The latest Conservative ‘pre-manifesto’ document, Believing in Britain, is an astonishing collection of bizarre statements, uncosted commitments and right-wing prejudices. Set out as a self-styled series of ‘principles from which Conservative policy flows’, there is little philosophical coherence in a plan that is fundamentally divided between neoliberal Redwoodisms and the authoritarian streak of Ann Widdecombe.
Economic policy wrestles with the uncomfortable reality that the Tories are inherently less trusted because of their stop-go reputation, while straining to reassure that they suddenly support an independent Bank of England. It is on public spending and taxation, however, where the Conservatives really fall to pieces. Remember the infamous ‘tax guarantee’ that wasn’t? In Believing In Britain, the word ‘guarantee’ is conspicuous by its absence. The Tories claim that their policy has evolved, but they also pledge: ‘In all normal circumstances we will reduce the burden of taxation…[with] real annual increases in spending which are within the trend rate of growth of the economy.’
Labour is able to commit to 3.3 percent real expenditure growth because savings from lower unemployment costs and lower debt interest payments enable investment in vital public services at this higher level. The Tory policy, however, would mean £16 billion less spent on schools, hospitals, transport, pensioners and much else besides. However much the Conservatives wriggle, they cannot escape the truth that they are now pledged to harsh and far-reaching cutbacks should they ever get their hands on government again. This is the equivalent of a £24 million cut in every single parliamentary constituency across the country. Tory parliamentary candidates should be aware that they will be held to account for this irresponsible pledge.
As the Tories try to develop policies in other fields, so they reveal the inconsistencies and dogma of a failed party. On health, they seem frightened to talk of their true privatising intentions, yet can’t avoid admitting they would ‘encourage independent health care’.
On education, the ‘free schools’ policy is a cloak for academic selection not only for secondary schools, but possibly for primary schools as well. They promise to effectively abolish LEAs and take universities outside public spending by using large capital receipts (such as the radio spectrum auction) so that they are ‘no longer dependent on Government funding’.
The Conservatives commit themselves to abolishing Regional Development Agencies and simultaneously ‘ensuring that devolution is a success’, a rather odd approach to constitutional policy to say the least.
Despite the £16 billion black hole in their policies, the Tories still can’t resist suggesting they would have more police officers, more bypass schemes, more prisoners in jail and new ‘secure reception centres’ for all asylum seekers. Yet they completely fail to say how they would pay for these expensive promises.
On welfare, the Tories want to reintroduce the Married Couples’ Tax Allowance (again, at unspecified cost), scrap the New Deal, end lone parent benefit for parents whose youngest is over 11 years-old, and abolish the pensioner Winter Allowance and the free TV licence for over-75s. Intriguingly, there is also the little-noticed pledge to privatise Industrial Injury Compensation Benefit, warning that ‘employers will be expected to have industrial injuries insurance’. So much for wanting to reduce burdens on business.
All in all, this document reveals the true agenda of the Tories no matter how they try to hide their intentions.