By Amber Bereznyckyj, History and Creative Writing student at the New College of the Humanities
As shortages worsened and diesel shopping became an all-day task; a haven of tory shenanigans was commencing in the Central Convention Centre in Manchester. There was a general leftie swing from the younger Conservative members, whereas the commentary on the leader’s keynote speech has been intriguing.
Most fringe events had a panel of experts; not exclusively conservative which was refreshing. The events focused around ‘low pay, low skill, low production’ and the matter of nuclear power, the argument being that we are on the way to net zero; but we will still need to become ‘less dependent on hydrocarbons from abroad’. A focus on social mobility and education was also present. The need for more efficiency during transitional periods ‘between health and social care,’ education and the labour market became apparent in order to re-skill.
Jonathan Pie met the PM’s keynote speech with an underwhelmed response but within the room it was certainly a party rally, starting with all the PM’s achievements via an inspirational video edited similar to that seen in a marvel movie. As ever, his speech was filled with Boris-esque metaphors, playful jeering at the opposition and the need to build back better, though no one got how this would happen from the speech. Despite the conference being filled with debate over using nuclear to subside the fuel crisis and universities to bolster vocational avenues into careers, many at home felt uninformed by the PMs keynote speech because while it celebrated the vision of levelling up, the consequences of Brexit are finally hitting the shelves of England. All the answers are there but a vision isn’t enough at this late stage.
One can easily compare notions put forward in the Keynote Speech to the general experience within the conference. For example, Boris Johnston made the comparison of University Degrees between York and Doncaster. He stated that the disparity in Doncaster was an ‘appalling waste of potential’. Here ‘pareto improvements’ had been the basis to the levelling up agenda. Trialing policies towards social mobility and net zero goals, such as ‘4000 clean buses’. Undeniably, there will be negative consequences which is why there is disillusionment surrounding levelling-up. Regardless, the general attitude within the conference was a drive to improve social mobility, both with Boris Johnston’s’ educational policies and welcoming of younger, more diverse individuals through the CCHQ internship.
There has been a healthy debate around progressive conservatism within the party. After the announcement that the LGB Alliance were invited to the conference (a charity notoriously accused of being anti-trans and binary accepting) there was clear discomfort. However, the LGBT+ Conservatives made it clear that those ideals were not shared by their committee and hoped to show that being LGBTQIA+ was no longer mutually exclusive with Conservatism. They showed this symbolically by taking section 28 during the convention, resembling Thatcher’s ‘Section 28’ policy against promoting homosexual relationships in schools which the PM sought to repeal as Mayor of London).
Despite this, the conference gave a general feeling that traditional conservatism still held great influence over policy. This was seen through the Friends of Israel social which, while encouraging a two-nation solution, saw strong defence as an inevitable reality. However, the inner circle rode a fine line throughout the week, trying not to alienate the older nationalist Tories and traditionally Conservative South. This is particularly seen through the PM’s keynote speech.
His mention of the Churchill controversy during the pandemic is a prime example of catering to traditional conservatism. Stating that contemporaries were trying to ‘edit’ , ‘attack’ and ‘deny’ national history by revealing evidence that Churchill was racist to the general public, he failed to mention that academics have openly discussed Churchill’s open racism for many years. Frankly, this was a dangerous attempt to validate Britain’s narrative as a heroic one. Given how political biases have already polluted the public’s social memory of our colonial past; it is crucial that the movement continues for the betterment of our children’s education.
It was also widely agreed that our children’s education is the key to Boris Johnson’s aim of a high pay, high skill, high productivity economy, with his linking of this to crime another example of catering to the traditional conservative; ultimately ‘betraying’ those children in the lowest socio-economic backgrounds. He further stated that while some will be imprisoned in the UK’s ‘one-way’ criminal system ‘others will not’. He intended on ‘toughening sentences’ because levelling up meant ‘fighting crime’. Low crime is important but the PM openly relating the transition from education to the ‘one-way’ prison system we have; is surely contradicting his views on social mobility. He understands that once you get a record it’s difficult to get back out due to our ‘ratchet’ system and yet doesn’t relate this to the poverty cycle and consequently as an obstacle to levelling-up. Perhaps reforming the justice system is equally as important to avoiding the irreversible path of low opportunity as a student, low pay as a young adult and low support as an offender which leaves most with little option other than to return to drug-related offences or theft. The PM speaks much like a royal navy advert ‘if you can steal a dog’; well if the poorest in society could afford to live and not be stunted for future employment after the first offence, even children as young as 13 or 14, then that would not be the case.
Overall, one could argue that the Government has a very clear but rigid view on how to level-up. Although it would be positive to see this being carried out; with the recent plans to increase national insurance and the ten-year estimation for levelling-up – this is doubtful. In the PM’s speech, he stated that the answer to his goal of high pay, high skill, high production was to ‘control immigration’ despite being in the middle of a supply chain crisis due to immigration issues and Brexit. It seems as though Johnson is playing the long game and with eleven years in power and a divided Labour party; who could blame him?