 |
||||
Home
|
||||
BOOKMARK |
||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Some
thoughts by an outsider on the ever-changing landscape of British
politics By Prof.
Charles A. Cain MA FCIB TEP, Editor-in-Chief, Isle of Man When I was
a youngster, and at university, fifty years ago, the fashionable thing
to be was a social democrat. So we all were. The word "liberal"
had become rather old fashioned, and conjured up either images of elderly
politicians in Homberg hats and walrus moustaches, or of middle-aged wimps
in open-toed sandals hugging trees. The image of the conservatives was
one of upper-class twits or of unbending exploitative employers. Ah! But
we were innocent in those days, as all students are! How language
changes! We redefine words to suit ourselves, to latch onto the latest
band wagon. A few years later, and I was less enthusiastic about socialism,
once I had realised that communism and Nazism were both manifestations
of socialism. The antipathy between Communists and Nazis had all the intensity
about it of sectarian ideology, not unlike that which lasted for hundreds
of years (and still does in some places) between Catholic Christianity
and Protestant Christianity. The original
Liberals, in the nineteenth century, were the descendants ideologically
of the protestant rebels of the seventeenth century, who demanded religious
freedom and founded the United States of America. Their attitudes were
encapsulated in the Whig party, which came to represent the economic reformers,
the free traders, the industrial entrepreneurs in an alliance with protestant
Christians and social reformers. In Britain, the Labour Party was born
out of this movement, when that wing representing the Christian and social
reform tradition left and joined the new alliance with the socialist working
class movement. From the liberal rump, the next fracture saw the economic
reformers, the free traders and the industrial entrepreneurs leave to
join the Conservatives as the National Liberals. The old Liberal Party
almost vanished. All that was left by 1950 was a handful of social reformers
for whom socialism was unacceptable. But nothing
stays the same for ever. The collapse of socialism in the 1970s and 80s
meant that the old Labour Party started to fall apart. The Social Democrats,
under Roy Jenkins, who left the Labour Party, consisted of that Christian
social reform wing, and it found its way back to its original alliance
with the Liberals. The Labour Party became unelectable. It was the genius,
however, of Tony Blair that he managed to resurrect the Christian social
reform tradition, and to restrain very effectively the old working class
socialist tradition. Now that he is going, can that magic be worked by
his successor? The Labour Government is palpably in trouble, with all
its key policies slowly falling to pieces. The most
serious failure, without question in my view, is that its policy on constitutional
reform and its attitude to the armed forces have fundamentally undermined
the institutions that hold the United Kingdom together. The Iraq war pales
into insignificance compared to this. Devolution
of power to Scotland, without considering the structure of the UK as a
whole, has fatally undermined confidence in the fairness and integrity
of its institution. The botched reform of the House of Lords, combined
with the "cash for honours" scandal, has undermined confidence
in the legislature. The cutbacks
in the armed forces by the Labour Party have been carried with a political
savagery that suggests a doctrinaire hatred of their traditions. It is,
perhaps, symptomatic that not a single member of the British cabinet has
ever served in the armed forces, and, as a consequence, the Labour Party
seems simply unable to comprehend how the British armed forces have been,
for long, the envy of the world as the finest fighting force. The Scottish
regimental tradition, in particular, has been far more than simply a military
matter. Ever since the Jacobite rebellions in the eighteenth century,
the Highland regiments expressed the spirit of Gaelic Scotland. It was
the Scottish regiments that popularised the wearing of the kilt, of tartan,
of bagpipes. Indeed, it is arguable that the Scottish Highland regiments
redefined the very concept of Scottishness, just as the spirit of independent
minded Scots found expression in a passionate identification with their
regiments. And yet, despite this (or probably in total ignorance of this),
the Labour Government has effectively destroyed these traditions by its
forcible amalgamation of these regiments into the so-called Royal Regiment
of Scotland. The final
straw for the Scots has been the repeated comment by the London establishment
that Scotland could not survive on its own economically. This reveals
that there is a fundamental failure in the London establishment to realise
that the UK is, today, essentially a political union, and NOT an economic
one. Economically, Scotland could do as well as Norway, Ireland or Denmark.
If the Isle of Man (population 80,000), can survive and prosper economically,
so can Scotland. Indeed, it is arguable that had Scotland been given its
independence when the issue first arose 30 years ago, it is England that
would have had trouble surviving economically. Unless there is a radical
reappraisal of the structure of the UK, Scotland's departure from it is
almost inevitable. But what
of the conservatives? Mrs Thatcher represented the national liberal tradition
of economic reformers, free traders, and industrial entrepreneurs. The
old Tory tradition of landowners, magnates and Catholic Christianity (the
"Tory Wets") disliked her intensely. After the fall of the last
Conservative Government, it was Mrs ThatcherÕs national liberal tendency
that came to the fore, and that caused the Conservative Party to be so
hated. This is curious, as it is often alleged that the national liberal
tradition represented traditional Toryism, but it does not. The Conservative
Party's new leader, David Cameron, is doing what Tony Blair did for Labour.
Tony Blair pulled his party back from old socialism by reviving the liberal
reform tradition. David Cameron is pulling the Conservative Party away
from the national liberal tradition back to old Toryism. Paradoxically,
old Tory values of landowners, magnates and Catholic Christianity were
much respected. They represented order and stability. They also represented
a caring society, in which government was composed of people with an acute
sense of duty and compassion for the people in their care. It is analogous
to the relationship in a regiment. The officers come from a powerful tradition
of caring for their men. The cavalry officer was always told "First
your horse, then your men, and lastly yourself". It is this tradition
that David Cameron is now reviving strongly. Compassionate conservatism
is thoroughly consistent with the traditions of Toryism, just as authoritarian
intolerance is thoroughly consistent with both liberal and socialist traditions.
Let us not forget that Liberalism is the direct descendant of the parliamentary
tradition of Oliver Cromwell. Back to
Scotland. Scotland holds the key to British politics in the foreseeable
future. The place of the old Conservative Party in Scotland has been assumed
by the Scottish National Party. This is because the Thatcherite tradition
had no respect for the old Tory virtues which, in many ways, have lasted
in Scotland more than anywhere else. Scottish Tories lost their faith
in the Conservative Party, and turned to a new home-grown conservative
party. Can David CameronÕs conservatives recover the position in Scotland
where they once had overall political control? I doubt it very much. It
would make far more sense for them to try to enter into an alliance with
the Scottish National Party to persuade them that they could do better
for Scotland in a restructured federal kingdom, than by casting their
lot with the unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats of the European Union,
and their hatred of individual freedoms. And what
of Northern Ireland? The fascinating thing about the troubles in Northern
Ireland is that they led to the British and Irish Council, which could
be the starting point for the restructuring of the political relations
of the nations of these islands. Out of the angst of Ulster could come
the answer for us all. Just as Northern Ireland as a political entity
is bound eventually to disappear into a restructured Ireland, so it may
also have given breath to the solution to the relationship in all these
islands. So am I
a liberal today? I think not. I have no wish to dictate to others how
they shall live their lives, nor do I want to be at the receiving end
of a lecture. I think that I am simply a radical conservative. Leave well
alone, but if it really is bust, then be radical. Tinkering will not do.
Mr Blair has made that abundantly clear. |
||||||||
