David Gauke is a former Justice Secretary and was an independent candidate in South-West Hertfordshire at the 2019 general election.
A few days on from the Conservative Party conference, I am going to say something that many ConHome readers will find appalling about the party’s political strategy.
Some will even accuse me of trying to undermine the party’s leadership. But here goes anyway. I was rather encouraged.
For those dismayed at this partial endorsement, please be reassured that there are some criticisms too, but you will have to make it to the second half of the column to read them.
Let us start with the positives.
First, The Right Way is a serious piece of work, in much the same way that The Right Approach was in 1976. I would not sign up to every aspect but it makes a compelling case for facing up to tough choices, controlling the size of the state, and fiscal responsibility.
Second, the focus throughout the week on economic growth is also very welcome.
In contrast, cultural matters barely got a look in, save for Badenoch splendid denunciation of ethno-nationalism. There is no sign from Andy Burnham that growing the economy is his principal objective, and the Tories look willing to fill the space. The issue of Heathrow expansion is a good example of where the Conservatives are taking an unambiguously pro-growth position whereas the Prime Minister is – at best – indifferent.
Third, the switch towards a focus on growth also creates an opportunity to build a broader base of support, including recovering support from better educated, higher paid voters rather than a futile attempt to win back the Red Wall. There is some criticism of the Conservatives that it has become the party of affluent voters in the south east and that the various policy announcements were all about shoring up its core vote.
The reality is that the type of voter likely to benefit from the extension of free child care – high earning families in their 30s and 40s – are by no means core Tory voters these days. I am sceptical about another spending commitment on child care in the current fiscal circumstances, but these are the voters the Conservatives can and should recover. If they succeed in doing that, the Tories will be re-established as the main electoral threat to Labour, which will then persuade soft Reform supporters that their votes would be better deployed backing the Conservatives.
And the fourth point that is worth highlighting was the full-throated and very effective attack on Reform UK in Badenoch’s conference speech. Not only was her assessment of Reform UK spot on, it also is politically astute. A regular point made in these columns is that the result of many Conservative/Reform contests at the next election is going to be determined by how many Labour and Liberal Democrat voters can be persuaded to vote tactically for the Tories to keep out Reform. This will in part be driven by how robust the Tories are in attacking Nigel Farage and his party.
The indications from this conference are that the attacks are going to be very robust indeed.
Put it all together and there is a coherent agenda and political strategy.
Be the truth-telling party that faces up to the policy trade-offs and recognises that we have to be fiscally responsible; focus on economic growth; try to win back the middle class vote; and make it clear that Reform UK is beyond the pale. It is exactly the agenda that Prosper UK was formed to advance. (And, by the way, given the positive response Prosper UK received at the party conference in terms of attendance at fringe events, one that much of the party can fall behind.)
The agenda and strategy, however, is still clearly work in progress. Most obviously, there is a tension between being the truth-telling party of fiscal responsibility and also providing a retail offer to better off voters. Trying to argue that the public finances are in crisis and that substantial tax cuts are affordable is not credible.
The answer back from Shadow Ministers is that spending cuts and reducing the size of the State is the answer.
That is all very well – but where?
Defence spending is obviously going to grow, and the conference kicked off with announcements of two extensions of the State – the child care offer and a massive expansion of the prison population. Margaret Thatcher left office with a prison population in England and Wales of 45,000, we currently have capacity of 90,000, and the Tories want it increased to 140,000. That is very definitely not shrinking the State.
The principal source of savings is going to be the welfare budget, where most of the identified £70bn savings are found. I am all for finding savings here, but cuts of that scale is not a simple task and some of the most effective measures in terms of getting people into work will come with upfront costs. “Cutting welfare” is becoming to the right what “tax the rich” has long been to the left – an all-purpose but implausible answer to questions about where the money is to come from.
The task of finding money from the benefits bill is made all the harder by the refusal to consider abandoning the triple lock on the state pension. Moving to a smoothed earnings link (where pensions increase in any one year at least in line with inflation but in the long run in line with earnings) is perfectly generous and protects the state pension in both real terms and relative terms. It would, however, end the expensive ratchet effect of the triple lock and is the very least we should do. Sticking with the triple lock is fundamentally unserious and undermines any claims for truth-telling and fiscal responsibility.
(By the way, further on the topic of taking inspiration from Margaret Thatcher, she moved the uprating of the state pension from earnings to inflation, where it stayed until 2011. That is what taking tough a decision really looks like.)
Then there is the question of whether, if we do have scope for tax cuts, the party has identified the right ones for delivering economic growth. There is certainly a good case for cutting SDLT (last year’s offering), but the IHT policy really does not meet that test. The growth rhetoric, just like the fiscal responsibility rhetoric, and the actual policies announced are not fully aligned.
A further potential problem for a Conservative strategy that is based on winning the economic arguments and recovering its dominance among affluent voters is the old topic of our relations with the EU. With a Government seeking to reset our relations with the EU, and potentially going into the next election willing to go much further, a policy of rejecting a closer relationship with the EU and further disrupting UK/EU relations (which is one consequence of leaving the ECHR) will sit uncomfortably with many of the voters the Tories are seeking to attract. Brexit was downplayed at the party conference by Badenoch, but Burnham might not allow the Tories to duck the issue for long.
Where does this leave us?
The pivot away from the Red Wall towards rebuilding support from affluent voters makes political sense. For it to succeed, however, greater emphasis on economic and fiscal credibility is needed which will require some political bravery on issues like the triple lock and EU relations. The party conference was a start, but there is still a very long way to go.