My parents, although not well off, were instinctive and strong supporters of the Conservative party. I doubt if they had ever analysed their own political beliefs but in the general election of 1951 the Conservative rallying cry was “Set the people free”, and my father, ever aware of the encroaching power of the state into their lives, strongly believed in that statement.

Whilst the Labour government of that time, under extremely difficult circumstances, had brilliantly revolutionised the social fabric of the nation, it had become increasingly obvious that they felt that our future lay in ever increasing centralised control. The classic example of the day was the failure to abolish the hated ration books and set the economy free to sort out issues of supply and demand. The incoming Conservative government embraced the free market, abolished rationing and established the basis of the wealth which later generations have enjoyed and upon which our public services have flourished.

However, when I was a student in London in the late fifties and early sixties I was to come across widely differing views which influenced my own thinking. I became an avid reader of the New Statesman edited by Kingsley Martin and later by Richard Crossman and enjoyed for the first time really high quality journalism, albeit the journalism of the left. I was not sufficiently convinced to join the Labour Party but I have the left to thank for my interest in politics. Although they were highly principled they were never true believers in free markets and all it could do for the ordinary working man or woman. I believed then as I believe now that “Set the people free” was a political slogan which underpinned everything else that mattered to the vast majority of people.

Of course, it was necessary over the years for governments of all hues to moderate the excesses that this free market can bring to the surface but it was essential that it was done without damaging the underlying principles of the market mechanism. Those who are old enough will remember the rent scandals of the 1960’s, which became known as Rachmanism after a particularly unsavoury and duplicitous landlord who cruelly exploited his numerous tenants. The response of the Wilson government was to clamp down so hard on all landlords that it became almost impossible for poorer people to rent property because no one wished to be a landlord and rent out property at all. They preferred to sit back and watch their property values rise because of the overall shortage of housing to rent.

Over the years it was this over reaction by Labour governments to these kinds of difficult issues which led to their downfall. Their motives could seldom be faulted but their policies were often tainted by a deliberate neglect of the realities underlying the market economy.

When my sons entered their teens, I lost the stimulation that helping them had given me in earlier years (in other words their homework was too difficult for me) and decided to take an Open University degree in Social Science. This was a fantastic opportunity created by Wilson’s Labour government and I seized it with both hands. I studied Economics and Decision Analysis as my specialist subjects and the effect on me was similar to that created by the New Statesman in earlier years. I loved every minute of the course, but as a hard working dentist with a family I did not feel I had the time to become politically active in any way. However, I was by this time, with my experience of the world of work a rock solid Conservative voter.

Elsewhere on this website my career in local politics from 1989 to the present day can be observed. I have found that the Conservative Party is my natural political home although there are many national policies of the Party with which I disagree. I doubt if there is any thinking person in any political party who agrees with everything done in his name but one learns to live with this.

The reader will by now have noticed that I am to the left of my party. I do not dislike socialists. People who have principles in which they believe and are prepared to fight for them are absolutely essential to the political process by which we are governed. What worries me far more is the lack of political principles and lack of understanding by the general public of just how essential political parties are in the process of governance. This has not been helped by recent events relating to MPs expenses and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but problems can only be solved through the fundamental philosophies espoused by caring, intelligent and thoughtful people in collaboration with others of a similar mind.

I have set out my thought on Independents elsewhere but one has to ask where their ideas come from? Must we judge their intelligence from a simple political pamphlet? To whom do they prove themselves as articulate and intelligent individuals? Do they have any political principles? If so what are they because they never tell us in their pamphlets? There is more to political beliefs than agreeing or disagreeing with a planning application or voting for or against a budget which, in some cases has not even been understood.

Finally, I come to the Liberal Democrats who are and have been for many years a highly respected political party. However, all those years in the political wilderness has made them a party of opportunism, particularly at local level. Where are the political principles about which I wrote earlier? Each time we see someone like Vince Cable who understands economic issues in depth we admire him. However, when it comes to getting votes at a local level they will abandon former beliefs (particularly on the local economy) at the drop of a ballot paper. Their driving motivation is expediency and this continues to make them a seriously damaged party. They no longer represent a third way but have become organised Independents without a guiding philosophy. This is sensed by the electorate who will not take them seriously until they head in a principled direction.

Why am I a Conservative? In the right hands the party will become the party to take our country forward. It is not hidebound by its history and has become under David Cameron a far more caring party better adapted to face the difficult future which our successor generations will face. I believe current generations owe it to their children to take politics seriously and could do worse then remember the words of the late President Kennedy. “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”