Agreed Jill. At the same time we should nail any suggestion we might raise VAT.

The media shots of them together are revealing: Clegg stands there like a school play understudy, struggling more to remember his lines at all rather than articulate them with any meaning, whilst Vince stands very close, looking at Clegg not the camera, like a vulture waiting for the last twitch.

Trend-spotting's quite a sensible thing to do, although I would worry about making it an -ology. "Pogonology" is the study of beards. Really. Better still, there's a phobia too: pogonophobia.

Hi Tim, Defence features in 2 of the top 6 for the insiders, but not in yours. Interested to see that. For what's it's worth my sense is that the Party's strategists decided in 2005-6 that they didn't want to focus on Defence because they didn't see it as fitting with the change narrative, but that events and the people of Wootton Bassett have forced them to rethink that. A further factor may also have been our party conference in 2007, when Liam Fox savaged Brown for using our troops for electoral purposes. But interested in where you think Defence does come in the first 100-days?

"The whole point, surely, is that under current Conservative policy it is millionaires who will still pay IHT?" Yes, that's right, but the Party has been woefully inadequate about pointing that out. I have not heard a single frontbencher put that point as yoi have done.

Without knowing anything of the details, it's a remarkably perfunctory response from Baroness Perry, suggesting a significant breakdown in relationships. A great pity.

Steve, This fringe meeting is not a debate about the pros and cons of assisted suicide. Although people can of course ask about that if they wish to, and have at both fringe meetings held so far, the aim is to raise public awareness about end of life care far more broadly. It goes well beyond that issue. End of life care is not a Conservative Party issue alone: the fringe meeting took place at the Liberal Democrats and Labour as well, and Dying Matters has been set up as part of this government's End of Life Care strategy. By setting it in the voluntary sector it's a welcome and rare example of government realising that there are some things government cannot do. You say death is a private and personal matter - but improving quality of care at the end of life should be everybody's business, so that you can have that private and personal death.

Agreed Julia. We need more balance between the resources we spend on care as opposed to cure.

I am delighted and surprised to hear that this defector agreed to fight a by-election under her new party colours. I wonder how often this has happened before. Party machines celebrate whenever a defector comes their way, but I wonder how much this is to celebrate a short-term gain which causes long-term damage to the whole body politic. It causes real damage to local trust whenever politicans cross the floor. Here in this constituency people are still very aggrieved by Quentin Davies. Congratulations to the new Conservative Councillor & to the Gainsborough Association for this. I hope they are blazing a trail (but won't hold my breath).

Again, massive! Lancastrians everywhere will rejoice. This day had seemed a long long way off for many years.

We have just won control in Derbyshire. Massive! Huge huge congratulations to everyone there. The County badly needed the bad red air to be cleaned out of local government.

Will you & CH be able to identify the correct results in each of those 493 wards, Harry, and produce a better table?

Sad to hear this news. I don't know Paul well, but have always been impressed by his thoughtful intelligence. It seems a particular shame when there is an opportunity to revitalise Parliament and ensure that it becomes a meaningful place once again. It will take a self-confident Prime Minister to increase the effectiveness and degress of scrutiny that his administration will be subjected to, but I believe that David Cameron realises that open-source politics makes this an inevitable development which he cannot prevent and will need to make work. Paul is going just as he had the chance to help make the difference. Bonne voyage, wherever it may be.

John Bercow has set out an outline manifesto in today’s Independent & Guardian, so it looks as if we are beginning to see the start of some open campaigning. Let’s hope the candidates make themselves available for interview as well. It would also be good to see candidates inviting comments from electors about how to reform and strengthen the Commons, publishing lists of supporters from outside as well as within Parliament, and engaging with the public about their proposals.

This was one of the most astonishing interviews I have ever heard. On a planet way beyond our solar system. If this is in the slightest bit symptomatic of what other MPs are thinking, we don't need the odd firing, but a firestorm. However it is so off the wall, I hope that it's not. There's a link here; it starts at 18.45 minutes in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00kcrmx

Dear Morus, The main point of my article wasn't about Bercow, it was about the way in which candidates and MPs conduct themselves in the next month in relation to the election of the new Speaker. We need an open debate that engages with the public, not a covert & unaccountable stitch-up within the House of Commons. Hence the headline I put on the top of this post. I don't, BTW, write the link on the front page of Conservative Home - that's down to the editors. Bercow has not yet, so far as I am aware, made any public announcement about his intentions. Frank Field has, and that's the way to go. I hope Bercow follows suit, if he is as interested in the job as he is reported as being. My criticism wasn't directed at him but at the approach being taken by the parliamentary Labour Party, hence my suggesting that he distance himself from the Mirror's story - assuming it's correct (it's also supported by Nadine Dorries on her blog). So I am afraid I don't understand the comparision you draw between Field and Bercow. One is being open and transparent about what he wants to do, and has engaged with the public. The other, if he wants the job, is yet to go on public record about it. MPs should not be seeking to vote in a party bloc, but judging individual candidates on their merits and on their campaigns over the next month.

I agree with pretty much all of this Charlie. In particular, we need now to be bold about our policies. There are areas where we spent too much time deliberately avoiding any significant differentiation from Labour: health, spending & tax being amongst them. That is now beginning to change, but if we are to counter the minor parties' (utterly unjustifiable) attempts to paint themselves as anti-politics, we need to be credible in saying: "The Conservatives: not all (mainstream) politicians are the same." This scandal has changed evrything. Our manifesto will need to reflect that.

In addition to those supporters of BOO, 5 of the 7 Conservatives are members of Cornerstone: Carswell, Davies & Davies, Hollobone & Walker. Perhaps a more forward-thinking grouping than its caricaturists would admit?

I like the idea in principle. In practice, how would you verify the signatures on the petition to ensure they are all genuine?

According to the BBC website Andrew Mackay has said that he will hold a public meeting in his constituency next week to face his electorate. He is brave to take this step. I wonder if any others will do the same.

In addition to the above, focus on how this is fixed, so that there's a fair & transparent system in place. What would be: 1) A fair salary for MPs 2) A fair way of funding the need for MPs to spend significant periods of time at 2 separate addresses (eg: renting furnished accomodation; hotel/club bills)?

Graeme, 1) They are not at war in Athganistan because Blair lied to Parliament. 2) I am not saying we need to use Trident in the current conflict. Of course we don't. However we cannot say that we will not need a credible and effective nuclear deterrent between now and 2035. My point was that our armed forces need to know that we take our long-term national security seriously. It will not help their morale if they think the next administration may make decisions about Trident for reasons of short-term political positioning and dub it a "sacred cow".

I find it difficult to see this as anything other than a desperate attempt by Demos to generate some work for itself, to ensure its survival beyond the end of the Labour government. Although in fairness "Red Toryism" isn't a total invention by some demented re-brander, but has some history in Canada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_conservatism). However, it's a pity that David Cameron and some of the Shadow Cabinet allowed themselves to be dragged into this - it's all a bit too early 2006. Definitely too frivolous for now. As for the allegedly well-known "Red Tory" Philip Blond, who had heard of him before today?

Thanks Will (1759). No weird pun, just in a hurry before lunch!