The perfect political U-turn is so subtle that it goes almost entirely unnoticed, as David Cameron demonstrated this week. He realised, well before the press, that a full-scale revolt was brewing in the Conservative party over his ill-conceived plan for all-women shortlists. So he abandoned the plan on Tuesday, but he did so using the sort of code that activists understand but Fleet Street cannot decipher. Cameron’s enemies stood down, his advisers relaxed. As a political manoeuvre, it was nothing short of masterful.
Initially the idea was to enhance Cameron’s modernising credentials by picking a fight with those whom the media regards as the bad old misogynist Tories. The notion of all-women shortlists, ran the argument, would infuriate local constituency chairmen, and this in turn would yield a helpful string of stories about young, in-touch Mr Cameron fighting Sir Bufton-Tufton. The BBC and swing voters would watch this battle with approval.
The problem was that Sir Bufton-Tufton was likely to win. It was clear by Monday that the constituency associations would outvote the leadership over all-women shortlists. Opposition to the idea cuts straight to the heart of Conservatism: a belief in judging everyone by their merits alone, and a belief that one should not demean women by tokenism. It is a matter of deep Tory pride that Baroness Thatcher was not helped in the slightest by positive discrimination.
To Mr Cameron’s immense credit, he realised this. Perhaps his greatest strength is his versatility. Politicians who are less intellectually secure become wedded to their mistakes, seeing it as a sign of personal authority. Mr Cameron divorces his mistakes quickly and heartlessly. This commends him as a future prime minister: the country he hopes to govern is in a huge state of flux. The electorate want to know that he will handle problems assuredly.
This drama-that-never-was speaks volumes about Mr Cameron’s relationship with his party. They are prepared to support him but also, where necessary, to defy him. There is a reason why the Tories specialise in regicide, whereas Labour has meekly formed a mass suicide pact with a man who may yet be judged the biggest human liability in the party’s history. And would it really be a good idea for a leader to present his own party as being somehow reluctant to recognise good female potential? Each Tory leader has had different relationships with the Conservative party. Harold Macmillan hated it almost as much as Ted Heath (a feeling which, latterly, was mutual). Thatcher, of course, loved the Conservative grassroots — and felt an ideological bond with them.
It is clear that David Cameron is a Conservative man in a way that Tony Blair never was a Labour man. For all his metropolitan credentials, he is a country Tory — as handy with a rifle as an autocue. And he is coming quickly to recognise the wisdom he has in his party. The irony is that traditional Tory principles are now proving the perfect remedy to modern Labour-induced problems. The phrase ‘progressive conservatism’ is not a new idea, but an age-old principle that the poor are best helped by empowerment rather than charity. Cuts are the cure for Labour profligacy. The awkward Cameroon catchphrase of ‘social responsibility’ is simply a new way of preaching the true Tory gospel: family and community matter more than the state. In short, Bufton-Tufton is a good deal wiser than his critics in the media believe. And Mr Cameron’s quick retreat shows that — though he would never admit it — he knows that too.
Comments