Why the Conservatives are looking towards Sweden

On May 6th 2010 thirteen years of centre-left government in the United Kingdom came to an end. For the first time since John Major left office in 1997, the UK has a Conservative in 10 Downing Street, with David Cameron leading a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition.

The resurgence of the British Conservative Party under Cameron’s leadership, from a party thrice humiliated at the polls, to the largest party in Parliament cannot be put down to any one factor. The unpopularity of Gordon Brown, the ongoing economic downturn, and increased exposure for minor parties were all responsible for votes falling away from the Labour Party. Undoubtedly however, under David Cameron the Conservative Party have succeeded in shaking off their “nasty party” tag, and convinced voters that they can be trusted with leading the country out of the worst recession seen for generations.

It is widely accepted that Cameron and the Conservatives have looked to Sweden’s Moderate Party, who themselves overcame an incumbent centre-left party to regain government in the 2006 General Election. The Moderate Party had been out of office for even longer than the Conservatives, having been in opposition since the government of Carl Bildt lost to the Social Democrats in 1994.

Under Fredrik Reinfeldt, who at 41 was the third-youngest person to become Prime Minister of Sweden, the Moderate Party renewed their image in the public eye, whilst retaining their traditional support base. This was something the Conservatives had spectacularly failed to do under the leaderships of William Hague, Iain Duncan-Smith and Michael Howard, despite an increasingly unpopular Labour Party administration in the wake of the Iraq War. Seemingly without direction, in 2005 the Party membership elected Cameron as leader, and in early 2007 he would travel to Sweden for a visit which would play a large role in a return to government for Britain’s most successful political party three years later.

Mr Reinfeldt was one of the first to offer his congratulations, and some advice, to Cameron, and this illustrates a closeness dating back to that 2007 visit. At the time, Cameron told the Swedish media “There is a lot the Conservative party has to learn from the Swedish Moderate Party in terms of how to win an election”.

“There is every reason to congratulate David Cameron for having made historic changes (within the Conservative Party) in a very short time”, Reinfeldt told a press conference.

“We’ve been in touch over the past year and I’m looking forward to working with him,” he added. “It’s amusing to notice there is a parallel between what happened in Sweden and what’s happening right now in Britain, after twelve years of Labour rule.”

As early as 2006, the British media had begun comparing Reinfeldt and Cameron. Both were young leaders taking over a rudderless party of the centre-right, considered by many commentators to be a spent political force. Both immediately set about modernising their parties,

attempting to reclaim the centre ground and attract voters from the left. It seemed only natural that these two men would find common ground, and look to one another for inspiration.

Around this time, Stephen Pollard wrote in The Times that David Cameron “has adopted hook, line and sinker the tactics of Mr Reinfeldt”. Pollard went on to say that “[Cameron] is luring new supporters by sounding very different from any previous leader of his party and emphasising that he is centre-right rather than right-of-centre. And he is holding on to existing supporters and party members who, after a succession of election defeats, are so desperate for power that they will back a winner whatever he says”, noting that Reinfeldt had achieved precisely the same before him.

In 2008, a few months after the infamous ‘election that never was’ of autumn 2007, (when Brown wavered from going to the polls after a surge in popularity for the Conservatives), the traditionally Labour supporting Guardian newspaper published an article noting the similarities between Conservative and Moderate Party policy, asking is this “what policy emanating from Westminster after our next general election might feel like?”.

The policy similarities between the now governing parties of Sweden and the UK are clear. Interestingly, they are areas from which centre-right governments have traditionally avoided, namely education, unemployment and benefits, environment, and health. Education policy of the Cameron ministry in particular appears to have been strongly influenced by Reinfeldt’s Moderate Alliance. Under the new British Education Secretary, Michael Gove, the government has begun drafting plans to import market reforms directly from Sweden. Granted, the Swedes are not the only ones to allow for government-funded schools to be privately run, but traditionally social-democratic Sweden is a useful barometer for Cameron when enacting policy associated more often with centrist voters than his traditional core party support.

Additionally, Sweden’s education system is more open than most examples; parents’ groups, charities, religious organisations, and even private businesses are able to open schools and claim as much money from the state per student as those set up and run by the state itself. Under this system, private education went from being almost unknown in Sweden to a situation whereby more than a thousand privately-run, free-to-attend institutions now exist, and government statistics show that 12,5% of 11-16-year-olds attend one. This is precisely the sort of successful revolution in public practice that

Cameron’s Tories are hoping for, and the trail blazed by his fellow young centre-right leader across the North Sea will only serve to strengthen their ideological bond.

The evidence is already there that this particular Swedish import has struck a chord with the British public. “There is plenty of interest in setting up Swedish-style free schools in England”, says Rachel Wolf of the New Schools Foundation, an independent think-tank founded last year to campaign for greater freedom in state schooling.

Conservative plans to borrow from Sweden’s model for contracting out traditionally state-run enterprises to private firms doesn’t end there. The Swedish healthcare company Capio is already contracting for medical treatment centres in England. Meanwhile, Conservative Party policy-makers have been visiting Stockholm city council, controlled by a conservative grouping, which has expanded private provision of care homes for the elderly.

Tory efforts to reduce Britain’s burgeoning ‘benefits culture’ and get more people in to work also draws inspiration from Swedish policy under Reinfeldt, particularly in its sweeping intent. Came-ron will also have noted falling trade union membership in Sweden, which many commentators believe to be a direct result of Reinfeldt policy, with some satisfaction; particularly given the recent number of union actions in the UK.

There are obvious differences in the Anglo-Swedish parallels though, which should be noted. For one, Sweden’s economy is in rude-health, in part due to the sound economic management of the previous Social-Democrat administration, a point begrudgingly admitted by Reinfeldt’s alliance. Another is the differing socio-economic make-up of the two nations: The UK has a far higher disparity in wealth between its citizens than does Sweden.

Nor is the inspiration all one-way. Fredrik Reinfeldt has often spoken of how he looks to the British Conservative Party under David Cameron as a leader on environmental issues: “I think [British Conservative] work, especially on the environment, is where my party can really learn a lot and it will be interesting to have further discussions on these issues”. Sustained success is another secret the Moderates could take from their Tory counter-parts. The previous Conservative administration lasted eighteen years, whilst at the time of writing Reinfeldt’s alliance are narrowly ahead in pre-election polls.

Within Britain public opinion is generally receptive of policies emanating out of the Nordics, and those fearful of Cameron swerving back to the right post-election are pleased to see him seem to take advice from European colleagues. Surely if the likes of Sweden enact a policy, it can be no bad thing?

In my own opinion, any co-operation with other parties of the centre-right in Europe is no bad thing, particularly given the Conservative Party’s increasingly Eurosceptic (phobic?) nature over the past two decades, culminating in Cameron’s pledge, since delivered upon, to withdraw from the EPP European Parliament grouping. The UK has been left in a woeful state by the previous Labour government, and having ready-made policies, already proven, to base future policy on can only help us resolve our current situation quickly and efficently. The terrible shame would be to see this burgeoning partnership cut short by a Social Democrat victory in Sweden this autumn.