The Conservative Party believe in a mythical creature – ‘ordinary people’ – and thinks it understands what they want. It has an instinctual, hazy vision of who that is. The ordinary person is probably employed, probably not in the public sector unless they are in the better paid white-collar end of it, probably has or wants children, has or wants to own a home and run a car, probably aspires to the suburbs – homo economicus, with a quietly patriotic sheen. MacMillan had a version of this concept, so did Thatcher, Major and Cameron. Johnson refocused it to make it altogether more brexity, and temporarily changed the Tory coalition to his short-term benefit and long-term cost (wide, shallow lakes cover more space but evaporate more easily).
The key thing to understand about this mindset is the way it informs policy announcements, especially in the build up to or during elections. When DWP ministers talk about punitive and vilifying reform of welfare services, they’re not talking to people who use them, they’re talking to the ‘ordinary people’. When education ministers pronounce upon the apparent dangers of ‘contested ideology’, all while insisting schools make explicit statements on British values (a contested concept if ever there was one) they aren’t addressing the parents of children who are questioning their gender and need empowering support – they are addressing their mythical ordinary people. So today, when Sunak announces that 18-year-olds will be conscripted into either military service or community ‘volunteering’, he is not talking to the young people he is planning to force into work; he’s offering bromides and comfort to his unicorn of ordinariness in the hope that it will vote for him. Never let it be said that the right don’t virtue signal.
Liberals understand that the ordinary person in this sense does not exist. Every individual, and every community, is distinct, special and ever-evolving. Liberals should be loudly and repeatedly opposing this ridiculous, vicious idea as a point of hard principle, even if it is only a gimmick. Forcing people into public service on the basis of their age is utterly wrong and deeply authoritarian. Doing it for votes is even worse. The government have had years to systematically invest in real services for young people that they can engage with voluntarily and on their terms (both cardinal principles of youth work – someone should tell the ‘tough love’ department of the shadow home office). I would be genuinely interested to know if anyone behind this policy thought for a moment about young carers, young people with long term health conditions, young people who have been victims of bullying or any of a hundred other barriers that an 18-year-old might encounter in participating in this pretence at positive intervention. They could offer to spend the money this policy will cost and invest in community youth services, creative spaces, opportunity hubs and other things that would make a massive difference, but that won’t keep the unicorn happy – just people who already weren’t voting for them.
Sunak’s announcement has had one small achievement – it made me so angry I rejoined the party. How active I can be in this election I don’t know and wouldn’t want to promise, but with the likely soon-to-be opposition almost certain to become Reform-lite, and a large and, though better-intentioned, authoritarian Labour government in the offing, I want to be somewhere where I can fight against patronising and coercive policy and help defend meaningful liberty, proper progressive politics and real, liberal change.
* Jack Nicholls is a returning Liberal Democrat member based in North East England.
The problem the Tory “National Service” idea is trying to solve
Most people who read this site are well used to being sickened to their stomachs by not just Conservative policy ideas but what they have done in practice. In the past few months alone, we’ve seen them pick on disabled people, sick people, vulnerable people seeking safety in this country, people coming to this country to share their skills in the workplace and pay taxes, trans people and anyone over 50 who isn’t working full time.
Today their big idea insults a generation of young people who have been failed by the Conservatives in spectacular style. A generation who, for the first time in a long time, is less well off than their parents. According to the Conservatives, the way to fix this generation is national service, forcing them into either a year of military service, or 12 weekends of volunteering. At a cost of £2.5 billion.
It doesn’t take long to think of better uses for that sum. Perhaps more housing so that young people don’t have to live with their parents into their 30s, perhaps by removing the discrimination in the minimum wage, perhaps by increasing social security to help the 1 in 4 children growing up in poverty, perhaps by making sure young people in distress can access mental health treatment quickly, perhaps by rebuilding youth services so young people can get the support they need in their communities. Perhaps by doing more to save the planet for future generations.
And then you come to the practicalities of all of this. Many young people are stuck in low quality, minimum wage jobs where they are treated badly – and which require them to work at weekends. And will they get expenses for travel to and from their volunteer placement? What if they are carers, or parents, or disabled?
I’m also increasingly worried about what seems to be attempts across several policy areas. The national service thing basically mandates adults to spend time in a particular way. What business is it of the state how law-abiding adults use their free time? That is a key principle for we liberals. I’m also concerned about the smoke-free generation stuff which may well be resurrected by Labour. Giving different rights to adults born on 31 December 2008 to those born on 1 January 2009 seems wrong, though I accept that this is one of these ideas where liberal principles can also lead you to support it.
But the national service idea isn’t about young people at all. It’s a cynical attempt to win voters back from Reform by throwing them a bit of right wing catnip. It’s about as morally bankrupt as you can get.
We’re used to this from the Conservatives. David Cameron inflicted Brexit on us, not because he believed in it but to try to unite the Conservative Party. Not only did that not work, but we are all paying the price.
The Conservative path to victory, or damage limitation, in this election, involves saving seats by stopping their more right wing supporters voting for Reform and their more centrist supporters voting for us. We will no doubt have prepared ourselves for the bile coming in our direction. We shouldn’t dismiss the threat. The Tories have cash to splash and will do so. Will they actually be able to persuade anyone to listen to them, though? Or are voters just motivated to get rid of them because they are so discredited?
We’ll have our stomachs turned by many more Conservative ideas over the next few weeks. How do we deal with it? By getting out there and beating as many of them as we possibly can. We have laid some strong foundations in our key seats over nearly 4 years now. We have some amazing candidates we need to turn into MPs, like Josh Babarinde in Eastbourne, Victoria Collins in Harpenden and Berkhamsted and Bobby Dean in Sutton and Cheam. You can read more about them in my report from the Social Liberal Forum lunch at Spring Conference.
Now is the time to show young people that we understand their needs and that we will not put up with them being on the sharp end of another Tory gimmick.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings
No comments:
Post a Comment