POLITICS
Shouldn't somebody tell them that we've already turned?
SIMON HEFFER
The Right has acquired the habit of lead- ing the assault on Mr Major for his occa- sional displays of lack of leadership. How- ever, since its defeat on the Maastricht paving motion the Right has hardly been in a position to criticise. A torrent of bad blood and recrimination about that vote has not yet fully subsided. One reason order was not restored more quickly was that the Right has no clear leader. People like Mr Bill Cash and Mr Michael Spicer, whose guerrilla warfare against the Maas- tricht Bill resumed this week, confine them- selves to that important matter. On wider issues there is no figurehead. One who is thought to be available, Lady Thatcher, is more reluctant than most imagine to fill this role. In any case, her own undisguised rancour at what she sees as the pusillanimi- ty of some of 'us' in recent months would make such a task difficult, even if she want- ed to undertake it.
The Tory Right was exciting in the mid- 1980s largely because, encouraged by a sympathetic leader, it had the incentive to promote new policies. It took a philosophi- cal lead in the party. It drew on ideas from the Centre for Policy Studies under Mr Gerry Frost (now happily restored to his post there) and the Institute of Economic Affairs under Lord Harris of High Cross and Mr Arthur Seldon. Not content with other people's think-tanks, the parliamen- tary Tory party invented one of its own, the No Turning Back Group. While the centre- left Blue Chips met for dinners at the home of Mr Tristan Garel-Jones, and discussed how they would provide each other with jobs in their cabinets when the time inevitably came, the No Turning Back Group produced impressive pamphlets about reducing the size of the state and advancing economic liberty. There was a war to be fought against bureaucrats, regu- lators, restrictive practitioners, syndicalists, corporatists, welfarists and municipal socialists, the worst of whom were to be found within the Conservative Party itself. The NTBs jolly well went out and fought it. Their success was conspicuous. Not only was most of their agenda taken up by Mrs Thatcher, who patronised them in the liter- al sense of the word, but they were taken up by her too. Of the 20 or so members of the group about half are in the Govern- ment; two of them, Mr Lilley, the Social Security Secretary, and Mr Portillo, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, have even reached the Cabinet.
The group is, though, a victim of its suc- cess. The backbenchers, almost to a man, voted against, or abstained on, the Maas- tricht paving motion. Some of them, and others on the Right outside the group, expected a gesture, or at least some firm leadership, from the ministers who were fellow members of their club. Very little,. with two or three distinguished exceptions, was forthcoming. That wound has yet to heal. Because of Mr Major's extreme sensi- tivity to criticism, for all his protestations to the contrary, there has been no rush to put heads above parapets. Right-wing MPs are dismayed there is no Rab Butler, no Peter Walker, no Michael Heseltine of the Right to give even the most coded indication that not every minister feels unqualified joy about the Government's direction. Such MPs know that, without such a figurehead, they can be no threat to the party line; hence their chagrin.
The disorganisation of the Right is hav- ing some embarrassing consequences. One of the truest believers, Lord Ridley of Lid- desdale, has called for tax increases now, echoing Professor Tim Congdon, one of Mr Lamont's advisers. NTB members general- ly, however, want no tax increases at all, but vicious cuts in public spending instead. Lady Thatcher advocated air strikes against Serbia; many of her NTB devotees, taking a more Powellite line, want Britain to stay out. The prospect of gagging the press with a privacy law is favoured by the majority of the Right, making a mockery of the liber- tarian basis of Thatcherism; Lady Thatch-• er's last recorded comments on the matter were in favour of self-regulation. It is one thing a party failing to have one voice on these important issues; but when a faction cannot agree on them, the chances of that faction influencing political developments in its party are slim indeed. Alert to the need to take some sort of lead, the NTB has leaked out that they would, some time soon, produce another one of their pamphlets. In it they would suggest what route ought to be followed by the Government and the Conservative Party. They know they have lost influence. It is sensible of them to think that by pre- senting coherent suggestions for the future they might well regain some of their old clout; after all, the alternatives have been a disaster. Yet their battle will be greater than ever before. Even their name is a sad irony; the turning has happened. The Maastricht Treaty (unless Mr Cash and his men can spare us), the Council Tax and the probable announcement soon of subsidies to the coal industry are the sort of thing that used to make NTB members shriek with horror. Public spending is controlled in much the same way that the Maginot Line was in May 1940. The state (the sworn enemy of the Right, except when it is con- trolling the press) grows inexorably. With three months of this financial year still to go, the deficit is already £39 billion. Attempts to fight rearguard actions, such as Mr Lilley trying to extend the taxability of welfare benefits, are repelled. A new pam- phlet would be a very fine thing; but who will take any notice of it, when things like this are happening all the time?
The events of 4 November 1992 showed that actions, not words, are what matter. in his resolve not to rejoin the Exchange Rate Mechanism this year, and in recent hints about his opposition to tax increases, Mr Major is showing signs of sympathy with the Right. This has little to do with his belief in their doctrines, but much to do with his awareness that, when organised and well-led, the Right can be lethal. If just two of the NTB ministers had resigned on 4 November and voted with the Opposition, he would no longer be Prime Minister. HIS apparent regard for the threat posed by his internal critics is more than they deserve- Before anyone finds out they are trading on their reputation, not their abilities, the Right should start working and campaign- ing for what they claim to believe in.
Previous page
