This article written by Chrisco.

‘Dave’ Cameron probably owes his leadership to the ubiquitous Frank Luntz, the U.S. Republican strategist and pollster who has been hired by Newsnight to conduct focus groups for their programme. Without that exuberant programme in which Luntz demonstrated that Cameron had an appeal to the electorate that no other candidate offered, Cameron would never have got past Davis.

A resurgent Liberal has outlined the main charges against the impartiality of these focus groups and the personal links between Luntz and Cameron.

Beyond that, however, I have been giving some thought to what Mr. Luntz does for his day job, i.e. as a Republican strategist and head of Luntz Research Companies. He first came to prominence in 1995 as the brains behind Newt Gingrich's 1994 'Contract with America'. In the USA he again regained brief notoriety when his '2006 Republican Playbook' got leaked. Of more interest to me, however, is his leaked briefing for the American right on how to turn the topic of the environment to their advantage.

The right attempting to turn the environment to their advantage? Doesn't that sound quite a lot like what David Cameron is trying to do? Well, precisely - so I decided to have a closer look to see if there were any similarities between what Luntz has been advising the American right, and what 'Dave' Cameron has been doing over here.

Now, on the face of it, Frank’s advice to his Republican friends is not particularly applicable to the British political scene, since it is mostly about how to convince an American public that is, or at least was, much more sceptical about global warming (a scepticism that the Republicans did a lot to foster) that the Republicans are not anti-environment. But if we examine the core message about how conservatives can turn environmental issues to their benefit, there are more than a few similarities.

Luntz begins:

“The the first (and most important) step to neutralizing the problem and eventually bringing people around to your point of view on environmental issues is to convince them of your sincerity and concern…

I don't have to remind you how often Republicans are depicted as cold, uncaring, ruthless, even downright anti-social. These attacks appeal to resentment and they are primarily emotional in nature, they cannot be blunted with logic or statistics. Therefore, any discussion of the environment has to be grounded in an effort to reassure a skeptical public that you care about the environment fur its own sake - that your intentions are strictly honorable. Otherwise, all the rational arguments in the world won't be enough for you to prevail.

The good news, amidst all this doom and gloom, is that once you are able to establish your environmental bona fides, once you show people that your heart is in the right place and make them comfortable listening to what you have to say, then the conservative, free market approach to the environment actually has the potential to be quite popular.�

Dave was clearly listening:

“I know that eyebrows have been raised in some quarters by the prominence which I have given to environmental issues ever since I became Leader of the Opposition.�

Frank recommends a ‘personal story’ to highlight a commitment to green issues, so Dave goes to visit a Norwegian glacier and ditches his official car.

Frank also has a few ‘principles’ of environmental policy and global warming, among which are:

Punishing real polluters must be a higher priority than creating more rules and regulations.

Local problems require local solutions. National standards may be necessary, but enforcement should be local. People in the country have the greatest incentive to keep their local environment clean.
Technology, innovation and discovery should preserve a clean and healthy environment.

All nations must share responsibility for the environment. No nation should be excluded from doing its part to improve climate conditions and the health and safety of its population.

Dave says:

“By setting the right market framework, we can achieve the right outcomes with the greatest possible efficiency and the least possible regulation and centralised direction.�

“I can today announce that we will be holding a Local Green Energy Summit to share environmental best practice in local government worldwide.�

“New technology - clean, green and, importantly, profitable - will be essential for delivering effective solutions to climate change. There are so many exciting developments already well underway, such as the exploration of hydrogen's potential in the US.�

“The first principle is international partnership. Climate change is a global phenomenon. We need global co-operation to tackle it… I believe it's clear and fair that all those who contribute to the problem should contribute proportionately to the solution.�

Frank says:

“"Climate change" is less frightening than "global warming".

Dave says

‘climate change’ fifty times in Oslo; he says ‘global warming’ twice.

Frank says:

‘We should be "conservationists", not "preservationists" or "environmentalists".’

Dave says:

‘As our name implies, we are the natural party of conservation.’

Frank says:

‘Preserving parks and open spaces is a winner because it doesn't need to be explained.’

Dave says:

‘Our parks and green spaces play a vital part in improving the quality of life we all enjoy – especially in urban areas, where they serve as the ‘green lungs’ of our towns and cities.’

And finally Frank says:

‘The Kyoto camp is divided into two categories: America Besters and Calamity Janes. The American Besters, led by Sen. John Kerry, will argue that we have the most innovative, technically advanced business community that can easily adapt to stricter anti-global warming regulations. The Calamity Janes, on the other hand, use scare tactics to convince audiences that global warming will lead to doom and gloom. Both have one common argument: The future will be a better place if we take the necessary actions today.

Let me warn you that both arguments do resonate with some people when they make the case that short-term pain will yield long term gain. Americans are still forward thinking and are likely to respond favorably to sacrifice if they can see a light at the end of the tunnel.

That's what you must offer. The fact that people take a long-term view gives you an opportunity to construct a 'zero-regrets' argument. For example, you should argue that America should invest more in research and development to find ways to burn fuel more efficiently.�

While Dave says:

“But when I think about climate change and our response to it, I don't think of doom and gloom, costs and sacrifice.

I think of a cleaner, greener world for our children to enjoy and inherit.

I think of the almost unlimited power of innovation, the new technologies, the new products and services, and the progress they can bring for our planet and all mankind.

And I think of the exciting possibilities that may seem a distant dream today - changing the way we live to improve our quality of life.�

So has Frank been advising his old chum Dave on how to maximize his environmental credentials, while at the same time appearing as an 'impartial' pollster on Newsnight?

You might think so, I couldn't possibly comment.