The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

The left should weep not cheer at the decline of Compassionate Conservatism

It is fatal to think that the worse the Tories look, the better Labour appears.

David Cameron
David Cameron. Photograph: Getty Images

A final nail has been bashed into the coffin of Compassionate Conservatism this week and the left should weep, not cheer.

Those receiving benefits, desperate burglars, Europeans, teaching unions, pregnant women and more are now in the sites of a vindictive Britannia that is being unchained before our eyes. In sorrow not anger we should morn the passing of what could have been - a decisive shift in British politics with the rebirth of a caring Tory Party that has turned into a fading dawn. Why and how can this be the case?

The real job of politics is to shift the centre of gravity in your direction for the longest possible period of time. To do this means not just changing your party but your opponents so that when you lose, and you will, nothing really changes. Thatcher realized this when claimed her ultimate triumph was not changing the Tory party but changing Labour. Blimey did she succeed.

The possibility of a one-nation, compassionate Conservatism taking root under Cameron's early leadership was a distinct and tantalizing possibility. Going green, hugging hoodies and the whole big society opened up space that was to the left of the arid spot New Labour finally landed on. A strong connection could have been made to the Disraeli and Macmillan strain of Conservatism that had been lost under the Thatcherite storm. After all, it was a Tory minister that founded our post war system of secondary education, it was a Tory government that built more council houses than any Labour government and under the Tories the NHS used to be safe. Of course it was a paternalistic politics born of an old class system - but a system that recognized obligation, duty, respect and tolerance. Cameron appeared to be of this ilk and not of the dry, utilitarian brand of market fundamentalists that took hold of the party after 1975.

That compassionate Conservatism failed to re-root itself is of course Cameron's fault. He didn't do the work politically or organizationally to dig in. Or perhaps he never really meant it? The crash didn't help either - giving Osborne an easy target with which to attack the state and to have a very lop-sided view of being "all in it together". But the forces outside of the Tory ranks acting against the back-sliding to compassionless Conservatism where too weak to act as an effective countervailing force.  Labour, the unions and wider civil society simply haven't been up to the job.   Too little of the New Labour legacy has survived because it was hardly ever based on principled argument and popular support and was therefore incapable of defining a lasting moral consensus once Labour was turfed out. Devolution stands but little else.

I come from a working class family. I didn't really know any Tories until I was an adult. It confounded my youthful prejudices to find out they could be kind and caring. But such traits find little echo in their party today. Cameron promised but failed to deliver. What happens to these people now - who speaks for them? And what about Ferdinand Mount, Ken Clarke, Peter Oborne and the Red Tory Philip Blond? These people have been adding a richness to the political debate and policy that no longer has a home. Where do they go and what has the country lost?

Some in Labour's ranks will cheer. The lines become clearer for them, a simple world of black and white, good and bad. The worse the Tories get the better Labour looks. Such a view is fatal. It either opens up the threat of Labour marching to the right again to eat up the space being vacated by the return of the great moving right show, or it polarises politics and the whole adversarial system that has done such damage to Britain. Can those who are cheering be so sure the centre of gravity, because of these preference shaping right wing Tories, won't shift even further right?   

The point at which our country was at its most equal was an era in the 1950s called Butskellism, named after the consensus between the hugely influential and decent Tory RA Butler and the Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell.  Compassionate Conservatism is not an oxymoron but it's taken another big hit. We should hope it recovers. The NHS being safe in the Tories hands is a good thing. It means poor people don't suffer unnecessarily. The left has to understand its victory comes is when it converts the Tories again to a humane form of politics.

PS The debacle of the West Coast Mainline franchise is yet another example of free market failure being turned into an attack on the state. In echoes of the banking crisis, that was the result of too little not too much state intervention, the right argue that civil service 'failure' merely shows how daft it would be to let the state ever run the railways again. You have to admire their brass neck.  The reality is that in our warped world we have private sector consultants paid £650k a year to shaft civil servants paid just £65k in the battle of who wins the franchise contract war. I wonder? The former are incentivized to make as much profit as possible while later are incentivized by what's in the public interest. The sooner the railways are run by and for the public the better. Where is Labour's brass neck?

Neal Lawson's column appears weekly on The Staggers.

12 comments

Fraziel1's picture

Isn't it amusing how the left screech about rabid right wingers, as they tar anyone who disagrees with them, along with islamaphobe, or misogynist, fascist etc. The idea of reducing benefits for people receiving often very large sums, and more than they could ever get in work, is enormously popular with people in the UK. Over 70% of people support it including nearly 70% of labour voters. Are they all rabid right wingers? It is exactly the same with regard to changing the law about protecting yourself from burglars in your own home. You could argue in fact that these views are now so widespread that they are in fact the mainstream and people who strongly oopose them are rabid left wingers.

As usual though the elitist left think they know best and look down their nose at public opinion as they remain out of touch in their ivory towers of privilege.

There is an intersting blog from Rod Liddle in the spectator just now about how people on the left are often incapable of having discussion with people that disagree with them and often resort to name calling and going in the huff. Worth a read, especially from a good few people who post on this site.

Alex W's picture

I'm on the centre left economically, and I'm afraid I have to agree with calling out the writer on referring to "desperate burglars", as though - in a country where the welfare state no matter how imperfect (and - failing that - soup kitchens) - most of these people have no other means of surviving than attacking the homes (and therby violating the human rights) of others.

No matter how corrupt the elite are, it should not be forgotten that criminals can be human rights abusers too, and - although there is odd crazed junkie - many muggers and burglars are bullies who choose to pray on the poor and weak, little different from militiamen in wartorn Africa or the highwayman of the past.

Fraziel1's picture

probably Benjamin because they cannot believe what is being spouted here. You should take a leaf out of the spectators book, they have contributors from all political colours, unlike the new statesman but then the left are without doubt the most intolerant of people and cannot stand dissent. You are just another elitist privileged liberal with no hope of ever understanding why people might think that desribing a burgalar as desperate is truly disgraceful.

Leftist at heart's picture

Dear Neal Lawson,
You appear ignorant to describe any burglar as 'desperate'. This is a socialist country by enlarge, and no individual citizen is has the right to violate another's home to survive. The majority of victims of burglaries are those who reside in socially deprived areas and have no means of getting justice. Having your home and personal belongings taken is deeply heart breaking, and those who live privileged lives in safe neighbourhoods can never understand this. If you believe there is nothing wrong with the term 'desperate' then I would suggest you are no different to the conservatives you so despise, who fail to empathise with the most vulnerable in society. Otherwise, I suggest you accept your wording was insensitive and amend it. Many thanks.

Benjamin Rae's picture

You have to wonder why so many hard line right wingers stalk the boards of a centrist /soft left magazine spitting poison.

RH47's picture

It's the legacy of nuliarbore delusions and identity confusion.

Fraziel1's picture

You sir, are a twat. " desperate burglars" ? I wonder if you would have such compassion for these utter scumbags that can cause such distress if you were burgled. I doubt it. That would perhaps be the only you would realise the idiocy of what you say. I know people who have been burgled and it has left them utterly distraught. I have heard of people being so distressed they have had to move house.

How unsurprising that some left wing liberal should feel compassion for a criminal rather than the victim. This law is long overdue. lets hope the thieving scum realise that from now on every time they break into someones house they potentially take their life in their hands. As for benefits, there are so many reasons that what the tories propose is right and fair it would take forever to list them.

As usual the left have no interest in public opinion and support the benefit claimant receiving more than he /she could ever hope to get in work over people who do go to work, and work hard. It's why i believe that come election time labour will still not get an overall majority.That and the prospect of Ed Miliband as PM. I am not a natural tory and have never voted for them but if i have to to keep you lot out that's what i will do.

RH47's picture

Interesting how Tories can't read anything more complex than tabloid headlines and jump like billy-o to a dog whistle.

mike cobley's picture

"...or it polarises politics and the whole adversarial system that has done such damage to Britain." - Sorry, but I think you've got this entirely wrong. There is nothing wrong with vigorous politics, especially when fuelled by undeniable anger over social injustices, and the only reason there was a cross party consensus in the postwar years was because the Tories knew that the prewar ambience of deference and privilege just didn't work any more. After striving to fend off then overcome Hitler's insanity, people just weren't willing to be cowed by class or assumed superiority. Attlee's government was forthright in its aims and the Tories and their allies fought those aims tooth and nail. And whenever the Tories have been in power, certainly since the 70s, they have pursued an adversarial course with vehemence and no quarter given.

We need a progressive government which is willing to face down the mavens and charlatans of the Right, and that means attacking them where they appear to be strongest. Because when you defeat the enemy on their strongest ground, their lesser strengths also fail, which means that they have few resources with which to reconstitute themselves. Of course, such a course demands honesty and integrity, which are a bit in short supply.

DaveSmith's picture

Neal, this is a shockingly poor effort. For a kicker it's "sights" not "sites", for a second thing how on earth are pregnant women actually being "attacked" or whatever. Maria Miller and Jeremy Hunt saying something doesn't make it a Green Paper, let alone a piece of legislation.

You also appear to sympathise with "desperate burglars", which I think any homeowner who's been the victim of one will be pretty cheesed off about. It also does a huge disservice to the hundreds of thousands living on the breadline who don't resort to what can often be violent crime to alleviate their difficulties.

I don't want to go on but, again, your "attack the state" line is not born out by the stats. State spending is being cut by about 1% a year and, even if the economy were performing as it had been projected, we'd still be looking at £500bn on top of our national debt just in this Parliament.

That's about all I can be arsed to take issue with in one go...

kelelmist's picture

Many poor are having all of their benefits removed, or capped, unable to house or feed themselves or family. I suppose you cannot be "arsed" to find out what's going on.

Ultra_Fox's picture

A deeply flawed analysis. How can we mourn something that never existed?

Cameron may have sounded vaguely progressive in opposition. But in office - even under the supposedly "moderating" influence of the LibDems - he has been anything but. The slash-and-burn economic policy and the shredding of the National Health Service are two prominent examples of this.

There may still be a social consensus between the main parties on matters such as abortion and gay rights. But the message from Tory conference is that even this may now be under threat.

Latest tweets