"Compassionate Conservatism" launched

Last night saw the formal launch at Policy Exchange of "Compassionate Conservatism: What It Is, Why We Need It" by Jesse Norman and Janan Ganesh.  As Conservative Home regulars will know from our advance coverage on Your Platform this presents a vision of the "connected society" of renewed institutions outside the state as a foundation for the revival of the Conservative Party.  This is not a policy programme, but an attempt to lay down a basis for future policy.  No, it's nothing to do with George Bush; and don't be misled by the name into thinking this is the rebirth of the Wets.    This is a significant contribution to the debate over decentralising Britain.

 

Policy Exchange's offices in Storey's Gate were packed out, and they had chosen a novel format for a book launch.  Firstly the authors outlined the themes and objectives of the book, then a diverse spread of invited guests gave their reactions to it, and finally there was a question and answer session from the audience.  Very prompt and efficient time management ensured a close of the proceedings to those interested in such things to leave and catch the next World Cup match.

 

Readers can refresh their memory on the authors' views with the four serialisations in YourPlatform or by reading all 82 pages here)
he comments of the invited panel are worth an airing since they set out the broad issues which will emerge in the coming debate over the over-centralised nature of the British state.

 

Neal Lawson, from a "Democratic Left perspective" agreed that British politics was currently going through a period of fluidity and it was anyone's guess how things would turn out.  He doubted the real political appeal of decentralisation: a strong state will always be needed, he claimed, to handle the fall-out of a free market and diversity in public service provision will always lead to unacceptable inequality of outcomes.  As a parthian shot he suggested that Cameron needs to "kill Thatcher" in the same way that Blair killed Old Labour.

The Times columnist Minette Marrin, describing herself as "right of centre, not centre-right", agreed that localism will mean allowing some areas to fail and she doubted whether the British electorate's aversion to inequality would permit that.  Although sympathetic to the author's theme she was dubious about whether non-state institutions could now be revived: they have been crushed by state control and political correctness and the multi-cultural society has weakened the ties that bind us.

 

David Willetts was on as the token Tory.  He explained that at the current point in the parliamentary cycle, the Party's emphasis should be on developing intellectual substance and investigating philosophical foundations rather than adopting rigid policy positions.  The biggest issue facing Britain is the need to handle the consequences of family change, and the challenge facing the Conservative Party is discovering a new language to articulate the unspoken values of the British people.  Rather tongue-in-cheek, he agreed with Lawson: Thatcherism has been misrepresented, but perhaps Lady Thatcher's final service to country and party might be to offer herself up as a spoof Clause IV?

 

The centre of gravity in the political blogosphere is clearly on the right, and the challenge is to harness this vitality and apply it in the wider public debate.  Policy Exchange should be congratulated for a stimulating evening and for their contribution to that debate.

 

Now over to the rest of you.

William Norton

Comments

[Jonathan Sheppard]

I have just conducted an interview with the author, Jess Norman, for Tory radio. If anyone wants to be on the mailing list to nake sure they recieve updates of new interviews just drop me a line.

[Phill H-B]

Compassionate Conservative is a phrase that is now indelibly linked to George W. Bush who used the term intensively in his 2000 election and once elected governed in a manner that was conspicuously neither conservative nor compassionate.

Recycling this phrase is a terrible idea. Bush is utterly discredited in the US amongst anyone who cares about fiscal prudence, honesty or the welfare of any members of society except for his personal friends.

Trying to claim that the phrase has nothing to do with Bush is like tying to claim that the phrase Final Solution can be used without people thinking about Belsen and the Holocaust.

[Geoff]

Godwin's Law strikes after only two posts! Must be a record...

[Jason Hughes]

There is nothing wrong with the idea of "Compassionate Conservatism" and I don't think the broad sway of the public would be 'put off' by its fairly flimsy links to George W. Bush. President Bush's term in office thus far has been marked by far more noticeable and important policies and outlooks than his "Compassionate Conservative" ticket, and to eb frank, I am not sure whether the average British elector even cares about the President's standpoint of about six years ago.

Compassionate Conservatism should NOT instinctively mean that will "Kill Thatcher" as commentators on the left routinely advise that we should. Is it not telling that we are constantly told by our politician adversaries and the ghosts of a Wet Tory Past that we should turn away from Thatcher, and her many successes? I make the contention it is because they still fear Thatcher-style politics' immanent power to appeal to the masses, and once again to stimulate fervour in politics.

I accept at the same time that we are not in the 80s, and that one could not transcribe all of Margaret Thatcher's styles, policies and ideological standpoints onto the modern British political arena; however at the same time we must, as a modern Conservative Party realise that the core principles of the "Thatcher" era, such as the ideas of individual liberty; meritocratic advancement; independence from an overbearing state; individual responsibility; a strong national identity; and the inheritance of tradition are STILL relevant concepts, and should still be exalted at the very heart of the Conservative Party.

For me, and I am sure many others this is the face of Compassionate Conservatism. When the untrue myth surfaced in the 80s onwards that Lady Thatcher's era signalled a time in which selfish, and rampantly detrimental individualism swamped the country, demolishing community and collective values - I rebuke this wholeheartedly. This has always been a misguided, and in my view an impotent attack on Thatcher's politics from the left.

Are we going to buy into that political lie as well? Are we going to play into the hands of the typically patronising, holier than thou left wing? I say we rebuke, and remind people why Thatcher one three successive General Elections; the true face of Compassionate Conservatism.

I would urge caution.

[Julian Morrison]

Might not be indelibly linked to GWB. His usage of "compassionate" was almost semantically null. I'd say it's still a phrase looking for a definition, and this book/site has as good a chance as any.