Let me count the ways I am a rubbish activist. I loathe leafleting. I do not like bothering voters with impertinent questions about how they are going to vote. I have an odd name, so, when phone canvassing, I invent a dull one and then forget my own alleged name.

It is a long charge sheet. Somewhere on it lies the fact that I do not particularly like conferences. Forgive me, but it is true. I am not even going to Progress’ one. Which is probably a reason you should. It is on Saturday.

Yet the allure of the exotic and the strange is great. So when Progress asked me if I wanted to go to the ConservativeHome ‘Securing A Majority’ conference last Saturday, I was agog. How would they be different? What would be the same? Would they have someone asking interminable questions with no discernible interrogative clause?

Indeed, there were some wonderful similarities between left and right.

There were advisers and journalists hanging around outside chatting, far too important to listen to the damn discussions.

The parliamentary candidate for safe Tory Wealden, Nusrat Ghani, cheered me by making a speech which declared her simple desire to serve her community and her disavowal of ideology, political stratagems or careerist tendencies. She asked only to serve, as the man once said. Her earnestness was identical to speeches I have heard from many Labour candidates and was only slightly undermined by the fact she has already been a candidate and professionally describes herself as ‘an expert in political communications’. She will be on the Tory frontbench soon enough, I expect.

I had promised myself I would not take the easy route of mocking Tory boys, all pocket squares and school ties, but in truth there were not many to mock. Maybe it is power, or my advancing age, but the audience seemed fairly typical young professionals. White, reasonably well-off and slightly glossy. Compared to Labour events, there was less artful scruffiness, a style more Bond Street and Selfridges than Converse and Dalston. But I like Selfridges, so I cannot sneer at that.

Enough cod sociology! What of the content?

I was worried for a while. Although somewhat relieved that last week’s local elections had not been worse, the Tories gathered seemed to have decided that the way to prosper was to talk about jobs, and housing, and opportunities for the aspirational middle class.

Was this a party marching onto the territory of spreading wealth and opportunity to the many, not just the few? Robert Halfon, Tim Montgomerie, George Osborne, Isabel Hardman, Lottie Dexter, all seemed to suggest it might be. I shifted uneasily in my seat at this seditious talk of creating a million jobs and of using public money to build half a million homes.

These Tories did not fear Labour. If anything, they regarded us with a sort of amused contempt. Yet they acknowledged that was not enough to guarantee victory for Toryism. In Osborne’s words, they needed to ‘listen, respond and deliver’, address the public mood of discontent and to turn ‘anger into answers’.

The problem was, listen to what, and give which answers? As one questioner pointed out, United Kingdom Independence party voters wanted lower immigration, an end to HS2, lower welfare spending and to leave Europe. Was Osborne proposing to respond and deliver to this agenda? He was not, and he left for Newark, unruffled.

After lunch (another difference: I have never been as well catered at a Labour conference. Lamb Tagine. Couscous. Eton Mess) we heard from peer and polling guru Lord Ashcroft.

If Osborne had been confident, Ashcroft forebode. His manner was that of an Old Testament prophet, warning the foolish of wrath to come if they did not heed him. His marginal seat polling showed the Tories losing 83 seats. People prefered Cameron to Miliband, a Tory economy to Labour growth, but were dissatisfied over Europe, the cost of living, the NHS and immigration, and resolutely refused to put their cross in the Tory box.

What to do about this? The advice seemed less clear than in Ashcroft’s previous reports, like Smell the Coffee. What if the coffee was now immigration flavoured?

This sums up the dilemma that ran through the conference’s theme of ‘securing a majority’.

There is a choice for modern Toryism about who to listen to, and how to respond. The Tories could seize the agenda of jobs, and housing and better public services, making themselves the party of the reforming centre. Alternatively they can try to protect their right flank, with talk of tax cuts and immigration caps and deregulation, of limiting the unions and biffing Europe.

This latter approach was more often advocated in the workshops than in the main speeches, with speakers from MigrationWatch and The Freedom Association talking confidently of the appeal of tax cuts and limiting immigration.

Too often, their leaders seem to want to do both, which means they achieve neither. Tellingly, when Osborne was questioned about this choice, he did not engage with the argument.

I began to suspect that leading Tories think they do not have to choose; that they do not have to confront, believing that the weakness of others allows them to dismiss the agenda of their friends and allies.

This would be a mistake. The Tories should choose one path or the other. For Labour, it would be better if they turned their eyes right. For the country, it would better if they look left. I have a sneaking suspicion they will continue to stare at their feet, firm in their strategic irresolve.

———————————

Hopi Sen is a Labour blogger who writes here, is a contributing editor to Progress, and writes a fortnightly column for ProgressOnline here