Comment: Why party leaders must offer more vision

Sunday, 18 December 2011 12:51 PM

The visions on offer by Britain's political leaders are about as inspiring as an omnibus edition of The Archers.

By Tim Patmore

For some people, doing political canvassing is an utterly terrifying activity. For me, it's almost a spiritual activity. So rarely in modern life are there opportunities to discuss the deeper things in life - as what is politics but 'philosophy in action'?

The curious thing, though, is given how inspired (in spirit) most political activists are, the people in charge of the three main parties appear to have no vision, no purpose and are about as inspiring as an omnibus edition of The Archers. Just look at the appalling 28.7% turnout in last week's Feltham and Heston by-election to see how underwhelmed the general public are by the lack of ideas emanating from the top.

Of course, all three parties have tried to inspire their followers with visions of where they see the country going, but most of the time they see it as an afterthought. They seem to prefer to tick the boxes of what will get them elected and to proffer vacuous charm, while forgetting to add that all important vision in the centre.

Take Ed Miliband's recent vision of 'good' and 'bad' businesses. It's a good idea in theory that the government should differentiate between Good and Bad, but greater power to an already vast state is hardly 'power to the people' or a way of inspiring a self-interested voter.

To be fair though, at least Ed Miliband has offered a heartfelt vision, which compares favourably with his two rivals.

Nick Clegg has offered what is now considered a deeply ironic vision of the country: 'an end to broken promises'. This vision is a typical example of an 'afterthought' vision. For one it was a naive idea. For two, even Clegg probably doesn't believe in it. Still, as the Lib Dems have delivered 85% of their manifesto, maybe it's the vision most likely of coming to pass (except if you happen to be a student).

Of all the three, though, the worst is Cameron, who seems to have learned from Tony Blair that empty rhetoric and charm is what the electorate want and that convictions (eg liberal intervention in Iraq) will get you sunk. Cameron has paid lip service to localism (but offered only very minor powers back from Westminster) and has set out the 'big society' as his big plan.

But what is the 'big society'? As an activist, I'm still bewildered by it. There are no armies (or even people) marching to carry it out, swept away in passionate desire to see it fulfilled and, like Clegg's 'broken promises' pledge, it seems to be more something invented with coffee and cigarettes at 3am, than something Cameron would be willing to live and die for.

Having a vision for the country is vital to getting elected. Look at the greatest British political landslides and it’s always because people are motivated to get off their chair to vote for a new and exciting weltanschauung for the country.
Take the '1945 Revolution' of Labour. The 1944 Beveridge report was a bestseller as it set out a detailed picture of the country fighting 'five giant evils'. And after one of the worst conflicts in human history, who would not be swept away by the ideals of justice, kindness and compassion to your fellow man that were set out by Clement Attlee and the Labour party?

Then there's the Thatcher revolution, where ideals of freedom and libertarianism provided not only a vaccine for 'the British disease', but also a return to self-reliance and the British spirit of get up and go.

And even with the Blairite revolution, thinking that Blair just proffered vacuous laissez-faire is to misunderstand the difference he represented from the fag-end of the Major years. It is not for nothing that our public services are now considered any governments' top priority, or that Cameron's Conservatives talk in terms of social justice.

Compared to this, Cameron's the 'big society' is just 'Thatcherism Lite', or 'Blue Labour' and fails to set the soul on fire.

If the Conservatives (or any party) are to win the next election, they will need to set out something new and exciting for the country. Something that would make you want to get out of bed in the morning and race to the office to achieve.

Cameron needs to show that a burning desire beats in his chest to achieve wonderful things with the power he is privileged to have and that he isn't just there, like Macmillan and Wilson, to add the position of prime minister to his CV.

As it is, the result in Feltham and Heston sees the Conservatives on a little more than half the vote of Labour (6,436 vs 12,639), in a seat that should have been a key marginal at the next election.

This just goes to illustrate how badly the Conservatives will do without a vision. In future by-elections, Cameron should remember that the heart of the activist is key to the mind of the voter.
 

Tim Patmore is assistant editor at The Groucho Tendency blog who specialises in offering alternative views on current events. He is also a qualified economist.

The opinions in politics.co.uk's Comment and Analysis section are those of the author and are no reflection of the views of the website or its owners.

Tags:
• big society
,
• party politics