Cameron needs a big idea

It is undeniable that the Conservative Party conference was a success for David Cameron. His evident rhetorical skill, which did so much to secure his election as party leader in 2005, was deployed to impressive effect again this week. All the right buttons were pressed, all the right noises made. The announcement of an increase in the threshold of IHT from £300,000 to £1,000,000 captured the headlines and the public imagination. All of this has resulted in a poll "bounce" for David Cameron to match that enjoyed by Gordon Brown over the past three months. The chances of a Conservative victory at the next election are still slim, but the measure of Cameron's success last week is that the prime minister now has to think again about the wisdom of calling an autumn election. Considering the drubbing that Cameron has taken at the hands of Gordon Brown in recent months, it will be a significant victory for the Conservative leader - and very damaging for Gordon Brown - if the prime minister is deterred from calling an election on the strength of the Conservative performance this week.

But if Cameron's credibility has suddenly taken a belated turn for the better, what exactly has he said or done to merit increased public support? The ability to wow a Conservative Party conference, and even the assembled media corps, is not really enough for a potential prime minister. A coherent set of policies and the ability to carry them through is also required. And although the policies are now starting to emerge, there is a lack of any overarching theme, other than a nebulous sense that it's "time for a change".

This is where Cameron is still likely to come unstuck. Beneath the rhetoric, the sound bites and the photo-calls, the Tories are not offering a coherent, consistent change for the better. The goal of the New Conservative Project is to win an election. Beyond that David Cameron has no "Big Idea". In fact, the Conservatives and Labour are still playing much the same game, albeit for different reasons.

On public services, it's the same old story. Andrew Lansley bleats that the Conservative Party is the party of the NHS: more fool him.

On foreign policy (or, if you prefer, "better government"), Kenneth Clarke follows Gordon Brown in informing us that Parliament will have to give approval before our armed forces are deployed in such a way that somebody might get hurt - in which case we had better hope that we never need them in a hurry.

On the environment, David Cameron aspires to make the Conservative Party the party of "responsible green leadership", but appears on the contrary to leap on every passing bandwagon.

Even where there is clear blue water between the two main parties, the Tories still manage to strike the wrong note. On tax reform, the proposed hike in the IHT threshold is welcome, and corrects a significant injustice, but it still represents, if not a tax cut for the rich, then at least a tax cut for the relatively comfortably off. An estate of £300,000 is hardly a king's ransom, but it is still a reasonably large amount of money for the majority of the population. Similarly, when Andrew Lansley beats the drum for the NHS, he ought to realise that in shoring up a failing state-run system he is condemning those who cannot afford private health care, possibly because of their existing tax burden, to a second class service or worse. The same of course also applies to education, where a voucher system would create a more level playing field for parents of all incomes, as distinct from the current situation where parents can buy a better education for their children either by paying for a private school, or by buying a house in the neighbourhood of a better state school.

Labour won't ever countenance these ideas for ideological reasons: for Labour state control is good, private sector is bad - end of story. The Tories are protecting the interest of middle class voters while paying lip service to the socialistic ideals of the welfare state. We need a truly liberal alternative that will promote the interests of all our people. If private health care is so good, why can't we all enjoy the benefits? If private schools are better than state schools, why not privatise all of them for the good of all our children? If we are going to reform taxes, why not go for a flat tax system with a high personal threshold which would benefit those on low incomes as well as the better off?

Our established political parties don't address these questions because they are interested not in real change, but in creating the illusion of change. The idea that David Cameron's programme (or for that matter Gordon Brown's) can bring real reform to this country is no more credible than the thought that the Titanic might have been saved if only the deck chairs had been a different colour. There is no vision, no sense of the country we want to build or how to build it. There is no Big Idea, which is why the main parties cannot deliver. The time for a genuinely new departure in British politics has come.