Jesse Norman: I’ve seen demands for ‘policy now’ but Badenoch is right to take her time

Jesse Norman is Shadow Leader of the House and MP for Hereford and South Herefordshire

In an impatient political culture, some within the Conservative Party and much of the media are urging Kemi Badenoch to accelerate the policy process: to set out a full programme immediately, with the goal of seizing the spotlight and galvanising public debate.

When parties of protest are on the march, what could be more understandable than to demand immediate policy prescriptions? All the more so if the council elections go against the Conservatives this week, after that extraordinary and unexpected “vaccine bounce” high point in 2021.

Of course, every political party needs to find new opportunities to communicate with voters and members, especially in opposition. But to seek to offer instant answers now would be a huge mistake. In resisting these calls, Badenoch is showing precisely the seriousness that the country needs.

We can all think of examples of leaders who rushed, and failed. Ed Miliband’s leadership of Labour is a case in point. Eager to satisfy every constituency, he unveiled a plethora of micro-policies, many of which lacked coherence or serious popular resonance. The result was a campaign that felt unfocused and reactive. Voters sensed the absence of a clear strategic diagnosis, tied it to a failure of leadership, and Labour lost decisively.

By contrast, David Cameron deliberately refused to rush into heavy policy commitments after 2005. His early focus was on showing that the Conservative party had changed and was worthy of a hearing. Only later, once the financial crisis had revealed Labour’s incompetence in failing to control bank leverage and voters were willing to listen again, did his team offer an array of substantive policies. That strategy returned the Conservatives to power after thirteen years in opposition.

History also shows the dangers of hurried politics. The Liberal Party’s collapse after the First World War arose partly because it was caught between free trade and support for the early welfare state, and had fragmented into competing factions, each offering piecemeal promises without a coherent national vision. Voters turned away from political turmoil and towards steadiness.

Against this, Stanley Baldwin understood that what Britain needed was not a blizzard of pledges but a re-establishment of calm authority and trust. He succeeded not because he dazzled with new schemes but because he convinced the country that he understood its anxieties and would govern steadily and seriously.

Today’s political cycle moves far faster, but the underlying principle remains the same: parties which fail to establish real credibility and coherence before offering solutions are unlikely to be trusted when it matters most.

Kemi Badenoch’s approach also recognises a hard truth: magnified by the pandemic, by war and by debt, Britain’s problems are deep and structural.

They cannot be solved by offering a shopping list of popular promises years before the Conservatives are realistically in a position to implement them. They require a proper rethinking of the role of government, the economy, and the British state itself: serious work that cannot be rushed to meet a news cycle.

This is not an easy message to convey, but Badenoch has never shied away from uncomfortable realities. She has long led on the legal status of women. She has insisted that any decision to leave the ECHR should be based on careful assessment and consideration. And she has been clear about the Conservative party’s recent mistakes in government.

As Leader she has also begun to put major policy truths into the public domain. On Net Zero, for instance, she has highlighted the fundamental impossibility of meeting unrealistic decarbonisation targets without massive cost to living standards and industrial capacity.

This is not populism. It is the start of serious politics, one which demands that political ambitions must be matched by capability and consent, rather than indulged as comforting illusions.

On issues of sovereignty, cultural identity, and institutional reform, too, Badenoch has been clear that Britain’s current settlement is struggling, and cannot be fixed by minor adjustments. In this, she echoes the seriousness with which Margaret Thatcher approached Britain’s malaise in the 1970s.

Thatcher did not promise immediate miracles. She framed the nature of the problem, made careful arguments with vigour, and built up a constituency for reform. Only later, once the ground was prepared, did she move decisively. The reward was a political realignment that endured for decades.

The comparison is not perfect. Mrs Thatcher took over a party that had suffered a crucial but relatively narrow election loss, and she was lucky in her enemies. Kemi Badenoch inherits a party that has just suffered the greatest defeat in its history, and in which the intellectual and institutional tools for renewal must themselves be regenerated. That makes patience, honesty, and structural thinking still more important.

This methodical strategy is not without risk, of course; and the party will have to earn its passage in the meantime. But the pressures on Britain’s economy, its energy resilience, its public services, and its constitutional settlement cannot be fixed by short-term promises. Nor can political trust, once squandered, be won back by a sudden burst of activity. It must be rebuilt carefully, through clarity, honesty, and long-term seriousness.

Badenoch is treating the public not as customers to be flattered, but as citizens who deserve the truth. That is rare. It is also essential.