:: Conservative Revival ::

:: Thursday, August 29, 2002 ::

Hope springs eternal
Andrew Gimson has a curiously upbeat piece in the new Spectator arguing that New Labour is like the New Economy, an idea that seemed good but which has been revealed as without real foundation. Old politics will return, and then the Tories will do well. Just one thing is needed:

That said, and when all due respect has been paid to his authentically dull way with words, Mr Duncan Smith would be well advised to find a speech-writer capable of explaining to his party, and even to the wider world, why conservatism, understood as a doctrine of limited government, is more in tune with the modern age than anything dreamt of by Mr Blair. There is an awkward but not insurmountable paradox here. How does one use political rhetoric to demonstrate that one is not just another glib politician intent on spinning his way into Downing Street? The answer, perhaps, lies in an unashamedly traditional tone of voice, informed by a deep knowledge and love of British political history, but rendered delightful by self-mockery.

As an aside -- could that needed speech-writer be one Andrew Gimson? Just a thought...

Anyway, I'm not sure this analysis is correct. Alan Duncan said, I am reliably informed, that he wanted to drive the moral authoritarians out of the party. If this is so, how can the Gimson argument hold water? The Tories are charging headlong into the New Politics. If the Gimson thesis is correct, they will be in the worst possible shape when the Old Politics returns.
:: Swordsman 8/29/2002 12:48:00 PM [+] ::
...

The HMS Tory is stuck in the mire of the Sargasso Sea with its Captain, Iain Duncan Smith unable to figure out how to stop his ship from continuing to wallow. He has recently attempted to change the chain of command on-board his ship. The result was only bitterness and/or indifference from the rest of the crew.

IDS is truly "all at sea" in his leadership of the Tory Party. Much of his problem is not of his own making. Having soundly lanced the "wet"/Clarke-ite boil, he now faces the rumble between the "tradionalists" and the "modernisers." It was expected that IDS' problems would not end with his trouncing of Clarke in the leadership battle. Many commentators, including me, expected to see a battle between the libertarians and the authoritarians for the heart of the party. Unfortunately, for all concerned, the battle-lines are not that clear-cut.

The frustrating thing about the situation is that the two groups are not that far apart philosophically. The battle is over the means to the end. In fact, it could be argued that the entire mess is over spin. The debate is over how to get the Tory message out of the masses. There are many who wish to sell the Tory Party as "caring and sharing", "inclusive" (which it already is, btw) and "modern." The other side is worried that if the party goes too far in that direction there will be no way to differentiate the party from the New Labour image. This is, in fact, not a debate over policy but one over PR. The Tory Party is running scared over the press, and it seems that there is no one yet discovered in their ranks who knows the first thing about how to get their message across to the electorate.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out over the summer. It is obvious to all that it needs to be sorted by Party Conference in October. Many activists are grumbling about the major overall rumoured to be happening this year. If they manage to ruin conference, one of the perks of being a Tory activists, they risk angering their already depleted activist base. My sources tell me that when participants receive their conference packs they are in for a nasty surprise.

The big question is: can the Conservatives free themselves from the "idle sea" in time to save IDS' leadership? Or are there those in the party who don't want him to succeed?
:: Andrew Ian Dodge 8/20/2002 08:05:00 AM [+] ::
...

Norris: is he any good?
I'm more sanguine about Norris than others, mainly 'cos I used to work for him and know how harmless he really is. I'd be worried if the Mayorship of London had any real power, but it doesn't, thanks to Tony Blair. London is the UK's New York in terms of its frightfully overwhelming political correctness, and the only Tory who could get elected there is someone who doesn't fit the Tory mould, just like Giuliani and Bloomberg in NYC. Did Giuliani's pro-choice views hurt the Republican Party? In that respect, I think Norris serves a purpose. He can stop Livingstone or some NuLab cipher getting elected, but at the same time not be too damaging to the Tory cause becuase you'd expect a Toty London Mayor to be on the left of the party. At the same time, he shows that the Tory party is a broad church, having room for dissenters. When "extremism" is the charge levelled at you -- and believed -- by so many, you have to have shields like Steve Norris. And if he's busy running the minutiae of London, he's not busy complaining about the party.

Having said all that, I think Frank's suggestion of approaching Ivan Massow again is worthwhile.
:: Swordsman 8/20/2002 06:24:00 AM [+] ::
...