Posts
The Attraction of the Centre
The last couple of weeks have seen a vast change in British politics. David Cameron has started to unveil his plans to change the Conservative Party, while Charles Kennedy has been forced out of the leadership of the UK’s third party, the Liberal (now Suicidal) Democrats.
Plus, thanks to Celebrity Big Brother, I can enjoy voting George Galloway out of something!
But let’s talk Tory. I’m motivated to write this mostly because of an interview with Ed Vaizey on last Sunday’s Talking Politics. Vaizey is the Tory MP for the constituency where I live, and sufficiently close to Cameron that it’s often presumed he speaks for him. I was shocked to find that I agreed with the general thrust of what Vaizey laid out as the New Tory attitude. Some of that is obviously down to my age: at 38, it’s about time for me to see signs that I’m swinging to the right. But a lot of it is, I think, down to a desire to see the New Labour mission completed no matter what, that is to say, to see the centre continue to dominate British politics, particularly in terms of schools and the N.H.S..
At this point I should emphasise that I see the supposed Blair/Brown divide as something of a mirage, a vision Old Labour have constructed for themselves (and that New Labour have chucklingly colluded in) so that they can feel they have a champion who might actually inherit the leadership. Policy differences between a future Brown Labour leadership and the current Blair one would probably be vanishingly small. (And in recent interviews, Blair’s been crowning Brown as his obvious successor.)
But let’s fantasise for a moment that a Brown government did take some real steps to the left, with the aim of getting the whole Labour movement behind the parliamentary party once more. Let’s assume that I, and people like me, had to watch as the vast gains of New Labour in terms of social justice were put in danger by a party that once more was flirting with the giddy joy of being unelectable.
In those circumstances, I might feel, for the first time in my life, and it amazes me to say this… that I could actually vote New Tory.
Let me explore the reasons.
I was very impressed when Vaizey declared that he supported the Iraq war, and would support, subject to terms and conditions, new military actions abroad in the future. (A very Socialist point of view, that tyrants are not to be tolerated.) I was also impressed by a Cameron quote that ‘not all Political Correctness is bad’. I was delighted beyond measure by the horrified reactions of the Daily Mail to the movement of the last few days: they’ve started to claim that the Tories are now the most left-wing party, in purely economic terms, in Britain.
Now, obviously, this isn’t Cameron and his mates winging it. These seductive viewpoints will have been focus group tested, broken and re-broken by the sort of political hacks that I deeply admire, and precisely aimed to hit me, and people like me, right between the eyes. The mirage that had me for a moment there, in front of my radio, was New Labour By Other Means, a government toying with the idea of drug use becoming a subject for radical libertarian thought, in which a Blairite reform programme would go beyond schools and hospitals and into the police force. Old Labour, in this scenario, would be happy again where they prefer to be, in the cosiness of opposition.
But, I’m relieved to say, the mirage was broken. It was broken by the thought of right wing David Davis, still sitting there in the Shadow Cabinet, now presumably biting his tongue so often he must be living off mushroom soup. It was broken by the thought of Cameron’s promise to legalise fox hunting. And it was broken by his stance on Europe, which at first sight seems breathtakingly askew with his bouncy new libertarian/liberal fusion. But let’s take a closer look at that…
The thought has swum into the public consciousness that a future Conservative government might pull Britain out of the European Union. (It was pie in the skied on Question Time, and has popped up in online bookmaker Paddy Power’s long odds list of things David Cameron might do next, and these things don’t happen by accident.) Now, this is a radical thought, and previously a very right wing one. (Myself, I think such a pull out would be the final nail in the coffin of British manufacturing.)
Cameron’s first act as Tory leader was to have his MEPS remove themselves from the EU centre right coalition. That was seen at the time as the right wing thing one does in order to then be able to do lots of left wing things. And it was that. But I think it also signified a genuine New Tory movement out of Europe. For, I think, two reasons. Firstly, to take a far fetched scenario seriously until it becomes not so far fetched, it could be that Cameron is planning the UK to be, for the last decade of oil use on planet Earth, a pomped-up high tariff seller of the black stuff. Secondly, if one removes the question of Europe from British politics, then the Tory right, or Old Conservatism, if we may call it that already, would lose its big campfire. Without Europe, the Daily Mail isn’t going to persuade a bunch of angry right wing Tory MPs to jump ship and inflate some ridiculous one issue party like UKIP to a point where it could cut into the New Tory vote.
All very clever. Serious applause, you brilliant hacks.
But it only got you so far. The mirage popped.
But just for a minute there. Just for a minute…
Plus, thanks to Celebrity Big Brother, I can enjoy voting George Galloway out of something!
But let’s talk Tory. I’m motivated to write this mostly because of an interview with Ed Vaizey on last Sunday’s Talking Politics. Vaizey is the Tory MP for the constituency where I live, and sufficiently close to Cameron that it’s often presumed he speaks for him. I was shocked to find that I agreed with the general thrust of what Vaizey laid out as the New Tory attitude. Some of that is obviously down to my age: at 38, it’s about time for me to see signs that I’m swinging to the right. But a lot of it is, I think, down to a desire to see the New Labour mission completed no matter what, that is to say, to see the centre continue to dominate British politics, particularly in terms of schools and the N.H.S..
At this point I should emphasise that I see the supposed Blair/Brown divide as something of a mirage, a vision Old Labour have constructed for themselves (and that New Labour have chucklingly colluded in) so that they can feel they have a champion who might actually inherit the leadership. Policy differences between a future Brown Labour leadership and the current Blair one would probably be vanishingly small. (And in recent interviews, Blair’s been crowning Brown as his obvious successor.)
But let’s fantasise for a moment that a Brown government did take some real steps to the left, with the aim of getting the whole Labour movement behind the parliamentary party once more. Let’s assume that I, and people like me, had to watch as the vast gains of New Labour in terms of social justice were put in danger by a party that once more was flirting with the giddy joy of being unelectable.
In those circumstances, I might feel, for the first time in my life, and it amazes me to say this… that I could actually vote New Tory.
Let me explore the reasons.
I was very impressed when Vaizey declared that he supported the Iraq war, and would support, subject to terms and conditions, new military actions abroad in the future. (A very Socialist point of view, that tyrants are not to be tolerated.) I was also impressed by a Cameron quote that ‘not all Political Correctness is bad’. I was delighted beyond measure by the horrified reactions of the Daily Mail to the movement of the last few days: they’ve started to claim that the Tories are now the most left-wing party, in purely economic terms, in Britain.
Now, obviously, this isn’t Cameron and his mates winging it. These seductive viewpoints will have been focus group tested, broken and re-broken by the sort of political hacks that I deeply admire, and precisely aimed to hit me, and people like me, right between the eyes. The mirage that had me for a moment there, in front of my radio, was New Labour By Other Means, a government toying with the idea of drug use becoming a subject for radical libertarian thought, in which a Blairite reform programme would go beyond schools and hospitals and into the police force. Old Labour, in this scenario, would be happy again where they prefer to be, in the cosiness of opposition.
But, I’m relieved to say, the mirage was broken. It was broken by the thought of right wing David Davis, still sitting there in the Shadow Cabinet, now presumably biting his tongue so often he must be living off mushroom soup. It was broken by the thought of Cameron’s promise to legalise fox hunting. And it was broken by his stance on Europe, which at first sight seems breathtakingly askew with his bouncy new libertarian/liberal fusion. But let’s take a closer look at that…
The thought has swum into the public consciousness that a future Conservative government might pull Britain out of the European Union. (It was pie in the skied on Question Time, and has popped up in online bookmaker Paddy Power’s long odds list of things David Cameron might do next, and these things don’t happen by accident.) Now, this is a radical thought, and previously a very right wing one. (Myself, I think such a pull out would be the final nail in the coffin of British manufacturing.)
Cameron’s first act as Tory leader was to have his MEPS remove themselves from the EU centre right coalition. That was seen at the time as the right wing thing one does in order to then be able to do lots of left wing things. And it was that. But I think it also signified a genuine New Tory movement out of Europe. For, I think, two reasons. Firstly, to take a far fetched scenario seriously until it becomes not so far fetched, it could be that Cameron is planning the UK to be, for the last decade of oil use on planet Earth, a pomped-up high tariff seller of the black stuff. Secondly, if one removes the question of Europe from British politics, then the Tory right, or Old Conservatism, if we may call it that already, would lose its big campfire. Without Europe, the Daily Mail isn’t going to persuade a bunch of angry right wing Tory MPs to jump ship and inflate some ridiculous one issue party like UKIP to a point where it could cut into the New Tory vote.
All very clever. Serious applause, you brilliant hacks.
But it only got you so far. The mirage popped.
But just for a minute there. Just for a minute…
|
I must say I'm releaved that your article came to the conclusion it did.
As someone to the political left of New Labour, I am satisfied to see their project continue, only because I console myself that the conservatives will thus not be in power.
If the tories did win the next election, there would still be a significant right wing element in the party, who would prevent, or try to prevent, Cameron moving to the centre, as some of old Labour have.
I would worry very much that if the conservatives were in power, then, given more of a free hand, they would drift back to the right very quickly.
But I had you going for a moment there, right?
All the Doctor Who themes you could ever wish for are here:
http://www.dannystewart.com/doctorwho/themes/
Although I'm not sure if anyone ever wishes too hard for that burbly one from Carnival of Monsters.
Thank you, Nick. I always think the one you mention sounds like it's played on a wobbleboard by Rolf Harris.
I know we're supposed to start left wing and go further to the right as we get older, but I seem to have gone the other way.
Mind you, in the 1980s in York the local Conservative association was probably left of New Labour, so I'm fairly sure I've stayed where I am and everyone else has moved...
That's the feeling I've got too. Back in the day not suffering foreign dictators was a hard left thing. But this shifting of political terms is nothing new: Chruchill crossed the floor of the house so many times in order to follow his beliefs on free trade from one party to another.
I think any potential credibility New Conservatism might have gained with me was lost the moment John Selwyn Gummer was on the Today programme last week spinning the NC line on transport and the environment. The moment he said that he didn't want to talk about the past*, I filed the whole NC as old conservatism with better shirts.
*code for an unwillingness to admit that the Tory transport policies of the early 90s were pro-car and anti-green. To be fair, New Labour are not exonerated as they pushed through the privatisation of the railway and are going ahead with the privatisation of the Tube, but hearing one of the early 90s cabinet refusing to even discuss their accountability does make one think NC is bollocks.
I think technically I'm a floating voter right now, since I no longer find myself in accord with any of the three main parties.
Within reason, I think politicians should be given leave to make vast u-turns and change their minds, given that most of the time they aren't able to express their personal wishes through their policies.
I'd be interested to hear why you're not a Lib Dem these days. Or are you a Green?
I have no problem with the notion of a U-turn. In fact, if something isn't working, a U-turn might be the very thing. I have a problem with the fact that rather than saying "yeah, we got it wrong", there's a tendancy to say "we want to talk about the future". It's this refusal to accept any culpability for past actions which annoys me.
I'm not aligned to the Lib Dems, although I did vote for them at parliamentary level, because I have some problems with their local actions. I vote Green at local level although I'm not sure they would be broad enough in their agenda to be a force at parliamentary level yet.
This is why I'd like a 'none of the above' option on the ballot paper. OK, it introduces a whole other raft of problems but at least I could use my vote instead of either taking a 'least evil/most likely to prevent evil' decision or not exercsing my rght to vote.
Interesting stuff. It's notable how often the Lib Dems find themselves mired in 'local difficulties'. It's possibly merely a by-product of their desire to be locally involved: you get involved, you get mired.
The reason that politicians never admit they were wrong last time is that there'd be headlines such as: 'I was wrong, admits Wonka!' The media they encounter is pitched at the level of a playground fight for a packet of crisps. It's irritating, but it's not really their fault.
Now, this really is crossing the Rubicon. I think in my younger days I may have actually thrown things in the general direction of John Selwyn Gummer!
Did I understand correctly, Paul, that you were pro- the Iraq war? If so I'm rather sorry to learn that. Removing dictators is all very good but it's not dictators who bear the brunt of the kind of invasion and occupation we've been involved in.
Saying Old Lefties were in favour of removing dictators is not the same as sanctioning the kind of horrific bloodshed and death and destruction that has taken place at our hands - let's not mince words.
There are other ways of unseating tyrants in which innocents don't suffer as much.
I can't think of anything that can justify what we did and are still doing in Iraq and are probably going to do again soon elsewhere.:(
This is not intended as a flame or the start of an argument; just my reaction to what I read.
My apologies for any offence caused
Hello me again.
Sorry i feel I was rather rude coming on here and going on about one small detail in your blog like that. I guess it's an issue that just gets to me.
Anyway, please feel free to delete it if you wish
All the best
It's kind of you to pop back to say that. I wouldn't dream of deleting your reply. (Yes, I was in favour of the war.) But if we're going to get into all that stuff, could I ask you to not be anonymous? It just feels weird to debate something not knowing who the other person is.
Anyone got any tips on how to write a good piece of opening dialogue?
Oh, hi way down here, Louis. Are you the previously anonymous chap? If you're talking about an opening line in fiction, I always just dive straight in and get past it. You're going to come back to it and rewrite it when you've got a context going anyway. An opening lines are often best if they don't draw attention to themselves.
Thanks very much for the advice. It's funny because whenever I try and write a script, the opening line of dialogue is something that always catches me out and I spend ages thinking of how to get the first line written. Now that you've said they work best when they don't draw attention to themselves, I can see now that I've just got to get straight into it and not worry about it. I'm the chap who praised your "Father's Day" script in the comments for another of your blog entries and said that I'm an aspiring scriptwriter.