Swift argues that Popular Conservatism is our best hope for welfare reform

Without being unkind, adroit is not normally a word which Swift – indeed the average voter – normally associates with Kemi Badenoch. Kind people think she is struggling to grow into her role, the unkind thinks she’s useless. And the Noes rather have it at present.

So it has been a bit of a surprise to see her offer a bipartisan approach on welfare reform, an offer which is both tactically adept and – wait for it – statesmanlike.

Of course, the latter term is normally attached to any proposal which is so boring that even Bright Blue (allegedly a right-of-centre think-tank, m’Lud) would reject it. But whether meant 100% seriously or not, it is an idea which Keir Starmer ought to have at least thought about for a moment before rejecting it. He naturally did not. A tactical success for the Conservatives, although it hardly commanded the headlines (another Badenoch problem).

We all know that welfare is swiftly becoming a colossal incubus on the public finances. Not only is it cripplingly expensive now, it will get worse. Just to give the public a nice added kick in the teeth, it is also amazingly ineffective and simply results in the pauperisation of the ill and the jobless. After almost two centuries of welfare ‘reform’ (Swift refers, as his erudite readers will recognise as one, to the New Poor Law Act of 1834), we have ended up with a system we can’t afford and doesn’t work.

In days gone by – think Wilson, think Heath – we would have had a Royal Commission. Took a while, true, made report, broadly implemented. These days we can have an expert commission, and then we can ignore it. The Dilnot Report on social care being Exhibit A. Might not have been totally right, but what was the point of having it?

Ergo, dear readers, there appear to be just four possibilities. First, a new insurgent party, untainted by decades of welfare failure, comes in and tackles the topic root and branch. Second, a revived Conservative Party, based on its hallowed principles of control of public expenditure and hard work, does the job. Third, the economy more-or-less collapses and the IMF does the reform for us. Fourth - and finally – there is a consensus between the pragmatic wings of both legacy parties (as we now call them) and we not only have a Royal Commission (or similar) but one which a majority of MPs agree must be actually implemented.

Obviously Swift would prefer either of the first two paths. Unfortunately, Reform doesn’t seem to grasp the need to deal with the welfare burden just yet (that might change under the pressure of government). Perhaps Badenoch’s offer signals that the Tories will do the job – ‘we offered a cross-party path but you weren’t interested so we can go it alone’, but Swift is not holding his breath. It also seems unlikely that we have still have enough confidence in experts for a consensus approach – we’ve been let down too much by them.

Hello IMF, good-bye parliamentary sovereignty. Depressing.

However, sneaky Swift has kept the best and fifth path until last. What we require is something that lies at the heart of Popular Conservatism, which is attracting strong support, interestingly, from Reform, many Conservatives, and even a few isolated voices in Labour.

If our new government’s first step, after the collapse of Starmer’s Labour project, is to reform the governance of Britain, as Popular Conservatism argues, then we will have a foundation to achieve great things, in welfare as elsewhere. The CINOs, the quangocrats, the charity campaigners (publicly funded), the Blob, the mandarins – à la lanterne! The lot of them (perhaps not literally; Swift is a man of mercy).

Genuine welfare reform must ignore the voices of the establishment and speak directly to the people who are either paying for the overmighty welfare state or are caught up in it (admittedly some rather willingly, but let’s be charitable to win the argument).

A British revolution like this will not only be much less bloody than the French version (of course) but far more beneficial. Let’s do it.