POLITICS
The Tories throw stones in a glass house of no principles
NOEL MALCOLM
Do you remember `Summer Heat on Labour'? Nor do most people. It was one of Mr Kenneth Baker's brainchildren when he was chairman of the Conservative Par- ty, a special mini-campaign to keep up the pressure on Labour during the summer months of 1990. It sported an amusing logo with a picture of a wilted rose; but unfortu- nately the campaign itself withered and died, partly as a result of the furnace-like heat generated by Mr Ridley's resignation.
That was not the only reason for the failure of `Summer Heat on Labour', however. The whole basis of the campaign was the idea that Mr Kinnock's famous policy review process should be exposed as a sham, and that Labour should be de- picted as the same old socialist party peddling the same old socialist dogmas. The main campaign document was entitled `Labour — Behind the Mask', and it bore a photograph of Mr Kinnock jabbing the air above him with a clenched-fist salute. 'Mr Kinnock's past history — as a left-wing rebel and a dedicated socialist — make [sic] it impossible for him to sound convinc- ing as a moderate,' it said.
The public simply did not buy this argument. Perhaps people had never thought that Mr Kinnock sounded convinc- ing as a left-wing rebel and a dedicated socialist either. Perhaps they now thought he was a moderate, or at any rate that he had filled his shadow cabinet with people who were. Perhaps they noticed that the new Labour policy documents, despite all their cloudy vagueness, clearly differed on many points from the socialist programme set out in the suicidal 1983 Labour manifes- to. Or it may be (and this, I think, is the catch-all explanation) that the vast major- ity of the population — subtract the readership of the Guardian from 56 million to get the rough figure — neither knew nor cared what the details of the Labour Party's policies were. If they planned to vote Labour it was because they were dissatisfied with some aspect or other of Tory policy or performance. They were against the poll tax, for example, without having any idea about the mechanics of Labour's 'Fair Rates' proposal — let alone having an opinion about whether it was a socialist policy in disguise.
As autumn turned to winter last year, the Conservative Party became too preoc- cupied with its own affairs to develop much of a strategy for attacking Labour. As winter turned to spring, the temporary political honeymooning of Mr Major was extended for several months by the Gulf war. For some time after that, the Tory Party was self-obsessed again. The main concern of Mr Chris Patten, the new Party Chairman, seemed to be to build up a novel, non-Thatcherite image, an image which in some ways (notably in its enthu- siasm for European federalism) differed not only from Thatcherism but from gov- ernment policy — to the point where one wondered whether the organisation in- habiting Conservative Central Office was now representing a new and different party. (The 'Chris Democrats', perhaps?) Only this summer, exactly a year after Mr Baker's abortive campaign began, did the Tory Party show any signs of having a new anti-Labour strategy.
The first evidence of this came with the publication of this year's Conservative Campaign Guide. Here is what Mr Baker's mini-campaign brochure said last year: 'In the one or two areas where Labour are attempting to change policy, their leaders sound unconvincing.' This summer's Cam- paign Guide, on the other hand, sings a different tune: 'In several areas Labour have changed their policies fundamentally. What is remarkable is that the areas where significant changes have taken place are normally those where conviction, rather than practicalities, determine [sic] policy. Labour have therefore laid themselves open to the charge that they have ditched their principles.' The examples given are Europe and devolution; and to these we may now add defence policy, which Mr Kinnock has revised by the strange expe- dient of omitting to renew his CND mem- bership card and getting Mr Kaufman to write an article in the Guardian.
Each edition of the Conservative Cam- paign Guide is an accretion of earlier editions, a living embodiment, almost, of Tory theories about tradition and cumula- tive wisdom. And so it is that, in additon to the claim that Labour have sold their principles down the river, there are also many pages in this Campaign Guide which run through the old arguments that Labour's policy review has been a `smokescreen'. Nonetheless, the real cut- ting edge of the Tory argument has changed. This was confirmed last month, when the order went out from Mr Chris Patten's office that Tory politicians should stop accusing the Labour leadership of being left-wing, and concentrate on calling it muddled and unprincipled instead.
Is this wise? Admittedly, some of the old recycled quotations were getting a little stale. There is a limit to how far you can frighten the children by telling them what Mr Ken Livingstone did when he was chairman of the GLC, or revealing that Mrs Margaret Beckett 'is notable for her hard-Left past'. Some of the statistics were becoming whiskery, too: an oft-reprinted analysis from immediately after the 1987 election, for example, showing that 57 Labour MPs belonged to the 'hard Left', should really be consigned to the history books. A truer figure for today's party would be roughly half that; only 28 MPs signed Mr Nellist's statement advocating defiance of the law on the poll tax.
On the other hand, it would be a mistake for Tory campaigners to let Labour get away with the idea that it has reconciled itself to privatisations and market reforms. Labour spokesmen have already outlined a worrying plan to use the regulatory author- ities of the privatised utilities to stop those companies from paying dividends, thus pushing down the share price and enabling a Labour government to re-nationalise on the cheap. Not many people know that, and it will be in Tory interests to make sure that many people do — especially those crucial floating voters who, according to the opinion polls, are drifting from Labour to Liberal Democrat and back again.
For the Tories to concentrate on calling Labour clueless and unprincipled is a dubious strategy. Many electors would not mind voting for such a party, thinking that it sounds reassuringly human and un- dogmatic; some voters, on the other hand, may ask whether the Tories are any diffe- rent as they fudge their way through Europe. These are secondary matters in electoral terms, of course; the primary issue will be the economy and taxation.
Nevertheless, one clear reminder of the old, unreconstructed Labour Party would be a useful supporting suit. The Tories have been searching for some time, and clever Mr Michael Howard has finally found the answer: the trade unions. Stir them up with some new proposals for union reform, and get them tugging hard again at Labour's bridle. The next few months will not be so dull after all. Watch this space.
Previous page
