Catching up on emails before nap...

date  Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 5:35 PM subject CF Reforms Dear Area Chairmen,

It is with great regret that I feel it necessary to write this e-mail however I feel that something needs to be said so that we can move forward from the divisions that have arisen in recent weeks. I also thought that given the criticism we have come under for failing to communicate, I should communicate my thoughts and what I intend to do at the Exec meeting to you.  I would like to state at the beginning of this that I cannot speak for any of my colleagues – I would only like to explain my position to you and why I feel that I have to take it.

My personal concerns echo much of what Adele said in her e-mail that ended up on Tory Bear. I also share many of the concerns expressed by Clare Hilley (AC for London South), Alex Agius (AC for Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire), and Paul Wells (President of UEA CF), Matt Lewis (AC for Staffordshire), Matthew Davison (AC for Norfolk and Suffolk) and many other members who have sought to contact me privately.  As most of you have read at least some of their comments and e-mails, I will not seek to repeat what they have said so well already, save to say that their arguments and my own are similar.

I would also like to recognise that the opposition to these reforms does not appear to London-centric but from all areas. The opposition to these reforms also comes not only from those who voted for Matt Richardson or Daryl Williams at the last election but many who voted for Michael as well. It would be a mistake for the opposition to these reforms to be viewed as an attack on anyone’s personality. Those that oppose it, or at least the majority of those that do, do so as a genuine matter of principle.

My reading of Michael’s e-mail is that if any reform proposal is decided at exec, it will be sent to the party board without a consultation period. I have checked with some of my NME colleagues as to whether that is their interpretation as well and it is. In my mind that is not acceptable and I intend to express this sentiment in the Executive meeting on the 13^th.

When I first considered running for Exec for a second time, I spoke to the then Chairman Mark Clarke about what exactly the role involved.  Mark very kindly spent most of an hour going through how the organisation worked, putting me right on some of my more loony ideas  and explaining that in a voluntary organisation no one ever  truly has power they only have influence. It is that final point that I have continued coming back to during over the past few months.  

As an Executive we do not have the power to force our membership to do anything that they do not want to. It is important to remember that volunteers are just that- volunteers – and anytime they give to helping our campaigns is voluntary.

To push reforms through which do not have the support of a substantial majority of the membership will cause them to lose what faith they have in CF and to potentially to feel so slighted as to withhold their support, in terms of time and physical resources from the organisation. At anytime this is damaging but in the run up to a General Election it will be especially so.

If any package of reforms is agreed on the meeting of the 13^th, I feel that we will be opening up a Pandora’s Box.  It at best means that this destructive debate goes on and on. At worst it means that CF gets an unnecessary and counterproductive structural overall the year before a General Election.

CF has developed an increasingly unhealthy focus on internal politics. This has to stop so that we can return to focusing on what really matters – developing new branches, empowering and supporting Area and Branch Chairmen and Campaigning in our Marginal Seats.  

I will be voting against these reforms in Executive and whilst I cannot speak for any of my colleagues I sincerely hope that they are voted down.

All the Best,

Patrick Sullivan 

And so it continues... 

Will comment on this whole saga in depth at some point but in the mean time TB can't really think straight and needs some sleep.

TB is very hungover.

Great weekend but bear with a sore head today.



This should keep you amused.

Sarah how could you?

Apparently the bear behind her criticised Madam VPILF on his blog...

TB is watching his step...

Busy little bear

Another busy weekend for TB so blogging will be light to non-existant...

Will get the the NME ratings index up in the next few days if you're lucky...

Seems it all got a little heated in the last 24 hours if the amount of emails and texts TB got last night are anything to go by. Here's a little song to lighten up your Friday...



If that doesn't calm things down nothing will!

Air Jonah

Remember

when that plane fell out of the sky above Heathrow in January?

Well today the official report blames ice in the fuel

. A previously unheard of problem...blah blah... Tory Bear can reveal that the real reasons this happened was because Gordon Brown was on the way to China and his motorcade drove under the approach path of BA038. TB has it good authority that his car had recently been installed with a brand new security system which utilised a RF transmitter to block out any mobile phone triggered bombs. These systems can have up to a two mile range and it apparently caused the Boeing 777 EEC’s (electronic engine controls) to sense a “over-boost” situation, thereby commanding a reduced-thrust situation for the engines.

Now it was originally spun that Gordo was already in the lounge when the plane came down but look what

Ben Brogan

said at the time

"This gets weirder. The PM's motorcade was coming up the A4 as the plane approached and at one point his detectives grew alarmed. The suggestion is the stricken Airbus misjudged its approach and nearly took out the PM..."

Coincidence? TB thinks not...



Having originally been sceptical about this story TB commented that it could have been a bird flying into the engine. His contact had this option covered though -

"Yeah but there were no feathers"

And so it continues...

CCF Reforms‏
Ffrom:	Adele Douglas (adele.n.douglas@hotmail.co.uk)
Ssent:	04 September 2008 18:42:51
Tto:	Christian May (christianjmay@googlemail.com); Cllr Steve Ricketts (steven.ricketts@plymouth.gov.uk); Michael Rock (michael@rock4cf.com); Patrick Sullivan (patricksullivan21@hotmail.com); Anastasia Beaumont-Bott (anastasiabeaumontbott@yahoo.co.uk); Richard Jackson (rngjackson@googlemail.com)

Hi Guys,

With regards to the publicity that the proposed reforming of CF has had today, I would like to make clear my position.

I expect that there will be a vote within the NME on the 13th - I fully intend to vote against the reforms being put to the Board.
I don't believe that the idea of Regional Chairmen is a bad one; they exist within the main voluntary Party. However, I do not believe that an RC could perform the function that a CF AC performs - due to constraints of time, travel and it simply being harder to be familiar with a whole region of the UK than one county. I believe that organisation in the remote parts of England and Wales would suffer if AC's were removed. Michael, I know we have discussed this before, and you said that AC's would be "optional" with regards to how the individual branches wish to organise themselves. This is fine, the more autonomy people have to run their branches the more successful they have proven to be. However, I believe that it would be far too much pressure on one individual as Regional Chairman to do the job that currently c. 25 AC's per region are doing - particularly if they are performing the function of an NME member at the same time. I also believe that the majority of AC's are passionate about, and committed to their area. I do not think you would get this depth of personal involvement on a regional level. I would also question the commitment that the executive of RC's could give to the projects of CF - such as Social Action - if they are first and foremost concentrating on regional politics. These projects need leadership and commitment, as does running a region or area. I feel that under these proposals, the lines would become too blurred, and there would be a very small amount of people trying to juggle a very large amount of responsibility.

I am aware that we do not currently have every Area Chairman position filled, but, as I have said many times previously, the key to achieving this is further engagement with groups of young people who are "small c" conservatives, and having a more positive approach to campaigning. We will not attract new members by re-writing the constitution but by being proactive, visible and approachable. Similar projects have been tried in the past, and have failed - mainly due to opposition in the North - the exact people you claim this will further include.

I would also urge you to remember that CF is first and foremost a voluntary organisation, and if members are not happy they will vote with their feet and leave. I think turnout at recent events has shown that this is already beginning to happen. Any proposed reforms to the organisation to which they give their time and effort to should be put first and foremost to the membership, as I believe we can only act legitimately as an executive with the member's consent. I will also say that the handling of this situation has been appalling and the membership are beginning to think that the NME hold them in contempt.

The Conservative Future that I joined was a fair and democratic organisation (unlike many other youth political organisations), and, as long as this is still true, the member's stake in the running of CF cannot be removed. Fairly or not, this is what these reforms are perceived to be doing, and I cannot stand by and watch while CF factionalises and tears itself apart.
This should not be taken as personally by anyone, it is an email I have been contemplating sending for a long time and expresses simply my opinions on what I believe to be right for the organisation.

See you all on the 13th.

ADx

Well that should liven things up a bit...

Talk amongst yourselves...

About this...

and...

Enjoy...

Rock's support dips as the reforms are chewed over...

of members are unhappy about the communication they have received regarding the proposed changes to the structure of Conservative Future.

Based on a survey of 13% of the CF electorate there is clearly a feeling that something needs to be done to reinvigorate and restructure the organisation but the reforms put forward by Michael Rock are clearly not seen as the answer:

As a result Michael's strong personal rating of 72.4% just two months ago has dropped ten points to 62%. Some members clearly used this opportunity to vent their frustrations with 15% of them giving the Rock a Zero rating.

TB isn't surprised by these developments and has voiced his concerns about this matter on many occasion. This poll proves his analysis that it was not necessarily reforms people were anti - it's being kept in the dark they object to.

It's not too late to salvage this. TB is receiving word that an email from Michael will go out to the Area Chairman sometime this afternoon...

Looks like this could be the announcement they've all been waiting for...

What has TB unleashed?

TB thought there would be a response to that last letter, but not this quickly... Luckily still up waiting for darling Sarah to begin her speech so caught this one early and can get this next letter up straight away:

Once again this has been reproduced at the request of the author:

Dear Christian/Tory Bear,

I felt it was about time to give my views on the proposed plans to change CF. I am emailing Tory Bear, as I believe we need to have an open debate and am happy to have my views made public.

I feel at best, the suggestions you have made would be counter-productive.

Firstly, however, I must echo the sentiments of Alex Agius. The manner in
which I first became aware of this plans was simply unacceptable. For such
drastic reforms to have been announced through a  series of blog posts on
third party sites, rather than direct attempts to communicate with the
Branch and Area chairs, is disgraceful. Although everyone accepts that CF
needs to change, the lack of communication in establishing change merely
reflects a continuation of the culture which created the present dire
state CF is in.

You, as a guest author on Tory Bear, described the replacement of area
chairs with regional coordinators, as being intended to make CF “more
effective at a local level and to increase its accountability.” This
simply will not work. A Regional Chairman would inevitably become
detached, due to simple geographical reasons, from much of their region;
focusing their attention on their locality or on a few big CF groups which
are easy to visit. How much attention would a regional chair for the East
of England, who combines a job with his CF duties, have to spend helping
out the Great Yarmouth CF? This already occurs within the current area
system. It is in practice impossible to be a good area chair for both
Norfolk and Suffolk. What is needed is a breaking up of the area; not
further centralisation. In the context of Student life regions make sense
simply due to the fact that we are dealing with a small number of
institutions, it does not make sense when one considers that in Norfolk
alone there are around 25 CF groups.

With this in mind regional elections would rapidly become polarising
events, with each county having their own candidate and the results having
everything to do with location not ability. In the East of England region,
a UEA/Norfolk candidate would fight an Essex, and possibly a Cambridge
one. Each election would become a messy and bloody affair with the
effective regional support being the prize. Communication and cooperation
would become increasingly difficult, with tribalism becoming even more
prevalent. As we are nearing a general election, the idea that we should
unleash the hounds of war upon ourselves rather than labour is pure
madness. CF is already too focused on internal politicking rather than
winning elections, (real ones that is, a lot of work goes into internal
elections.)

I will concede that a regional organiser supporting the efforts of a
larger team of area chairs could possibly work. As would the creation of
them as a professional paid position. Having only a regional chairman
however, would leave the majority of branches on their own. If you wanted
to destroy CF as nation wide institution, leaving only localised fiefdoms
around the CF groups big enough to survive without regional support, then
this policy would achieve your aim.


CF needs reform, but rather than grand structural reforms what we need
first is genuine effectiveness in communication, a centralised resource
website, regular events held across the nation and crucially the injection
of funding required allowing us to professionalise. I am not in favour of
the status quo, but I fail to see how this would improve the situation.

Yours
Paul Wells
University of East Anglia CF Chairman
CF Student Life Elections Officer

And so it begins...

TB has been looking at the survey results that are coming in and it is  no surprise that the much talked about reforms play a big role in shaping members' opinions of those in charge of Conservative Future. TB will do the number crunching tomorrow and release the results over the next few days, but in the mean time this letter could well be the beginning of an onslaught of opposition to not necessarily the reforms, but they way in which they are being put through...

This was received late last night and is reproduced in full with the authors permission:

Dear Christian/Tory Bear,

I am writing to you about the blog post you wrote/published on the tory bear blog on the 22^nd of August 2008.

You started your article by saying that the NME have been watching lots of comments and conjecture from Conservative Future members flying around recently about big changes to the structure of our organisation. Changes you acknowledge are in your plans later in your article i.e. the introduction of Regional Coordinators and the abolition of the NME and Area Chairmen. You go on to ask members to provide feedback on these ideas to the NME (a request fellow NME member Patrick Sullivan repeats in the same blog post in the comments section).

I am interested to hear your full proposals and would like to ask when you intend to publish them so that the members you represent and are requesting feedback from can see all the plans in full and gain a true understanding of what you are proposing? You appear to criticise those who are speculating about the full details of your plans but you do not seem to appreciate that you have greatly added to this speculation by your blog post and failing to publish your proposals in full. Publishing your proposals in full would very quickly kill off this speculation you seem to find unwelcome. Not only would this end the speculation you talk about but it is necessary if you are to carry the majority of the membership. It has been a little while (13 days) since you began this speculation and brought your proposed changes  to a wider audience by your blog post but yet the members are still waiting to see your full plans. When do you intend to publish them? My understanding is that you do not have long (a few days) to do this if you are to do so and allow time for the members to digest and provide the feedback you requested before the next NME meeting.

After reading your blog post and despite the fact that it is the NME who are making these proposals I felt it unfair to expect the NME to do all the work to communicate these changes and reach out to every member to explain your plans. So to do my bit and make it as easy as possible to allow this flow of information I contacted another NME member who I will not name (the NME member who I felt most comfortable with discussing these plans). She refused point blank to discuss the matter with me when I raised the topic and told me that this was due to the NME making a group decision not to discuss the matter or talk to the members they profess to represent about these changes. As I am sure you will agree this is unacceptable, the NME are there to represent the organisations members who elected them, in fact many of the current NME members promised to do just that while seeking election to the NME not that long ago. However now it would appear (if my friend on the NME is correct) they are now involved in actively withholding information and are not interested in representing the members who elected them while trying to bring about large organisational changes. It also seems a crazy position that my friend on the NME cannot talk to me about this matter but you can publicly write blog posts contributing to the speculation.

As for the substance to your proposals I have not yet come to form an opinion (How can I? You have yet to publish your proposals) but the way this matter has been handled has already put me off before I have even seen the details. I will be interested to see your thought on my criticisms of how this matter has been handled, the behaviour of the NME in actively and deliberately withholding information from its members & refusing to discuss this matter with them and look forward to seeing your proposals in full.

Many thanks,

Alex Agius.

Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire Conservative Future Area Chairman.

Beige vs. Scurvy Steve

This email from the enigmatically named "Hidden Pride" pinged into TB's inbox a couple of hours ago:

Your survey has a flaw. It can be taken over and over again from the same computer/IP so Steve "For Britain" Rickets can big himself up an awful lot!

HP

OK so nothing new in TB receiving a bitchy email about one of the elected Conservative Future officials or the like, but something about this one made TB check out the finer details of the IP address of the sender... 

Wait let's have a closer look... 

Surely not?

Would that be owenlmeredith@googlemail.com? 

Isn't that the host email account for owen@owenmeredith.com? 

Owen "

Delivering

for Everyone, Aspiration for All

" Meredith how could you?

Shamelessly slagging off your fellow elected officials... tut tut.

Young, fun and... Republican?

If you think young Tories in this country get a bit of stick for the old YC memories, spare a moment's thought for the young Republicans who are battling the fact that Obama has brainwashed their entire generation... Well almost all of them:

"A lot of people my age don't have a grasp on what's going on in the world," said a 22 year-old seating attendant who wished to remain nameless (attendants were not supposed to talk politics to guests). "It might be appealing to have the government try and bail out poor people, but that's not the way the government works. It might be appealing to get out of Iraq, but that's not the way war works. It might be appealing to have the government fix schools, but that's not the way education works. McCain is talking in practical terms, and it's time young people got more practical."

Baring in mind this came from the ever irritating

Huffington Post

, it isn’t likely to be the most balanced of views on the young Republican movement, but the rest of the article is well worth a read.

Word from TB’s friends who recently spent a lot of time in the company of Young Republicans painted a different picture. It seems that the press across the pond are as unfair as certain attacks CF has to put up with…

Classic line at the end of this video:

Seems they have some hotties...

Oh dear...

Maybe TB won't make it Washington after all : (

If you have half an hour....

TB strongly recommends you listen to this

amazing interview

with Shaun Bailey that was on Radio4 this morning.

Inspirational stuff...

Cheers

Thank you very much to everyone who, after just three months, voted Tory Bear to the giddy heights of 35th in

Iain Dale's 2008 Top 100 Right of Centre Blogs

.

TB is looking forward to meeting lots of you in Birmingham.

If you go down to the Brum today...

Click to enlarge

(More infomation here)

Pay now with PayPal:
(Please email editor@torybear.com to confirm your payment is received)

wtf?

Why the hell is The Times spending money on GoogleAds spreading unsubstantiated, tainted and poorly sourced gossip?

Are things really that desperate for the dead tree lot?

Pre-Conference Ratings

It's that time again already... Please click the link below and take a moment to fill out the ten questions here. Just did it and it takes less than a minute!

TB will re run this survey the week after Birmingham and see how the results change.

Cheers

Enjoying this election a little too much...

Despite having no vote in the USA and having a go at people last week who act like they do, TB can't help sitting back and watching this fascinating election unfold. For a political junkie like TB each twist and turn and new development is new crack.

Americans take their elections to a whole new level. This years DNC was smashed all viewing records and had more people watching Obama than the Oscars. Our conference season is going to be tiny in the face of the grand conventions- party conference struggles to get decent coverage from the rolling news channels, let alone the "prime-time."

Bare with TB if he gets more than a little excited from time to time over the next eight weeks. The combination of a fascinating primary season and the fact the race is still wide open and likely to get bloody could make this the most exciting election in a very long time... or McCain or Palin will do something fucking stupid and BO will storm it... but only time will tell!

At this rate TB is very, very tempted to fly out in November... Who's coming?

In the meantime here's a little tune for y'all.



Give it a minute to get going...

True Love Waits...

This from CNN:

"Sarah Palin, who announced on Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, indicated during her run for Alaska governor that she was a firm supporter of abstinence-only education in schools.

In a 2006 Eagle Forum questionnaire, Palin indicated that she supported funding abstinence-until-marriage education programs instead of teaching sex-education programs.

"Explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," Palin wrote in the conservative group’s questionnaire."

Hmmmm whoopsy daisy... seems the message didn't quite resonate at home.

This won't do her any damage, if anything it will dog-whistle the middle-America Republican base. Palin doesn't just talk the talk about being pro-life she walks the walk too and will do everything to help her daughter. This would have broken at some point and the sooner the better really. Especially as this can be used to help kill the

the speculation

that her youngest son was actually her daughters has been blown out of all proportion. The photos of the supposed "bump" under Bristol's jumper do not warrant the attention this story got and the lovely Sarah looks pretty damn pregnant

here

.

These developments prove two things about this election:

1. The Democrats are running very scared about Palin.

Obama may be feigning his disgust but the left have woken up. After the battering that Kerry got, going from war-hero to fraud in 2 months has not been forgotten and the left have learnt how to fight dirty.

2. This really is the year of the blogger.

The fake pregnancy attack on the Daily Kos

went from being an obnoxious smear by some bearded little lefty to hitting the networks and international newspapers in just 24 hours. Just four years ago the MSM treated the blogsphere with slight disdain and now every single network and every single newspaper in both the USA and UK has a full staff of bloggers and strong internet presence. The bloggers break the "news", true or not and the old guard follow. The prominence of the blogs in USA2008 bodes extremely well for the UK whenever our miserable, cynical and negative government finally comes to a grind halt and we get out turn on the stump...

But with power comes responsibility... The left truly are the nasty ones these days the DK lies aren't something to be celebrated but demonstrate how powerful the blogs have become.