Since the election, Theresa May has often mentioned how her personal mission about building ‘a country that works for everyone’ failed to shine through during the election campaign. I agree with this analysis as it could’ve substantially helped counter claims from Labour on austerity and the Conservatives not being on the side of ordinary working people. The Conservative Party has a lot to say about what it has achieved in tackling long term barriers holding back social justice in Britain in the last 7 years but put on the spot, May failed to detail them. For example, it is the Conservative Party in government that has banned exclusive zero hours contracts; a blanket ban on all zero hours contracts as Labour proposes is populist and wrong as zero hours contracts do offer flexibility to some workers and small and medium-sized enterprises. It is Conservatives in government that pushed for the Lammy Review into racial disparities in the criminal justice system and the review by Matthew Taylor into modern employment practices, the gig economy and workers’ rights. Conservatives put into practice the Modern Slavery Act and cracked down on tax avoidance and tax evasion to the tune of tens of billions of pounds also putting it at the heart of the UK’S G8 Presidency in 2013. None of these things were achieved by Labour in 13 years of government. Corbyn’s Labour cannot dissociate themselves from the record of the last Labour government however different they may be to Blair. On austerity, any government at the time would have made cuts; Gordon Brown in 2010 and Ed Miliband in 2015 both proposed a similar level of cuts to public spending as David Cameron and didn’t pledge to reverse a single cutback. Also, in 2015, public satisfaction in the overall quality of public services was greater than in 2010, delivering value for money.

On Brexit, there are people today who feel that Jeremy Corbyn may do a better job in the negotiations than the government. For all the faults with the Conservatives, I trust the team that negotiated arguably the most successful British peacetime coalition government ever and rescued the British economy from the doldrums of the financial crisis in 2010. Labour under Gordon Brown and Tony Blair never stood up for Britain in Europe, quickly signing up to the Lisbon Treaty and failing to put in transitional immigration controls available at the time, and Jeremy Corbyn’s desire to secure the rights of European nationals living in Britain without a concomitant guarantee of British nationals’ rights in European countries seems ludicrous and frankly one must ask, whose side is he really on? Labour’s position on Brexit is ambiguous for political advantage (Keir Starmer was recently overheard labelling his party’s Brexit stance as ‘constructive ambiguity’) and it is the government in precarious circumstances that is making tough, unpopular decisions. It isn’t clever to want to sign up to any deal with the EU at any price; no deal is better than a bad deal and Britain should be prepared to walk away from a punishment deal. Britain was a global, successful trading nation before the EU and can be outside.

Many people will criticise the Conservatives for having called a snap election, however, asking the verdict of the people, in the scheme of things, isn’t really a major mistake especially when compared to calamities such as Iraq. Also, it is often those very people who criticise government policy at every opportunity that are the loudest critics of the calling of an early election. Surely people would’ve been happy to put their arguments for the country out for election?

True Conservatives believe in equality of opportunity, that each person should be able to fulfil their potential and go as far as their talents can take them. The Conservative Party believes in making Britain the world’s Great Meritocracy. Complete equality, as the left desires, is always an illusion; naturally different people will have different talents and different physical strengths. Complete equality, as the left desires, is undesirable; because to create such a society would require extreme state intervention to redistribute wealth of the kind never seen before in history and which has never ever succeeded. A society which is completely equal lacks innovation, and the incentive to strive to be better. Instead, the best pathway to a more equal society is the pragmatic Conservative way of providing a ladder of opportunity by which people are able to lift themselves. Conservatives strongly believe in government intervention to tackle injustices within society that hold people back- investing in skills and education such as free schools, providing alternative pathways to further and higher education such as apprenticeships and new technical qualifications, providing fair protections for those in work as recommended by the review into modern employment by Matthew Taylor and for those in uncompetitive free markets such as energy and banking; because truly free markets are when government intervenes to correct market failure and take on vested interests.

Conservatives believe in society and that individuals have duties and obligations to one another in their community. Humans have always required the sense of belonging that results from family, friends and locality. On social issues, there is thus a desire to conserve traditions and respect culture. Unfettered liberalism and globalisation, which can erode national solidarity and ties, must be avoided because it is the nation state above all which humans have always been attached to throughout history. Although one can find an endless list of experts who espouse the net economic benefits of mass immigration, this overlooks the lack of cultural cohesion and community solidarity which many working class voters have felt as a consequence of successive governments’ preference for a multiculturalism that hasn’t worked in practice. They never remember being consulted on this vast change. Immigration and the issue of national identity is the big elephant in the room for the Labour party for which it has no consistent and credible response. Labour cannot just hope to change the electorate or wish the problem away. Similarly, on the issue of grammar schools, although experts cite study after study that detail how detrimental grammar schools are to people from the lowest income backgrounds, Conservatives have always believed that society cannot be reduced to science; human instinct and knowledge matters more in the end. I believe the expansion of grammar schools is progressive; transforming the life chances of talented children from low income backgrounds, provided sufficient accessibility is mandated by government. A good example is the schools of King Edward VI in Birmingham whereby there are lower pass marks and quotas for disadvantaged students. Free trade and comparative advantage as advocated by Adam Smith and David Ricardo are highly important for economic prosperity but there are times when governments should intervene to protect national jobs and industry- such as the dumping of Chinese steel in the EU and to protect jobs. The rise of Donald Trump’s ‘regulated’ approach to free trade is an example of the ascendancy and popularity of this form of politics. Those who argue that by leaving the EU’s Single Market Britain is turning its back from free trade are wrong; in fact the EU is one of the most protectionist organizations on the planet; imposing punitive tariffs on countries exporting inside the bloc. By leaving the Single Market and Customs Union, Britain is free to take down tariffs on the rest of the world.

Conservatism is about pragmatism and the common good. There is an emphasis on tackling long-term problems head on, beyond short term electoral cycles. That is why the epidemic of low wage, low skilled employment in Britain cannot simply be tackled by gimmicks such as increased minimum wages and increased spending on tax credits that just delays the problem and kicks the can down the road for future generations. Theresa May understands this and that is why she commissioned Matthew Taylor, a former advisor to Tony Blair, to conduct a review of modern employment practices in Britain, listening to businesses and employees across Britain. She also initiated a review into ethnic discrimination in public services as soon as she became Prime Minister. Taylor recommended creating a new category of ‘dependent contractors’ for those working in the gig economy for firms such as Uber and Deliveroo and greater rights for the self-employed among other recommendations. Only since the Conservatives have come to power have we seen a greater focus on apprenticeships as credible alternative routes to careers than university with 2.5 million apprentices being created since 2010. Theresa May has also vowed to invest in technical education with the creation of new ‘T’ level technical qualifications rivalling A levels in the future. The lack of technical skills is a crucial reason why Britain’s manufacturing sector lags behind European competitors. Britain is one of very few countries in Europe that does not have any legislation requiring businesses to have some form of worker representation on company boards. This creates poor workplace relations with employees’ skills not being utilised effectively and discontent with the management and direction of the company. Businesses ultimately succeed due to people, customers and employees, and no incorporation of employees in determining the direction of a company could lead to low productivity. Theresa May has often talked about changing this and putting worker representation on company boards, publishing the pay ratio between the average paid and highest paid employee of a company and mandating binding shareholder votes on executive pay. Unfortunately, even today the postcode where you are born is still one of the best predictors of your future income. Investment in early years such as childcare, nursery education and primary schools is crucial in changing this. Since 2010, the government set up the Pupil Premium, a fund providing extra money for disadvantaged pupils, and free school meals for primary school children. The doubling of free childcare for 3–4-year olds by the government since 2015 has also enabled greater access to the labour market for parents, especially women, and more professional childcare. However much more needs to be done in this area, especially concerning childcare for 0–2-year olds where there is a gap in provision. The expansion of free schools (schools which are free from local authority control) has enabled greater flexibility in the educational provision for different children who may be suited to different educational methods although it doesn’t go far enough.

The Labour party and the left advocates endless sympathy and ever-increasing welfare to those looking for work and on low incomes. However, this does no favours to the poorest and least skilled who feel a sense of entitlement. In countries such as China and Singapore, the skill levels of the population are much higher than in the UK. In those countries, there is only a minimal social security net and a culture of hard work, persistence and independence. After 13 years of a Labour government in the UK, the tax credits bill increased from approximately £8 Billion to £30 Billion whilst poverty increased over the same period. I am not arguing against welfare spending, after all it is a crucial safety net for those who may fall into unemployment or suffer from longer term disabilities which society must help, but the policy of thinking that ever-increasing welfare is a solution to the UK’s endemic problems of low productivity, low wages and high long-term unemployment is a mirage. In 2010, the UK Government had the highest budget deficit in its peacetime history and realistically welfare spending, by far the government’s biggest single component of expenditure, had to be reduced whichever government was in power if NHS spending and other areas were to be protected. Indeed, at the 2015 UK Election, Labour leader Ed Miliband led his party into the election without pledging to reverse a single cutback made by the Coalition between 2010 and 2015
At the heart of Conservatism lies a commitment to ensuring future generations can do better than the last, emphasizing long term thinking. The continuing commitment by the Conservatives to eradicate the budget deficit and achieve a surplus is driven by the belief that our grandchildren shouldn’t be asked to pick up the burden of debt left by this generation. For every year the country runs a budget deficit, the national debt increases and the last time there was a budget surplus was in 2001. Surely it is about time the country started to pay off rather than add to its debts after 10 years of economic growth? Similarly, Conservatives are committed to protecting and improving the environment for future generations. Conservatives recognise the huge danger that manmade climate change poses to humanity and the need for action now. Conservatives in government since 2010 developed the UK’s first ever Green Investment Bank, initiated an audit of government and public-sector energy use and helped achieve a vast reduction in carbon emissions between 2010 and 2015. The Conservative government is strongly committed to international cooperation such as the Paris Climate Accord.

The left often talks about desirable outcomes but Conservatives provide the means to achieve those outcomes. The current Labour leadership advocates the destruction of capitalism; however, this fails to recognise the nearly 1 Billion people worldwide lifted out of poverty since 1990 as a result of capitalism and the vast reductions in prices of consumer goods for those in the developed world. Business, profit and competition have been core parts of humanity for hundreds of years since the Roman era. Competition creates a drive for efficiency and innovation and profit rallies workers in a company around a clear aim.

There are clearly problems with capitalism as usual and at the heart of Conservatism is recognition for the need to reform capitalism, correcting market failures and enhancing opportunity for all; Edmund Burke, a prominent 18th century Conservative thinker, once said that at the heart of conservatism and the desire to conserve is recognition of the need for reform. Thus, Conservatives wanting to conserve capitalism must be prepared to reform it and that means intervening in failing markets. Conservatives should be willing to regulate anti-competitive markets such as monopolies and oligopolies, ensure that perverse incentives such as moral hazard and information asymmetries are not allowed to persist and that negative externalities are internalised.

Although Theresa May finds herself in a difficult predicament following the 2017 UK Election having lost her majority, the beliefs she espoused about building ‘a country that works for everyone’ on the steps of Downing Street when she first became Prime Minister on 13th July 2016 and in her 2016 Conservative Party Conference Speech must not be abandoned. It is inevitable that May will not lead the Conservative Party into another General Election and will probably be deposed of by her party shortly after the completion of the Brexit negotiations. However, if she wants her legacy to not be completely overshadowed by Brexit, I urge her to be bold and radical, after all she has nothing to lose. It may even leave Labour on the back foot.