POLITICS

The Tory party has a hole in its bucket but all is not lost

BRUCE ANDERSON

It is the best pantomime in London. Tim Collins's mother is a remarkable Widow Twankey, and as for Steve Norris: what a master of multiple entendre. The way he pauses and winks as he says the name 'Dick Whittington' has the grown-ups in so many stitches that they are hardly able to fend off the children's awkward questions: 'Daddy, what's so funny about Buttons and Puss-in- Boots?'

But there is one place where they are not laughing: the Tory parliamentary party. Even after all these years, Tory MPs cannot believe their bad luck. The government's transport policy is disintegrating as is its Euro-diplomacy, and where is the Tory party's response? Mired in malarkey in the Essex suburbs. No wonder a lot of MPs are giving way to despair and rage; nor is it sur- prising that confidence in Mr Hague's lead- ership is back iri the depths. Over the past few days, I have heard two members of the last government make the same Napoleonic allusion. 'I know William's able and he's good in the House, but, say what you like: he's an unlucky Marshal.'

While that is undoubtedly true, Mr Hague is not blameless; he is not wholly at the mercy of misfortune. He should forget Napoleon's Marshals and concentrate on two British Field Marshals who never lost a battle: Montgomery and Wellington. The Tory party's problems stem from a lack of grip; it never seems to know what is hap- pening on the other side of the hill. Events just stroll up to it and punch it on the nose.

Take the notorious Clause 28, which for- bids the promotion of homosexuality in schools. One could argue whether such a clause was ever necessary; consule Thatch- er, there was a tendency — dangerous dogs, kerb-crawling, perhaps Clause 28 — to leg- islate first and think later. But now that the clause is enshrined in law, there is no rea- son to repeal it. After all, does anyone except Peter Tatchell believe that schools should be allowed to promote homosexu- ality? So it would have been perfectly possi- ble for the Tory party to adopt a common- sense, popular position. Of course schools should be able to offer pastoral care to pupils who believe themselves to be homo- sexual, and of course bullying should be stamped out: all bullying. But there is noth- ing in the present legislation to prohibit counselling or to encourage bullying. Let it stand, while schools get on with what they

should be promoting, such as literacy and numeracy.

Five minutes' thought should have been more than enough to work out such an obvious position, but as Professor Hous- man reminded us, five minutes is a long time and thinking is hard. It is ludicrous that no one in Mr Hague's office and no one in Central Office — both of which are more amply staffed than they were when Mrs Thatcher led the opposition — foresaw the difficulty.

Which brings us to Mr Norris. It was a bit of a facer that several of his former con- stituency chairmen felt strongly enough to write a letter denouncing him as unsuitable to be a mayoral candidate. But that was insufficient reason to disqualify him. For a start, what about audi alteram partem, a legal maxim which is applicable even in Epping Forest? Mr Norris was entitled to give his version of events. Indeed, the com- mittee which was sitting in judgment was entitled to be cross with Mrs Collins and her colleagues; they should either have drawn attention to the impediment at a much earlier stage, or for ever held their peace.

Above all, however, the committee should have lifted its eyes from niceties and procedures to consider the political embar- rassment that would be caused by blocking the Norris candidacy. It is said that when he heard their decision, Michael Ancram replied with an expletive. Lord Ancram rarely uses such language; on this occasion, nothing else would do. Yet again, the prob- lem is forethought, foresight — or rather the lack of it. Michael Ancram is a shrewd old bird, but he appears to preside over an anti-forethought culture in Central Office.

We are already more than halfway though this parliament, and we can be cer- tain that Tony Blair will call an election the moment he decently can; he would love an excuse to spring one next year. 'New man- date for a new millennium' might seem garbage too emetic to be fed to a French farm animal, but so do some of Mr Blair's other successful soundbites. Anyway, and whatever the PM's intentions, the Tory party should be battle-ready, which it is not. There is no sign of a theme, a political direction, a strategy. By this stage in a par- liament, a successful opposition would have tried to suffuse the public mind with hostile images of the government. The Tory party

has hardly begun to do this, Mr Hague ought to bring forward his reshuffle and deploy Lord Ancram elsewhere. After a surfeit of emollience, it is time to turn Cen- tral Office into a political warfare execu- tive; the man to do that is Michael PortiIto.

But there is an irony in all this. While the Tory party has been lamenting the holes in its bucket and squabbling over the details of Tim Collins's parents' marriage, there has been a much more significant marital breakdown. As a result of recent develop- ments, Britain and Europe are now living apart. Both parties insist that this is a pure- ly temporary dislocation, that no one else is involved, and that they love each other as much as ever. But such is the momentum of incompatibility that these protestations count for nothing. Even before Helsinki, a wise former German commissioner whose own federalist convictions have never clouded his political assessments observed that despite all the Blair government's efforts, the gap in world-view between the Kingdom and the Continent was not nar- rowing, but growing.

Because of the confluence of forces — beef, withholding tax, structural reform — the Helsinki summit will go down in history as a defining moment in Euro-British rela- tions. Mr Blair is the most pro-European Prime Minister since Ted Heath. He has a massive majority and an apparently unbreakable hold over public opinion. Yet even he cannot make EMU or federalism happen.

To judge by their recent interviews, Messrs Jospin and Prodi have not given up hope. The Eurocrats still want Britain to join their march and they are still trying to convince themselves that it will happen; still trying to believe in Tony Blair's private assurances. But there is a growing sub-text of desperation. Feasting and shooting apart, this is about the one reason for cheer which a Tory can find at the moment. When the Continentals are losing faith in Britain's commitment to Europe, all is not lost.

At the end of this Conservative century, the forces of conservatism have never seemed in greater disarray. But with the collapse of the British version of the feder- alist project, those forces have won a his- toric victory. The defeat of the Twelve Stars will be remembered long after the five mis- tresses have been forgotten.