So how will David Cameron cope with Prime Minister Brown? The Tory strategy to date has tried to replicate the ‘lessons’ of Blair’s 1990s journey. These were to modernise a previously unelectable and distrusted party, tackle internal party extremes head on, and triangulate between party shibboleths and conventional media wisdom. It doesn’t take a tactical genius to understand that the Tories would do well to be perceived as more centrist – they need to win more votes, after all.

But there are dangers for Cameron in merely attempting to cut and paste the strategy as it applied to Labour 15 years ago, as if history is bound to repeat itself when mirrored on the right of British politics today. George Osborne must have felt he’d ticked several boxes by simultaneously claiming the Conservatives were the true ‘heir to Blair’, both annoying his party and signalling a ‘change’ message at the same time.

So there is a certain amount of predictability to the year ahead for the Tories. They will try to steer clear of policy content unless it tacks towards the centre, creating the impression of challenging deep-rooted Tory taboos. The quest for the infamous Clause IV equivalent had Cameron in a terrible tangle with his own front bench, who were not convinced that ditching new grammar schools was a smart move. Resignations by moderate frontbenchers gave the impression of division and confusion, swiftly compounded by the harm of a U-turn after further pressure.

These are the dangers for party leaders who inflate a synthetic internal fight – especially when the conflict is neither winnable nor populist. Labour was more sophisticated in the fights it picked, taking on the genuinely difficult issues of public ownership and sending a team-building ‘big tent’ message with a consensus appeal.

Will Cameron be brave enough to do some real house-cleaning in his party? Some would say that the genuine Clause IV equivalent for the Tories would be on the issue of Europe, and that ditching the anti-EU stance and accepting the case for integration would send a jolt significant enough to be noticed by the electorate. Cameron’s personal Euroscepticism makes such bravery highly unlikely. The Tories will instead seek to mimic much of the Blair agenda on choice and diversity and on social policy, sending modernising signals about equality on the basis of gender, ethnicity and sexual orientation. Though 10 years ago these would have been radical messages, in today’s world they appear fairly timid, if not long overdue.

The challenges for the Tories on economic policy are meatier – addressing issues of economic fairness, inequality and the distribution of income are anathemas to the laissez-faire neocons. On taxation, Cameron has already shown signs of accepting defeat in the battle of investment versus tax cuts; he thinks that the tightrope walk of ‘sharing the proceeds of growth’ can neutralise Labour accusations that the Tories would cut back public spending.

Cameron’s advisers know their man’s strengths and weaknesses. He polls reasonably well on the ‘likeability’ front, he presents well, and the ratings suggest the public see strong ‘forward-looking’ traits to his leadership. They will therefore look to accentuate these strengths in contrast to Gordon Brown, suggesting that approachability is a virtue to be prized more highly than any other. Expect attacks on Brown for supposed remoteness, coupled with claims that he is somehow ‘out of touch’.

However, Cameron’s weaknesses relative to Brown demand attention. Central to this is the issue of ‘experience’, a trait related to competence, strength and trustworthiness. So Cameron’s schedulers will be desperately keen to associate him with activities that suggest he has depth of character and worldliness – literally beginning with an international beefing up of his image. Cameron will seek to meet with George Bush, will want to be seen in a UN setting, and will seek to demonstrate alliances with potential European allies including Sarkozy and Merkel.

So much of politics is about momentum and direction of travel. The real danger to David Cameron would come if received wisdom began to suggest he had peaked too soon, with Gordon Brown – coming from behind in the polls – as the fighter on the upward trajectory. Cameron’s defensive strategy will therefore try to hold back this tide. The roll-out of conclusions from the long-awaited Conservative Policy Groups might offer a few ‘hooks’ on which to hang opportunities to regain some impetus.

The problem here is that many of these Policy Groups were established in part as a sop to established interests in the different wings of the Party. The notion that their chairmen (Iain Duncan-Smith, Peter Lilley, Ken Clarke and John Redwood) are the catalyst for new inspirational policy momentum should raise a few eyebrows among most commentators. The Tories have yet to reconcile their deep-seated desire to shrink the size of the public realm with the public’s distaste for a right-wing cuts agenda; hence the procrastination in announcing spending plans or firm policy commitments. Cameron will therefore be interested in surfing the zeitgeist of media opinion, reacting to the perceived mood of the country rather than sticking his neck out too far and risking pro-activity. Bandwagon politics, though, can also be perilous, and won’t necessarily give the Tories the real boost they need.

In these circumstances, where positive policy routes are blocked either by obstacles too awkward to move or too contentious to risk challenging, I would expect the Tory hierarchy to reach deeper into their arsenal, and negative campaigning is usually an available weapon of choice. There will be attempted attacks on Gordon Brown, both implied and overt, though his track record as chancellor has built him formidably hard-wearing body armour over the years. The Conservatives will search around for right-wing tabloid media allies to magnify their caricaturing of choice. Selecting former News of the World editor Andy Coulson as Cameron’s communications director suggests they want to take their battle into the popular media. But here too Cameron must realise the constraints he faces; he was elected, after all, aspiring to end ‘yah-boo’ politics.

Whatever Cameron’s tactics, he can only control a certain amount of the political agenda, while the new prime minister has a few strong cards up his sleeve. The British public have a tendency to want fair play and to give the new chap a chance to prove himself – which could play to Gordon Brown’s advantage. However, there should be no resting on laurels. Labour faces some significant challenges, not least a party machine that requires rejuvenation and resources: no matter how good the message is, it is futile unless the electorate actually hear it.

Gordon Brown will be under more scrutiny and pressure than ever before, but having finally won that top job he will certainly be working harder than ever to keep it. David Cameron can attempt to shape his strategy to his own agenda, but Gordon Brown’s record of campaigning would suggest that the dividing lines between Labour and Conservative will be defined very clearly on his terms. Over the coming year I suspect that it will be the opposition – and not the government – who are put on the defensive back – foot, which could leave Cameron in a very difficult place.