Anthony Browne: If Mr Cameron has the courage to bring morality back into politics, he will truly be Thatcher's heir

13 April 2012

The look of pure shock in his young eyes showed he had never before been shown the difference between right and wrong.


The boy of what — six? — in designer gear had just jumped out at me and shot at me at point blank range without warning or provocation as I walked down the street.

Admittedly, it was with a water pistol, so it was hardly life-threatening. But it was still a shock.

Brave: Mr Cameron has taken the same risk tackling behaviour as Mrs Thatcher

Brave: Mr Cameron has taken the same risk tackling behaviour as Mrs Thatcher

Call me a middle-aged Eeyore, but as the water soaked through my shirt and suit, I failed to see the funny side.

As he carried on squirting at me, I grabbed his water pistol and barked at him the difference between right and wrong — leaving him in no doubt which category into which I put unprovoked attacks on strangers.

He looked utterly aghast. What right did I have to speak to him like that? He had clearly done it before, and no one had answered back.

And I explained that while firing a water pistol at strangers might seem harmless, he had to learn boundaries. If he didn’t learn this was wrong, what next — throwing stones at strangers? And after that?

It was a trivial incident, but the underlying point is anything but. The little boy didn’t know what was acceptable because no one — neither his parents, teachers nor other adults — had told him.

He was clearly going down a certain path in life because, as David Cameron put it on Monday, society has been too sensitive in failing to judge the behaviour of others.

In his turning-point speech on the election campaign trail in Glasgow, Cameron said it was time to speak out against ‘moral neutrality’.

It is brave for a Conservative leader to talk about making judgments, because he risks being accused of being that terrible thing: judgmental.

Critics can twist attacks on behaviour as attacks on vulnerable individuals or portray it as trying to impose a personal morality on the rest of society.

That’s why politicians of all hues have steered clear of talking about morality for years, and why David Cameron’s speech is so significant.

With the exception of John Major’s abortive talk of back to basics, it is the first time since Margaret Thatcher was prime minister that a party leader has bravely brought morality into politics.

Cameron was quick to acknowledge that it is a highrisk strategy, as politicians themselves are often accused of failing to distinguish between right and wrong in their own behaviour.

But, he said, to remain silent on such an important matter doubles the failure of politicians.

Although he got some brickbats from Left-wingers, Cameron’s speech was largely applauded, mainly because he steered clear of old Conservative concerns of sexual morality.

Instead, he talked more about personal responsibility. After a decade of big-brother government increasingly encroaching on our lives, it is a message that many are eager to hear.

If people don’t learn the difference between right and wrong, it is not just that they become anti-social. They don’t learn the fundamental lesson that there is only one person responsible for what they do — and that is themselves.

Nothing is wrong, and nothing is anyone’s fault; it is always someone else’s. Don’t blame me for what I do; it’s society’s fault.

As Cameron pointed out, we talk about people being ‘at risk of obesity’ instead of people who eat too much and don’t do enough exercise.

Obesity, alcohol abuse and drug addiction are talked of as external events rather than consequences of people’s actions.

Obviously, there are always external factors which have a big influence.

People from difficult backgrounds definitely have higher hurdles to jump over, and need help. But for all of us, whatever our background, what we do is ultimately up to us.

This Left-wing moral neutrality comes from the best of intentions — wanting to sympathise with victims and other vulnerable people.

If they do something anti-social, it is because anti-social things have been done to them — they are not at fault.

And if you can’t judge someone for their actions, there can’t really be a right or wrong thing to do.

The violent alcoholic is not ‘wrong’, just perpetuating behaviour he learned from his violent alcoholic parents.

This is not just dubious intellectually, but seriously damaging for society.

There is one way to encourage the growth of anti- social behaviour, and that is to not to judge it, nor hold the perpetrators responsible for their actions.

You can have all the laws and punishments you like, but teaching people right from wrong and holding them accountable for what they do is far more effective.

In Japan, they have low crime rates not because of terrible punishments, but because the Japanese have a powerful, deeply ingrained value system.

In Jamaica, they have high crime despite ferocious punishments because there is no strong value system.

And, indeed, the no-blame mentality is deeply patronising, saying in effect that people from deprived backgrounds are like animals who can make no conscious decision about their behaviour.

There is also nothing more disempowering for someone than teaching them they are victims, and by implication there is nothing they can do.

Teaching fat people that they are ‘victims’ of McDonald’s marketing department is teaching them that they can’t control their weight.

Telling young black boys that their underachievement at school is due to racist teachers is to tell them that it is not up to them to get ahead.

The rise of moral neutrality has coincided with the growth in the role of the state into every nook and cranny of life, further eroding personal responsibility.

If the Government takes responsibility for something — such as care of your elderly parents or your own safety from financial privation — then you learn that you are not responsible for it.

Gordon Brown’s latest wheeze is bribing pregnant women to eat healthily. This may seem fine, but the subliminal message to women is that they are not responsible for their own healthy eating. The ‘It is all the Government’s fault’ syndrome infantilises us all.

As Keith Joseph — a minister in Margaret Thatcher’s government — said, if you take responsibility away from people, they become irresponsible.

The growth of the human rights movement — again, wellintentioned — has accelerated the trend. It has taught us that we all have rights unmatched by responsibilities.

All this leaves the question of what politicians can actually do. The first step is speaking out about it — as David Cameron has started to do.

Teachers and parents can be emboldened to once again help children learn the difference from right and wrong.

Doctors can make clear to fat people that they must take personal responsibility for their weight. Holding people to account for their actions, and the importance of taking personal responsibility, can run through countless policy areas.

In welfare policy, for example, we should make it clear that the right to benefits is matched by the responsibility to do some work in return ( socalled workfare).

A society where people know the difference between right and wrong, and take personal responsibility for their actions, is not just a healthier society; it is also a more fulfilling one.

After decades of erosion of personal responsibility in the public and political sphere, David Cameron may just have signalled that it is about to make a comeback.

• Anthony Browne is the director of Policy Exchange.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in