Let us suppose the next General Election takes place in nearly five years time – in the spring or summer of 2029. It could be earlier, of course. But Labour have an overall majority of 172. That would make it hard to show a need to go early, and as Theresa May found out, calling an unnecessary General Election can annoy the voters.
If the Conservatives have by then restored their identity as a party of freedom – championing competition, free enterprise, home ownership and a small state – what credibility will that have?
The Labour Party will probably still be banging on about the downfall of Liz Truss. They will argue that proves the need for pragmatism over ideology.
The broadcasters, who are usually baffled by such notions, can hardly be expected to present a bold free market alternative to Labour’s technocratic mush sympathetically to the public. Experts will be wheeled out to say an ever bigger state is ‘inevitable’.
Some voters will wonder if the Conservatives really mean it. Others will be sceptical over whether such an approach is realistic. Would such radicalism be risky? How do we know it would work?
However, the good news is that by 2029 there should be plenty of international examples to point to. The next Canadian elections are due to take place by October next year. At the moment, the Conservatives have opinion poll leads ranging from 17% to 22%. Their leader Pierre Poilievre is the firm favourite to become Canada’s next Prime Minister.
Poilievre is a libertarian whose focus on increasing the housing supply has particular appeal for young Canadians. Under Justin Trudeau, housing costs have doubled. Poilievre argues that demand was pumped up by immigration and the money supply. At the same time, construction of new homes was held back by tight restrictions of housing permits. He calls for regulations to be lifted and to ‘sell off six thousand federal buildings and thousands of acres of federal land to build, build, build’. He wants to scrap the carbon tax, which increases building costs.
My hunch is that Poilievre will get the chance to implement this bold programme, and by 2029 it will already have made a significant difference. By contrast, I suspect housing in the UK will be even less affordable than it is now. That will give the British Conservatives the chance to reassert their credentials as the party of home ownership and to point to Canada to show what can be done.
Argentina offers a more dramatic source of inspiration. Javier Milei, the economist and rock musician, was elected that country’s president last October. Dismayed by corruption, poverty and hyperinflation, the electorate were prepared not only to throw out their socialist government but to embrace someone offering a drastic change of direction. He campaigned waving a chainsaw to give emphasis to his commitment to reducing the size of the public sector. In a video, he ripped cards with the names of government departments that he proposed to abolish off a board, declaring ‘Afuera!‘, meaning ‘Get out!’
Naturally, there is some irony that the clearest experiment in Thatcherism currently taking place can be seen in Argentina. But in some ways Milei has gone further than Thatcher. Certainly faster. Subsidies halted, regulations lifted, the brakes slammed onto the money supply. Inflation is so high it is measured monthly. Yet it is down sharply – from 25% in December, the month Milei took office to 4.6% in June. The budget deficit has been eliminated.
After a painful adjustment, the Argentine economy has started to grow. Milei has managed to bring in an astonishing reform programme despite his insurgent libertarian party not having anything like a majority in Parliament – a situation likely to improve in legislative elections next year.
Suppose that by 2029 we are contemplating an economic miracle in Argentina? If Milei’s people have escaped poverty to enjoy unprecedented affluence in double-quick time, I don’t think he will be shy talking about it. He combines academic rigour with indignation towards his adversaries and great warmth and showmanship.
Rather more quietly, a conservative/libertarian coalition came to power in New Zealand at around the same time as Milei. The first Budget of the new Kiwi Government, presented in May, sets out billions of savings in public spending without cutting front-line services. This allows room for lower taxes while eliminating the budget deficit. A more flexible approach to net zero is also being taken, with the lifting of pointless ‘green taxes’ which penalised New Zealand’s farmers compared to those from other countries.
Portugal, among the poorest countries in Europe, also has a new Conservative Government – among other things, it is cutting the corporate tax in the country from 21% to 15% over the next three years. Will we see its fortunes turn around?
Finland returned a staunchly Conservative coalition Government last year. Again it has started delivering on lower tax, financed by lower state spending.
Germany has elections due next year. The Christian Democrats have a huge poll lead. They are much more distinctively Conservative now than they were under Angela Merkel – for instance, their objections to the excessive costs of net zero. So they might prove another interesting case study.
Then, as you may have noticed, we have elections coming up in the United States this November. Regardless of who wins, I think the most useful comparisons are between states. Florida versus New York. Or California versus Texas. Where is woke indoctrination in schools avoided? Where is it embraced? Where is wealth creation rewarded? Where is it shunned? Where is law and order maintained? Where do the police retreat in the face of mob rule?
Doubtless, there will be unexpected triumphs and disasters for Conservatives across the globe. However, there will surely be no shortage of inspiration in the coming years. Rather more than Margaret Thatcher was able to highlight in the grim period before the 1979 election when she was much more of an international pioneer.
The depleted Conservative forces in our own country are bound to face plenty of sneering – especially if they offer the sort of radical programme that is required. Being able to show how such measures have proved effective in practice will be much more convincing than any claims relying on theory alone.
Click here to subscribe to our daily briefing – the best pieces from CapX and across the web.
CapX depends on the generosity of its readers. If you value what we do, please consider making a donation.
