception and he gave what sounded like a compressed version of his speech for Wednesday. Introduced by ConHome proprietor Lord Ashcroft, who he praised as a "great philanthropist", and by 1922 chairman Graham Brady (recently profiled by my colleague Caroline Crampton), Cameron declared that the Tories must "exude a confidence that we can win the next election", adding that he "absolutely believed" that they could. Drawing unlikely inspiration from Roy "Chubby" Brown, he recalled that the comedian had once joked that someone had told him that there was a rumour going round that he was "exceptional in bed". "Yes, I know," Brown replied, "I started it". In this spirit, Cameron suggested, the Tories should talk up their chances at the next election. An "outright Conservative majority" was "your ambition and my ambition".

He noted that between 1983 and 1987, the party averaged just 24% in the opinion polls, but that Margaret Thatcher went on to win a majority of 102 seats. While he would settle for less than that, he believed that "boundaries or no boundaries", the Tories could win. At the last election, the party had to target 160 seats, this time round it would need to target just 40. Attempting to define the terms on which the election will be fought, Cameron said voters would ask "which party has the best leaders, the best plan to deal with the debt and our economy, and the best plans to reform welfare, pensions and our schools".

Cameron's comments were designed to reassure those activists unsettled by his earlier suggestion that the coalition was superior to single-party government. In May, he was criticised for speaking merely of a future "Conservative-led government", an error he has been careful not to repeat.

Finally, I was amused by Cameron's quip that Ashcroft might want to consider purchasing "one or two newspapers" to aid the Tories' cause. Judging by Ashcroft's recent interventions (he criticised a recent anti-Labour Tory poster as "daft" and "juvenile"), there's no guarantee that the PM would win a better hearing.

David Cameron addresses the 1922 Committee/ConservativeHome reception at The Cube in Birmingham.

David Cameron listens to Foreign Secretary William Hague deliver his speech at the Conservative Party conference. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

The dog at the end of the lead may be small, but in fact what I’m walking is a hound of love

There is a new, hairy face in the Hovel.

There is a new, hairy face in the Hovel. I seem to have become a temporary co-owner of an enthusiastic Chorkie. A Chorkie, in case you’re not quite up to speed with your canine crossbreeds, is a mixture of a chihuahua and a Yorkshire Terrier, and while my friend K— busies herself elsewhere I am looking after this hound.

This falls squarely into the category of Things I Never Thought I’d Do. I’m a cat person, taking my cue from their idleness, cruelty and beauty. Dogs, with their loyalty, their enthusiasm and their barking, are all a little too much for me, even after the first drink of the day. But the dog is here, and I am in loco parentis, and it is up to me to make sure that she is looked after and entertained, and that there is no repetition of the unfortunate accident that occurred outside my housemate’s room, and which needed several tissues and a little poo baggie to make good.

As it is, the dog thinks I am the bee’s knees. To give you an idea of how beeskneesian it finds me, it is licking my feet as I write. “All right,” I feel like saying to her, “you don’t have to go that far.”

But it’s quite nice to be worshipped like this, I have decided. She has also fallen in love with the Hovel, and literally writhes with delight at the stinky cushions on the sofa. Named after Trude Fleischmann, the lesbian erotic photographer of the Twenties, Thirties and Forties, she has decided, with admirable open-mindedness, that I am the Leader of the Pack. When I take the lead, K— gets a little vexed.

“She’s walking on a loose lead, with you,” K— says. “She never does that when I’m walking her.” I don’t even know what that means, until I have a think and work it out.

“She’s also walking to heel with you,” K— adds, and once again I have to join a couple of mental dots before the mists part. It would appear that when it comes to dogs, I have a natural competence and authority, qualities I had never, not even in my most deranged flights of self-love, considered myself to possess in any measurable quantity at all.

And golly, does having a dog change the relationship the British urban flâneur has with the rest of society. The British, especially those living south of Watford, and above all those in London, do not recognise other people’s existence unless they want to buy something off them or stop them standing on the left of the sodding escalator, you idiot. This all changes when you have a dog with you. You are now fair game for any dog-fancier to come up to you and ask the most personal questions about the dog’s history and genealogy. They don’t even have to have a dog of their own; but if you do, you are obliged by law to stop and exchange dog facts.

My knowledge of dog facts is scant, extending not much further beyond them having a leg at each corner and chasing squirrels, so I leave the talking to K—, who, being a friendly sort who could probably talk dog all day long if pressed, is quite happy to do that. I look meanwhile in a kind of blank wonder at whichever brand of dog we’ve just encountered, and marvel not only at the incredible diversity of dog that abounds in the world, but at a realisation that had hitherto escaped me: almost half of London seems to have one.

And here’s the really interesting thing. When I have the leash, the city looks at me another way. And, specifically, the young women of the city. Having reached the age when one ceases to be visible to any member of the opposite sex under 30, I find, all of a sudden, that I exist again. Women of improbable beauty look at Trude, who looks far more Yorkie than chihuahua, apart from when she does that thing with the ears, and then look at me, and smile unguardedly and unironically, signalling to me that they have decided I am a Good Thing and would, were their schedules not preventing them, like to chat and get to know me and the dog a bit better.

I wonder at first if I am imagining this. I mention it to K—.

“Oh yes,” she says, “it’s a thing. My friend P-J regularly borrows her when he wants to get laid. He reckons he’s had about 12 shags thanks to her in the last six months. The problems only arise when they come back again and notice the dog isn’t there.”

I do the maths. Twelve in six months! That’s one a fortnight. An idea begins to form in my mind. I suppose you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to work out what it is. But no. I couldn’t. Could I?

Nicholas Lezard is a literary critic for the Guardian and also writes for the Independent. He writes the Down and Out in London column for the New Statesman.

This article first appeared in the 28 April 2016 issue of the New Statesman, The new fascism