The Guardian view on the Conservative conference: defying gravity
The Conservative party gathers in Manchester on Sunday for an 11th consecutive annual conference as a party in government. It is the first time the Tories will meet in person since Britain left the European Union. Last year’s jamboree was a virtual affair.
Brexit, followed immediately by the pandemic, created an illusion of rupture from the era of Theresa May and David Cameron. Boris Johnson speaks about problems facing the country – social inequalities and underinvestment, for example – as if they are the legacy of some party other than his own. In Manchester, ministers will boast of their ambitions for “levelling up” parts of the country, without noting that a root cause of disadvantage to those regions is the decade of Tory government they have endured.
The prime minister believes he should not be held accountable for that legacy for two reasons (three, if you count his temperamental aversion to responsibility of any kind). One is the idea that Brexit was a revolution that reset politics, so whatever came before is attributable to the ancien régimethat has since been deposed. Another is the result of the 2019 general election, which generated a fresh mandate from voters who in many cases had never previously endorsed a Conservative candidate.
It is true that Mr Johnson’s personal following – a fabled “Boris effect” – gives him room for manoeuvre that few politicians enjoy. But when there is such a weight of incumbency hanging over his party, he cannot defy gravity for ever. The supply-chain crisis, exacerbated by labour shortages attributable mostly to Brexit, signals a new phase in the political cycle.
Mismanagement defined the government’s pandemic response, but opinion polls suggest that many voters extended considerable benefit of the doubt to Mr Johnson on the grounds that the virus was an unforeseen and international calamity. A common view is that any administration would have struggled to cope with such an extraordinary event. That generosity may be frustrating for the opposition, but it is not in Labour’s gift to instruct voters how to feel about a national tragedy.
Ministers would like current economic problems also to be blamed on forces outside the government’s control – global commodity prices, a longstanding shortage of lorry drivers, and panicbuying whipped up by media. It is true that many factors have conspired to disrupt supply chains and that Britain is not alone in experiencing high gas prices, but the country is uniquely afflicted by labour shortages as a direct consequence of the government’s immigration policy. While Brexit is not the only reason some supermarket shelves are empty, the prime minister’s complacency about quitting the single market and arrogant dismissal of anyone who warned of a downside are intrinsic to the current problems.
Logistical side-effects from ending free movement of goods and people were predicted. Whether it was wise to pursue a hard Brexit at all is a separate issue to the government’s failure to anticipate the consequences, plan and build resilience. Remainers might feel vindicated, but it is leavers who should feel most betrayed by the prime minister’s glib gambles and incapacity for foresight.
Mr Johnson is a master of political escapology. He has undisputed talents as a performer, but they are mostly deployed getting out of the difficulties that arise from his deficient attention span and lack of administrative capability. For his next trick, he will try to turn the Conservative conference in Manchester into a showcase of plans to tackle health inequalities and bring prosperity to all, without reference to the role that he and his party have played in generating the crisis to which he shamelessly then sells himself as the solution. It is an act that wears thinner with each improbable repetition. The prime minister would be well-advised to spend less effort devising new ways
to avoid responsibility and more time on the old-fashioned business of competent administration.