To unleash Britain’s potential, the Tories must end the groupthink

Have you ever sat through a meeting where a lot of informed people run through an agenda, but everyone knows that you are all failing to discuss the elephant in the room? The desire for conformity; the wish to be liked; the fear of being called “disloyal” – all this creates groupthink.

The most worrying aspect of groupthink in the Conservative Party today is that the state, not the individual, is the answer to the problems we face. This thought has seeped into our party’s worldview over decades. It has suffocated what was the lodestar of Conservatism, expressed in our 1992 manifesto: “you, and not the Government, should be in charge of your life. That’s what Conservatism stands for… a society in which government doesn’t try to take responsibility away from people.

Politicians must never make the mistake of thinking the state always knows best.”

Thanks to the Conservative Party’s lack of a “constitution”, we never had a Clause 4 moment where we rejected this principle. Imperceptibly it happened. There are numerous reasons for this. Our nation’s addiction to cheap money is one. Another is the deluded argument you hear that our overriding objective must be to keep so-called Red Wall voters onside, and that means spending more money.

For proof of how this groupthink manifests itself, consider our approach to social care. A consensus has built up that the family home is a sacred asset, and parents must be supported in passing it on to their children. After all, the Englishman’s home is his castle, and surely must be defended at all costs? The last Conservative manifesto said “nobody needing care should be forced to sell their home to pay for it.” Based on this assumption, complex policies have been dreamt up, costing billions of pounds. And to pay for it, the government raised taxes.

It’s worth remembering the justification the ministers responsible gave for raising taxes. “Instead of individuals having to bear the financial risks of catastrophic care costs themselves, we as a country are deciding to share more of that risk collectively. This is a permanent, new role for the Government.”

But surely Conservatives believe in encouraging personal responsibility? By telling everyone that we are sharing risks collectively, how does this encourage me to take responsibility for myself in old age? How can it be justified that someone – who may be on low pay, working their guts out – is paying a new tax so that my children can inherit my house?

Some might try to portray such questions as part of a libertarian, ideological quest. Wrong. Tories have long believed the state has a role to play in supporting the vulnerable. But to do that, we know it’s not enough to wear your heart on your sleeve: you need money in your pocket. And that money comes from enterprise and businesses. They are the geese that lay the golden eggs that enable us to pay for public services on which the vulnerable depend. But forever higher taxes on the geese means fewer eggs.

To make these points is not to question the new Prime Minister’s wish to balance the books. Difficult decisions need to be taken now to stabilise our finances, while ensuring the NHS is funded, the vulnerable are protected, and – crucially – borrowing is controlled. This is not about what is in the forthcoming financial statement, but something much bigger: the kind of country we want to be.

So long as the Party remains gripped by this groupthink, the demand for more state intervention will grow. Will the world suddenly end? No, of course not. But the arteries of our economy will slowly fur up, our energy for innovation will be sapped. This is not the road to serfdom. But far from “Unleashing Britain’s Potential” – the title of the last Conservative manifesto – we will stifle it.

The Tories now put too much trust in the state and not enough in the individual