Michael Brown: Cameron should remould our political system

The Brown government is now likely to lose the next election

This Thursday, in another of his excellent television political spectaculars on BBC2, Michael Cockerell will attempt to describe David Cameron's Incredible Journey, tracing the party leader's rise to the top of the Tory Christmas tree.

The most extraordinary part of the journey to the top of the polls this weekend is, however, unfortunately missing since filming ended several weeks ago. The programme underlines the difficulties we have all been having these past couple of months in digesting the incredible velocity of change to the political landscape since "the election that never was" was called off on 4 October by the Prime Minister. As I suggested here in August (when we were speculating whether Mr Cameron would even still be Tory leader by Christmas), it would never get better for Mr Brown and he would live to regret not being bold enough to make a quick run for it.

The latest YouGov poll represents the biggest upheaval in public opinion, so far as the Tories are concerned, since 1992, and Mr Cameron has finally broken through the glass ceiling of 40 per cent. Now registering 45 per cent, the Tories can even imagine winning the next election with an outright majority.

Of course it would be foolish for anyone in any party to make too many assumptions about the future from a single poll. Bearing in mind that it was only 12 weeks ago that Gordon Brown enjoyed a similar rating, it would be rash to make predictions about a general election that must now surely be delayed until 2010.

What is certain, however, is that Mr Cameron has been gifted by Mr Brown entirely free of charge a second honeymoon. Mr Brown has comprehensively, through a series of unforced errors, not only trashed his own honeymoon but seems destined to ensure that his relationship with the voters ends in a messy divorce.

And all this is before any voter has yet been personally hurt. The Northern Rock debacle, the missing Inland Revenue files and the recent party funding scandal have not actually affected the daily outcome of voters' lives. But things can only get worse for Mr Brown during the coming year as the consequences of higher mortgages impinge directly on voters. Most home owners have taken out fixed-rate mortgages, many of which will be renegotiated during the coming months. The latest mortgage statement I have received shows my current fixed rate of 4.99 per cent due to be replaced with a variable rate of 7.5 per cent. This is the most obvious way that millions will see their monthly disposable income reduce during the months ahead.

It is probably these factors, more than any attraction to Tory policies, that has altered the poll ratings. But the first condition for the Tories to contemplate winning has now been met: namely, the Brown government is now likely to lose the next election. That is a far cry, of course from saying that Mr Cameron is actually going to win. The huge gap that exists between Labour's total of 355 MPs and the Tories' tally of 197 means that a hung Parliament is now becoming the most likely outcome in 2010.

Labour only has to lose 32 seats to lose its overall majority. But Mr Cameron has to gain about 130 seats from both Labour and the Liberal Democrats to gain an overall majority of just one. Even with a current 45 per cent rating, the bias and unfairness in the electoral system mean fewer Tory MPs per vote than Labour MPs per vote.

The Tory party needs to face the fact that, more than the Lib Dems, it has the biggest vested interest in an overhaul of the electoral system. Mr Cameron was right to make his "progressive alliance" pitch in a weekend press article to Lib Dem voters.

But if by this act he considers his policies appealing enough to Lib Dems voters he must secretly believe they are also appealing enough to the new Liberal Democrat leader.

The Lib Dems would be crucified if they were to try to sustain a recently rejected Brown government that had lost its overall majority and, for all their claims to act independently on an "issue by issue" basis, it is hard to imagine that after years of looking forward to a "balanced Parliament" Lib Dems would want to squander the opportunity by precipitating a second election the result of which would be their own decimation. But they will rightly expect some nod in their direction, in advance, from Mr Cameron regarding proportional representation, as the price for providing stable government for a fixed period of time.

If only the new Lib Dem leader could persuade Mr Cameron that his own Tory electoral interest is best served by electoral reform, then there really could be a remoulding of the political system.

mrbrown@talktalk.net