---

Local Government and Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

I am sorry, but I must tell my hon. Friend that I always think that it is marvellous to be in the Chamber to hear the right hon. Lady speak. It reminds me why I am a Conservative. The right hon. Lady strongly believed that she, I and other hon. Members should have a more pressing engagement. If the Prime Minister had listened to her, we would be pounding the streets, either last Thursday or today, securing the vote for the general election. I know that, because she is a blogger—and a very fine one with surprising views. For the sake of accuracy, I have obtained a copy of her conference blog, which is entitled, ““Snap election? Bring it on!”” She is not afraid of holding unconventional views. The Prime Minister's speech at the conference was described by commentators as"““one-third piffle and two-thirds plagiarism””." It is worth giving the right hon. Lady's assessment, as it expresses an interesting oddball view:"““Gordon's speech…was the highlight of the week. It showed real strength and national leadership. It also was noticeable for not mentioning David Cameron once.””" It is fair to say, however, that the Prime Minister mentioned my right hon. Friend a few times the following week. In case hon. Members are worried that the Secretary of State's judgment was temporarily unhinged by her time as chairman of the Labour party—that would be understandable, given that she suffered the worst local government defeat in the history of that once-great party—may I tell them that her recovery has begun? She showed great prescience—and I commend her on it—in her assessment of the leaders of our respective parties. She wrote:"““The contrast between the two leaders couldn't be starker. Strength versus weakness. Vision versus PR.””" Before the pixels had a chance to reform on her computer, it was pretty clear to everyone which leader had strength, vision and bottle.