Andrew Grice: The Week In Politics

The political ground is quaking under the impact of Cameron's Conservative revolution

When Michael Howard became Tory leader, he considered ditching the party's opposition to university tuition fees. But he was told that thousands of Tory coffee mugs had already been dispatched to the universities, pledging to scrap top-up fees - and saying there was no "small print" attached.

The Tories maintained their opportunist stance against a Labour policy most of them, including David Cameron, knew was right. There are no such inhibitions now Mr Cameron is their leader. This week, he formally buried his party's policy on tuition fees. He has also killed off the vote-losing "patients' passport" which subsidised people who pay for private health treatment.

Under Mr Cameron, the Tories are no longer the mugs of British politics. In his first month as Tory leader, Mr Cameron has given a new meaning to the cliche "hitting the ground running". The political ground is quaking under his impact.

Charles Kennedy might even be in his post today if Mr Cameron had not been elected Tory leader last month. My guess is that his enemies within would have driven him out sooner or later. But Mr Cameron's highly effective new year media blitz -- just the sort of thing Mr Kennedy desperately needed --was the final straw for some Liberal Democrat MPs. Mr Kennedy's drink problem gave them an excuse.

The candidates battling to succeed Mr Kennedy can't stop talking about Mr Cameron -- a recognition of the potentially devastating threat a revived Conservative Party poses to the Liberal Democrats.

Similarly, the Cameron effect was top of the agenda when the Cabinet held a political strategy session on Thursday. The meeting's "don't panic" message to Labour's backbench troops had more than a whiff of Captain Mainwaring about it. But Philip Gould, Mr Blair's pollster, told ministers the new Tory leader had so far added only a few points to his party's ratings -- less than the 10-point boost when John Major succeeded Margaret Thatcher in 1990.

The Cabinet agreed that Labour's attacks on Mr Cameron had to be "wedded in reality". Ministers will launch selective assaults to test whether Mr Cameron's centre-ground credentials amount to more than warm words. They think he is uncomfortable there because it is not his natural home, pointing out that, when challenged, he backed away from a free-for-all on selection in every school. Ministers will try to put him on the wrong side of the argument on issues such antisocial behaviour.

Some cabinet ministers argued that Mr Cameron's decision to drag his party back to the centre is a victory for New Labour. Just as Mr Blair persuaded Labour to swallow some unpalatable Thatcherite medicine, Mr Cameron is clearing away the negative undergrowth that prevents his party getting a fair hearing.

Labour's problem is that renewing a party is much easier in opposition than in government. Labour must earn the right to stay in power without losing it. That is why Mr Blair wants New Labour to move on to the "next level". In a speech today, he will say the Government's next challenge is to empower people to take more control over their lives.

Labour's task should be easier under a new leader. If Mr Cameron has more tricks up his sleeve, then Mr Brown will have plenty of shots in his locker when he becomes prime minister. After all, he will have had lots of time to plan them.

The good news for Labour is that Mr Blair and Mr Brown are working together again. The Chancellor told the cabinet meeting that Labour "must not yield the centre ground". The Tories who expect him to veer off to the left will be sorely disappointed. The Cameron effect has intensified the debate over when Mr Blair should stand down. No prizes for guessing his view: he should stick around a bit longer to see off the Cameron threat. As one minister put it: "If Cameron runs out of steam, Gordon would take over in a strong position. If he keeps it up, we will trump him."

Mr Brown, however, is anxious to halt Mr Cameron in his tracks and keener than ever to take over the reins of power. To delay might be to allow the revitalised Tories to build unstoppable momentum, and bring about his nightmare scenario -- a short-lived spell as Prime Minister followed by an election defeat.

There are many parallels between the march of Mr Cameron and Mr Blair's transformation of Labour in 1994. A small group of true believers hijacks a party and throws out the baggage that has made it unelectable. A lot of people don't like what he's doing but they put up with it because they are hungry for power.

The Cameroons deny the charge of copycat politics. Not for them, for example, Mr Blair's obsession with Mr Gould's focus groups. Nor do they pick fights with Tory right-wingers, in the way Mr Blair defined New Labour in opposition to the rest of the party. I doubt, though, that Mr Cameron loses any sleep when Lord Tebbit pops up to spell out the dangers of a three-party "dogfight" on the "mythical centre ground" as he did on Thursday.

I suspect those cabinet ministers hoping Mr Cameron will "run out of steam" will be disappointed. If he can maintain his early momentum - and it is still a big "if"-then anything is possible at the next election.

a.grice@independent.co.uk