Commentators

Showers (AM and PM) 5° London Hi 10°C / Lo 5°C

Bruce Anderson: In these grim times, the Tories need to hide their happiness and hone their soundbites

Cameron forced his followers to discover bunny-hugging rather than bunny-boiling

Monday, 21 July 2008

Last week, a glove-puppet turned into a grave-digger. For the past year, Alistair Darling had been Chancellor in name and salary only. Modern prime ministers also hold the title "First Lord of the Treasury". In Gordon Brown's case, it has not been a mere honorific. He has continued to run the Treasury as if he were still Chancellor.

In one respect, this has improved the quality of government. While he was at No. 11, Mr Brown was a constant source of disruption. He continually interfered with other departments, usually to block measures which had Tony Blair's support or to punish ministers who appeared to be in favour with the PM. Above all, Mr Brown would never tell Mr Blair what he was doing. For the past year, he had told Mr Darling what to do, so the civil servants no longer had to wonder who was in charge.

Now, suddenly, Mr Darling has found his own voice. He actually sounded authoritative. Admittedly, it was a depressing message. The Government's fiscal policy had collapsed. It had no more money. Neither had the taxpayer. Borrowing was out of control and Mr Brown's golden rule had gone the way of the rest of the gold reserves, which he sold at the bottom of the market. Things were bad, Mr Darling told us, and would get worse. He had no idea how much worse, or how long the trouble would last, and he had no idea what to do. At least no one could accuse him of spin.

It may be, of course, that Gordon Brown is doing another Macavity act. Whenever there was trouble in the Blair years, we always knew where Mr Brown would not be found: anywhere near the firing line. It is possible that Mr Darling was left to make the announcement because Gordon Brown could not bear to admit that 11 years of boasting about his economic prowess had ended in abject failure and that his credibility was falling even faster than the budget deficit was rising. Mr Darling cannot be accused of boastfulness. Gloom comes easily to him. This is just as well. He is going to need a lot of it between now and the election.

Mr Brown went abroad in the hope of looking prime ministerial. Instead, he looked as he usually does these days: irrelevant. As always, he had no luck. It was not his fault that his attempt at poll-boosting coincided with Mr Obama's. Barack O'Blair can still rely on the credulity of his audiences. With smiles, platitudes and flip-flops, he tells everyone what they want to hear. He invites them to imagine their ideal President and then assures them that they have found him.

It is not guaranteed that this will play hugely well back home. In much of the States, it does not help to be known as the candidate who just swept France. But we can be certain of one point. Mr Obama's trip will be more fruitful than Mr Brown's. Admittedly, Mr Brown too would find it easy to tell people what they want to hear. It would only take him two words: "I resign". But whatever he says, wherever he goes, the British voters have stopped listening.

Most leading Tories are now intellectually convinced that they will win the election. And who can blame them? Most front-line Labour people are of the same opinion. But the Tories' intellectual conclusions are far from suffusing their vitals. Eleven years in opposition is a thorough cure for facile optimism. The Cameroons are still asking themselves what can go wrong and how they can stop it.

Their opponents accuse them of lacking policies. That charge has no substance. In the course of last year, the party published well over 1,000 pages of policy documents. It was at least as extensive as the policy-making process during the late Seventies and infinitely more thorough than anything Labour attempted before 1997. Determined to learn from Tony Blair's mistakes, David Cameron is adamant that he and his ministers must be prepared for government. Well and good, but the Tories should also learn from Mr Blair's successes.

The Cameron team does not lack policies. It does lack succinct summaries. It lacks sound-bites. Could anyone describe the Tories' economic policy in six lines? Even if that sounds over-simplified, every candidate will be obliged to do it during his election campaign. In 1997, the Blairites could do their policy in three lines. There was a problem, in that those three lines exhausted the intellectual resources of the incoming government. But Mr Cameron will have enough of those resources when he arrives in No. 10. He needs the sound-bites to ensure his arrival.

He also needs to strengthen his connections with his core vote. On that, he has a difficulty which he cannot help. He and his close political associates visibly enjoy life, at a time when many Tory supporters are hurting. For his first two-and-a-half years, Mr Cameron had another problem. Convinced that his party must change, he led it away from the prejudices and verities of the Daily Mail into unfamiliar territory, forcing his followers to discover the pleasures of bunny-hugging rather than bunny-boiling.

However shocking all this sounded to Tory ears permanently attuned to a Thatcherite wavelength, it did not involve the renunciation of any realistic contemporary Tory principles. On the contrary: David Cameron served happily in Michael Howard's Home Office. He does not have a molecule of Euro-federalism in his political being. He believes in sound money and discipline in schools. He abhors the welfare-dependency culture.

On both welfare and parental choice in schools, Mr Cameron will be more Thatcherite than she was. On negligent black fathers, he has made points that ought to have been made years ago, but which no senior Tory dared to make. Mr Cameron was able to put this right because he has ensured that his party will receive credit for the social generosity that has always been integral to Toryism, but which has rarely won the Tories its due share of electoral credit.

That said, large swathes of the Tory lower-middle classes are not feeling socially generous right now. Angry, they expect their party to express their feelings. They warmed to Margaret Thatcher, because whatever her government did, they always felt that she was on their side. A lot of them are still not convinced about young Mr Cameron (if he could rectify that, a three-figure Tory majority would not be inconceivable).

Irrespective of psephology, the economy's problems will force the Tories into a rhetorical adjustment. This is grim, grey, storms, sou'westers and battened-down hatches political weather. The Tories now have to prove that they are serious men for serious times.

As that happens to be true, it should not be beyond them and it is an easier task than Mr Brown faces. Truth is Mr Cameron's ally, but even if Alistair Darling starts to tell the truth about the economy, it is too late for Gordon Brown. All he can do is throw lead balloons in the air, to come crashing down on his cranium, while his Chancellor tolls the knell of passing day.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Comments

14 Comments

Mr Darling has found his voice and voiced what we all knew anyway. Will the day come when somebody in this government of loons says something original? That we haven't heard before? That doesn't begin with 'We have always been clear.... Probably never. In the meantime we can all read 'The Wind in the Willows' and see how prescient its author was when he created the characters of Toad and Rat. Also in the meantime, Cameron should adopt the persona of that famous boxer and 'float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.'

Posted by john problem | 22.07.08, 08:46 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details


The Independent?

What happened to you people?

Anderson, Cameron, Bush, Berlusconi........McCain, Sarkosy, Merkel, Yeltsin...

All friends together.

Tell the truth - richer and richer with no real answers.

Thatcher's kids are stabbing each other for material goods while you are rubbing your hands....

Posted by ian soffe | 22.07.08, 01:14 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

"The Cameron team does not lack policies."

That's news (i.e. the substance of journalism) to me.

" It does lack succinct summaries."

OK Bruce, well you are a professional wordsmith, are you not? So produce some summaries of Cameron's policies and publish them in your next few pieces.

That would be journalism; but what you have written here is the usual stuff that is being churned around and spewed out all over the place by every "commentator" in the land.

Lazy, sloppy, uninformative, boring, dull.

Educate me please.

Posted by JB | 21.07.08, 23:05 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

It'll take more than hiding their happiness to fool the electorate into believing Jeeves and wooster(osbourne
andCameron could do anything more than just not be Gordon Brown apart from the odd smart if snide quip at pmqsthey lack policies or any kind of credibility
they even pretend to support those who object to heathrow expansion no more believable than those 'green'fopasphoto opportunitieswhich made him
appear less than credible.
as the country tightens it's belts one cannot escape the fact that the tory party is run by two over priviledged public schoolboys reminiscence of jeeves and wooster, yes the haves and want much more section of society will gladly back themordinary people
on less than £30000 per annum will need a great deal
of convincing that a wallpaper heir and a public schoolboy who resembles tony blair, would nderstand and deal with their problems any better
than even a labour government which abandoned
their core vote long ago!

Posted by mike knoth | 21.07.08, 20:51 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Why are neither the writer nor (apparently) Cameron concerned about negligent white fathers?

Posted by Robert | 21.07.08, 15:35 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

re Chris71 ...tory governments are always unpopular because they have to be, to clear up the hideous mess left by their predecessors.

Cameron needs tough nuts around him - Fox, Hague, Grayling - scour the back-benches for others. Those squidgy, sybaritic types (Letwin, d'Ancona, Johnson, Spelman, Willetts) are not the people to pull the car out of the ditch.


Posted by Dave | 21.07.08, 12:06 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Whatever the rhetoric, a Tory government will lay waste to our public services and do nothing meaningful to address poverty. Cameron and co in government will quickly become even more unpopular than Thatcher, Major and even Brown.

Posted by Chris71 | 21.07.08, 11:40 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Wouldn't it be refreshing to have a set of policies presented to the electorate that are not about opinion-chasing and spin, that are coherent, and which take strong stands against the ills that are making our world unlivable. It would be reassuring to hear talk of a steady-state economy that invests growth in quality, not a growth-based economy; not to follow the USA and Israel in their foolhardy madness with Iran; to replenish the mauled and spoiled social fabric by reinstating limits to surveillance and "Big Brother"; by diverting the funding for Trident into social, educational & health programmes; by listening to the public; etc.

Instead, we have politicians who continue to follow party colours, who reduce complex political issues to soundbites, who develop policy based on the Sun's headlines and knee-jerk reaction. I think it's time to upset the apple-cart entirely and vote outside of the traditional two-party state actors who represent the same coin.

Time for change now!

Posted by Brendan | 21.07.08, 11:38 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Wise words! The sooner the better for a Tory government but yes, they do rather lack soundbites. On the other hand, Blair was nothing much else than soundbites, which were easy to remember when things went wrong for Labour as we found they weren't doing what they said they'd do and could slate them.

How about the Indy publishing some of the Tory papers on their policies? Let's see the facts.

Of course the main problem for the next Government is going to be the massive debt Labour have (as always when in power) built up. It'll probably take a whole, difficult Tory Parliament to sort that out. I really sometimes wonder if Labour indulge in their customary spending chaos deliberately to spike the next Tory government so the Tories are blamed for lack of funds. It gets really tedious this having to clear up after Labour every time. Problem is, the voters suffer.

Posted by R.W. | 21.07.08, 11:10 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Oh Dear, another 'follow the zeitgeist and be thought prescient' article. Journalists have become followers of each other, pumping out opinion without showing on what it is based, for these opinions I can go down the pub ( one would obviously avoid the Clapham Omnibus! ).

A poor article, in an era of very poor journalism.

Posted by Simon F | 21.07.08, 09:54 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

14 Comments

Columnist Comments

steve_richards

Steve Richards: Damian Green will soon be forgotten

Cameron’s speech, though good, was upstaged by Brown’s mortgage coup.

matthew_norman

Matthew Norman: A written constitution is the answer

Jacqui Smith is Brown’s lightning rod when it’s the PM we should be frazzling

john_rentoul

John Rentoul: Thanks Queen, but it's about the Budget

The Queen's Speech never has a theme, New Labour has never fabricated one.