Miriam Cates is the former MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge.
The Reform Party has a rare opportunity to reshape the British political landscape. Having enjoyed a breakthrough at July’s General Election by voicing the concerns of voters disenchanted with the established parties, Reform UK is currently well-positioned to cause a major shakeup of our two party system.
In an opinion poll last week, Reform outperformed Labour and fell only narrowly shy of the Conservative Party. Nigel Farage has recently poached some well-known Conservatives, including Andrea Jenkyns and Tim Montgomerie.
And yet beyond its opposition to immigration and net zero, the party has yet to articulate its core principles. As Reform grows (membership has now exceeded 100 000) its leadership will inevitably face criticism from every disgruntled voter wanting to refashion it precisely into their own mould.
Reform will need to define its underlying philosophy or risk being paralysed by the same unmanageable breadth that has plagued the Conservative Party, split as it has been between liberals and conservatives.
The potential for such a fissure was highlighted by the recent parliamentary vote on assisted suicide. Amongst MPs from the larger parties, the issue united the ‘autonomy above all else’ wings of both Conservatives and Labour, with Tory libertarians and progressive left Labour MPs supporting an individual’s right to determine their destiny over wider social concerns whilst social conservatives and the traditional socialist Left favoured the protection of the vulnerable and voted against the Bill.
For Reform, this tension led to a split whereby three of its MPs voted in favour of assisted suicide, while two, including Farage, voted against. This has led to an uncomfortable situation where a higher percentage of Reform MPs than either their Conservative or Labour colleagues voted for an issue that has long been considered a domain of the progressive left.
The backlash against Reform from its core voters has been significant. The strength of feeling perhaps derives from a previously disenfranchised support base placing in Reform its last hopes for socially-conservative representation, only to have those hopes seemingly dashed at the first major test of the party’s cultural credentials. If even Reform’s MPs can’t be trusted on an issue as fundamental as the sanctity of life, what hope is there?
To give credit to Nigel Farage himself, while he has libertarian leanings he has also long since displayed socially conservative instincts.
Those disillusioned about his colleagues’ votes on assisted suicide were wooed during the election campaign by Farage’s support for marriage tax breaks and the abolition of the two-child benefit cap, as well as his firm opposition to gender ideology. Less than a fortnight ago, Farage argued for a parliamentary vote on reducing the abortion time limit to 22 weeks.
Reform’s threefold slogan of ‘Family, Community, Country’ is appealing to social conservatives across the political spectrum. As a Conservative MP in the last parliament, I argued for similar values in my own party and it is heartening to see a major political figure willing to make the arguments for them.
But it is now far from clear whether the wider Reform Party will embrace genuine conservatism ahead of libertarianism when the two are in tension.
The former is of course not contradictory to liberty. But conservatism recognises that for freedom to flourish, certain moral boundaries and social norms must exist. From the Garden of Eden to Marxist revolutions, despite its promises, throwing off boundaries has made humanity less free and happy.
Unfettered personal freedom, whether economic or social, is ultimately damaging because of its effects on wider society: this is exemplified in the assisted suicide debate where a desire for a right to die risks leaving vulnerable people feeling a duty to die.
Farage has sharp political instincts and I suspect understands this. He has repeatedly opposed the assault on our country’s Judeo-Christian foundations because he recognises it is these which have created the environment for our historic freedoms and prosperity. Here he is in tune with his party’s members.
It remains to be seen how the three Reform MPs who diverged from their leader will vote at Third Reading. I respect each of them and share their views on many issues. They may yet oppose the Bill when it comes to the decisive vote.
Two voted for the Bill in large part because of online surveys. Such ‘polling’ taps into Reform’s populist approach but is fraught with problems. Not only is it hard to ensure such surveys are representative, but more reliable recent polling suggests that just 11 per cent of the British public support legalising assisted dying once they are fully informed about what is involved.
For Reform to achieve major breakthrough at the next election, the Party will have to pick up votes from millions of disillusioned Labour voters. Ultra-libertarian campaigns, such as the push for assisted suicide, tend to be the preserve of affluent elites.
Libertarianism, both cultural and economic, is also a minority political view amongst voters: the electorate is generally socially conservative but favours state intervention in appropriate circumstances. Labour voters in particular hold such views; adopting a socially conservative heartbeat will likely result in electoral reward for Reform.
The Reform Party is currently enjoying extraordinary growth and looks set to be the first major new party to emerge in Britain in over a century. But if the Party wants to avoid the paralysing divisions that have plagued the Conservatives for decades, its leaders must define their underpinning philosophy.
Will Reform choose to represent yet another branch of social liberalism? Or will it learn the lessons of past Tory party failure and have the courage to take the path of true conservatism?