Cameron’s Conservative Party, social liberalism and social justice

Abstract

Social liberalism has consistently been highlighted as arguably the defining feature of David C C Party. However, this article challenges the perception that modernisation has fundamentally transformed the position of social liberalism in contemporary conservatism, questioning the extent to which the Conservatives under Cameron have deviated from their socially conservative Thatcherite ideological inheritance. Two key aspects T C policy areas. The first is the issue of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, and the second is W Ctransforming Conservative attitudes and policies in a socially liberal direction has been very limited, challenging the widespread characterisation of the Coalition as a fundamentally government.

Getting back in the DeLorean: modernization vs. anti-modernization in contemporary British politics

“…Nevertheless, a strong theme that unites much of this literature is the sense that the Tories modernisation project has been less substantial than its New Labour counterpart. As such, it has tended to be more easily blown off course, and should be viewed as a relatively more precarious and unsuccessful attempt at party adaptation (Hayton & McEnHill, 2015;Dommett, 2015;Kerr & Hayton, 2015).…”

“…This has led to continual pressure on Cameron to take tougher and more traditionalist stances on issues such as Europe and immigration. Even on other issues which were previously dominated by the modernisers, Cameron has been forced to either defend his stand against some aggressively traditionalist opposition, as in the case of equal marriage, or beat a hasty retreat onto more traditionalist ground, as in for eg, social policy, where Cameron's former, more compassionate rhetoric has given way to some stringent welfare reforms (Hayton & McEnhill, 2015). Similarly, on the issue of the environment, his modernising pledge to deliver the 'greenest government ever' has largely given way to a discourse of 'get rid of all the green crap' and commitments F o r P e e r R e v i e w towards allowing 'fracking' and the construction of HS2 (Carter & Clements, 2015).…”

Beyond Continuity? Understanding Change in the UK Welfare State since 2010

“…These changes focus less on inequality and more on individual and societal problems. The implication is that poverty cannot be addressed without resolving these issues, downgrading the importance of income transfer measures (Hayton and McEnhill ). Consequentially, measures such as changes to up‐rating and the benefit cap which will increase relative child poverty (Brewer et al .…”

“…These changes focus less on inequality and more on individual and societal problems. The implication is that poverty cannot be addressed without resolving these issues, downgrading the importance of income transfer measures (Hayton and McEnhill 2015). Consequentially, measures such as changes to up-rating and the benefit cap which will increase relative child poverty (Brewer et al 2011: 25-31;Browne 2012: 23) can be framed as unproblematic because they purport to tackle behavioural issues: notably, the apparently longstanding challenge of 'welfare dependency' (Hickson 2009).…”

Whatever happened to compassionate Conservatism under the Coalition government?

“…They also placed even greater emphasis than had New Labour on individual responsibility. As a result, and despite the greater use of socially inclusive language and the commitment of some Conservatives to equality for samesex couples, it is perhaps unsurprising that Hayton and McEnhill (2015) concluded that 'the socially liberal character of the Conservatives under Cameron's leadership is far from certain' (p. 144).…”