Political commentary
Seeingthelightmanship
Ferdinand Mount
Once again exam time is back with uS at Old Nick's and we in the Faculty of Black Arts at the Machiavelli Memorial College of Political Science are looking forward to the usual stimulating tussle with our students. This year's crop of examination candidates is generally agreed to be outstandingly able, perhaps the most brilliant since the 'Borgia generation' of 1494. Even so, our new Infenials paper, 'Social Democracy I', has floored many promising candidates. The question which proved to be the most frequent stumbling block was: 'How should the Conservative Party act to secure maximum advantage from the formation of a Social Democratic Party'? It was disappointing to see so many candidates give such crude and predictable answers. 'Pretend to be as like them as you possibly can' (Norman Stevas, Shell) was worth at best gamma +; 'Accuse them of acting like slow poison' (M. Thatcher, Upper Fifth) secured a charitable betaminus; 'Be patronising and mildly facetious to them' (P. 'Thorneycroft, Lower Sixth) was the least inadequate response and was rather strictly marked at beta?+. One would like to have seen a little more of this candidate's working.
The Examining Board thought it might be helpful, without further ado, to append a model answer for the benefit of some of our weaker brethren if the college is not to disgrace itself on Judgment Day (or Vail-. ers and Gnashers', as it is commonly known on campus). The formation of a Social DemocratiC Party, led by four active and not unpopular former Labour Cabinet Ministers, is the worst news the Labour Party has had in 50 years. Therefore, it must be the best news the Conservative Party has had in 50 years. There can be no mumbling and quibbling on' this point. As Mr Eric Heifer put it, dredging his youthful memories for the fitting adverb, the Social Democratic Party is 'objectively' the ally of the Conservative Party. All the opinion polls agree: at the pit of this government's unpopularity, the Social Democrats are getting roughly two exLabour supporters for every ex-Tory. If a Social-Democratic candidate runs, Conservative and Labour stand roughly equal. Without a Social Democratic Party in the race, Labour is 8 to 10 per cent ahead. The better the Social Democrats do, the better the Conservatives' chances of winning the next election.
Ah, but isn't there a danger of the Social Democrats doing too well? Isn't there a chance that they might actually win? And would not that be a terrible thing? A Social-Democratic-Liberal alliance can become the largest single party in Parliament only by destroying the existing Labour Party — and that is a prize worth taking a few risks for. 'One enemy at a time' is a sound rule. And so is 'my enemy's enemy is my friend'. All the same, the Conservative Party is in politics in order to win and retain pqwer. Ideally, what it ought to be aiming for at the next election is a result of the following shape: Conservative 40 per cent, SocialDemocrat-Liberal alliance 33 per cent, Labour Party 27 per cent — a winning margin large enough to give Mrs Thatcher an overall majority, with Labour being firmly and permaneptly relegated to third place. How are the Tories to achieve this?
The operation can be divided into two distinct stages. First, the gentlemanly. The Conservatives should welcome the formation of a 'responsible', mature, adult opposition. Speak in the manner of, say, Ronald Colman welcoming David Niven to a desert island previously inhabited only by fuzzy-wuzzies. Never let it look as if you are ganging up with Labour against the new party. Let little of their newness rub off on you. Don't let any hint of domestic tiffs show, either.
Be helpful. Offer the Social Democrats a comfortable whips' office. Suggest a change in the arrangements for paying the parliamentary expenses of opposition parties. The present arrangements — known as the `Shortnioney' after Ted Short, now Lord Glenamara, then Leader of the House — are a Labour fiddle designed, among other things, to deny help to splitters. To qualify, a party has to have had at least two MPs elected or one MP elected and 150,000 votes cast for it at the last general election. This condition officially freezes allegiance in a spirit contrary to the independence constitutionally enjoyed by each MP. The new rule should simply entitle any parliamentary grouping to ix per MP. The money involved is only about £10,000 a year, but it would be a pretty gesture and it would begin the process of subtly embarrassing the Social Democrats by outgentlemaning them. Congratulate the Social Democrats warmly on adopting so many of your own policies — what Potter would have called Seeingthelightmanship.
Remember, at this stage your aim is to build up the authority and prominence of the Social Democrats so that they come naturally to be regarded as the second party in the state. This will make the Labour Party very cross.
If asked to appear on television to debate with your Labour opposite number, insist on a Social Democrat taking part as well If Labour chap withdraws in a huff, you via hands down, and you draw attention to your victory by loudly inviting him to an alternk tive debate in some other forum. If Labour chap agrees, you embarrass both Labour chap and the Social Democrat by continually referring on television to the supposedlY confidential preliminary arrangements for the programme: 'I'm very glad, Neil, that you finally agreed that Shirley should take part here tonight because I think it's awfullY important to let the real opposition pot its views. And if I may say so, I think it was rather courageous of you because I 1030 there are people high up in the Labour, Party who are trying to keep the Socia,' Democrats off television altogether • ; About 18 months before the genera' election, you should be moving over gentlY. and unobtrusively to the second, or condescending stage. Nothing ill-hunaoured shrill (oh dear, some students are going 0 find this bit rather difficult). Your intention should be to appear awfully weathered. Yml have been through the furnace; you have stood eyeball to eyeball; and you have cone through.
Whereas these new fellows . • some of them are decent, sensible peoP,e (make them sound just a little bit dull, every now and then accidentally get the name wrong — call them 'the Social Liberal Party'), but they are fatally short of match practice. They don't really know what if's like out there in the middle. Now of courses we're tremendously glad that so manY these middle-aged socialists have come t° see the error of their ways and we &Ill want to be unkind, but you cannot heIP wondering about the judgment of peoPl° who spend 25 years of their life backing a loser . . . You'll soon get the hang of it. One w°fr/, of warning, though. If attempting arkvsporting metaphor, do not over-elaborate, and do master the rules of the game question first. Unless properly executefl o, this kind of ordinary-chappery makes le average politician seem even more peculiar than he seemed before. One final tip. The arrival of the Social Democratic Party ought to dispel ag thought of the Conservatives ditching Mrs Thatcher before the next general election. The Tories do love to liquidate a leader, but it usually has to be a leader who has lost a general election or whose health is groggY' or both. Normally, the sight of the blood on the floor does not lose many votes because die Labour Party is an even nastier spectacle,' But the Social Democrats present a Of: standard of comparison; the Conservative Party can no longer afford to behave like au undisciplined branch of Cosa Nostra, CO spiratorial in style and ruthless but chaof''' in its treachery. Even the most disenochanted Tory Cabinet ministers will have learn to put on an open, pleasant face. W.ell nobody ever said politics was an easy hfe'
Previous page
