Speaking at Cross Purposes? The Rhetorical Problems of ‘Progressive’ Politics

On 22 J anuary 2009 D avid C ameron launched the ‘ P rogressive C onservatism P roject’ at D emos, a think tank previously associated with the centre‐left. He made clear that he considered this a new departure both for the C onservative P arty and for the country. His words were widely interpreted as an attempt to distance the party from T hatcherism and to move towards values more usually associated with the L ib– L ab ‘progressive tradition’ in B ritish politics. This paper questions the efficacy of this rhetorical strategy in reorienting voters' impressions of the C onservative P arty. It uses a 2012 Y ou G ov/ U niversity of N ottingham survey to show that the word ‘progressive’ is not well understood by the B ritish public. A plurality of survey respondents felt unable to define the word, and those who did tended to use politically neutral terms such as forward movement, improvement and change. Very few defined it in terms of liberalism, left politics or social justice. Moreover, while many respondents did view C onservative politicians as ‘progressive’, they included M argaret T hatcher within this. The idea of ‘progressive conservatism’ might have seemed attractive to voters in that it signified optimism and change. However, for the majority, it is unlikely to have indicated a shift to the left.