The Conservative Party: From Thatcher to Cameron

by Tim Bale

The Conservatives are back - but how did they do it and what took them so long? What happened between the party's decision to dump one of the world's most iconic leaders, Margaret Thatcher, and the arrival in office of David Cameron at the head of the UK's new coalition government? Has Britain's prime minister really changed his party as much as he claims? Are they devotees of the Big Society or just the 'same old Tories', keen on cuts and obsessively Eurosceptic? The answers, as this accessible and gripping book shows, are as intriguing and provocative as the questions. Based on in-depth research and interviews with the key players, Tim Bale explains why the Tories got themselves into so much trouble in the first place and how they were finally able to get things back on track. In the new paperback version, he also explores their inability to win an outright victory at the 2010 election and looks at their decision to share power with the Liberal Democrats. The Conservative From Thatcher to Cameron is a must-read for anyone wanting to understand what makes the Tories tick. And it contains valuable lessons about what to do - and what not to do - for their Labour opponents.

Genres: Politics, History, Nonfiction

504 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2010

Reviews

[Yolanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book whose critical stance on people's motives can go overboard - for example, I do think IDS had genuine reasons for adopting a compassionate Conservative stance rather than just the desire to get power or give the Tory Party a mask of magnanimity. However, I found this an excellent read, giving me an academic analysis of the Opposition's activities during the Blair years - which I'd already read extensively about this year (in Nick Cohen's words and those of Blair himself.) I would be interested to learn what Bale made of the Coalition years and of how Cameron handled the recession in government. Actually, scratch that: I'd be most interested in what he made of the activities of, and motivation behind, Osborne.

Alarmingly, some of the wrong-headed retrenchment practised by various Tories while in Opposition may now be on the cards in government. Nobody should find that an appealing prospect, especially not because one main point this book makes is a) how much the Party in the media, especially Dacre's Mail, influences how individuals on the front bench act and react and b) what an utter self-licking lolly it is and how out of touch with what aspects of life the public are in fact conservative about. There was a lot of crowing by Corbyn fans at the last election about how people had 'finally seen through' the Murdoch press (which doesn't have a single editorial stance, guys, sorry to disappoint: the Sun was Leave and the Times was Remain at the referendum) and the Mail. I suspect Bale would find this patronising in the extreme and, having read his analysis, I do, too. Bale successfully, in my view, indicates a number of times that these papers have directed a Tory leader either to promise something impossible, promise something the public don't generally understand, or promise something they don't want.

Finally, with hindsight, I'd have said the referendum being called was a done deal years ago, when I was just a kid. You can see the buildup all the way through this book, even though that isn't why Bale wrote it.

[Rupert Matthews · Rating 1 out of 5]

I struggled through to page 167 before I gave up on this book. The author has clearly done a lot of research and spoken to a large number of people. On one level it is, therefore, a good history of the Tory Party from 1990 to 2010. But on another level this is a dreadful book. The author has a very clear view of politics, and in particular of what he thinks (writing very obviously with hindsight) the Party should and should not have done. In virtually every sentence the writer forces his views on the reader, and not in very subtle fashion. People who act in a way he approves of are "flexible", "pragmatic" or "sensible". Those who do not are "ideological", "blinkered" or "unreconstructed". The writer is entitled to his views, of course, but I am afraid that I found this constant stream of biased invective just too much to cope with. Ironically by his constant pushing of his own views and opinions as if they were clearly correct, the writer shows himself to be every bit as blinkered as those he criticised. I have other books to read, thank you very much.

[Sioned Raybould · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good book, although quite a heavy read. Took me six months to finish it although I'm glad I did. Very informative.

[Mills College Library]

324.24104 B183 2016