Who is the Cameron family member who doesn't vote Tory?

The Prime Minister suggests that not all of his family are as supportive as they could be.

After Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg's appearances earlier this week, it was David Cameron's turn on The World At One this lunchtime. Asked about the decision of Conservative MP Priti Patel's father to stand as a UKIP candidate, Cameron replied: "it's a free country...often in families you get split loyalties", before intriguingly adding: "I'm trying to think of my own family. I don't want to reveal which members of my family ...". He quickly trailed off but the clear suggestion was that one or several members of the Cameron clan don't vote Conservative. "On the whole, they're all pretty supportive," he added, sounding less than convincing. Cameron couldn't bring himself to mention the word 'UKIP' (a fact that Martha Kearney rightly drew attention to) but could there be a supporter of Nigel Farage's party in the ranks? 

I'm reminded of the incident before the 2010 general election when Ed Vaizey, a friend of Cameron's from Oxford University, suggested that Samantha Cameron "might have voted for Blair" and "would be going into this poll thinking 'Is Cameron the real deal or should I stick with Brown?'" A furious CCHQ went on to force the-then shadow culture minister to issue this retraction: "I am very embarrassed by this. I had no justification for what I said. The only thing I do know from seeing David and Sam for many years is that Sam worked night and day on David's campaign in 1997 in Stafford and, as she said, has never voted Labour."

David Cameron leaves 10 Downing Street in central London on April 24, 2013. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

I'm a Remain voter who feels optimistic about Brexit - here's why

Take back control is more than just a slogan. 

Most politics geeks have found themselves deliciously sucked into a soap opera over the last few days. It’s fast-paced, personality-based and ripe for speculation. But underneath it all, the deeper, harder questions remain – what does Brexit look like, and how can we make it work?

When news of Leave’s victory broke in the early hours of Friday morning (is it possible that was just a week ago?) I felt like the only Remain voter who had some kind of optimism. Fellow Remainers still reeling from the result berate me for it, but I continue to find two reasons for hope.

First, leaving gives us a chance to build a different type of economy. I don’t wish to belittle the recent economic fallout, but with the right leadership and negotiations, we could use this moment to push for an increase in trade with the Commonwealth and beyond. A fall in the pound will disappoint many, but it could help with a much needed rebalancing of our economy, moving from one predominantly based on financial services in London to manufacturing across the regions. 

Second – and perhaps more importantly – leaving is a chance to rebuild our politics. For too long, millions of people in this country have felt ignored or exploited by those who call themselves democratic leaders. In protest, they have left mainstream parties to join UKIP or the hordes of non-voters. In winning this referendum, they have finally been listened to. Perhaps the pressure cooker of discontent can finally be taken off the boil. Perhaps parties can use this result as a chance to rebuild trust and shake up some of our other institutions that are badly in need of reform. 

This point was really brought home to me by a student in the school where I teach. The morning of the referendum she told me that she didn’t think we’d leave the EU, even if the people voted for it. Her friends agreed, saying it was “weird you have to vote in pencil”. They were scared the people’s voice could so easily be rubbed out. When I saw her the next day, a small part of me was relieved that these students had seen that people can genuinely trump the establishment. 

If you’re not convinced, just imagine the backlash if Remain had won by a point or two. We almost certainly would then have voted in an extremely right-wing government, much the same way that the SNP saw a boost after they lost the independence referendum last year. 

Of course, a positive path for Brexit is far from guaranteed. Any leader that goes back on the vote, or tries to fudge it by saying that open borders are a price worth paying, is going to do worse than plummet in the polls - they are going to undermine our entire democracy. And a whole generation’s trust in politicians is already dangerously low.

But this doesn’t have to be a moment for the right. Good leaders understand that Leave’s “take back control” message was about a genuine concern with our borders. Great leaders will acknowledge that it also reflected a deeper concern about the need for agency. They understand the vote was a rejection of a neoliberal approach to the economy that fails to make space for well-paid work, family and community.

The public voted for decreased pressure on public services and a Britain that would negotiate as hard in India as it would in Germany for trade deals. They voted to end a perceived overcentralisation of power by elites, and create a more democratic Britain that gives more dignity to its people. I might not have believed that leaving the EU was the best way to achieve these things, but I’m on the left because I believe we are best placed to make these desires real.  

The vote to Leave or Remain was a binary decision. But Brexit is not. What type of path we take now depends entirely on the direction we choose, and the perseverance we show along the way.

Rowenna Davis is Labour PPC for Southampton Itchen and a councillor for Peckham