Party conference season - a survey

David Cameron

Labour’s week in Brighton saw the opening salvos of “Operation Fightback” fired. Between the thespian flourish of Peter Mandelson, the bombast of the Prime Minister, and conventional Labour attacks on putative Conservative attacks on public services, there was much to interest the observer. Firstly, a referendum on electoral reform was promised, amidst guarantees of free childcare, improvements to the NHS and stringent regulation of bankers. The Sun’s betrayal was disastrous, however much Labour claims ran to the contrary, as was their acceptance of the necessity of “cuts”. The spectre of an electoral defeat similar in scale to that suffered in the European elections remains a reality, as does the loss of key figures in marginal constituencies. “Operation Fightback” should perhaps be renamed “Operation Rearguard”.

The uncomfortable reality for Labour, however - as revealed by their actions over public service cuts, and the expenses controversy - is that they, and their leader, march to David Cameron’s tune. He and his inner cabal now seem to hold the political initiative, in both policy and philosophy, and Labour’s best chance of retaining power is thus either a hung parliament, or Conservative implosion. Both, though entirely plausible, would transpire only if Mr. Cameron allowed them to.

The Conservative conference was a stage-managed demonstration of readiness for government, striking an austere tone to resonate with wider national stringency and repeated Conservative calls for public economies. Just as David Cameron has modelled his party in his own image, so too this conference mirrored Cameron’s own concern for self-presentation and the aesthetic; champagne, the sine qua non of any Tory conference, was prohibited.

There were, finally, specific policies announced. George Osborne unveiled the first of many potential economies to the public purse, whilst the ever-articulate Michael Gove gave notice of extensive reforms in education. More significantly still, David Cameron’s keynote speech saw the leader finally reveal genuine conservative principles: “small government”, personal responsibility et al., all couched in the Thatcherite rhetorical flourish of “the state as servant, not as master”.

However, what was most significant was what was not said. The reiteration ad nauseam that, should the Lisbon treaty be fully ratified before a British general election, the party “would not let matters rest there”, was transparently evasive. So too the conscious decision to skirt about the potentially incendiary issue of the fifty pence tax band, and the wholesale omission of selective education. We should not doubt, given Mr. Cameron’s expertise in public relations, that the evasion of potentially divisive issues was deliberate. It also reveals the greatest threat to the Cameron project; internal division. For all his success in convincing the wider electorate of his charms, David Cameron remains a divisive leader within his party, and might yet find his position undermined - along with the electoral chances of his party - should controversy arise over any one of a number of potential flashpoints.

The Liberal Democrat conference was, of the three major parties, by far the most intriguing. The policies announced were an interesting confection intended to reduce public expenditure without impinging on the income and economic welfare of lower income households. To this end, it was announced that Trident would be attenuated, tuition fees retained, a tax imposed on homes worth in excess of one million pounds, current levels of welfare provision sustained, and all income tax for households with income below £10,000 abolished. Of these policies, the retention of tuition fees, and removal of lower level income tax, are the most significant; the former because it imperils Lib Dem student votes, the latter because it is so clearly intended to undermine the mass support of the Labour party.

For all the innovation of Liberal Democrat policies, and the articulacy with which they were announced, their prospects of forming a government remain negligible. However, in light of the sheer scale of the electoral task confronting the Conservative party, and their continued frustrations in the north, the prospect of a hung parliament lingers. If this contingency does arise, both Labour and the Tories would undoubtedly rather form a coalition government with the Lib Dems than with their direct rivals.

It is clear, after a conference season that marks the beginning of the campaign to the general election, that the election is Mr. Cameron’s to lose. He has positioned his party on the front foot, finally revealed himself a conservative in thought as well as affiliation, and, in his attack on an overlarge state, struck a resonant chord with the electorate. Though a Conservative government seems the most likely prospect, the potential for internal strife, or any number of variables, might yet see a hung parliament, and a rare coalition government.

Add Comment

You must log in to submit a comment.