‘Progressive’ Turns in Post-1945 Conservative Social Policy

Abstract

This paper explores the diverse ways in which the Conservative Party has responded to the notion of progress in relation to social policy during its periods in government since the Second World War. It identifies three distinctive approaches – one nation progressive conservatism (1945–74), neo‐liberal (anti‐progressive) conservatism (1979–97) and progressive neo‐liberal conservatism (2010–present), highlighting the dilemmas and difficulties the party has faced in engaging with a concept that it has always found to be problematic.

An Assessment of the Significance of the 1947 Industrial Charter in Shaping One Nation Conservatism

“…As Page notes, the policy agendas of Churchill, Eden and Macmillan administrations all conform to the Conservative pivot to One Nation social policies. 126 Bochel argues the One Nation approach to welfare, was "distinct" in that it focused on targeting, restraint on spending and use of charging. 127 Despite the prevailing theme of Consensus by scholars, rather than imitating Labour, the Conservatives always sought to pursue what Gilmour attributes to Butler as "private enterprise in the public interest".…”

Whatever happened to compassionate Conservatism under the Coalition government?

“…Page (2015a), too, suggests that when Cameron became leader he and his closest associates felt that 'the construction of a new, softer, social narrative was necessary to 'detoxify' the Conservatives and to highlight how the Party's agenda in this sphere differed from the overly statist strategy of New Labour' (p. 130). For Page (2014), the progressive elements of Cameron's conservatism includied: a more relaxed approach to diverse lifestyles; a toning down of the anti-state rhetoric associated with neoliberal approaches; and a recognition that the state could play some role in protecting people from poverty and disadvantage (for example, Letwin, 2002;Willetts, 2002). He suggests that in the attempts to dispel the idea that the Conservatives were uncaring, great importance was paid to the role of voluntarism and civic institutions in creating the 'Big Society', initially appearing to draw on ideas such as those of Blond (2010), together with conditional state support for those who were unable to provide for themselves.…”

“…Against wider arguments and positioning associated with Conservative modernisation (Garnett, 2010;Hayton, 2010;Bale, 2012;Griffiths, 2014;Kerr and Hayton, 2015), one area where that was particularly the case was in relation to social issues and policies (Bochel, 2011;Hayton and McEnhill, 2014;Page, 2014;Williams, 2015), so that on topics such as the NHS, inequality and social mobility, gender and family structure, Cameron and his allies argued that the Conservative Party recognised and would respond to the concerns of the public in a different manner. However, the nature and extent of any new approach have been questioned, along with the record of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition government in taking a more 'compassionate' approach in its social policies (for example, Beech and Lee, 2015;Bochel and Powell, 2016).…”

‘Tory-normativity’ and gay rights advocacy in the British Conservative Party since the 1950s

“…Significantly, Page identifies the contingent nature of Tory progressivism: the immediate public order issues at hand are what dictate responsible action rather than values. As Page (2014b: 18) writes: ‘actions (for the progressive Tory) are pragmatic responses to existing problems rather than part of some broader, transformative “progressive” goal’. This observation is key to understanding Conservative gay rights advocacy: it was continually necessary (though the means change) to lessen the ideological agenda.…”