Perversely, the fiscal crisis strengthens the chances of Cameron’s modern Conservatism surviving and possibly becoming a model for Conservative Government.

The combination of coalition government and economic breakdown encourages a reformist administration.  With the public finances in such a mess the time is ripe for reform and acting tomorrow is viewed as inappropriate and irresponsible. During the election campaign one of the Conservative’s central arguments was that excessive government spending had made the state obese. This profligate way of running the country was both unnecessary and unsustainable, thus reducing public spending would be the priority for any new Conservative administration. At the heart of new conservatism is a desire to deliver a smaller state through positive delegation.

The Coalition government strengthens Cameron’s reinvention of Conservatism because the Liberal Democrat’s naturally support the ‘new’ ideas. The Big Society agenda, with its promotion of localism and individual responsibility, effortlessly brings together forward thinking Tories and centrist Lib Dems. Cameron’s modernisation would have been under greater threat if the Conservatives had gained a tiny majority, forcing him to negotiate with the outer reaches of his own party, many of whom are dismissive of the chosen direction of travel. If the Party forces Cameron to retreat to old Conservatism the Coalition will crumble.

The economic situation created a strong adhesive between the coalition partners, fostering a feeling of togetherness and joint ownership. Coalition negotiations took place against the backdrop of a burning Greece, which focused minds and, ultimately, led the Lib Dems to embrace fiscal Conservatism. Unity on economic policy is crucially important to ensuring the coalition lasts the full five years, giving Cameron enough time to implement the Big Society agenda.

In Cameron’s first 100 days his administration has enjoyed a political honeymoon. Attacks have been easily brushed off; mistakes forgiven and the tough choices agenda has not led to public outrage but this mood can’t last. It’s easy for people’s rational minds to support the concept of cutting spending to balance the books, however, it becomes a different and emotional issue if ‘my child’s school roof can’t be mended’ or ‘my contract is cancelled’. Mistakes will be portrayed by the media via a ‘cuts are hurting’ narrative. Nothing sells papers like a good old scare story, especially if blame can be heaped on those in high office. Groups, both left and right, who are wary of Cameron’s agenda will use the change in mood to attack the Coalition. Strong leadership will be needed when making decisions that may be right but not instantly popular.

The new Conservative ideas are about resolving the structural problems that created the fiscal crises. Cameron will make it work because it has to work. There will be no mandate for a second go and no money to spend on a second agenda.

This post was originally published at The Frum Forum – http://www.frumforum.com/is-the-honeymoon-over-for-cameron-clegg

It was never going to be easy.  The coalition Government has faced a set of challenges largely without parallel in post war history.

In May the Government was faced with a record deficit; an economy gradually getting back to its knees following the deepest recession since records began; plummeting faith in the political system; widening inequality; stalling social mobility; and seemingly intractable social problems.

100 days is always a slightly arbitrary time to judge a Government’s record.  However, it is actually crucial – the political capital of any Government is at its highest at the beginning.  It marks the perfect time to get things done.

Unlike other blogs, we at Platform 10 have always been enthusiastic supporters of the coalition.  On May 9^th, I called for a ‘coalition of the progressive centre.’ I argued that:

“With the support of the Liberal Democrats, a Conservative-Liberal coalition of the progressive centre can deliver the radical economic, political and social reform the country needs.”

I believe that the coalition has, so far, lived up to those lofty expectations.  It has governed in a progressive and radical manner.  Already, in 100 breathless days, the coalition has:

• Dealt with one of the biggest fiscal catastrophes the country has faced since the war.  Faced with a choice of setting out a credible plan to pay down a record budget deficit or letting our domestic policies be placed at the whim of global financiers (as Greece, Spain and Portugal have found), we wisely opted for the former;
• Laid the framework for renewed growth and renewed job creation;
• Placed as a priority delivering social justice and enhancing social mobility;
• Created a bonfire of restrictions on civil liberties.  Even after 100 days, this Government has claim to be the most civil libertarian since the war – a welcome change after New Labour’s social authoritarianism;
• Set out the biggest programme of constitutional change for decades.  House of Lords reform is, after a century and more of dithering, set to be achieved.  Governmental transparency looks set to improve both visibility and performance of Government.  Ideas of recall and referenda (albeit slightly too limited at this early stage – as Douglas Carswell argues) have at last been injected into the body politic.  Indeed, the cooperation across party lines in itself is something that most people outside of the political class have welcomed;
• Already decentralised power to local people to an unprecedented extent.  Hopefully more decentralisation will follow;
• Instituted a Great Repeal Bill – with the aim of repealing unnecessary legislation that impinges on freedom;
• Unveiled an evidence based policy on prisons that has more in common with traditional Conservative views than the authoritarianism of recent years.

After thirteen years of small ‘c’ conservative Government, it comes as a breath of fresh air to have a Government prepared to make the brave and radical decisions that are in the national interest.  Despite the heckling from nay sayers, it is the coalition that has made this possible.

The Economist has described the Government as a “radical force.”  I am confident that 100 radical, progressive days will become five radical, progressive years.

I’m not sure whether this is a good or a bad thing, but Gordon Brown’s interview in the Independent today shows him to be just the latest in a long line of converts to the Big Society.

Here are some choice quotes:

“We’re just recovering from the 1980s,” says Bryan. “We know what works.” Brown nods grimly. “We’re going to have to be prepared,” he [Brown] says, “to do things locally.”

Why is that something to be grim about?

[Brown is] telling me about a local youth project called “midnight football” in which young people play sports with professionals, and a local cycling club, which lends bikes to people who can’t afford them, and a website that Tim Berners-Lee told him about where you can look up cycling danger spots and plot your route.

(We wrote about the cycle map AGES ago)

What I’ve done in the last two months is really what I wanted to do, which is do things locally. That’s been my first interest, to put something back into a local community that I feel very much part of, and that I feel I’ve got a duty to.

How disappointing that he didn’t feel the need to empower others to do the same while he had the power to do so.

The Saturday Times magazine (link here but it’s behind the paywall) had a great article about Apple, and how all companies basically want to be the Apple of their industry. Farhad Manjoo also came up with a list of the attributes that make Apple Apple.

He notes that discipline, focus and long-term thinking are key, along with a willingness to flout conventional wisdom. He adds a fanatical attention to detail, unrelenting focus on branding (and all that that implies, not just the look of the thing), and the ability to absorb the lessons and move on from mistakes.

That all sounds pretty good to me – in fact, I’d say that all of those things are essential for political parties. Perhaps his most interesting point, though, is his final one – that Apple’s essential skill is in remixing: taking the best of what’s out there, bringing it together, tweaking it and releasing it to fulfil demands people didn’t know they had.

I know that there are going to be people who say that the Coalition has no principles, that David Cameron has sold his soul for the sake of being Prime Minister, that it will all end in disaster.  But they are wrong and I can’t be bothered arguing again about this one. What I do want to say is this: for years, I was never really a fan of Apple products which seemed a little bit style over substance and poseur for me. But then I got an ipod nano. And then an ipod Touch. And now I am kind of thinking I want an ipad.

What happened? Well… I tried them out. They worked. They did what they were supposed to. When the battery gave up after 13 months (just out of warranty – as Apple batteries do), I took it to the ipod store and they replaced it for free. I use it for all sorts of things I never knew I wanted to do.

That is what the Coalition will stand or fall on. The internal stuff – the discipline, the focus, the attention to detail and so on – will wax and wane over time, of course. But the thing that will mean the Coalition is a success is the experience that users have, just as the thing that makes Apple a success is not the white earphones or the drag and do (though those features all help). The overall delivery and additional experiences that you never thought were possible – that is what keeps Apple desirable, and that will be what does or doesn’t get the Coalition re-elected.

As The Times (within the paywall) reported this morning, Trimdon Labour Club has poured its last pint.  The club where Tony Blair repeatedly popped along to when he wanted to connect with traditional working class voters closed yesterday.  It is a shame that Mr Blair couldn’t put his hand in his pockets to help the venue that helped him so many times.

The closure is just the latest chapter in the sad decline of British working men’s clubs.  In the 1970s, there were over 4,000 working men’s clubs.  Now, there are little more than 2,000.  The decline of working mens’ clubs creates a shell in the community of towns and villages across the country.

The Working Men’s Clubs organisation is one of the most important organisations in the country. It provides an important glue to help hold our towns and villages together. They provide great community facilities, an excellent social setting, great banter and excellent value drinks. At the same time as other pubs are ripping their dartboards and pool tables out to make way for sometimes dubious claims to ‘gastropub’ status, the CIU constitution ensures that each club must have a board and a pool table. Ever since my Dad took me to some of the Working Men’s Clubs around the County Durham area for a pint or two, I have been a massive fan of the Working Men’s Club movement.

The sad truth is, unless the decline is arrested, working men’s clubs will become an increasing rarity.  In an age where politicians talk about cooperatives and community involvement, the working mens’ clubs, the living breathing embodiments of such ideas, are in steep decline.  They surely embody a lot of what the ‘big society’ should be about.  Communal meeting places, run by enthused local volunteers and often acting as the beating heart of communities.  The removal of a working me’s club often only serves to atomise communities further and diminish community spirit.

There are many factors that have caused the decline of the movement.  Some of these factors are irreversible and societal. Some are connected with the tragic deindustrialisation of the the 1960s, 70s and 80s that hollowed out too much of working class life and, all too often, removed the vital glue from communities.

But other factors can be changed.  Clubs are suffering because they cannot afford to pay the extortionate fees of BSkyB, so are losing the football and cricket watching crowds to the pub chains.

The smoking ban was introduced completely ignoring the views of the working mens’ club movement.  As the General Secretary of the CIU says the ‘no compromise’ approach adopted by last Government has left elderly and infirm CIU members standing outside in the cold. Surely we can reach a compromise where working men’s clubs are enabled to have properly ventilated ’smoking rooms’ if their members desire and their staff assent?

And that is on top of the other factors that are causing pubs around the country to struggle.

The decline of working men’s clubs is another example of how, all too often, working class communities have been ignored and marginalised.  Hopefully, the working men’s club movement can play a reinvigorated role in reinvigorating communities in the coming years.