Labour should be wary of the new Tory modernisers

In 1999, Philip Gould published his tome on the modernisation of the Labour Party, The Unfinished Revolution. The incomplete status here did not refer to Tony Blair’s unwillingness to go further with reform of the party, but the idea that modernisation of a political party was not a simple process with a single end goal. Instead, it would entail a shift in thinking that would mean becoming more receptive and adaptive to the wills of the electorate – hence Gould’s often derided but unwavering belief in focus groups.

David Cameron has an unfinished revolution of his own. He was elected leader on the promise of changing his party, whose poor reputation had led them to three consecutive, thumping election defeats. However, somewhere along the way, he seemed to simply give up on the “modern and compassionate” Conservative Party.

Mentions of the Big Society, sadly, ebbed away. For all the mockery, a Big Society existing outside of state structures is not an unusual concept for those on the left from trade union and church backgrounds – Parliament has only ever been one facet of effecting change in communities. Despite the possibilities here to reach beyond his base, the chillaxing PM simply never finished what he started.

Cameron’s Tories have reverted to traditional form. This week’s welfare announcements prove their casual attitude towards vindictive measures. Putting young people straight into 30 hours of mandatory litter picking before they can claim a measly £57 on the dole will not instil a sense of community spirit within them, and the DWP’s own impact analysis suggests it will not help them find jobs.

Theresa May, who once castigated her own conference for their “Nasty Party” image, is now probably the frontrunner in the race to be next Tory leader. Yet her zeal to shake up the party’s image seems lost: this is a Home Secretary who has allowed only 90 refugees into the country from war-torn Syria over the last year.

These ‘tough’ announcements have little to do with whether they are good policy, and all to do with positioning. In search of easy votes, the distinction between ‘being receptive’ and ‘pandering’ has been lost. The publishing of research into branding yesterday shows how much work there is left to do with the Conservatives: they remain the second most disliked brand in Britain.

Cameron’s modernisation project may have been mistaken from the start. He attempted to ape Blair’s Labour Party of the 1990s rather than create a Conservative Party of the 2000s, and then aborted his mission early anyway.

What Labour should be fearful of is a real re-imagining of the Conservative Party’s image. Unfortunately, that re-imagining is apparent in the Good Right, the new project Times columnist Tim Montgomerie and YouGov’s Stephan Shakespeare, launched yesterday.

Looking through their initial 12 policy manifesto, I found myself basically agreeing with about nine – more than ConservativeHome’s Mark Wallace. For the low paid, they recommend a hike in wages, tax cuts, and support in running for Parliamentary selections. They support a rise in housebuilding and home ownership, reforms to funding for political parties, forcing private schools to diversify, and investment in the north.

Moving past traditional left/politics (at one point they ponder whether the name is a hindrance), although far from a new claim, is nevertheless a smart reaction to the burgeoning political landscape. This is a time when traditional Labour voters will move in large numbers to small state conservatives like UKIP, and where the young appear to be right wing in many respects.

In declaring that “the state is not the enemy”, they not only tell an obvious truth, but are able to move beyond haggard old ideological divides. If, upon gaining traction, they are able to resist the temptation of childish barbs at trade unions, the Good Right have real opportunity to broaden the appeal of conservatism.

Should Ed Miliband come to power in May, the Conservative Party will have to ask themselves some searching questions about where they go next. For anyone with the Labour Party’s future interests at heart, it should be a concern that the Tories have a good basis for an answer already prepared.