What is the point of a political party?

Like so much that pertains to British politics it was most ably clarified by Burke, as a “body of men united for promoting by their joint endeavours the national interest upon some particular principle in which they are all agreed.”

This most primitive of definitions was true when Burke wrote it, in 1770. Then, political parties were still in their first flowering, and the older British political system — under which governments made parliaments — that held sway.

This system is far behind us. Now it is parliaments that make governments, and they do so through parties. Modern political parties are integral to British democracy; they provide a platform for public expression by engaging citizens, from which they recruit and promote political leaders, whilst articulating and aggregating the interests of the body politic into a coherent political philosophy and practicable public policy.

But we must ask, after 14 years in government, how many of these boxes the Conservatives have managed to tick.

Have we engaged citizens? Our membership is perhaps the lowest it has ever been, and our voter base certainly is. We are no longer the mass-membership party that we need to be to deliver campaigns, or to properly represent the electorate; we may now have less than 100,000 members, the lowest we have ever had.

As for recruiting and promoting political leaders, we can hardly claim to have drawn from a wide range of citizens. For years, CCHQ has parachuted in the preferred sons and daughters of the regime to safe seats, looking inwards instead of outwards. As a result, just one in 100 Tory MPs in the last Parliament came from a working-class job.

What of articulating and aggregating the interests of the body politic into a coherent political philosophy? After 14 years of back and forth, endless party factionalism and interminable internal wrangling, no serious political commentator could make the case that our political philosophy was coherent — much less consistent.

And, finally, how did we score on articulating and aggregating the interests of the body politic into practicable public policy? Although there are success stories — employment, education, delivering Brexit — they are precious few for so long in power. If anything, what we seemed to specialise in was articulating and aggregating the interests of the body politic into impracticable public policy (principally on immigration).

If we are to win back power, we must begin with these problems, and with ourselves; it’s no good blaming the mirror if you’re ugly.

By returning power to local associations and rolling back the frontiers of CCHQ, Robert Jenrick will offer genuine power and responsibility to members, giving people a reason to stay or join the party. He has also talked often of realising the dream of home ownership amongst Britain’s young — giving them a reason to be Conservative.

On political leadership, Robert has promised an end to the parachuting of candidates, calling it “immensely disrespectful” and arguing that it dissuades people of substance from standing for Parliament. He has even suggested an end to the candidates’ list, another oft-bemoaned and CCHQ-gatekept process.

As for coherent political philosophy, Rob has pushed forward the idea of having core principles, “a common creed” around which the party can — must — unite, and has even gone so far as to publish a first attempt to outline that creed. That would provide a sense of unity of purpose that has been sadly lacking. 

Finally, on practicable public policy, Robert has been policy-forward — most importantly, on immigration. Immigration was our greatest failure in government. We betrayed those that we should serve. If we are to win back the public then offering bold and well-founded actions, not more empty promises, is the task of the day. Rob and I first came into contact when he referenced work of mine in “Taking Back Control”, his mammoth report for the CPS, which included over 30 policies that could be enacted tomorrow in order to reduce migration back to the tens of thousands. That promise, being made, must be kept.

It was right that we were thrown out of government. The electorate are never wrong. But this country has to be saved from Labour; they won the last election by promoting the idea that the only problem with Britain was that Tories were running it —- that we were the worst thing since unsliced bread. They said we were bad. They might have been right; but they’ve practiced electoral deception on immigration, taxes, spending and integrity — and things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.

Either the arrow must fly, or the string will break

Yet before we can make a government, we must make a party. Rob’s plan will restore to our hands the tools to rebuild this, the greatest and most successful party anywhere in the world.  As Ronald Reagan once said; “He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.” He will make it right, but we must make it fight.

Still, there is, in a larger sense, a more fundamental task. We stand at a fork in the road. If we offer vague promises instead of clarity, hand-wringing instead of bold action, heads in the clouds instead of feet in the mud, the Conservative Party will perish from the earth. Either the arrow must fly, or the string will break.