The Economist - UK (2019-06-01)

The EconomistJune 1st 2019 Britain 25

I

f the Church of England is the Tory Party

at prayer, garden parties are where it lets

its hair down. Several dozen members

pootle about the grounds of a country man-

or in the village of Ide Hill, in Kent, nib-

bling salmon canapés and admiring the

moat. “Have you been to see my fruit cage?”

the owner asks a guest. Others buy tickets

for the raffle, hoping to nab biscuits from

the Chelsea flower show or a box of after-

dinner mints donated by their mp. “Live in

Kent”, reads an old railway poster hanging

in the pool house, “and be content.”

The mood, however, is not. The Conser-

vatives’ 124,000 or so members like to

think of themselves as winners, foot-sol-

diers of the natural party of government. So

Theresa May’s failure to implement Brexit

has been unsatisfactory. “She’s been a total

disaster,” says one member, shivering in a

summer dress beside the swimming pool.

“We’ve made a real mess of the last three

years,” says another.

It is in this disillusioned state that they

will pick Britain’s next prime minister.

Tory leaders used to “emerge” from back-

room chats among party grandees. But

since 1998 members have had the final say

on a shortlist of two candidates picked by

mps. Eleven mps have already announced

their candidacy.

Who are the selectorate? Research by

Queen Mary University of London suggests

they are mostly male, white and live in the

south of England. Many are well off; one in

20 earns more than £100,000 ($127,000) a

year. The average member is 57, but 44% are

65 or older.

They are hardly modernisers. More

than half support the death penalty and

84% believe schools should teach children

to obey authority. They are keen on old-

fashioned pastimes, too. One Tory associa-

tion is advertising its 40th annual raspber-

ry-and-wine evening. Another promises a

stall at an upcoming leek show, “as always”.

For now, they care about Brexit above all

else. In one poll, three-quarters of Tory

members ranked it the most important is-

sue facing the country, compared with

three-fifths of voters. Their views on the eu

have become more extreme and intractable

over the past four years.

Polls suggest that a plurality of mem-

bers would back Boris Johnson, who prom-

ises to leave the euin October with or with-

out a deal, if he makes it to the final run-off.

At the garden party, most have strong views

aboutMrJohnson:halfthinkhecouldbe

theparty’ssaviour;therest,a disaster.The

onlyothercandidatetoelicitsuchstrong

reactions isMichael Gove, the environ-

mentsecretary,whommembersblamefor

underminingMrJohnson’slastleadership

bid.“Iwouldn’ttrusthimwitha farthing,”

insistsoneTory,referringtoa unitofcur-

rencythatceasedtoexist 59 yearsago.

ButMrJohnsonshouldnotbecompla-

cent.Thefrontrunnerhasfailedtotakethe

crowninsevenofthepasteightleadership

races. David Cameron beat David Davis

after giving an impassioned conference

speechwithoutnotes.Televisedhustings

willgiveMrJohnson’slesser-knownrivals

a chancetodemonstrateanyelection-win-

ningcredentials. “Thememberswilllis-

ten,”saysoneTorymp. “Theyarenotbe-

yondreasonatall.” 7

IDE HILL

The (mostly) men who will pick

Britain’s next prime minister

Tory members

Ide Hill minds

A garden-varietyConservative

I

n an attemptto kickstart her splutter-

ing government, Theresa May last year

announced a review of higher education.

While doing so the prime minister became

the latest in a long line of politicians to rail

against “outdated” attitudes that favour ac-

ademic over technical qualifications. Since

then speculation has centred on little apart

from what the recommended annual tu-

ition fee would be for students attending

university.

On May 30th Philip Augar, the banker

commissioned to produce the report, de-

livered his thoughts. Under the plans, fees

would be capped at £7,500 ($9,500) a year,

down from the current level of £9,250, and

students from poor families would benefit

from the return of grants to support them

while studying. It is not, however, all good

news for students. The report also suggests

fiddling with terms on the loans, including

by moving back the date at which they are

written off, so that more people—especial-

ly middle-income types—will end up re-

paying the entirety of the cash they borrow.

The recommendations, which lay out re-

forms to the whole higher-education sys-

tem, are backed up by 210 pages of analysis

and charts.

The plans are designed so that universi-

ties would not be too hard hit financially.

Although income would not rise with in-

flation, the report envisions that the gov-

ernment would make up the gap in tuition-

fee funding, and notes that demographic

trends mean they will soon benefit from an

influx of 18-year-olds. Since the marginal

cost of educating each extra student is rela-

tively low, that could prove a windfall for

the institutions.

The report frowns upon the recent

growth in the number of creative-arts and

business degrees, which are cheap to pro-

vide, but whose graduates are unlikely to

repay their loans. It therefore asks the gov-

ernment to use funding to incentivise uni-

versities to provide more economically

valuable degrees, although it remains

vague on precisely how this will work. Not

everyone is convinced. Jo Johnson, the uni-

versities minister between 2015 and 2018,

argued the report’s proposal would desta-

bilise university finances, and that the

Treasury would be unwilling to cough up

the funds to plug the gap.

The report’s central desire is to reverse

what it terms the “neglect” of post-school

education outside universities. It proposes

a raft of changes, starting with a £1bn capi-

tal investment to get further-education

colleges back on their feet after years of low

funding. The plans would allow students to

get loans to study for some technical qual-

ifications, and would introduce a “lifelong-

learning loan allowance”, to the value of

£30,000, that could be spent on high-level

technical and academic study whenever

the recipient needs it. The hope is that this

will build the prestige of non-academic

qualifications to the point where universi-

ty is not the only game in town.

This would be a lot to get on with for a

government at the height of its powers, let

alone one limping to its demise. Any

change in the level of tuition fee would, for

instance, require new legislation, some-

thing that is unlikely anytime soon. La-

bour, which wants to abolish fees altogeth-

er if it comes to power, immediately

dismissed the plan as “all talk, empty

promises and very little action.” The report

has dreamy aspirations. They are unlikely

to be fulfilled. 7

A government review proposes an

overhaul of higher education

Technical v academic studies

A for effort