The Conservatives need to define what they stand for as they go up against Reform as the party of the right. They can be guardians of paternalism or engineers of growth. But it is dishonest to pretend both are possible.
Britain’s housing crisis is not unique amongst developed nations. But alongside an acute supply shortage, it faces weakening demand. If the most talented young people don’t believe there’s a realistic route to buying, they will leave.
Americans feel some control over their financial future. Brits don’t. This breeds a zero-sum approach to money that manifests in pernicious ways.
Parties are far too in thrall to the temporary nature of polls that gauge those public attitudes. They don’t share my Fantasy Premier League patience or Singapore’s investing mantra.
Singapore lets you build momentum around that income, while the UK just exacerbates the expenses. If we returned, we’d pay a gruelling marginal rate of tax while footing the bill entirely for nursery and childcare costs. Treading water rather than making progress.
Cabinet members in the US and Singapore can command far better pay elsewhere. But they are freed up to take on real responsibility. If the UK can’t offer similar paths to the country’s brightest, it condemns itself to mid-table mediocrity.
Deciding what you’re going to do is more effective than a lengthy mission statement. Many of the UK’s political failures of the last 15 years stem from giving too much thought to branding and too little to a plan.
The UK’s wealthiest clearly see life as more than a game of hoarding money. But it doesn’t mean they will indulge in an indefinite game of jump and how high with the government. Patience is wearing thin.
Civil liberties don’t carry as much traction as we might wish. And the Conservatives will carry the can for the Boriswave into the next election. Labour can easily finger them as soft if it appears they won’t give the state extra powers in Digital ID to tackle immigration.
The UK has the resources. Its universities, legal system, financial markets and cultural capital are assets which could allow it to punch far above its weight.
We may resent China’s methods, but it thinks seriously and strategically and can execute quickly. By contrast, Liz Truss’ attempts to reshape the UK were immediately cast as inherently destructive because they rattled short-term nerves.
Britain should ask what kind of business it resembles now. WeWork comes to mind, as successive governments seek only popularity, without any strategy for long-term profitability.
The Wrexham model shows the possibilities of treating towns as assets rather than state-dependents. Joseph Phua’s plans for King’s Lynn reflect that mentality.
Can economic liberalism exist without social conservatism? The most permissive societies don’t thrive economically. If the basis of capitalism is private property, one must feel secure in its ownership.
Instead of instinctively dividing society into sinners (elites) and the saved (working people), populism needs to reach across divides. Resentment can spark a movement but only discipline and humility can sustain it.