My purpose to-night is to say something about the importance of ideas in politics; then to draw on Raymond's own ideas and link them to what I have been doing in Rwanda before returning to the importance of Raymond's idea.
The current prevailing political wisdom is that image is more important than ideas: it's all about how you appear on television; and that elections are only to be won by capturing the 'centre ground', eschewing anything that smacks of a philosophy or right wing ideology. -If you want philosophy then go to the library.
In his recent essay In Praise of Ideology Maurice Saatchi -who masterminded our PR for the 1979 election including that magnificent poster 'Labour isn't Working'- attributes this nonsense largely to an analogy between politics and Chess, where it is always advantageous to take your opponent's centre pawn and to control the geometric centre of the board.
But, politics isn't Chess.
The problem with political parties that are only concerned with image and contest only the centre ground is that they increasingly look and sound the same and voters quickly cotton-on that there might not be much difference between them and adjust their behaviour accordingly. In the 1950 general election turnout was 84%; at the last general election it was only just over 60%; In 1950, when the population was much smaller, fully 3.5 million citizens were members of a political party; today it is well under a million.
I think politics is much more like a military campaign, after all, we so often speak of fighting an election. So, listen to this wisdom from General William Slim's Defeat into Victory –it was required reading when I was a Sandhurst- in which he describes first our defeat by, and then the our victory over the Japanese in Burma, the campaign of the 14th Army, so often called the 'forgotten army'. Here he looks back to identify why things went so wrong at the outset.
"….Of these causes, one affected all our efforts and contributed much to turning our defeat into disaster – the failure… to give the forces in the field a clear strategic object for the campaign. As a result, our plans had to be based on the rather nebulous, short-term idea of holding ground –we were not even sure what ground or for what purpose."
Well it sounds a bit like Afghanistan – but let's not get side-tracked down that alley.
The first principle of war is selection and maintenance of the aim. If you are being asked to fight you need first to know what it is you are fighting for.
So, what is the aim? What is it that we do believe?
It was at this point that I planned an erudite discourse on the history of the Tory Party and what it has stood for. I find it fascinating but I would send you to sleep. I've thought of a better way: Consider this question.
Raymond was a generous friend and supporter of the Conservative Party. So, what did he think was the aim?
We all know his philosophy: "you can if you try". A noble philosophy stretching back 600 years BC to Zoroaster who put it slightly differently. He said:
"if you would go high, then use your own legs"
Of the two, I prefer Raymond's formulation but it is the same philosophy of individual liberty and responsibility that demands everyone have the opportunity to work hard in order to realise their dream and their potential. Of course, this philosophy is intimately connected with economics and the creation of wealth because nothing stifles liberty more than the complete absence of money. Many things follow naturally from it such as low taxation and minimal regulation.
There is a problem, however: a perception arose and gained currency that our concern was only with individuals and individual wealth, that we neglected serving society and the common good. This is absurd. A rising tide lifts all ships. So many of our great entrepreneurs, have also been great philanthropists. Raymond, himself a supreme example of rugged individualist capitalism, was a most community minded businessman. He was justifiably proud of his company's service to the community. Many have cause to be thankful to him for his generosity and the opportunities it opened up to them.
So often I have visited some local voluntary organisation and seen people working hard, giving everything to improve the lives of others less fortunate, and then you come across something that they could not possibly have afforded, and they tell you that Raymond Brown gave it to them or built it for them. We are rightly grateful to people like Raymond, Ron, his board of directors, and indeed all the employees and shareholders. And to so many companies like them.
The Good Samaritan would have been a fat lot of use had he not had the substance to put his hand in his pocket and pay for the care of the victim that he had rescued.
But however unfair or absurd, we have to accept that there is a perception that we do not care beyond our narrow focus on the creation of individual wealth. And that the Conservative Party is a party only for the rich. And we have to work to dispel that perception. It is for this reason among others that we have organised for over 100 volunteers to go, at their own expense, to Rwanda in each of the last 3 years, one of the poorest countries on Earth. A country scarred by genocide that saw 1 million people butchered in less than 100 days – a higher rate of productivity than achieved by Hitler's death camps. We've sent medics to treat the sick, to train others, and to educate about public health; we've sent lawyers to establish principles of contract and property rights, without which none would invest; we've sent entrepreneurs and businessmen to establish links and share ideas, and help with micro- finance projects. We even raised sponsorship for hundreds of footballs and took a team of coaches to tour the country in a nation that is football mad.
Undoubtedly the main effort in the last couple of years, and the one in which I was personally involved, has been the teaching project. Teaching Primary school teachers because they are themselves now required to teach all lessons- whatever the subject- in English.
Rwanda wants to join the Commonwealth and be part of the English speaking world. They have already joined the English speaking East Africa Economic Community and they want to excel in new information technologies in which the English language dominates.
They admire us, they admire our values and they want to emulate us; they want be as prosperous as we are, and they know they can, if they try.
Of course we should help. Last year about 50 of us went out to teach a two week course to about 2000 English teachers; this year we extended that to about the same number of teachers of all subjects. I make no bones about it: it is blooming hard work, perhaps the hardest work I've done.
Why do we do it?
We do it to give the lie to the absurd notion that Conservatives don't care. But why then haven't we made more of it? why no publicity campaign? Why haven't we been shouting about it?
I remember a line in Arthur Miller's play Death of a Salesman
When Willy Loman the salesman discovers that his neighbour Charley's lawyer son is about to take a case to the US supreme court. Willy demands to know why Charley he hasn't been telling everyone. Charley replies "he don't need to, he's gonna do it!"
We do it to remind ourselves that it isn't true that Conservatives don't care. I remember back in 1996 before I was elected Raymond invited me to a Rotary lunch and afterwards he took me aside and warned me that he thought the party was losing its way, that Labour was stealing some of our clothes. Nobody can steal your clothes unless you first take them off.
And we do it to build up in our party a growing group of young people who are passionately committed to tackling social problems and poverty. Of, course Tories are against poverty. It's just that we believe in doing it the way Raymond did: by creating wealth; rather that attacking profit as if it were something anti-social.
And, of course, benefits flow both ways. Our visits to Rwanda coincide with Umuganda: the last Saturday of the month when everyone from the President down has to put in a morning's work on some collective community project. Accordingly, 100 of us went off to put in some heavy labour on a drainage ditch.
But think about it. What an excellent idea. I get letters all the time demanding the return of National Service. I still hope, with some confidence, that the next Conservative Government will begin implementing a return of a form of National Service. It will be expensive and we have no money. Umuganda , however, has an enormous appeal to me: it would cost little to set up and organise; and it would afford the opportunity to many to get out from behind their video game consoles and experience the liberation of some hard work. It could give them some pride and self-respect, a novel feeling for many. It could give them a glimpse of their own potential. It might teach them the most important lesson in life: that
You can if you try. |
