Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Peter Kellner

GET UPDATES FROM Peter Kellner
 

Let Cameron Be Cameron

Posted: 11/09/2012 01:00

An open letter to the Prime Minister from YouGov President Peter Kellner

Dear David,

So far, so bad. Last week you reshuffled half your cabinet in order to inject vitality into your government and demonstrate a fresh sense of purpose. Sadly, voters are unpersuaded. YouGov polls since the reshuffle show Labour retaining its lead of 10 points or so, and our survey for the Sunday Times helps to explain why.

Your latest personal rating is one of your worst. Just 33% think you are doing well as Prime Minister, while 61% think you are doing badly. This net rating of minus 28 compares with minus 22 for Ed Miliband. I'm sure you will find little consolation in the fact that Nick Clegg, on minus 58, is doing even worse.

Now, if you can stomach yet more bad news, look at your personal scores when we tested a series of specific leadership attributes:

% who think Cameron...

 

 

Is in touch

23%

Is out of touch

67%

Has plenty of ideas

26%

Has run out of ideas

57%

Is decisive

32%

Is indecisive

53%

Is strong

33%

Is weak

51%

Is likeable

41%

Is unlikeable

45%

To be sure, some negativity is inevitable. You'd expect most Labour voters to give you the thumbs down and, sure enough, they do. And maybe you are not too worried that around half of all Lib Dem voters dislike you. But you also get low marks from a sizeable minority of Conservative voters: 27% of them think you are indecisive and 25% accuse you of being out of touch. They don't seem to have got the right message from last week's reshuffle, and that SHOULD worry you - somewhat more, in fact, than the somewhat excitable stories over the weekend about a challenge from Boris Johnson.

What can you do about it? For some years, one central piece of advice to all leading politicians has been: be yourself. Authenticity is what counts. Did you watch that wonderful American TV series the West Wing? If so, you may recall the staff memo to the fictional President, Josiah Bartlet, who was struggling to change the perception that he was a timid leader too readily buffeted by events. The memo's advice was: "Let Bartlet be Bartlet".

Now, authenticity is vital. Voters don't like leaders whom they think aren't being straight with them, or who say things for effect and not because they mean them. But authenticity may not be enough. Joe Klein, who eventually owned up to being the author of Primary Colors, the best recent novel about presidential campaigning, amended his views when Bill Clinton was President. Clinton, Klein argued, had managed, quite brilliantly, to fake authenticity. Klein felt that what was really needed was a quality that could not be faked, or at least not so easily. This quality, he had concluded, was courage. A leader who deserved respect was one who was seen to take genuine risks to achieve what s/he truly believed. Think of it as authenticity-plus.

Perhaps the clearest example of authenticity-plus in our lifetime was Margaret Thatcher. She believed wholeheartedly in privatising state-run industries, letting people own their own homes and curbing the power of the trade unions. She stuck with these policies and faced down opposition from much of the public and even some of her own backbenchers. And she won three big election victories.

My point here is not to argue whether Thatcherism was right or wrong, but rather to illustrate the dividends to be won from having the courage to stick to what you believe.

How could you apply that dictum to your current plight? If your way back to public respect is to take risks to pursue your beliefs, then you need to define your beliefs and identify the necessary risks. You need to "let Cameron be Cameron". What, though, does this actually mean? A big part of your problem is that many, perhaps most, of us, have little idea who "Cameron" in this context actually is; and I don't think that's simply because you are constrained by your coalition with the Lib Dems. If anything, the need to negotiate policies with another party makes it more, not less, vital to tell us what you stand for. And it is more vital now than ever before, with your old slogans about "the Big Society" and "go green, vote blue" attracting so much derision.

If anything, you made things harder with your reshuffle. Take health. You had two courageous options: to insist that Andrew Lansley had done a great job in pushing through vital reforms and keep him as Health Secretary; or admit that the reform bill was botched and appoint a new health secretary whose job was to put things right. Instead, you sent a profoundly uncourageous mixed message: that the policy was right but the man wrong.

Likewise with the row over whether Heathrow should have a third runway. Courageous option number one: stick to your manifesto promise to oppose a third runway and keep Justine Greening as Transport Secretary. Courageous option number two: acknowledge that your pledge was a mistake and install a new minister who was prepared to say so. Again you did neither. You demoted Ms Greening but decided... well, what DID you decide? Interviews given by different ministers in recent days have failed to clarify whether the prospect of a third runway in due course is on, off, or doing the hokey-cokey. The only certainty is an absence of courage.

Now, a word of warning. Courage can bring more pain than gain. Tony Blair displayed courage of a sort when he sent British troops into Iraq nine years ago. He took two big risks: that weapons of mass destruction would be found, and that once Saddam Hussein had been removed from power, Iraq would move smoothly towards a contented democracy. When neither risk paid off, Blair's reputation nosedived. In contrast, Mrs Thatcher's equally risky decision to send a task force to liberate the Falkland Islands back in 1982 massively enhanced her reputation when the Argentine forces surrendered.

In a way, that's the point. Courage can lead to disaster as well as triumph. It's that very danger that defines a true leader, one who sets out to master events, knowing that things may go horribly wrong.

So I can't offer you a strategy that is bound to succeed. Would that an option of risk-free courage were available. Sadly, it never is. Rather your choice is between taking risks, which may pay off, and your current reputation for weakness and indecision which, if you allow it to persist, will definitely cause you to fail. "Let Cameron be Cameron" is undoubtedly your best way forward; but just now, it looks far easier said than done.

Yours ever

Peter

See all of Peter Kellner's commentaries on our website here

See the full results for the YouGov/Sunday Times poll here

 

Follow Peter Kellner on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@YouGov

FOLLOW UK POLITICS
An open letter to the Prime Minister from YouGov President Peter Kellner Dear David, So far, so bad. Last week you reshuffled half your cabinet in order to inject vitality into your government and d...
An open letter to the Prime Minister from YouGov President Peter Kellner Dear David, So far, so bad. Last week you reshuffled half your cabinet in order to inject vitality into your government and d...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 13
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
04:24 PM on 09/15/2012
A loightweight indeed, who had no more than "public relations" to offer the countrry.
05:32 PM on 09/11/2012
Promoting Jeremy Hunt, a man who cocked up the Minister of Fun job, makes Cameron look weaker not stronger. Hunt has stated in writing that the NHS should be broken up and believes in homeopathy, he's now Health Secretary. The environment minister is noted as a climate change sceptic who in his own constituency has opposed green energy projects. We now have a 'prisons too good for them' Justice Secretary, and two cabinet ministers blankly refused to move when asked.

Weak, stupid and not to be trusted.
04:36 PM on 09/11/2012
I am not sure whether it was his wisest career move but Cameron did set up a machine to try and take on Murdoch. That was a pretty gutsy move.
05:34 PM on 09/11/2012
We'll see when Levenson reports. I suspect his proposals will be watered down to nothing and Cameron has already said that he supports press self regulation. The best way to avoid doing something, hold a lengthy expensive enquiry into it.
06:15 PM on 09/11/2012
Sadly I think you are correct. That said we did get a pretty interesting look into the inside workings of the British press. 
11:46 PM on 09/11/2012
Cameron had no choice in setting up that machine, the Murdoch empire started seriously unravelling while he was in power.

I honestly don't think Cameron actually believes in anything except maybe that he can find a persona that's electable. Obama was right, he's a political lightweight
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ResearchGirl
03:18 PM on 09/11/2012
Cameron is being Cameron: he let Lansley design the sales policy and has appointed Hunt to follow up on selling the NHS, NOW, today, to the highest bidders:

http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/jeremy-hunt-to-force-nhs-to-sell-456.html.

He has a climate sceptic in charge of Environment and the new SoS for Development is on the record as saying "I didn't join politics to give money to poor people in foreign countries."

Cameron IS being Cameron.
lastpost
see biography
01:18 PM on 09/11/2012
“a challenge from Boris Johnson.”
Last one on the zip wire is a stuffed shirt.

“fake authenticity”
Call a republic a democracy for long enough, and the rest's history.

“A leader who deserved respect was one who was seen to take genuine risks”
Who last deployed that weapon of mass destruction?

“She believed wholeheartedly in”
unleashing banking. To create the mess, that others are now having the utmost difficulty rectifying.

“not to argue whether Thatcherism was right or wrong, but rather”
to appreciate just what can happen. When questions regarding unintended consequences, are blanked.

“your way back to public respect is to take risks to pursue your beliefs”
As long as that belief is: Government (policies) by the will of the majority of the people.

“If anything, the need to negotiate policies with”
the people is more imperative than ever. Given the likely alternative.

“The only certainty is ”
uncertainty. When doing the will of the majority, majority support is assured. Even if its wrong. If its wrong, then the arguments were ineffectively presented.

“Courage can lead to disaster as well as triumph.”
Who knows where real democracy would lead, if no leader has the courage to try it?

“Would that an option of risk-free courage were available.”
How about the power of the people replacing the beliefs of courageous leaders, which have brought us here?

"Let Cameron be Cameron" is undoubtedly your best way forward; but”
letting Britain be Britain might be better for Britain.
05:35 PM on 09/11/2012
You've made many points. Just to query your 2nd to last point. Sometimes we do need courageous leaders, Wilberforce, Robert Peel, Churchill, others for USA civil rights, UK abortion and diversity rights, and on down a long list. But there is also the risk of Hitler and Stalin, so my thought is that the power of the people should stand to regulate courageous leaders, if they have gone bonkers!
photo
mmartini54
Roll on 2015!
12:36 PM on 09/11/2012
Silk Purse out of Sow's Ear comes to mind, Peter.
photo
Lykos
Nobody Never Eat No Fifty Eggs
10:33 AM on 09/11/2012
Someone's been watching The West Wing, eh?
I much prefer "Let Cameron be Gone. Let Ed Miliband be Replaced. Let Labour be elected, immediately - but with someone who the public can trust, and who can articulate the real Labour message, and let's not have any more of that "new Labour" compromise nonsense. Let the free ride to the rich be ended. Let "trickle-down" trickle off, and start placing funding to the bottom of society, in order that it seeps upwards - which it will do, and a darned sight more efficiently than the false promises of trickle-down. Let the economy be shored-up with effective infrastructure job-creation, and a government that uses public money wisely, and to the *public's* best interests, not to fill the offshore accounts of "something-for-nothing" companies and the rich friends of politicians. And because of idiot politicians like Michael Gove, let's draw a nice fat boundary line between religion and politics in this country, too. Let the rail service be renationalised. Let the NHS be the NHS, and let Teachers be Teachers. Let the government represent the people, all the people, and not just the ones that can afford to pay to be heard/gain sickening advantages from corrupted officials."
Just me?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fandabidozi
10:32 AM on 09/11/2012
Let Cameron be Cameron?

A misogynist who cannot take criticism and has no self awareness...poor qualities for a leader to have.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dijit44
09:30 PM on 09/10/2012
Cameron being Cameron has already, because he has failed to use common sense and the advice of the sensible in the economic profession/tradition, resulted in Great Britain falling back in deep recession with no signs of climbing back out in the foreseeable future.
Perhaps, for the good of his citizens, he should try being someone else entirely.