Three newspapers caught my attention today, in relation to what they had to say about the Conservative party.
Mark Steyn in the Daily Telegraph pointed out that the Conservative party was not even arguing against the doctrines of social democracy and therefore could not complain with the fact that the forces of an ever larger government were going to win the general election in Britain. If one will not even argue one can not blame the people for siding with one’s opponents.
Mr Richard Littlejohn in The Sun newspaper (sorry, not in on-line edition) also argued that timidness of the Conservatives would mean that they had no hope of victory.
Finally the Financial Times had on its front page the fact that almost 7 out of 10 voters believed that the Conservative party would put taxes UP if elected to government.
I believe that two things are wrong with the Conservative party. One is indeed the timid nature of its policies, as the Economist journal pointed out weeks ago the tax and spend policies of the Conservative and Labour parties are so similar as to be almost indentical.
But it is not just a matter of policy, it is a matter of the arbitrary power of the leadership. In the late 1970’s (when the Conservative party was last out of government) many Conservatives showed interest in ideas, they visited the Institute of Economic Affairs, they set up research bodies of their own (such as the Centre for Policy Studies) they freely debated both the practical details of policy and the political principles on which policy should rest.
All this has been much more muted in recent times. First, pressure was put on people to only say what the party wished them to say (and this pressure started long before the election campaign) and now first candidates and then an actual member of Parliament have been turned on – turned on for absurdly mild ‘crimes’.
First a candidate was told he must stand down because he had been photographed with firearms (that did not even belong to him) in the background of the photograph – this in the party that once represented not just shooting for hunting but the British National Rifle Association and the Constitutional Club network (once stronger in Britian than in the United States).
Then a candidate was told he must stand down because the socialist Guardian newspaper had attacked his use of the term creative destruction in relation to the public services. It did not matter that the candidate was simply quoting Joseph Schumpeter (the non Austrian school, Austrian economist). It was not a question of the leadership thinking that, say, Hayek and Mises were better economists than Schumpeter – the leadership of the Conservative party were not interested ideas at all. The Guardian had attacked, so the candidate must go.
Then Mr. Flight a member of Parliament (whilst Parliament was still sitting) was told he would not be allowed to stand for Parliament as a Conservative again – regardless of the fact that his Constituency Association and the local voters supported him. His crime? Saying that he thought there was more scope for savings in government spending than the leadership had said.
Mr Flight said nothing about ‘secret plans’, but he was not just removed from the Shadow Cabinet, – he was removed from the list of candidates for the Conservative party.
It is this “list” that is the key problem.
It is not a simple matter of Mr Howard (the leader of the Conservative party) being a bad man – no person should have the arbitary power to effectively expel someone from Parliament simply because they do not happen to like something they have said.
It is as if President Bush could expel any Republican from the House of Representatives simply because they said that they thought that there was more scope for savings in government spending than President Bush has said.
This arbitrary power of the leadership of the Conservative party did not use to be used liked this (so some fault does go to Mr Howard as an individual), but it is the power itself that must be removed if their is to be a real chance of an intellectual restoration of the Conservative party.
The Conservative party was once called by its enemies the ‘stupid party’. Whatever the truth or falseness of this charge, a political party today that is uninterested in ideas, indeed expels anyone who shows an interest, has no chance of returning to power.
Until a few weeks ago the Conservatives were still dropping hints that they would be promoting a radical tax-cutting programme in the election. Then all of a sudden they went coy about the numbers, and soon afterwards they began boasting how they could find piddling savings which would allow them to spend more on ‘skoolznospitalz’ than Labour.
It was at that time that I knew they’d lost their nerve and the election. Voters will not prefer a cheap imitation over the real statist article for the sake of giving out-of-office politicians their turn with the houses, limos and ministerial salaries.
It doesn’t matter how much you dress up the promise to keep the state juggernaut rolling with sweet talk about making it more efficient. Electors are not daft. They know this is just a way of saying ‘We haven’t got the balls to close down any major area of government activity, we’re just going through the motions of snipping a button or two off the uniforms here and there.’
The Tories have succumbed to the pre-Thatcher ratchet effect, consensually accepting a permanently exorbitant public sector share of GDP and juggling at the margins of the behemoth’s scope. Big bloody deal.
They deserve to lose and lose badly. In particular the spluttering twit Oliver Letwin, who has done the same disappearing act as in 2001 after failing to put clear blue water between his fiscal policies and Gordon Brown’s, should be ejected from Parliament.
The realignment of British politics on the so-called right, taking in UKIP and Veritas as well as the reviving individualist elements in the Liberal Democrats, cannot get cracking until the bloated carcass of the Conservative Party has been given the coup de grace and dragged off the highway. Unfortunately the FPTP system protects the Tories up to a point, probably making a Canadian-style meltdown unlikely.
Brown is going to hit BIG financial trouble within three years as the USA leads the world into depression; this will give the British Tory remnant, diseased and futile as it is, enough hope of a backlash against NuLab to linger in the way of the more vigorous and thoughtful spirits who have written it off. But at least we can hope for a lousy turnout at the coming election which will make all the corrupt careerists of Westminster look illegitimate.
Just when I feel bad about the state of libertarian-informed conservatism within the U.S. Republican Party, you guys come along and cheer me right up. Yep, it could always be worse. We could have the feckless Tories on our side, instead of the unprincipled but occasionally conservative / libertarian Republicans.
Always look on the bright side of life… I suppose in your case, you could always look at the right in France if you need cheering up. It should help out in the same manner.
They haven’t had any inkling of principled policies since Thatcher. They haven’t had any inkling of true leadership since Thatcher. They aren’t even trying to be a party of principle other than the principle of gaining power. Without a principled platform the only point of their gaining power is for the spoils and I don’t think they deserve anything but our contempt for that.
If they were to look back to the time they were last doing well, as in Thatcher’s first and second terms, and then looked to find the exact point where they went off the rails I think it would have to be the Poll Tax debacle. Prior to that they were dismantling the State. If they were also to ditch their “morality” causes I think they would be a worthy party and I think many of their old supporters would return with zeal.
If they were to look back to the time they were last doing well, as in Thatcher’s first and second terms, and then looked to find the exact point where they went off the rails I think it would have to be the Poll Tax debacle. Prior to that they were dismantling the State. If they were also to ditch their “morality” causes I think they would be a worthy party and I think many of their old supporters would return with zeal.
I agree with all of that, specially the last sentence. The Conservatives should once again be championing actively the reduction of the state’s involvement in our daily lives and reducing dramatically the tax-take by a significant amount, not the miniscule change (in relation to the size of the economy) they are wittering on about. As for their support, in principle, for ID Cards – well, it just makes me spitting mad.
It’s hard not to feel that Luniversal’s conclusions are ‘vicious but fair’. Howard is leading a campaign that is so barely distinguishable from Za-Nu Labour’s that it is barely worth considering. The only people getting excited by this campaign are the professional journalistic clowns who are paid to entertain us.
And, boy, is Luniversal right about the ghastly spectacle that is Oliver Letwin!
Yes, Za-NuLabour will win this election because there is no opposition. No engagement. Sauve qui peut , because it will be a long, long time before Britain recovers, if it ever does rather than being subsumed into Europe, from a third Za-NuLabour term.
I had high hopes for Howard. I always thought he was a bit cat-like. But a cat would have leapt onto Tone’s face by now and clawed it off – and the ones underneath, too.
As for Oliver Letwin, I have one word: why?
The queeny, physically repulsive (imagine being touched by him!) Gordon Brown should be so easy to best … and they put up the only man in Britain who thought it reasonable to let burlars into his house to use the loo and allow himself to be burgled.
Whoaaa! Shrewd! Maybe the only person in public life less qualified than the weird chancellor.
What is wrong with the Conservatives? How could an entire party lose its nerve so collectively and so decisively – and in the face of such weakness? I’ve said it before, Blair has no substance. He’s a weak little Wizard of Oz not even clever enough to hide the machinery of his “magic”. Where is the Conservative Toto to pull back the curtain?
I have met Oliver Letwin enough times to say he is a nice, charming fellow, but utterly hopeless as a serious political player.
Their approach to tax cuts is pathetic. They talk of cutting taxes by “4 billion pounds”. What is that going to mean to the man on the street? What counts is tax rates, as the not-so-dumb Ronald Reagan understood.
I am afraid I lost hope in the Tories when they backed ID cards and when it appeared some of the shadow cabinet wanted John Kerry to win. Then I knew they were finished.
There has been some quite encouraging material in the Telegraph (the paper commonly associated with the Tories), such as an article that called for liberalising Britain’s draconian firearms laws. I’ve blogged quite a bit about this myself. But I could never vote for them while they employ the “lowest common denominator” politics imported from Australia.
What? They’ve been employing “lowest common denominator” tactics for years. In the Major years, the Tories were termed an election-winning machine. Don’t blame it on us and that (Australian) Liberal Party apparatchik they’ve hired.
And the sad fact is THEY ARE RIGHT TO THINK THAT. The complete bankrupcy of the Tory party is now complete and I hope they get wiped out so that the Tories can be written off forever and something better come in its place, such as the UKIP perhaps. But the Tories need to die first.
If they were to look back to the time they were last doing well, as in Thatcher’s first and second terms, and then looked to find the exact point where they went off the rails I think it would have to be the Poll Tax debacle. Prior to that they were dismantling the State.
Government Outlays as a Percentage of GDP
UK 1980: 44.9%
UK 1990: 42.3%
– Josh
BTW, that info is here.
– Josh
The queeny, physically repulsive (imagine being touched by him!) Gordon Brown should be so easy to best
Strangely enough I never had, and now you’ve put the image into my head. Thanks for that.
As for Oliver Letwin, I have one word: why?
As you say, a nice man no doubt, but politically he’s no use. I believe there’s a fair chance that the LibDems might take his seat, in which case he’ll be able to go off and do something useful with his life.
“As for their support, in principle, for ID Cards – well, it just makes me spitting mad. [etc.]
Well that’s down to centralised control, too. It’s hard to find a leading Tory who is, in private, in favour of that particular massive increase in state power, but there is one key exception–Michael Howard.
Centralisation of power in the Labour Party is what they are competing with, and what has done the real damage. That’s why Blair can keep his foot on the authoritarian accelerator. The honest socialists are squeezed out too.
… More guillotines under this adminstration than in rest of parliamentary history. … More laws, faster, than ever before. … More power, more patronage, in one pair of hands than any in Britain since Elizabeth I. … The State and the Party interpenetrating, and other institutions (such as the BBC) beginning to treat them as one and the same.
All I can see of the current crop of Conservatives under Howard is yesterday’s sad old men desperate to regain their days of ‘glory’ under John Major. I can fully understand and sympathise with George Osborne’s, and the other up and coming crop of Conservative MP’s, views regarding the need for a damn good clearout of the rubbish that lost the Conservatives the 1997 election and produced an even worse result for the 2001 election, but I fear that the time needed to cut out the dead wood is no longer a luxury that the Conservative Party can enjoy.
If Blair is returned with an increased majority we know that a number of things will happen – he will not be resigning; it is extremely likely that the ID card bill will be rushed up ahead of its intended schedule; middle income indirect taxes will skyrocket as well as public spending and the Employer NI contribution rate.
Personally I feel that despite my wish to vote for UKIP on 5th May I will have to vote for the Conservative Party – if only in the vague hope that they might be able to diminish Tony Blair’s majority in some way.
I DO understand but Julian, Labour IS going to win this time so the only real value of your vote is with NEXT time in mind. I urge you to make your objective the construction of a REAL opposition and that is not going to be the pathetic Tories. Vote UKIP.
Absolutely right. The Tories simply aren’t going to win. Even they know that. It is essential that the Parliamentary Conservative Party gets the message that running on a platform most charitably described as New Labour-lite will lead them to oblivion.
Amen, Michael, and the only way to do that is not to vote for them!
Old Jack Tar writes:
“Amen, Michael, and the only way to do that is not to vote for them!”
If I lived in constituency where the Tories stood a chance and their candidate wasn’t a clown, they’d have (reluctantly) got my vote.
But I don’t, so they won’t. Once again, I’ll be voting UKIP and wishing I didn’t have to.
GCooper: I think that to get a proper opposition, it means voting against ever “non-clown” Tories even if they have a chance regardless. The Tory party machine needs to be destroyed and the best way to do that is to just vote UKIP (even if the UKIP person IS a clown and has no chance).
And by the way, I shall be voting for Richard Buckley, who is really quite “non-clown”.
Boris Johnson today shows why the Tories are hopeless. The piece is an anecdote of how he comes across a road sweeper while campaigning. They eventually get chatting and the fella shows Boris one of his pay slips. Boris is amazed by the amount of tax that this government is sucking from him.
If I were Boris I’d be ashamed at spending 4 years in complete ignorance of the state of the nation whilst featherbedding my fat arse with appearances on comedy news programmes. He wants us to believe that Howard and the Tories are on the Council Tax case and will lower our burden. The only episodes I remember Howard for in his time as Tory leader are tripping himself up on Iraq and not opposing ID cards. On tax and corruption alone this government would have been nailed years ago by an opposition with any shred of self respect and an ounce of fight yet the Tories have nothing to say for its natural constituency.
They are a bunch of spineless losers who have aquiesced in corrupt Labour’s destruction of a proud country and are not fit to even dare ask for a vote. Screw’em.
What Pete_London said. Blair has, with malice and intent, dismantled almost all of what was so valuable about the United Kingdom. Civil society, the ancient, dependable edifice of our law and our machinery of legislation, our independence, our voice in the world – all axed in the name of the foul Blair’s ego and hatred of Britain.
I wonder about his mental/emotional pathology, by the way. To the outside observer, he seems clearly insane. He talks in tongues on TV couches. An accent for every occasion. He dresses up in costumes when not physically restrained by Alastair Campbell. (The jeans and western shirt and boots at Mr Bush’s ranch were hysterical. From his pose, he looked as though he was about to begin a line dancing lesson.) He rants in public about “conservative values” – despite that Britain is, was, a conservative nation, which made it so stable. He routinely tells bare-faced lies and sincerely appears to think he is believed. There’s an alarming messianic gleam in his eye that, did it appear in someone who wasn’t the leader of the country, would warrant a medical evaluation. He appears autistic in his lack of understanding (maybe) of the terrible harm he has done the country. He believes he has “a mission” to be the president of a country called the EU.
This self-regarding empty bag of wind is what the Tories fear. Prick Tony Blair and he never fights back. He backs down immediately. Michael Howard could have lain about him with an axe and the highly nervous Mr Blair would have retreated step by step.
If Blair gets back in, there will be a mass exodus from Britain, I guarantee you.
He’d be less amazed if he hadn’t got the numbers wrong. It seems he’s confused between weeks and fortnights.
Indeed, perhaps on the same scale as the mass exodus from the US when Bush won last year? I guarantee there will be no significant difference either way. Perhaps we can review the numbers in May 2006 and see who was right.
EG
For once I agree with Gray. There will just a trickle of high initiative people away to greener pastures, not a deluge… rather like the ‘brain drain’ in the 1960’s in fact.
Well, perhaps “mass exodus” was a little overwrought, but it will be more than a trickle. I read the figures for after the last election – I wish I could remember where, and I apologise – and there was something like 70,000 net emigration. And these, it’s important to bear in mind, are the qualified who can expect to be welcomed in the US or Oz, and who are adventurous and independent minded and have the mental and emotional wherewithal to make a go of it.
I stick by my prediction that more will leave next time, meaning there will be a thinning out of professional people and competent, motivated tradespeople, leaving the welfare mothers, the unemployed, the people on permanent “disability”, pensioners and the vast army of public sector parasites to be supported by an ever diminishing supply of wealth creators.
The desperate plight of the Tory Party was on display on This Week last night. The great Tory “moderniser” Michael Portillo was there doing his creepy double act with Diane Abbott. When asked by Andrew Neill how he would have run this election campaign, Portillo said that he would have dropped the Tories’ emphasis on immigration and committed to levels of public spending as high as Labour’s. Neill sensibly retorted that in that case why should people vote for the Tory monkey when they could get the Labour organ grinder. Portillo lapsed into evasive waffle about how the Tory Party needed to do a New Labour (change its make up, “ditch its negatives”) but could only do this after an election……
Portillo’s comments show how little intellectual renewal there has been in the Conservative Party over the last ten years. It is light years away from presenting a serious challenge to the left. True, Portillo is no longer an MP but is very influential in Tory circles. He regularly uses his Sunday Times column to snipe at those who think that the Tories should be anything other than a pathetic New Labour tribute band. Expect major internal warfare within the Tory party post-5th May.
Portillo was never more than a lily-livered opportunist in conservative clothing. He ducked every test. He and the liberal meejah deserve each other. I hope he winds up presenting ‘Through the Keyhole’.
The Tories have tried Portillo’s solution in the past and been trounced. He’s yesterday’s man and can be safely ignored. Given the performance of people like him and Ken Clarke over the years I do wonder if the Gramscians managed to infiltrate the Tories. I was going to turn in when I saw Frederick Forsyth come on. When the hideous Diane Abbott all but called him a racist for advocating controlled immigration his self restraint was admirable. I’d have wrapped the microphone around her neck.
Yes, the socialist Diane Abbott, who sends her kid to a private school, is hideous. I think every time a Labourite uses either “racist” or “xenophobe” on radio or TV, loud bells and sirens ought to go off and drown out the rest of whatever drivel is coming out of their mouths.
Diane Abbott should have lived in the US 40 or 50 years ago and then she would know what racism is.
Funny, I never hear Condoleezza Rice call anyone a racist or sling any other cheap slurs around, either. Of course, she knows how to formulate complete sentences extemporaneously. Condi Rice is the most powerful woman in the world. Dianne Abbott’s just another fat, self-indulgent, lazy thinking, unprincipled oxygen thief.
And these, it’s important to bear in mind, are the qualified who can expect to be welcomed in the US or Oz, and who are adventurous and independent minded and have the mental and emotional wherewithal to make a go of it.
Hahahahahahaha. Oh, you Brits and your American dreams.
– Josh
When the hideous Diane Abbott all but called him a racist for advocating controlled immigration his self restraint was admirable. I’d have wrapped the microphone around her neck.
At one point on this programme Freddy Forsyth menioned something like “born Brits” as opposed to immigrants. Diane Abbott looked at him as if he’d just pulled on a pair of jackboots, she started to splutter, but couldn’t get any words out.
Portillo is a spent force, the best he could come up with was to sneer at the Conservative’s immigration policies, which are almost the only popular policy they have, since they flunked tax cuts.
Seriously, i don’t think Portillo’s ever got over the revelations about his gay past, and he’s been trying to reinvent himself ever since. Unfortunately, he seems to have reinvented himself as a middle of the road ponce. It’s a shame, the boy could’ve been a contender.
John K – He couldn’t have been a contender, because he didn’t really ever join the battle. He kept falling short of being a contender because he didn’t want to fail. We should stop thinking of Portillo as the prince across the water and recognise that he played his cards all wrong and then got the public sulks when people took him at his word.
Wild Pegasus – I don’t have any American dreams. The people who get US Green Cards – certainly for the years I lived in the US – and who get admitted to Oz (on the points system) are people who qualify.
Obviously, not everyone who emigrates has the stamina to grit their teeth and learn new customs and new ways of doing things. Some do fail and return home. Some just miss their families. But those with the right stuff stay, settle and make a life for themselves. I cannot see what I have said that is naive enough to have motivated a sarcastic response.
I really didn’t understand the point of your patronising comment.