Bernard Ingham: Cameron the progressive abandons his security blanket

I could cheerfully ditch the Blackberry, not being a modern gent. But I am with David Cameron on walkabouts and outriders. Things have come to a pretty pass if our Prime Minister cannot walk randomly, but far from unprotected, in Whitehall and Westminster. As for outriders, I consider them un-British. They are, of course, de rigueur on the Continent and elsewhere. In going about their business, I found they reflect the national character. The Germans, formidably efficient. The French, capriciously bossy. The Russians, fiercely authoritarian. The Italians, noisily ostentatious – a sort of La Scala production. And so on.

Margaret Thatcher was horrified when they once cleared her way around Hyde Park Corner en route to Northolt. Never again, she said. Just the way to build up resentment against the government. It is not how we do things here.

In any case, in an emergency, her unmarked escorts could always have stuck their blue lights on the top and opened up the traffic.

In this small way, Cameron has shown himself to be a true progressive, to use one of the most over-worked words in the political lexicon. By that I mean that, as a reputed moderniser, he questions established practice. That is how progress is made. Unfortunately, that is not what warms the cockles of the hearts of the majority of our body politic when they congratulate themselves on being progressive. Instead, they are talking about an attitude of mind that is at once unthinkingly convinced of its own moral superiority, patronising, pious and

arrogant.

It is, therefore, profoundly to be hoped that Liberal Democrat members of our coalition Government, or at least some of them, are purged of it under, ironically, Conservative influence with a capital C. This assumes, of course, that Cameron proves to be a real Conservative: a reformer who conserves the good but ditches the bad.

Let it never be forgotten that the "progressives" of this land were in raptures about the possibility of a "progressive" Labour/Liberal Democrat coalition until Nick Clegg looked at the arithmetic.

I have grown used to being patronised, even pitied, by

the "progressives" of the Left of this world, often for no better reason than I worked for Thatcher. To my great satisfaction, I sense they regard me as a man gone bad.

Rather like a pill, they stimulate my circulation and reinforce my self-confidence. Generally speaking, if they advocate a line of action, I know I must shun it. As such, they perform an invaluable social service.

I cannot for the life of me see what is progressive about an attitude of mind that ignores human nature, puts idealistic compassion before common sense, believes passionately in social engineering and an egalitarian society (provided the progressives are more equal than others) and in many ways undermines society, whether or not that is its objective.

What is progressive about a deficit of 156bn? An education system that so utterly fails about 20 per cent of our children that employers have to teach them the 3Rs? Higher education that saddles our most able with a millstone of debt before they even take out a mortgage?

A welfare system that condemns millions to the serfdom of a life on benefits? A police that all too often seem not to do their duty by the law abiding majority? Courts that, under the influence of human rights law, make a mockery of justice. Prisons that resemble holiday camps with all mod con?

An approach to the environment that destroys it to no purpose on the altar of global warming while at the same time seriously imperilling power supplies without which the nation would grind to a halt? Unrestricted immigration? Overseas aid that never solves the problem?

What use is liberalism (with a small "l") – the euphemism for progressive politics – to any man if it systematically ignores its consequences? To describe yourself as progressive – as the term is now regarded – is to brand yourself as self-regarding in your stupidity.

I fully accept that David Cameron's concept of security might be risky. But at least it shows some faith in man's goodness. It is truly progressive to encourage it. There is hope for us yet.