David Cameron closed the Conservative Party Conference – much overshadowed by the economic crisis befalling the world – with a passionate, substantial speech, devoid of flashy gimmicks that addressed the anxieties people have about the economy but also – in what was a surprise to commentators – also addressed a series of wide-ranging issues which he linked around the themes of his speech – responsibility, change, small government, values, character and judgement. It had been thought that Cameron would have drastically re-written his speech to take into account the gravity of the economic crisis otherwise he would have been criticised for being out of touch. Instead, he seemed to have kept much of his original content in place but with added passages about the economy, however, it is likely he did tone down his speech, limiting the jokes, and keeping the anti-Brown/Labour comments to a minimum.
Cameron faced a difficult balancing act with his speech – how much time should he spend addressing the economy at the expense of other issues – but probably felt that with his emergency statement yesterday, he did not want to overdo the economy. Had he done so he would no doubt have been criticised for having given a one-dimensional Shadow Chancellor’s speech. As it was, he adopted the right serious, Prime Ministerial tone, reiterating many of the points he had made yesterday about the economy and giving a critique of the Labour years, but also talked about other issues which he considers key such as social breakdown. He used talk of people’s anxieties to nicely link to other themes such as Britain being at war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Conservatives have always been the party of the military but the fact that Cameron chose to talk about the armed forces so early was no doubt meant as a riposte to Brown who only mentioned them as an afterthought at the end of his speech last week which those on the Right thought was disgraceful.
Much of the speech was in a measured tone with Cameron speaking with notes behind a lectern (rather than autocue, from memory, or TV screens a la Nick Clegg) to convey a more serious and statesmanlike image. However, at times Cameron became quite passionate especially when conveying stories about his constituents – particularly one about a small businessman who had lost his business and a man’s wife who had died without dignity from MRSA caught in hospital – and while he began his speech in sombre tones, he finished with a passionate, rousing and uplifting vision about Britain overcoming obstacles to reach better times ahead. Performance wise, Cameron has many of the gifts of Blair and Bill Clinton. At times he seemed to ad-lib, departing from his script so that he could speak direct to the audience without looking down at his notes. Whether genuine or rehearsed, it nonetheless made Cameron look more informal and his message heartfelt.
He talked about his passions and beliefs and the speech was designed to be a very personal – about him the man. He used it as a clever device, considering the political climate, to indirectly criticise Brown and Labour, subtly contrasting his opponents with himself without mentioning them. For example, he said: “I believe in building a strong team - and really trusting them. Their success is to be celebrated - not seen as some kind of threat. Thinking before deciding is good. Not deciding because you don't like the consequences of a decision is bad. Trust your principles, your judgment and your colleagues.” Here he was talking about himself but subtly he was clearly attacking Brown as a control freak who hoards power, does not delegate or trust his Cabinet colleagues, sees strong performances from his colleagues as threats to his leadership, and dithers over decisions because he is fearful of the consequences (here read: Northern Rock).
Cameron also took head-on the Prime Minister’s claim that this was “no time for a novice” making a powerful argument for change and deflating Brown’s ‘experience’ argument in what was perhaps the best part of Cameron’s speech. He said character and judgement were more important than experience. He said people wanted to know about his values and character, how he made decisions and how he operated. He said his values were conservative, not libertarian, and that the most important word for him was ‘responsibility’: “Personal responsibility. Professional responsibility. Civic responsibility. Corporate responsibility. Our responsibility to our family, to our neighbourhood, our country. Our responsibility to behave in a decent and civilised way. To help others. That is what this Party is all about.” Cameron said before he makes a decision he asks whether it will encourage or discourage responsibility. Cameron has talked about responsibility in his speeches before but it had added resonance after Brown had talked about the “age of irresponsibility” which the Conservatives say sums up Brown’s 11 years in power. Cameron said he could not prove he was ready to be PM – to say he was ready would be arrogant – the best he could do was to say who he is. He said his family was most important to him, that he was very patriotic, and that he was passionate about the Union. In a shot across the bows of Alex Salmond, he said he wanted to be the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, not of England. Cameron said the long-term was important and that if elected tough decisions would have to be made which he was ready for.
He then moved on to addressing the experience issue directly:
“What matters more than experience is character and judgment, and what you really believe needs to happen to make things right. I believe that to rebuild our economy, it's not more of the same we need, but change. To repair our broken society, it's not more of the same we need, but change. Experience is the excuse of the incumbent over the ages. Experience is what they always say when they try to stop change.”
These were some of his best lines as he linked the issue of experience with more of the same from tired governments which fear making the changes necessary because admitting change is needed would mean they would have to admit they were wrong. Cameron then gave an example of experience not being all its cracked up to be which was well received in the Conference hall:
“In 1979, James Callaghan had been Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Chancellor before he became Prime Minister. He had plenty of experience. But thank god we changed him for Margaret Thatcher.”
And then made a joke at Brown’s expense:
“Just think about it: if we listened to this argument about experience, we'd never change a government, ever. We'd have Gordon Brown as Prime Minister - for ever. I won’t go on; there are people up there in balconies…”
Cameron then shifted focus to what the country has received from the Gordon Brown experience during the past 11 years:
“Gordon Brown talks about his economic experience. The problem is, we have actually experienced his experience. We've experienced the massive increase in debt. We have experienced the huge rise in taxes. We experienced the folly of pretending that boom and bust could be ended.”
Finally, Cameron argued that the country did not need Brown’s experience; what it needed was real change:
“The risk is not in making a change. The risk is sticking with what you've got and expecting a different result. There is a simple truth for times like this. When you've taken the wrong road, you don't just keep going. You change direction - and that is what we need to do.”
It is a gamble by Cameron but he obviously believes that ultimately change will trump experience at the next general election.
Cameron then returned to the issue of the economy outlining what he saw as being at the heart of the financial crisis. He sad the ‘tap’ marked borrowing had been turned on and left on for far too long and that governments on both sides of the Atlantic had been guilty of believing the good times would go on forever. He also criticised bankers but reiterated his measured appeal that now was not the time to turn against them with left-wing zeal. Their time would come down the line, he said.
Cameron said Brown had made two bad decisions. 1) He had taken away the Bank of England’s powers to call time on debt back in 1997. 2) Government borrowing had got out of control after Brown became a spendaholic leaving the cupboard bare.
He said he believed in sound money and low taxes. Portraying the Conservatives as the party of prudence and economic stability, Cameron said he would restore the Bank of England’s powers removed by Brown, as well as financial responsibility and fiscal responsibility. He hinted at cuts in public spending saying he had asked all his Shadow Cabinet members to review every spending programme they had committed to and said big savings would be made from reforming the public services and that the Tories would establish an Office of Budget Responsibility so there could be no hiding place for governments and no fiddling of the figures.
In a dig at Brown, Cameron said he understood enterprise and that people created jobs, not governments. Brown, in his speech, said his government had created three million jobs. Even Brown has not made that many in the public sector and certainly has not made any in the private sector. Cameron said that Labour’s taxes and regulations had hurt business and that the Conservatives would cut corporation tax by 3p.
Leaving behind the economy for a second time, Cameron said he did not only want to be judged just by how he handled crises, but on two things: 1) the NHS and 2) “the long-term mission of the next Conservative government: to repair our broken society.”
He attacked Labour over their support for big government and signalled out David Miliband for particular criticism. Cameron said that in difficult times, Labour always argues for a bigger state. He said Miliband had been very arrogant for saying last week that unless government is on your side, you are on your own. He said for Labour there was just the state and the individual – nothing in between like families, faith groups etc. In a clever line, he said as far as Labour was concerned there was no such thing as society – clever because Labour has for years thrown this line at the Conservatives after it was first used by Margaret Thatcher.
Cameron said that the problem was not leadership (Brown or anybody else) in Labour; it was Labour. He accused the governing party of treating people like children; never trusting them.
Cameron said politics needed to be cleaned up. He said it was not a party issue but a Westminster one. He said he had shown leadership by standing up to vested interests, namely his MPs and MEPs over expenses. He then linked to another reason for the destruction of faith in politics, that is, when manifesto commitments are not honoured. This allowed him to throw some red meat to the party faithful by saying Conservatives will campaign in the European elections for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
Cameron moved onto the NHS claiming Labour had blown its chance and proclaimed: “We are now the party of the NHS and that is the way it’s going to stay.” Labour will not like that one bit.
Returning to his theme of change, he said he would be as radical in social reform as Thatcher had been in economic reform and pledged this is how the Conservatives would fix the ‘Broken Society’. There has been some talk recently that Cameron had been pulling back from his ‘Broken Society’ assessment of the country, qualifying it, but he displaced any such notions in his speech saying those who disputed society was broken must be living in another world.
The Tory leader then sought to show his progressive credentials. He said society could be repaired but traditional approaches had only ever addressed symptoms not causes. He said the Tories were not an anti-state party. In the 20th Century state interventions had done much good. However, in the 21st century, there were diminishing returns to state interventions because they did not address the underlying causes of problems. He called the ‘family’ the “best welfare system there is” and the “first line of defence against social breakdown.” He said strengthening schools was the second line of defence and welfare reform the third. He said working together with Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader, the Tories had become the party for “social justice.” Again Labour would not like this claim. He then repeated his claim that the Conservatives were the true progressives and that Conservative means would deliver progressive ends such as ending child poverty. By this point I expect Labour supporters would have become apoplectic with rage with Cameron driving his ‘tanks’ on to areas they consider their own.
One key message of Cameron’s speech was that he was leading a united party unlike Brown. He even began his speech with a light-hearted joke that they were in the Symphony Hall in Birmingham and that it was good to know everyone in his party was playing the same tune – the clear implication being that this is not the case in the disunited Labour Party. Presentationally the message was rammed home with the entire Cabinet positioned behind Cameron on the stage. The TV cameras showed Cameron flanked by his top two – Hague and Osborne. He returned to this theme several times, especially at the end of his speech, declaring that his party was a “changed party. A united party.” Cameron said the Conservatives were “united in spirit and purpose.”
He acknowledged that the task for his party was to take people with them saying his plan for change involved rebuilding the battered economy, renewing the bureaucratised NHS and repairing Britain’s broken society. However, Cameron was keen not to raise expectations too high saying these were “difficult times” with “no overnight transformations.” He said he was “a man with a plan, not a miracle cure.”
Cameron then brought his speech to a rousing, passionate end by offering an optimistic appraisal of the future and saying only the character, leadership and judgement that the Conservative Party offers (in other words what he offers and Brown does not) could deliver the change the country needs:
“These difficult times need leadership, yes. They need character and judgment. The leadership to unite your party and build a strong team. The character to stick to your guns and not bottle it when times get tough. The judgment to understand the mistakes that have been made and to offer the country change. Leadership, character, judgment. That's what Britain needs at a time like this and that's what this party now offers. I know we are living in difficult times but I am still optimistic because I have faith in human nature… In our remarkable capacity to innovate, to experiment, to overcome obstacles and to find a way through difficulties… whether those problems are created by man or nature. We can and will come through. We always do. Not because of our government. But because of the people of Britain. Because of what you do - because of the work you do, the families you raise, the jobs you create… because of your attitude, your confidence and your determination. So because we are united… Because we have had the courage to change… Because we have the fresh answers to the challenges of our age. I believe we now have the opportunity, and more than that the responsibility, to bring our country together. Together in the face of this financial crisis. Together in determination that we will come through it. Together in the hope, the belief that better times will lie ahead.”
All-in-all, the speech was very good. It received rapturous applause as one would expect. He adopted the right Prime Ministerial tone for these austere times but refused to allow it to limit the scope of his speech and finished on an optimistic, uplifting note that was designed to offer the country hope and show he was the man to deliver much needed change. It might be criticised for not offering anything new in terms of policy pledges but Cameron sought instead to offer a detailed critique of the past 11 years, show the direction the Conservatives would take and their priorities for office, and importantly, to show himself as a Prime Minister-in-waiting who might not have the experience but has the values, character and judgement which is what matters which matters most. It was astonishing that the speech was 10 minutes longer than Brown’s yet felt so much shorter. Whereas Brown’s badly began to flag two-thirds of the way through losing structure and the audience’s attention, Cameron, like Blair used to do, was able to keep his voice and words interesting – a key advantage Cameron holds over Brown.
