Norman Tebbit is confusing the coalition with the Tories

It is Tory ministers, not their Lib Dem counterparts, who are responsible for the "omnishambles".

Close but no cigar, Norman Tebbit

When you say:

This dog of a coalition government has let itself be given a bad name and now anybody can beat it…The abiding sin of the government is not that some ministers are rich but that it seems unable to manage its affairs competently

…you make the mistake of confusing "the government" with "the Conservative Party".

You are not alone in this error. Most Tory backbenchers seem to spend much of their time bemoaning the fact that Lib Dems are hanging around, preventing them from implementing an unpleasant right-wing agenda. I suppose it’s second nature, when you view yourselves as the natural party of government, to forget that you didn’t win the last election.

But take a look at all the examples of why the sobriquet "omnishambles" is being bandied around so (for want of a better word) liberally at the moment. In the past week, when there has been a sequence of good pieces of economic news, the agenda has been dominated by the "energy-policy-that-never-was" , "plebgate", and "the great train snobbery".

In fact, take a look at the 34 U-turns the government has made to date. Thirty three were performed by the Tories. The 34th – Lords reform  - may have been announced by Nick Clegg, but we all know that’s down to Conservative mismanagement too. And it will lead to the 35th – boundary reform – which will cost the Tories dearly at the next election. Another cock up.

That’s without picking up on the stuff the Tories have managed to get away with. My personal favourite is that the PM managed to appoint a new Transport Secretary, apparently forgetting that her west London constituency and its proximity to Heathrow may cause a few issues. So, just 11 months later, he moved her out – and brought in an aviation minister whose constituency sits next to Stansted and who is an avowed opponent of the third runway at Heathrow. Well done, Mr Cameron, top work.

And that’s before we even start on the Budget….

The Lib Dems may have done many things in government that have proved unpopular - as much with the rank and file of the party as with the country at large. But the one charge you can’t level at our representatives in Westminster is incompetence. The Tories have that field all to themselves.

Norman Tebbit – we’re certainly not all in this together.

Richard Morris blogs at A View From Ham Common, which was named Best New Blog at the 2011 Liberal Democrat Conference.

David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg walk through the Aldermere Housing Development. Photograph: Getty Images.

Richard Morris blogs at A View From Ham Common, which was named Best New Blog at the 2011 Lib Dem Conference

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

UnHerd's rejection of the new isn't as groundbreaking as it seems to think

Tim Montgomerie's new venture has some promise, but it's trying to solve an old problem.

Information overload is oft-cited as one of the main drawbacks of the modern age. There is simply too much to take in, especially when it comes to news. Hourly radio bulletins, rolling news channels and the constant stream of updates available from the internet – there is just more than any one person can consume. 

Luckily Tim Montgomerie, the founder of ConservativeHome and former Times comment editor, is here to help. Montgomerie is launching UnHerd, a new media venture that promises to pull back and focus on "the important things rather than the latest things". 

According to Montgomerie the site has a "package of investment", at least some of which comes from Paul Marshall. He is co-founder of one of Europe's largest hedge funds, Marshall Wace, formerly a longstanding Lib Dem, and also one of the main backers and chair of Ark Schools, an academy chain. The money behind the project is on display in UnHerd's swish (if slightly overwhelming) site, Google ads promoting the homepage, and article commissions worth up to $5,000. The selection of articles at launch includes an entertaining piece by Lionel Shriver on being a "news-aholic", though currently most of the bylines belong to Montgomerie himself. 

Guidelines for contributors, also meant to reflect the site's "values", contain some sensible advice. This includes breaking down ideas into bullet points, thinking about who is likely to read and promote articles, and footnoting facts. 

The guidelines also suggest focusing on what people will "still want to read in six, 12 or 24 months" and that will "be of interest to someone in Cincinnati or Perth as well as Vancouver or St Petersburg and Cape Town and Edinburgh" – though it's not quite clear how one of Montgomerie's early contributions, a defence of George Osborne's editorship of the Evening Standard, quite fits that global criteria. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the full page comment piece Montgomerie got in Osborne's paper to bemoan the deficiencies of modern media on the day UnHerd launched. 

UnHerd's mascot  – a cow – has also created some confusion, compounded by another line in the writing tips describing it as "a cow, who like our target readers, tends to avoid herds and behave in unmissable ways as a result". At least Montgomerie only picked the second-most famous poster animal for herding behaviour. It could have been a sheep. In any case, the line has since disappeared from the post – suggesting the zoological inadequacy of the metaphor may have been recognised. 

There is one way in which UnHerd perfectly embodies its stated aim of avoiding the new – the idea that we need to address the frenetic nature of modern news has been around for years.

"Slow news" – a more considered approach to what's going on in the world that takes in the bigger picture – has been talked about since at least the beginning of this decade.

In fact, it's been around so long that it has become positively mainstream. That pusher of rolling coverage the BBC has been talking about using slow news to counteract fake news, and Montgomerie's old employers, the Times decided last year to move to publishing digital editions at set points during the day, rather than constantly updating as stories break. Even the Guardian – which has most enthusiastically embraced the crack-cocaine of rolling web coverage, the live blog – also publishes regular long reads taking a deep dive into a weighty subject. 

UnHerd may well find an audience particularly attuned to its approach and values. It intends to introduce paid services – an especially good idea given the perverse incentives to chase traffic that come with relying on digital advertising. The ethos it is pitching may well help persuade people to pay, and I don't doubt Montgomerie will be able to find good writers who will deal with big ideas in interesting ways. 

But the idea UnHerd is offering a groundbreaking solution to information overload is faintly ludicrous. There are plenty of ways for people to disengage from the news cycle – and plenty of sources of information and good writing that allow people to do it while staying informed. It's just that given so many opportunities to stay up to date with what has just happened, few people decide they would rather not know.