The Norman conquest
Matthew d'Ancona 11:01am
Lord Tebbit’s response to Michael Gove’s Spectator article last week is a remarkable spectacle: an argument between a past colossus of Tory Government and a future one. To the irritation of some of my fellow modernisers, I have a deep respect for Norman and thought it was especially crazy of that faction to try and expel him from the party in 2002. He is not, as some mods claim, the Scargill of the Right: this is a man who took on the unions and won, drove through many of the key Thatcherite reforms and was responsible for some of the party’s most remarkable electoral achievements. He is also a hero of the fight against the IRA, and has made huge personal sacrifices to care for his wife, horribly injured in the Brighton bomb. So a bit of respect please, gentlemen.
That said, I think his anxieties about Michael, expressed in a letter to the new issue of the magazine, are misplaced. Read Fraser’s account of the Gove education plan – much of it drawn from Sweden – and you will discover a model of liberalisation in education and consumer choice of precisely the sort that Norman has always called for. Then look at each of his individual anxieties about “Blair worship” in the shadow cabinet. It is true that the Cameroons admire Blair’s electoral success – that is only rational – and took his side in his battles with Brown over marketisation and choice in public service reform. It is also true that they accept that the Britain of 2008 is no more like the Britain of the Thatcher era than the Britain of 1979, which Tebbit and co inherited, was like the Britain of Macmillan. It may have been wrong of Cameron to coin the phrase “heir to Blair” but – short of turning back the clock – he is bound by the circumstances of history to try and follow him, identifying what was good and discarding the rest.
As a matter of fact, I don’t think the Cameroons have taken very much from the “poisonous tree” of Blairism. Norman’s shopping-list of Blair crimes is instructive because it is so easy to reassure him that the next Tory Government will not make the same mistakes:
1) The bungled war in Iraq: even key Atlanticists in the Shadow Cabinet like George Osborne say that the errors in planning and execution of the conflict must never be repeated. William Hague has called repeatedly for an independent inquiry into the war.
2) The dispatch of men and women to fight without the equipment they need: no parliamentarian has been more vocal on this matter than the Shadow Defence Secretary, Liam Fox.
3) The sensational increases in tax without measurable improvement in services: Lord Tebbit would not approve of Osborne’s commitment for the next three years to Labour’s spending plans. But he should be heartened by the promise that the whole issue will be reviewed in the third year (around the likely date of the next election) and by the existing plans to cut inheritance tax, stamp duty, and corporation tax, and to spend the money from green taxes on helping families.
4) The debauchment of the civil service: Cameron has spoken often of the need to roll back the “sofa government” of the Blair era and bring probity back to Whitehall.
5) The identity card fiasco: David Davis couldn’t have put it better himself. He wants to spend the money saved from scrapping the scheme n building prisons.
6) The criminal justice fiasco: see above. The “hug-a-hoodie” tone of early Cameronism has been replaced by a much tougher approach to crime and is at the heart of all Tory campaigning (witness the commitment to scrap the early release scheme and Boris’s mayoral strategy, which rightly focuses on safety on London’s streets and public transport.)
7) His [Blair's] surrender of British sovereignty to Brussels: the Tories are pressing for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and have promised that they will not “let the matter rest there” in power. The detail is being hammered out, but a Cameron Government would undoubtedly seek the repatriation of powers (it is already committed to leaving the social chapter).
8) Remorseless attacks on the conventional family: Cameron’s social liberalism is tempered by a strong, pragmatic attachment to the institution of marriage. He is already committed to financial help for married coupled.
9) Despoilation of education: after the disaster of the grammar schools row, Tory education policy is right back on track under Michael Gove, and is one of the most energising aspects of the offer the Tories will make at the next election. See above.
10) Use of the benefit system to deepen the poverty trap, lesser incentives to work or save, his fuelling of the culture of drugs, alcohol, yobbery and violent crime: Norman’s successor as MP for Chingford, Iain Duncan Smith, has addressed these very issues in his pioneering work on the Broken Society. Wisconsin-style welfare reform would be at the heart of a Cameron Government’s policy agenda.
So – apart from that – what have the Cameroons ever done for us? Not so much Blair worship, as the Norman Conquest. Thoughts please, Coffee Housers.
Previous
Nicholas
February 28th, 2008 11:46am Report this commentAll of this makes perfect sense and may be acknowledged by Tory supporters and Coffee House regulars but it is not the perception "out there" and the problem remains how to make it so. The public perception and particularly the New Labour media will gleefully seize on the apparent division between Lord Tebbit and David Cameron and I fear they will not see, let alone publicise, the actualities you have so ably listed here. When New Labour came to power they did so as a "pretend party", bringing with them a huge chunk of the nasty old Left and a ragged band of camp following minority pressure groups. Those elements were empowered to make revolutionary and unaccountable change in our establishment, public services and society. For ten years it has been the classic "breaking down" of cultural revolution but achieved by stealth and subversion. The consequence of this subversion is the dire catalogue of modern Britain as described by Lord Tebbit. The challenge for David Cameron and his party is not just how to achieve universal recognition for their policies to save Britain but also how they are going to defeat the old Left and New Labour camp followers now entrenched in almost every aspect of daily life here and misrepresenting the Tories as ever.
Dontmakemelaugh
February 28th, 2008 11:58am Report this commentIn the words of Benny Hill, "You no rissen". Lord Tebbit was castigating Gove, a leading light in Cameron's cabal, regarding Gove portraying his admiration for Blair. There is little to admire about the mainly detestable Blair if you are a practical conservative and not a politician with a large expense account and can afford to overlook what Blair has done to England. Perhaps because Gove is a fellow Scot that he finds Blair so admirable. The message that Lord Tebbit was trying to relay to the dunderheads in the Tories is that the great bulk of the electorate have a hard job trying to differentiate between BLair and Cameron, the man who called for a standing ovation for one of the worst leaders England has ever been saddled with and had to endure. Never mind eh! Vote for the heirs to Blair's admirers. It is only a game after-all. No one is supposed to take those embedded in Club Parliament seriously. Its just a parish council doing a rubber stamp job. When the Tories stood up to give Blair his standing ovation did they believe in what they were doing or were they being hypocrites? At least we know Gove, in regards to Blair is not a hypocrite but an admirer. As for the rest? Who cares, but I do remember Blair stating in a speech that he wished to bury Conservatism in Britain - it looks like he has succeeded.
MagicAldo
February 28th, 2008 12:47pm Report this commentA fair argument, Matthew. But consider this: Mr Blair's Government vandalised our constitution, increased taxation to levels higher than in Germany, devalued our exam system to the point of absurdity, deliberately encouraged unprecedented levels of immigration, and entrenched the ideology of multiculturalism at every level in public institutions. Yet on his day of departure, Her Majesty's loyal opposition gave Mr Blair a standing ovation. Surely Lord Tebbit has every right to be angry.
Mark
February 28th, 2008 3:04pm Report this commentBlair's only admirable achievement was his electoral success. he had some noble aims - welfare reform, raising standards in education - but did not deliver. He wasted his opportunities and our money. Lord Tebbit is right and Michael Gove is wrong.
mart
February 28th, 2008 3:53pm Report this commentMatthew, a masterful post. Those are indeed the instinctive positions of the centre right, and we must hope that they all remain - or in some cases become - Conservative policy. (But can we be sure they will?) What is needed is not so much "heir to Blair" chicanery, but something that offers an alternative. Blair had gravitas and even developed good centre-right views on some policy matters, but in fact presided over a decline in such areas as enumerated by Lord Tebbit. (Also see MagicAldo's point above about the British constitution, which is left in a dangerously unsettled state). The Tories should therefore decry these failures with clarity, and offer a centre-right alternative on all of them. As a side note, I wonder for how long Mr Gove will be able to speak his mind so freely and lucidly, while also avoiding the Labour and BBC gaffe-detectors? There is little room for nuance or "thoughful" contributions in British politics (witness recently, Mr Lansley's statements being discussed today, and Archbishop Williams' views expressed the other week).
Ian C
February 28th, 2008 4:38pm Report this commentThis is a good reply to Tebbit who is a key figure. Amid all this we should not foregt that the 'Granita pact' allowed Brown resposnibilty for domestic policy and finance and Blair's influence on these policies was very much hamstrung. Which resulted in the politicisation of the Civil Service, the worsening of health and education per £ spent, inadequate law and order/militray kit at war, the trashing of the family and so on. Tebbit's point is that these happend on Blair's watch and any 'right' thinker should want them reversed and give Blair no credit whatever for allowing it - however masterful he was in his day. And his lordship is surely right in this. We should not credit Blair with anything very much other than being the man left holding the parcel when Major dropped it. It was not Blair that defeated the Tories again in 01 and 05, it was the Tories. Tebbit was right to have a go at Gove, who I rate. The Tories need to be utterly uncompromising in their criticism of Blair's wasted opportunity while pointing out that Brown had far more to do with it than was thought at the time - and not genuflect in his memory.
bill
February 28th, 2008 7:25pm Report this commentTebbit was right. Gove was wrong. And Cameron was utterly wrong giving Blair a standing ovation. I've never supported Cameron but that single act was enough to not vote Conservative.
CS
February 28th, 2008 8:39pm Report this commentI'm afraid that I've grown too weary of Tebbit's ranting bigotry in the Lords to pay much attention to his views any more. He claims to be a champion of liberty and personal responsibility but too often he's ony prepared top grant it to those prepared to live as if we were still in pre-War Britain. Freedom of choice for people of whom he approves.
Back to top