The Conservatives Have A Rhetoric Problem

Suella Braverman came under fire for her criticism of the Progress Flag

There are few gulfs greater than that between the rhetoric and the policy accomplishments of the Conservative and Unionist Party. The eight years since the Brexit referendum have seen numerous Conservative politicians style themselves as committed traditionalists, supposedly determined to reverse the constitutional and cultural change initiated by New Labour. Nevertheless, despite a General Election victory to the tune of a majority of 80 in 2019, the Conservative Party has brought about an anti-work marginal tax schedule, given up on border control, and presided over a soft-sentencing approach to law and order. Have we had a Conservative Party at all?

A perusal of The Telegraph's opinion section at any point between the dampened Downing Street election announcement and polling day itself makes the size of the gulf ghastly. Every week saw a new plea by a Tory parliamentarian or one of their Fleet Street allies, pointing at the supposed spectre of the Labour-Liberal Democrat left that was threatening to haunt Britain. The campaign message became clear: a vote for anyone other than the Conservatives would usher in hellscapes not dreamt up since the days of Mary Shelley. Reform, the band of right-wing radicals, were at first held at bay; at the sound of Farage's trumpet, the walls protecting Conservative support came down. Given the spoiling effect of Reform, the election result was no surprise, with many pollsters predicting events more catastrophic than the eventual 121 seats won. In the end, the few returning Tory parliamentarians appeared contrite, even if at too late a point.

The failure to move right on policy has come in step with the move rightwards on rhetoric. At the National Conservatism conference held last week in Washington DC, Suella Braverman lamented that she was unable to have Progress flags uninstalled from government buildings, despite her personal view that the flag was "monstrous" that represented support for the mutilation of children. The speech was immediately denounced by those representing the centre ground of the party, with Ben Houchen, mayor of the Tees Valley, writing to Rishi Sunak to demand Braverman's expulsion. The episode illustrated Lisa Nandy's triumphalist declaration that "the era of culture wars is over"; the culture wars are over because the cultural progressives have beaten everyone else into unquestioning submission. Braverman's fear of the Britain that we are losing quietened any talk of optimism about the Britain that British conservatives hope to create.

This combination of lionhearted rhetoric and lamblike action must be eradicated from the conservative approach to politics. Conservatives, must cease to simply stand athwart at history, yelling "Stop!". Instead, the British right-wing needs to re-orientate its approach to politics such that it focuses on an identifiable vision for Britain, rather than merely reacting to left-wing proposals, however abhorrent. To their credit, the Conservative General Election campaign recognised this to some degree, hinting at this in the slogan "Clear Plan, Bold Action, Secure Future". The future referenced, however, was the entrenchment of Britain's gerontocracy: "triple-lock-plus" pensions for the aged, and mandatory national service, on threat of losing access to driving licences and personal finances, for the young. It may have prevented the complete annihilation of the Tories' vote share among those aged 65 and over, but it permanently alienated nearly everyone else. Management consultant conservatism, appeals to competency of this sort, fails when people of all political backgrounds feel that the country is broken.

That "the adults are back in the room", the tired line bandied by ministers and supposedly impartial civil servants alike, is not good news for Labour, even if shown true. The metaphor supposes that functionality will be effortlessly restored; once the chairs are tucked in and the carpet is re-aligned, all will be fine. In that way, it shares the same assumptions as the failed management consultant conservatism of the Conservative Party; there is no need for a fundamental change in thinking, simply for a safer pair of hands.

Even in areas where Labour is promising genuine change, such as planning reform, it remains unlikely that Rachel Reeves will be able to challenge the political orthodoxy a la Blair. Given that half of the Cabinet, including the Chancellor herself, have opposed infrastructure and house building projects in their own constituencies while in Parliament, Reeves' hard hat, hi-vis persona is unconvincing. Beyond the frontbench, nimbyism lingers in the four-hundred-seat-strong parliamentary Labour Party. In a now-deleted tweet, Sarah Coombes, the newly elected MP for West Bromwich, shared that she spent her first day in office speaking at a planning appeal against house building in the Black Country. The widespread opposition to the principles espoused in their manifesto will stunt any effort to take on the anti-growth coalition.

That Labour lumbered to their "loveless landslide" makes them no less powerful in Westminster. Nevertheless, conservatives should remain hopeful that a campaign that identifies a positive vision of Britain can win back voters. Braverman's rhetorical mistake was not in criticising the Progress flag, but in failing to identify what might have replaced it. Movements defined by what they oppose cannot win on account of themselves. In choosing to play defensively, one gleans, at best, a draw. More probably, one suffers an unspirited defeat. It is no accident that, in the Anglosphere, the most successful conservative movement of recent decades has been the American pro-life movement. In managing to frame themselves as "pro-life", rather than "anti-abortion", American conservatives have found something that is held dear and identified themselves as unashamedly in favour of it.

Sir Roger Scruton's sentiment that good things are easily destroyed but not easily created is an admirable one, but it is not a guide to politics in itself. Having identified the good that we have eschewed, conservatives need to commit themselves to proactive support for family, home and nation. When Labour's plans for further devolution inevitably scupper their efforts to see homes and critical infrastructure built, it will fall to a party of the right to awaken the dormant British economic superpower. Once Labour's early release of convicted criminals has endangered communities, it will fall to conservatives to defend the innocent. Conservatives are good at complaining about issues, it's time to at least attempt fixing them.