Tories, your cab is waiting...
People often ask me what the point of being a moderate in the Tory party is. You get patronised from all sides, they say (with, it has to be said, more than one grain of truth) and your party forgot about One Nation a long time ago. It has to be said that there have been times when I agreed, as the Tory party aimed for an image that was tougher than Maggie's hairspray and plummeted towards defeat at the hands of a government whose idea of helping the three educations was to cut back on the spending increases of John Major and scrap places at good schools for talented children. It was certainly not a heartening sight but as the Tory party returns to its roots, the One Nation philosophy, and the Tory Reform Group which kept it alive while the party drifted, have once again a pivotal role to play in modern politics.
The renewal of One Nation Conservatism is of pivotal importance in ensuring that the government faces an Opposition that not only presents an alternative but one that has a credible, practical alternative rather than one based on ideology.
The difficulties of the last leadership were compounded by the inconsistencies between the practical and the ideological as a result of pandering to populist opinion on issues like the fuel crisis, Tony Martin and Section 28. The same mistake must not be made again. A good example would be how it reacts to the Countryside Alliance; while it is consistent with Conservative philosophy on the freedom of the individual to support the right of people to hunt vermin it would be a disaster to continue to support massive intervention in the agricultural industry. Much of our farming industry is held up by UK and European subsidies that are saving a minimal number of jobs while the European Union's protectionist laws stop trade in foodstuffs with the third world countries, thereby keeping food prices high and the third world countries unable to compete with us in a futile effort to keep a few farmers in business for another couple of decades. The need to ensure that the benefits of free trade are extended to as many countries as possible is one important reason for Britain to continue playing a role in the European Union, a European Union without the weight of Britain to argue for increased free trade would leave the protectionist countries led by France with unrivalled power and would massively increase the danger of creating two opposing protectionist blocs of the USA and the EU.
The issue of free trade and freedom of the individual is perhaps at the base of many of the splits in the party, not out of disagreement in their validity but out of the need to find a balance between pure laissez-faire and a over centralised 'nanny state'. The One Nation tradition has always emphasised that while the government is not there to tell people how to live their lives, the state is the best way to let people fulfil their potential. This is one reason why the leading One Nation Tory in the shadow cabinet, Damian Green, is looking to see how vocational training in the UK can be increased (an aim set out over 50 years ago by another One Nation Tory, Rab Butler, in the 1944 Education Act). Education must become more channelled toward activities more relevant to people in their later life.
It must be remembered however that the government's duty is not just to those who are young but those who have failed in earlier life, it is not a waste to train unqualified people and give them the opportunity to have self-respect quite apart from the extra benefits through greater employment.
The Tory Reform Group's inaugural dinner of the Oxford branch is in Pembroke on November 7th.
Where next, then, for the Conservative Party? Popular wisdom has it that Iain Duncan Smith and Hague have been lame ducks. Both have been pilloried by the media for their bald pates and weak voices. The party itself is at its lowest ebb for decades. As Charles Kennedy quite rightly pointed out, there is no law of nature which dictates that the Conservative party must revive. The demographics of party membership are truly horrifying - with the average age of party members reaching the upper 60s, Party members in the crucial age range of 22-32 account for less than 15% of total membership.
Opinion is divided about what to do next, and the argument is becoming ever more bitter and confusing. The chief argument at Westminister is between the economic liberals at the Adam Smith Institute and the IDS-backed social reformers in Policy Exchange, and its sister thinktank, The Centre for Policy Studies. Then there is the broader argument on social policy; Section 28, cannabis, homosexuality. But these issues are muddied by the continuing row about Europe. Conservative Mainstream and the Tory Reform Group (who both engage in a cult of Ken Clarke) are in favour of liberal social and economic policies, but alienate many in the party by their Pro-European stance. Hence the division between Europhobes and Europhiles becomes cemented in terms of social policy. It is an especially curious paradox that these Ken Clarke fetishists in many ways are more economically liberal than Mrs. Thatcher. But woe-betide anyone who calls them Thatcherites.
All of these groups claims to be 'dynamic', 'forward thinking', 'moderate', and that all important buzzword - 'inclusive'. They search for the Holy Grail of finding the single issue which to change, and thereby create an 'elect-able' Tory party again. I am not a member of any of these, at least not yet. Currently I am a Tory who belongs to the undecided silent majority. Ambiguously, the wing of the party which I hail from is currently far and away the most successful group at returning MPs. This is the more traditional 'High Tory' Party of England, whose spiritual home is the Carlton Club. They are people who are intrinsically conservative. They are also deeply unhappy. Often uncomfortable with the at times cruel dynamic of Thatcherism, and especially uncomfortable with the social liberalism espoused by the TRG and Ken Clarke, they inhabit a desolate hinterland between the two, unloved and unlovely.
Yet this is precisely why, I believe, it is from this group of the party that the Tory party will find its apotheosis, for the simple reason that this group of the party represents far more of the floating Labour vote than any other. The vast majority of these undecided party members are decent, hardworking people, with an active social conscience, and with firmly held beliefs and values. They want good local state schools for their children, but often have to move to areas that have better schools due to the postcode lottery. Sometimes, they are forced to make great sacrifices to send their children to private schools, forgoing family holidays and second cars. They hold traditional values for what their children are taught, and oppose the repeal of Section 28.
Moreover, they resent the way the English are consistently put at a disadvantage by devolution. They have to pay for their health care in old age and for their children's university fees: Scottish families don't. They resent the extra education handouts for Northern Ireland that make their Grammar Schools the best in the UK. They resent the fact that Wales has the highest per capita distribution of hospitals. For these people, at least, One Nation Toryism is not only dead but damned. The resentments of these people encapsulate traditional Tory values of fairness, equality of opportunity, and tolerance. All of these values are lacking in the devolved system. After 18 Conservative years, a failing Major government could no longer respond to the needs and wishes of these voters. It is these voters that the party needs to get back in touch with, and their resentments provide this opportunity. Taking advantage of this opportunity is the leadership's task. The question is: are they up to the job?
The Oxford University Conservative Association website is www.ouca.org.uk
17th Oct 2002