British Tories should look across the Atlantic – but not to the US

After getting marmalised at the general election, the Conservative party is now conducting the time-honoured debate of the newly ejected.

Did it lose because it wasn't sufficiently like itself while in government (see, for example, the hats on sale in Birmingham this week emblazoned with the words: "Make the Tory party Conservative again") or because it drifted from the centre (where most but not all elections are won)?

Overlaying that dichotomy is a dilemma. In attempting to turn around their reputation, the Tories will struggle to lay out a vision unless they can convince voters that they are competent, but competence alone won't be sufficient without a compelling vision.

Lastly, the Conservative party will have to demonstrate that it both understands and can address the concerns of younger voters and ordinary families. In a recent YouGov poll, only 21pc of respondents agreed that the Tories cared about "people like you". That's a pretty shaky launchpad for an electoral reboot .

So, what now? Those Westminster politicians in such dire need of inspiration have traditionally looked across the Atlantic for guidance. That may again prove a useful avenue of inquiry for the Conservative party as it tries to plot its future course – albeit with a significant twist this time.

In a much-discussed New York Times earlier this year, David Leonhardt pointed out that, for all the perfectly justified talk of polarisation in American politics, the two parties have found "an unexpected amount of common ground" over the past four years.

There have, for example, been bipartisan majorities for new laws on infrastructure and semiconductor chips, on providing military aid to Ukraine and forcing the sale of TikTok by its Chinese owner . These are not insignificant policies.

It helps that President Joe Biden's long career in the Senate means he has, in the words of Leonhardt, "an almost theological belief in bipartisanship".

However, it's also clear that Donald Trump, while extreme in many areas and inconsistent (to say the least) on most, has, almost accidentally, moved his party closer to the centre on, for example, free trade and government programmes like Medicare.

Both parties now appear to be concurring with the median voter's assessment that the free market capitalist model has fallen short of delivering its two main promises: increasing prosperity at home (especially for working people) and spreading democracy abroad.

This has prompted a growing desire for the state to address the market's shortcomings and protect domestic industries from increasingly adversarial foreign regimes.

Leonhardt argues this represents a rejection of the "Washington consensus" in favour of a new form of American centrism that he classifies as "neopopulism", which is coalescing around policies that are "more consistent with the presidencies of Dwight Eisenhower or Franklin Roosevelt than those of Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton".

That seems like a pretty good broad-brush appraisal of the emerging political zeitgeist not just in the US but also in Europe: from different starting points the appetite is for more government, higher taxes, tighter regulation, greater protectionism and less immigration. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's either inevitable or the correct prescription for what ails many rich economies.

North of the 49th parallel, Pierre Poilievre, the leader of the Canadian Tories who looks increasingly likely to trounce Justin Trudeau at the next election, is offering a different approach.

It helps that his opponent is labouring under the problems besetting most incumbent politicians paired with an almost Olympian disregard for the difficulties of ordinary mortals. But Poilievre also appears to have discovered answers to some of the questions British Tories are now asking themselves.

"He is very steadfast to the free market principles that served centre-right parties so well in the 1980s and 1990s but wants to apply them in ways that are more relevant to today's problems," says Ginny Roth, who was in charge of communications for Poilievre's leadership campaign.

"He's achieving that synthesis in a way that has so far eluded Republicans in the US and Conservatives in the UK."

The key to Poilievre's approach, Roth argues, is that he has remained committed to the belief that supply-side reforms are the best hope of growing the overall economic pie while being more open to discussions around how the pie is divided up.

For example, in the old battle of capital versus workers it is easier for those on the centre-right to come down on the side of capital. But, more often than not, Poilievre has instead championed workers.

He has, for example, supported legislation to ban replacement workers. He also refused to support new back-to-work rules that were proposed when Air Canada pilots threatened to go on strike, arguing that the national airline was underpaying its staff and should cough up.

However, this approach is still anchored in fiscal conservatism and free market principles. Poilievre is basically saying workers have the right to earn a decent wage and that's been denied them because of rampant inflation caused by profligate public spending.

This balancing act relies on an acknowledgement that the present tough times are partly a consequence of globalisation and immigration-driven economic growth. Poilievre is looking to present himself as an economic liberal who is awake to the political moment.

"I would describe him as a free market realist rather than a neopopulist," says Roth. His approach could serve as a model for Republicans in the post-Trump era and for the UK Conservatives looking to regain relevance.

The pugnacious Poilievre clearly won't be everyone's cup of tea. The verve with which he's going after many of his country's institutions – with promises to defund the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and sack the central bank governor – could suggest Poilievre may be susceptible to anti-democratic notions about the will of the people that should give traditional Conservatives pause.

However, for now he appears to be pulling off the trick of persuading voters that he is competent, radical and attuned to the problems faced by ordinary people. That rare trifecta has delivered him to the cusp of electoral success. British Tories will be hard-pressed to find a better blueprint for their own recovery.