Seems like some people like to fight dirty. “In a leaked email to members, chairwoman Sophie Shrubsole said: “CCHQ (Conservative headquarters) have requested that Conservative Future members from across the country gather in Warwick to form our own publicity stunt. This will be a sign to the Prime Minister and the Labour Party as a whole, that as Conservatives we are ready for the General Election. It will no doubt act as a demoralising element to Gordon Brown’s trip. Ms Shrubsole told members: “This will not appear as a Facebook event, as we are trying to keep our preparations as low-key as possible.”…Now while Sophie is not the “chairwoman”, I do personally think that BUC”F” has sunk to a new low.
From what I’ve heard it was regarded as rather amusing at the conference. Pity the Tories are having to resort to this, no one was there at the opening of the airbrushed Dave posters, admittadely they were vandalised a bit later on, but your kind of asking for it when they’re that bad.
Max
And in November last year, the party’s chairman Eric Pickles threatened to sack members who indulged in “dirty tricks”.
He told Tory Radio: “Of course it’s going to be a dirty [Labour Party] campaign, we’ve seen that a lot in all the by-elections… the dirtier it is, the more it will backfire on those who seem to spread the dirt.
“I’m giving out straight advice: anybody does any dirty tricks from our side, we will sack them.
“Anyone does any dirty tricks in constituencies, we’ll take a very firm disciplinary line on that.
“You can’t be an open and transparent party and engage in dirty tricks.”"
Looks like some heads should role then
I don’t think it was a particularly dirty trick. Protest is fine. But it was slightly pathetic if it really was meant to have a “demoralising” effect on us. About 8 people with banners saying “Brown out”. Hardly going to do much damage considering there were hundreds of people there supporting the party.
So when Labour youth members protested outside the Conservative Party conference in Maggie Thatcher masks, or when they took to the streets in Crewe and Nantwich in morning suits that was all fair play? Come on Max. All we did was go with a few plackards saying “Brown out”. We did not scream and swear at him. We did not seek to disrupt his speech. We did not seek to cause trouble. All we did was make it clear that we oppose his leadership. That after all is our job as the “opposition” is it not? I could understand you taking issue with “dirty tricks” if we’d caused trouble or shouted obscenities but it was all perfectly amicable and dignified. I even blew Harman a kiss when she drove past us what more do you want lol? Even Mandleson gave us a wave!
Also I think you under-estimate the impact of the protest. Whilst there may not have been hundreds of us we certainly made our point and the BBC, Sky News and the other major news channels covering Browns arrival live noted that they could hear “loud shouts of Brown out” in the background. Point made, job done. Thats not dirty tricks thats politics
Yeh don’t worry I kinda guessed that, I was just hoping to stir something up, worth a try, lol! And I wish I’d seen it on tv, would’ve been there to see you do it to, cept I was home for reading week
Haha we made sure we were a suitable distance away from the PM… so as not to be in range of any flying mobile cellular devices that may have come our way ;P
Or shoes, lol
lol WHAT A GOOD IDEA! I haaaddn’t thought of it… I was too preoccupied with the mobiles to think of the shoes lol. Although you can’t blame us, at one stage he stared straight at us then seemed to put his hand in his pocket and everyone hit the deck lol…
Like I said, nothing wrong with it. The opposition should protest its their job. Fact is that being in opposition is fairly simple as you are never really blamed for what goes on. It just seemed slightly pathetic, not only in terms of numbers, but that the only thing that was said was ‘Brown Out’. Fairly mundane message.
I certainly won’t be doing the same at the Conservative Party Conference because, quite frankly, I think there are more effective ways of doing things, such as speaking to voters.
On the bullying row, everyone has had a laugh and a giggle about what are, as yet, only allegations but there is a serious matter that I think has been missed by many commentators here in the search for a story or cheap political points. That point is that this organisation which is supposed to support individuals who ring for help, is supposed to pride itself on protecting the anonymity of the people who use it. Just because someone works in number 10, does that mean that this person should lose that right to anonymity just because it makes, undoubtedly, a good story. I think it is shamefully irresponsible for the head of this organisation to have released these details. I am not condoning bullying, far from it, any accusations of illegality should be thoroughly investigated. But if people, even those who work for government, are deemed not worth the same treatment when using a service which is supposed to protect their identity then, what really does that say about that organisation? Were this Childline or the Samaritans, we would be appalled and I think in this instance we should be too. Just because something is a good story does not mean it should be in the public domain. That is not censorship, that is called responsibility.
But thats the point Sean – we kept to the point. We didn’t want a slanging match, we only protested when Brown arrived and when he left. Incidently i’ve heard a few Labourites say how low the numbers were but let me remind you –
1) We had about a days notice
2) It was reading week so many people had gone home
3) It was in Coventry when many of our members are in Bham
4) It was an 8am start in the freezing cold for a short protest and they are students remember lol
The fact we got 15 out is a miracle. Incidently that is what we did spend our time doing – we spoke to interested passers by who asked us what we were doing, some even joined in the protest, we told them what we were about, we handed out a few leaflets/books and we got our point across. It wasn’t a high calibre protest designed to unseat the government of the day, although it is flattering to know you seem to suggest our humble university society capable of such feats
, it was merely an opportunity for us to voice our displeasure at his leadership. The fact it made all the news channels and that we’re still talking about it shows it was effective. Far more so than we thought it would be.
Depends what you mean ‘effective’. If the intention was to ‘demoralise’ us as the quote says, then I think it did the opposite. If the aim was top get on tv, then it was effective. Congratulations.
Think far from underestimating the effect of the protest, it is the newspapers and press making more of something than it actually was, which is often the case.
People continue to make out like this “email” was some kind of top secret CCHQ approved statement that had been drafted, approved and circulated from the “Conservative command center” – All very dramatic and “spooks-esque” but im afraid incorrect – If anything it was a hurried email sent out by a flustered individual who was doing her best to organise as large a scale protest as possible at very short notice.
In her hurry she nost likely adopted a poor choice of words which misrepresented the purpose of the protest. It certainly was never our intention, nor were we ever encouraged for that matter, to “cause trouble” and Im sorry but we have more common sense than to think a Conservative protest would “dishearten Labour activists”… If anything I expect it would spur them on in the same way it would had Labour activists protested at a Tory event.
Our protest was by no means a “dirty trick” as Labour have shamefully tried to make out, it was merely meant to show that there are many in the country who are dis-satisfied with Brown and many who want him out. The national press were there and it was a good opportunity to remind people of that fact before Brown launched his election campaign. Therefore I think Labour and indeed some in the media have blown this “email” out of proportion and misinterpreted our intentions. Actions speak louder than words and our actions as far as I can see were perfectly acceptable. We came, we protested in a respectful but determined way, we didn’t respond to some outrageous comments coming from the hoards of dilluded trots emmerging from the speech and we left satisifed our point had been well made and well publicised. If I was Labour I’d shut up about it now lol…
OK, to call people ‘trots’ and then to proceed in exactly the same sentence to spell both ‘deluded’ and ‘emerging’ incorrectly, does very little to help your cause. I am not trying to be pedantic, mistakes are made when people type things, by me included. I am just pointing out how preposterous that sentence reads as a result.
And I do think it is utterly appalling to refer to followers of any political party as ‘deluded trots’ just because you disagree with them. I disagree with Conservatives for firm ideological reasons but I don’t think they are in any senses deluded. I think that they are wrong, but not wrong because they have been easily misled due to a lack of intelligence, which is what the term ‘deluded’ implies. What Conservatives and I have happens to be called a ‘difference of opinion’. The fact is that I happen to have a little bit more respect for other people and their opinions than you, as well as, though I would not have been so presumptious as to have assumed so until now, a little bit more intelligence.
I have no problem with you protesting. It’s not a ‘dirty trick’ and I think, to be fair, Mr Ramsey was seeking to provoke this sort of reaction by labelling it as such, rather than actually believing it to be. Go for it and protest as far as I am concerned. I am giving you my opinion; which is that if the attempt was to ‘de-moralise’ the Labour Party as the quote says, whatever may be wrong with that quote as a source in your view, then from where I was it failed. Most Labour supporters I saw noticed it and did not seem in any sense ‘de-moralised’.
I will happily wager money that were there a similar crowd at a Conservative Party event, it would not be mentioned by the press. This is because it is fashionable at the moment for Labour to be portrayed as unpopular, divided and de-moralised, when in fact these labels are vastly exaggerated and distorted from what is actually true. That comes with being in government, and especially comes with having been in government for a long time and I am more than happy to accept that. Just as I am happy to accept your right to protest as I am happy to state that it was fairly pathetic, in my eyes, and in the eyes of the one or two others who I spoke to about it.
It is politics, you and I disagree. Stop being so defensive and grow up.
Haha me being pulled up for spelling? On this site? Reeaaalllyy? I think if you review almost EVERY post on this website you will find multiple spelling mistakes but i’ve never felt the need to point it out because its the content of the posts I take issue with, not pedantics. Listen mate Im not engaging in an essay writing competition – Im writing as I think of it and I couldn’t give two hoots if I make one or two spelling mistakes nor do I care if anyone else does – I don’t spend time drafting and redrafting my replies you know lol.
Anyway to deal with the rest of your comment – I think you over-estimate the scale of my opposition. I really couldn’t care less what is written on this site, in fact I expect it to be flippant and “opposition for oppositions sake” to anything remotely Tory. So im not suprised, bothered or “defensive” as you put it if anything im amused and I like to engage in a bit of cordial, I hope, banter.
If people reply to my comments I will obviously reply back. Thats not being defensive its continuing a conversation and picking people up on anything they may have said that I don’t agree with, as they would do with me. Similarly I was not referring to every Labour activist as a “delluded trot” although certainly there were some! The only reason I can say that legitimately is due to some of the crap they some spouting at us e.g:
“I still remember what it was like under that bitch Thatcher” First of all – charming nice to see courtesy is alive and well in Labour. Secondly – The same “bitch Thatcher” that New Labour, the party they apparently support, continually praised and snuggled up to? What major policies of hers have your precious party reversed? Thats right – none.
“You wouldn’t be in education if it weren’t for Labour” – I howled at that one… the same Labour that introduced top up fees and priced thousands of students out of education and saddled millions more with astronomical debt? Yes well done Labour.
“Tories hate the poor” – So the abolition of the 10p tax band, the soaring gap between the richest and the poorest and the worst social mobility ever is helping the working man is it?
They were but a taste of the deluded, yes deluded, comments emmerging from people who clearly still think of Labour as this “champion of the working man”. Something it clearly isn’t anymore. The hard left “class warrior” mentality, a mentality Kinnock and Blair tried to flush out of the Labour party because the country were sick of it, is still prevailant amongst some of its members. That to me IS deluded. They can’t see that, in the words of Peter Mandleson, “we’re all Thatcherites now”. The British political debate today is how we apply Thatcherism and how we redistribute its rewards not whether it works, but some in your party still seem determined to fight it, even when their opposition flies in the face of their own party’s record!
“Deluded – To deceive the mind”