The Tories' hardline 2015 manifesto is taking shape

Conservative ministers have been trailing right-wing policies for post-coalition life.

We've heard plenty about the Lib Dems' "differentiation strategy" in the last year, but surprisingly few have noted the Conservatives' equivalent. On Europe, welfare, human rights law and employment regulation, Tory ministers now routinely say what a Conservative government would do differently to the coalition. At last night's meeting of the 1922 Committee, David Cameron promised his MPs that the party would go into the next election "with a clear Eurosceptic position": expect the 2015 Conservative manifesto to include a commitment to hold an EU referendum (likely offering voters a choice between looser membership and withdrawal). Below, I've compiled a list of other Tory-pleasing policies set to make an appearance.

Even deeper and harsher welfare cuts

George Osborne wanted to announce £10bn of welfare cuts in the Autumn Statement but the Lib Dems limited him to £3.8bn. Expect a promise of deeper cuts to appear in the manifesto.

It's also likely that Tory welfare proposals blocked by Nick Clegg's party, such as the abolition of housing benefit for the under-25s and the restriction of child benefit for families with more than two children, will feature. Other policies trailed by David Cameron in his welfare speech in the summer included:

- Preventing teenagers from claiming benefits as soon as they leave school.

- Paying benefits in kind (like free school meals), rather than in cash.

- Reducing benefit levels for the long-term unemployed.

- A lower housing benefit cap. Cameron said that the current limit of £20,000 was still too high. 

Some or all of those could appear in the manifesto.

For-profit free schools

Early on in the coalition's life, Nick Clegg made it clear that he would veto any move to introduce for-profit free schools, viewed by some Tories as the key to transforming the education system. But when he appeared before the Leveson inquiry, Michael Gove indicated that they could be established under a Conservative majority government.

The Education Secretary remarked that unlike some of his coalition colleagues, "who are very sceptical of the benefits of profit", he had an "open mind", adding: "I believe that it may be the case that we can augment the quality of state education by extending the range of people involved in its provision."

Withdrawal from the European Court of Human Rights

The Conservatives have become increasingly hostile towards the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which has prevented the deportation of Abu Qatada and forced the government to consider extending voting rights to some prisoners, but Lib Dem obstructionism has prevented reform. The commission set up to examine the proposed British Bill of Rights, split as it was between Cameron and Clegg nominees, failed to reach agreement when it published its report this week.

But in an article for the Daily Telegraph, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling wrote: "I will also be looking clearly towards the next election, and starting work on ensuring that we have a real plan for change then as well." Rather than merely replacing the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights, which would still allow UK citizens to petition the ECHR, it's increasingly likely that the Tories will promise to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the court and leave the European Convention on Human Rights altogether (a position recently supported by former justice minister Nick Herbert). Such a move would require David Cameron to replace Attorney General Dominic Grieve, an avowed defender of the ECHR, but a post-election reshuffle could take care of that.

Hire-and-fire employment laws

Vince Cable ensured that a Tory proposal to allow employers to fire workers at will (contained in the now-infamous report by Conservative donor Adrian Beecroft) didn't become law, but Downing Street made it clear that it approved of the plan and it is likely to feature in the party's election offering.

David Cameron and George Osborne are already dropping hints about what the Conservatives' 2015 election manifesto will look like. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market

Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU. 

I’ve been trying to work out what bothers me about the response to Jeremy Corbyn’s interview on the Andrew Marr programme.

What bothers me about Corbyn’s interview is obvious: the use of the phrase “wholesale importation” to describe people coming from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom makes them sound like boxes of sugar rather than people. Adding to that, by suggesting that this “importation” had “destroy[ed] conditions”, rather than laying the blame on Britain’s under-enforced and under-regulated labour market, his words were more appropriate to a politician who believes that immigrants are objects to be scapegoated, not people to be served. (Though perhaps that is appropriate for the leader of the Labour Party if recent history is any guide.)

But I’m bothered, too, by the reaction to another part of his interview, in which the Labour leader said that Britain must leave the single market as it leaves the European Union. The response to this, which is technically correct, has been to attack Corbyn as Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland are members of the single market but not the European Union.

In my view, leaving the single market will make Britain poorer in the short and long term, will immediately render much of Labour’s 2017 manifesto moot and will, in the long run, be a far bigger victory for right-wing politics than any mere election. Corbyn’s view, that the benefits of freeing a British government from the rules of the single market will outweigh the costs, doesn’t seem very likely to me. So why do I feel so uneasy about the claim that you can be a member of the single market and not the European Union?

I think it’s because the difficult truth is that these countries are, de facto, in the European Union in any meaningful sense. By any estimation, the three pillars of Britain’s “Out” vote were, firstly, control over Britain’s borders, aka the end of the free movement of people, secondly, more money for the public realm aka £350m a week for the NHS, and thirdly control over Britain’s own laws. It’s hard to see how, if the United Kingdom continues to be subject to the free movement of people, continues to pay large sums towards the European Union, and continues to have its laws set elsewhere, we have “honoured the referendum result”.

None of which changes my view that leaving the single market would be a catastrophe for the United Kingdom. But retaining Britain’s single market membership starts with making the argument for single market membership, not hiding behind rhetorical tricks about whether or not single market membership was on the ballot last June, when it quite clearly was. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.