Well, didn't Cameron manage to turn the tables in the expenses row?
Lots of positive coverage on the BBC, for example, for his sudden decree that Tory MPs don't claim for furniture or food in their second homes. We'll see what the papers are like.
I can't help but think the BBC coverage was
a bit too positive. 'Appalled Cameron leads payback', was the headline.
Nick Robinson is a well known Tory, granted, but his clear implication tonight was that Cameron's (let's face it) essentially reactive measures displayed 'decisiveness' and 'leadership':
For David Cameron the stories of cash for moats and manure was both a threat and an opportunity. A threat to his claim to have changed and modernised the Conservative Party but also an opportunity to demonstrate leadership in doing just that ... Labour [has] been left trailing in David Cameron's wake ...
And Norman Smith's report on Radio 4's 6pm bulletin described how Cameron had 'summoned' senior Tories to instruct them to pay some of the money back, without even mentioning that Cameron himself has come under scrutiny for a £680 home repair bill. Which left me shouting at the radio -
'What? He summoned himself?'(This is not to sat to say the proposal is not spot on - Brown should have done exactly the same thing a couple of weeks ago when he went on You Tube. As we know, he came up with a lump-sum half-measure which pleased no-one, effectively paving the way for Cameron to take the initiative).
Notwithstanding some greater scrutiny of their policies, there is the inevitable tendency for PMs-in -waiting get an easy ride from a media hoping for access when the new regime enters Downing Street. Is it happening for Cameron now? Tories made exactly this complaint against coverage of Blair before the 1997 election. But nothing remotely as serious as these Tory expenses revelations happened to Labour between 1994 and 1997, did it?
