Choice?
The possibilities have ended
Posted on 30 May 25
by Mark HodgsonIn History, politics, Stats
It occurred to me the other day that the last time the Tories succumbed to a crashing general election defeat (in 1997, to Tony Blair’s Labour Party) the doctrinal and dogmatic obsession with climate change had barely stirred, and in those days the mantra – from all three main parties – was about the need to facilitate personal choice. Nobody was telling us we had to put up with renewables infrastructure (solar farms, wind farms, BESS, pylons) next door to our homes whether we liked it or not; nobody was telling us we had to have “smart” meters, whether we liked it or not; nobody was telling motor manufacturers that they had to sell cars that their customers didn’t want, or else they would have to pay fines; nobody was telling landlords and home-owners that they should install heat pumps, and nobody was considering fining boiler manufacturers for selling the gas boilers that people want and for selling insufficient numbers of heat pumps that people don’t want.
The interesting thing is that a generation ago, in 1997, I don’t remember the population at large sharing the obsession of the political class with choice. A generation later, and I don’t believe the population is happy with being dictated to by a political class that is fixated on climate change and net zero. And yet, without any popular demand at all, the narrative has changed. Choice is out; compulsion is in. Although there has been no shortage of publicity (propaganda or brain-washing might be more appropriate terminology) about climate change and net zero, nobody in the political class has articulated the U-turn that has taken place. There has been no fanfare, no explanation, and (ironically enough) no choice has been offered to the electorate with regard to this policy change. The Uniparty has simply changed direction, and whereas in 1997 we were all supposed to embrace choice as a good thing, now we are supposed to accept that the politicians and the “experts” know best, and we must do as we are told.
I think the point can be made quite simply by taking a quick look at the 1997 election manifestos of the three main parties, and then comparing them with their 2024 equivalents.
Conservative Party – 1997
The 1997 Tory Party manifesto can be found here. The word “choice” appears 27 times, though in fairness, not all are entirely relevant. For example, this paragraph contains the word “choice” three times, but it doesn’t precisely illustrate the point I seek to make:
That choice – between stagnation and dynamism – is the choice which faces Britain at this election. It is a stark choice between the British way – of trusting the people and unleashing enterprise – and the failing social model, practised on the continent, which the Labour Party wants to impose on us here under the guise of “stakeholding”.
Having said that, it does demonstrate a desire to allow people to get on with their lives, and not to tell them what they must do. Other references to “choice” are perhaps more explicit:
https://cliscep.com/2025/05/30/choice/
