How the Tories can win over a new

generation
BY A N DR E W WI L LS H I R E / 11 JU LY 2 017

Copied from article on https://reaction.life

When the 6th Duke of Westminster was asked what advice hed give to
young entrepreneurs, he replied: Make sure they have an ancestor who was
a very close friend of William the Conqueror. He was being ironic.

When, on these pages, Sir John Wheeler mused about policies to help attract
young people to conservatism, he said: Parents and grandparents with
property and assets are sometimes in a position to make gifts of cash but this
is limited to 3,000 a year. Why not make this 20,000?

And so, I must respectfully disagree with Sir John; the truth is that, for many
in the country, his proposed route to wealth is as improbable as the Dukes.
Today 20,000 is roughly what is left after tax from the UK median annual
salary. How many people can simply gift a years salary?

Or imagine what Labours attack machine would make of an inheritance tax

cut in a week when the usurious interest on student loans, the public sector
pay-cap and concerns about the Grenfell Tower tragedy were all in the news?
I find it hard to conceive of a policy an IHT cut more likely to result in
Jeremy Corbyn being carried shoulder-high into Downing Street, unless it
were to require nurses to go fox-hunting in exchange for their pay-rise.
It is true that many older people own their own property outright, and are
probably relieved to have paid off the mortgage after 30 years of hard graft.
But releasing equity sounds so harmless, doesnt it? As though you could
slice off a small portion of your bungalow and sell it to a friendly local
merchant, passing the cash on to your children with smiles all round. In
reality, it means taking on the burden of repayments, out of a small pension
income, with the associated risk of repossession. Property bestows security
you finally have a place that is yours, no-one can take it from you. Are we
seriously proposing that a Conservative policy is to insist that people live in
debt for their entire lives?

Worse than that, the implication is that conservatism is only open to those
who already have family wealth. If the only new Conservatives are the
children of existing Conservatives, then the Conservative gene will
eventually die out.

The Tory party does not need any more people to give up listening to its
arguments. Indeed, the fatal flaw in Theresa Mays manifesto was that it was
all too easy for people to say that theyre not the party for me.

Frustratingly, many of the moderate Labour types who were told by the
Corbynistas to f*** off and join the Tories might actually have done so if a
little more care had been taken about what was written on the welcome mat.
The failure to convert these voters was probably the biggest missed
opportunity in British politics of the last 40 years.

The Conservatives must stop thinking of only the haves and have-yachts
as potential members and voters and instead think about those who have
nothing to their name: a migrant newly arrived in the country, a teenager
released from the care system, a thirty-year-old in London whose parents
cannot spare anything like the 50k required to put a deposit on a studio flat.

Corbynism is rampant because there is a critical mass of people who see

themselves, and every one of their peers, in the same situation. It is a self-
perpetuating belief system; when you dont know a single person of your age
who can afford a house, how can you believe that you might? Why would
you even try?

To counter this movement, the Tories need to remove sufficient members

from the group so that its internal logic no longer holds. Actually, they need
them to remove themselves. There are some already on the edge, disaffected
by the cruel reality of kinder, gentler politics who must be supported in
thinking their way out of Corbynism and into conservatism.

There are three parts to this for the Tories:

Come up with policies that will genuinely help those at the bottom.

Argue the case for those policies relentlessly.

Give people permission to think differently, demonstrating that the left does
not own the freehold on compassion.

So, what policies can be offered to someone who believes their only route to
financial security passes through Jeremy Corbyns redistributive paradise?

First, education. Too many people complete university only to find that they
are not qualified for graduate jobs despite their degree and the associated
debt. How can they be helped to move on and how can we prevent more
people finding themselves in this situation?

For a start, student loan repayments should be taken before income-tax is

levied, like pension contributions, and the interest rate should be tied to the
base rate, not inflation. Universities should be forced to publish employment
rates and future income for all their courses, with data from HMRC. Students
should be able to claw-back fees from universities who deliver poor-value
courses. The post-graduate student loan scheme should be extended to allow
people to have a second chance at getting the right qualification. Embrace
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), creating a route by which studying
on Coursera or EdX can lead to a degree. Make university scholarships
offered by businesses fully tax-deductible on condition that there is a
guaranteed graduate position at the end.

Second, offer genuine assistance for people to create their own wealth
without relying on an intergenerational cash transfusion to get started, and
without the fear of falling foul of regulations.

The gig economy is bursting with opportunity for conservatives. If a person

is self-employed, even just working for Uber, TaskRabbit or Deliveroo, they
are a mini-entrepreneur. But how do they take the next step? How can they be
protected from exploitation? The government should be faster in banning
restrictive practices like when companies offering zero-hour contracts were
forced to remove exclusivity clauses. The Taylor Report is an attempt to
address these questions.

But Conservatives should recognise that the power of the state can be used
for the benefit of all. They must create a framework for a more equitable
capitalism.

Start with the premise that the big guys can watch out for themselves its
the little guys who need help. For example, set a legal limit for maximum
payment terms; there is no reason why payment should take longer than 30
days, let alone 120.

Then design a low-regulation starter company structure with associated

lighter regulations and be more relaxed about accidental infringements of
bureaucratic standards until a company reaches a certain stage. Create
individual tax accounts so that if a person earns 100 for a days work they
can immediately pay the tax thats due on it without needing to bother an
accountant.
It also needs to be easier to convert income to property. Find ways to reduce
the requirement for deposits on property, the biggest single obstacle to a
family affording their own home. Encourage innovation in financial services
perhaps pension companies could offer shared ownership of property,
linked to an individuals pension fund.

Once a set of policies has been identified, set to work selling them. Identify
the most talented communicators in the party and get them writing articles,
presenting documentaries, and generally talking to anyone who will listen.
They dont even have to all agree with each other just get the strands of
conservative thinking on the air.

Labour had great success at the election despite the apparent gaping
contradictions in its position. Keir Starmer would be talking about soft
Brexit even while John McDonnell was pushing to leave the single market.
Meanwhile Theresa Mays team enforced strict message discipline while not
even defending it herself. Only one of those methods worked.

Finally, the Tories mustnt be afraid to talk about the morality. They might
disparage virtue-signalling but human nature demands that people can feel
confident that theyre not the bad guys.

P J ORourke once wrote that a politician who portrays himself as caring

and sensitive because he wants to expand the governments charitable
programs is merely saying that hes willing to try to do good with other
peoples money. Well, who isnt? And a voter who takes pride in supporting
such programs is telling us that hell do good with his own money if a gun
is held to his head.

That is the Corbyn Gambit; that he is uniquely kind and compassionate

because he is prepared to hand out sweeties paid for with other peoples
money taken under threat of imprisonment. Is this moral? Robbing Peter to
pay Paul is always popular with Paul, but even a five-year-old could point
out the holes in the argument. Its only a surprise that so few Conservative
MPs are willing to do so in public.

Will what I suggest work? Well, it couldnt hurt. Maybe the Tories should ask
atypical Conservatives like John Major, Eric Pickles, David Davis, and
Stephen Crabb to talk about what led them to join the Conservative Party.
Whatever it was, Ill bet it wasnt the prospect of cutting inheritance tax.

Conservatism is moral and conservatives should say so