Tamasin Cave, 27 May 2009

Is Cameron’s reform strategy designed to resurrect the image of his opponent as a tyrant holding onto power (or "hoarding power" as he put it)? Remember the Stalin jibe thrown at Brown? Cameron, by contrast, will give “power back to the powerless”.

In March 2007 in an interview with the FT, Lord Turnbull accused Brown of running the Treasury with "Stalinist ruthlessness".  The former permanent secretary later claimed that he thought it was a "background chat" and that we wouldn't be quoted. Whatever the case, coming as it did on the eve of Brown's last budget as Chancellor, it presented Cameron with what The Times described as an "open goal" in the following day's Budget debate. The paper added: "The comparison of Britain's Iron Chancellor with Josef Stalin, brought chuckles of recognition across Westminster." The 10 O'Clock news superimposed Brown's head on Stalin's body.

Today, faced with public anger over the expenses saga, both men are slogging it out  to be seen as the great reformer. The Tory media machine has certainly been shown to be the quicker and slicker of the two operations. Is this their work, or is Cameron sincere in his plans for the redistribution of power "in the spirit of glasnost", as the Guardian put it.

Given the Conservative's extensive links to business, devolving power to voters may prove to be a reform too far. Aside from Cameron's privatisation agenda, which Richard Murphy of Tax Research UK writes about today, there's plenty of room for conflicts between the private and the public: 66 per cent of Tories have outside interests (as opposed to 19 per cent of Labour MPs). And donations to the party from the City have been coming thick and fast. Will he really be able to tackle the power they wield?