POLITICS
When the Tory Party needs more than something to shout about
NOEL MALCOLM
A
Blackpool t half past five on Tuesday after- noon, I heard a strange, terrible and exhilarating sound. Just as 19th-century American pioneers found it hard to cap- ture in words the noise of a million buffaloes thundering across the plains, so I too have difficulty in describing the almost primaeval sound which I heard that day. It was the sound of the Tory Party roaring.
Let me explain. A shout is not a roar, however loud it may be. What delegates were celebrating so noisily was the decision to admit the fledgeling Conservative Asso- ciations of Northern Ireland. This was a question of principle for most of those present, but not of abstract, rational princi- ple: the issue had somehow touched their hearts, stirring both their latent Unionism and their sense of identity as a party. Their shout was not only loud; it was also leonine, a roar of affirmation.
And that was a rather poignant thing, because in every other respect this party is looking and feeling less leonine now (more, perhaps, like a startled rabbit) than it has for a very long time. Some delegates are bewildered by policies they do not understand, and others are angry at poli- cies whose electoral consequences for their constituencies they understand all too well. No doubt these feelings added zest to the Ulster debate, which gave them a permissi- ble way of venting anger against the blockheadedness of the party hierarchy. But the debate was a side-show, and in the main sessions of the conference the audi- ence has often looked nervous and unsure — unhappy to be stifling its criticisms, but uncertain whether voicing them would only make things worse.
At times like these, where can the ordinary Tory turn? Just down the road from the conference centre is the Grand Theatre, with a sign outside advertising the appearance of the Grumbleweeds; and there a full house gave its rapt attention to the Tory Reform Group Lecture delivered by the Rt Hon. Michael Heseltine. The ex-minister's audience grows larger each year, and its trust in his messianic abilities increases, it seems, in inverse proportion to his ability to deliver the goods. Last year his message was about showing greater compassion. This year he struck a more bold-sounding note: 'There are some who want the Government just to consolidate
its position,' he said. 'But 1 reject utterly that approach.' The Government must press onwards and upwards, he insisted: there must be more government-funded research, more public procurement, more governmental support for companies at the frontiers of technology. In other words, a sort of technocratic corporatism. That may be the way forward on Mr Heseltine's route map, but if this Government fol- lowed his directions it would begin to feel like the man in the desert who sees his own tracks in the sand, and discovers he has been walking in a circle.
A delegate I was talking to as I came out of the Northern Ireland debate raised aft interesting question. Why, he wondered, had Mr Heseltine not identified himself with the campaign for recognition of the Ulster constituency associations — a move which would have strengthened still further his popular support in the party? And yet no sooner was the question posed than one sensed that there was something wrong with it, that this was not and could not be Mr Heseltine's kind of issue. Michael Heseltine can make the party shout, he can work them up into a lather of alarm at the thought of having to compete with Japanese industry, and then set their hands a-clapping when he assures them that it can be done. But I really do not believe that Mr Heseltine can make them roar.
Mrs Thatcher used to be able to do that, but over the last year or so she seems to have been losing the knack. The stand she took on Europe last autumn was intended as an identity-affirming, roar-inducing me- asure. With 50-odd motions submitted to this year's conference in support of her defence of national sovereignty in Europe, it does look as if she struck a chord. However, the trauma of the European election and the siren call of the Exchange Rate Mechanism have weakened people's confidence in her judgment here, and made them feel that Europe is one of those issues where it will never be possible to stick to an entirely clear-cut position.
But what of the original message of Thatcherism, which was something to do with the relationship between the indi- vidual and the state? Privatisation, for example, was meant to be justified not by the fact that it gave revenue to the Treas- ury or windfall profits to shareholders, but by the fact that it took the state out of the marketplace and gave freer rein to indi- vidual choice. That was a combination of abstract principle and populist crusade which once seemed eminently roar-worthy.
Maybe this lode is not as exhausted as it appears, and the Government can still extract some further support here if it learns how to present the real arguments again. But this will require proper persua- sion and education, in place of the glitzy advertising which is now the Government's preferred mode of communication with the electorate. Oddly enough, the area where the argument might be won most effective- ly is the one where the Government's prospects look bleakest at present, namely the debate about the NHS. The issue there is not privatisation but replacing a bureaucratic allocation of resources with one which mimics the actions of the mar- ket. If Mr Kenneth Clarke can persuade the public that this really will lead to greater choice and speedier treatments — and his engagingly upbeat conference speech suggested that he has it in him — it might be the turning of the tide for the Conservatives on their controversial domestic policies.
But however much the tide turns, this Government will remain beached unless it can get the economy running smoothly again. Inflation and high interest rates are the Tories' fundamental problems: they create an atmosphere of government fai- lure which magnifies the resentment felt towards any other policies. The atmos- phere was almost tangible on Mr Lawson's first appearance at the Imperial Hotel in Blackpool when some Tory bystanders inside the hotel were softly but audibly jeering. With a flourishing economy, the Government could take the poll tax and the privatisations in its stride. Without those policies, but with an economic crisis,. the Government would still be in trouble.
As it happens, the one person who has been vindicated by the present run on sterling is Mrs Thatcher, whose views on the unbuckability of the market are well known. It is Lawsonism, not Thatcherism, that is showing signs of failure; but of course the public will not bother to make the distinction. What Thatcherism needs now is to recover some central articles of faith to have a good roar about — other- wise the only roar we'll hear will be melancholy, long and withdrawing.
Previous page
