Tories must prove they are working for the public good – or face oblivion

Without drastic action, the Conservative Party could be wiped out as a parliamentary force at the next election. Here’s why, says Hereford MP Jesse Norman

Jesse Norman: ‘Is it racist to say that recent levels of immigration have made it harder to see a doctor?’ (Rex)

To say that the 2024 election was a disaster for the Conservative Party tests the art of political euphemism to its limits.

Scan the scene: one or two tattered flags still flying. The dead brought back in cartloads. And in a few places, blinking, wounded and shellshocked, survivors.

It has created a wasteland on the centre-right of British politics. Far from bouncing back, it is quite possible that without drastic remedial action the Conservative parliamentary party will be wiped out altogether come the next election in 2028-9.

If it wishes to avoid this fate, it will need a deep intellectual renewal as well as a practical one.

The root issue is one of core values, authenticity and legitimacy. The Conservative Party needs to earn a measure of trust and belief, to show that it is serious, competent and orientated towards the public good for a vast swathe of the people of this country. But to do that it needs to know what it stands for.

For example: If someone shouts “Jews matter, too” at a protest about Gaza, should they be protected as uttering free speech – or arrested as a threat to public order? When, if ever, should people born as biologically male be allowed to use public lavatories, or sent to prisons, which have been historically reserved for women? Is it racist to say that recent levels of immigration have made it harder to see a doctor?

The stakes are raised when, as some Conservatives did during the process of Brexit, protestors or their political leaders claim that their position represents "the will of the people", or when they anoint themselves as “the voice of the people”.

They are raised again when sections of the media denounce their supposed opponents as “enemies of the people”, as the Daily Mail famously described three senior judges on its front page in 2016.

The claim that something is "the will of the people", taken literally, is invariably bogus. Why should we think that such a large number of people could ever have a single will?

A natural answer to this arose in the context of the Brexit referendum. This was to say that a large number of people had been asked to vote on a particular issue, they had done so, and a clear majority had voted for one outcome and not the other. This example, in fact, proves the opposite of what is suggested. Yes, there was a decisive result, in that 52 per cent voted to leave the EU and 48 per cent voted to remain. But that would at best be the will, not of the people, but of 52 per cent of those consulted.

To say this is not to take a partisan position on Brexit. Exactly the same would be true if the vote had gone the other way.

The point is not to refight the Brexit referendum. It is to illustrate what a vacuous and dangerous phrase "the will of the people" is. It is a political slogan, and as such it is part of an attempt to win by emotion what may not be winnable by calm discussion. This is not to say that the public concern behind this emotive language is always unwarranted.

Conservatives will naturally and rightly rejoice at the achievements of great heroes from Elizabeth I to Winston Churchill. But the twin obligations to attend to context and to understand their own society require real conservatives in particular not to retreat into some imagined insular and monocultural past, but to acknowledge the range of peoples and traditions from which Britain has been formed, for example, the complex and sometimes disastrous legacies of the British empire.

Conservatives cannot simply pick and choose what they like from the past. In seeking the best, they cannot ignore the many histories of British discrimination, domination and injustice to others.

In the face of Brexit, with many of its members lacking any deep immersion in conservative history or ideas, the Conservative parliamentary party became consumed by internal disagreements and factional divisions, exacerbated by leadership elections. Very little of this had to do with real conservatism.

Lines like "I don’t recognise my country any more" – heard on both sides of the Brexit debate – may be code for xenophobia or racism. But very often they are a lament for the loss of the distinctive British values that the speakers have traditionally associated… with this country.

One useful definition of a conservative is “someone who regards institutions as wiser than individuals”. Respecting the constitution means, among much else, setting one’s face against referendums… a settled disposition to curb the creeping presidentialism of the office of prime minister… and respecting the civil service and a free press.

Conservatives should make a point of treating the general public like grown-ups. That means thinking through policy positions, avoiding bandwagons, offering explanations rather than slogans… and seeking to dial down public emotions, not inflame them.

Finally, the Conservative Party should rediscover its own duties as a political party. The purpose of political parties includes recruiting people of talent and experience drawn from across the nation as a whole. And to do so, not simply as a vehicle for those individuals’ personal ambition, but to channel that ambition into the public service. The opportunity now exists for the Conservative Party to rededicate itself to public service.

Provided it can avoid annihilation – by no means a certainty – the likelihood is that cabinet ministers and even prime ministers will be drawn from its next generation of recruits.

The Conservative Party could do worse than to include two specific tests for potential candidates: demonstrate that you were a real conservative before you sought public office; and show us that you made a meaningful commitment to public service before you sought public office. If the answer to either of these questions is No, then the candidate should be thanked and gently encouraged to apply again in the future.

This may seem frivolous, but it is not. Now more than ever, the Conservative Party needs to be serious in the way it treats the British constitution, in the way it treats the public, in recognising and addressing the deep challenges this country faces, and in the way it conducts itself. That begins with people who know what real conservatism is, and who are personally committed to it.

Jesse Norman is the Conservative MP for Hereford and South Herefordshire