Why the Tory wobble could be our cue

The Tory economic strategy is unravelling. Having banked on an early election and economic figures showing no light at the end of the tunnel, they are beginning to wobble with self-doubt.

It was always an odd way to approach the electorate. "Vote for us and we'll cut public services harder and more ruthlessly than the others."

Traditionally parties promise more than they deliver, hoping to be seen as national saviours rather than posturing as the barbarians at the gates.

Trying to portray David Cameron as an economic Genghis Khan had to be a risky strategy. He wouldn't even look good in the hat.

However, there was method in the madness.

Years of saying nothing of substance for fear of putting anybody off have left Cameron with a jelly-like semi-transparent appearance. Posing as a man of fiscal violence helped to beef him up and "show" that he is willing to play the hard man rather than simply the blank space you might prefer to Gordon Brown.

All the promises of tough love may be at an end, though. Both shadow chancellor George Osborne and the Tory leader made statements at the weekend indicating a retreat from a slash-and-burn economic strategy.

Although the £178 billion budget deficit has not disappeared, the Tory rhetoric towards it seems to have softened.

Cameron told the media: "We're not talking about swingeing cuts. We're talking about making a start in reducing our deficit."

This statement stands in stark contrast to his previous position. Only a few weeks ago posters went up around the country showing pictures of a vapid Cameron blankly staring out into the void next to slogans promoting the budget deficit as his number one concern. Now we're being told he's going to have a go at making the books balance a little bit better.

Osborne said there was "a limit" to what he thought could be done before 2011 and that any savings that could be made would have to be in consultation with the Bank of England lest the government rock the interest rates. This shift in emphasis from the enthusiastic slashing of public spending towards cautious responsibility is a big one.

It's not a turn towards real investment, job security or a new green economic deal - that would be far too much to ask - but it is a welcome sign that the election will not be dominated by the parties competing with each other on who is the most ruthless towards the poor.

Labour and the Lib Dems both reacted to the news with horror as it leaves them appearing to be to the right of the Tories on public spending.

Peter Mandelson responded to the Tory U-turn by reiterating that the next spending round, if conducted under Labour, would be the toughest in decades - which includes the Thatcher era.

However the message was somewhat undercut yesterday when Gordon Brown announced a massive increase in military spending. He has ordered two new aircraft carriers - a snip at £5 billion - committed to the Joint Strike Fighter, costing £10 billion, and announced that the completion of the Typhoon programme would cost a further the £20 billion.

This doesn't include the £1.5 billion bonus payments, not to pensioners, but to the war in Afghanistan.

Sadly this windfall for the military does not herald a new era of Keynesianism but is the exception to the rule and the only area of public spending that Brown will commit to safeguarding.

But back to the Tories.

Osborne and Cameron's suggestion that the cuts would not come quite as hard nor quite as fast as they may have first suggested is welcome news on a number of levels.

Obviously it makes the Tories look like they don't know what they're doing. That's satisfying to the eye and costs them floating votes.

It's also appears that they have become less confident about the cuts. If, as many predict, they do form the next government, the difference between a confident Thatcherite government determined to obliterate public services and a weak new-Tory government more concerned about how cuts play with a wary public and an uncommitted press will determine how deep those cuts are - and how willing to buckle under pressure the new government is. Their fear means our ability to win the jobs fight is given a terrific boost.

Up to this point the three main parties have been competing with each other on the cuts agenda. It's been a revolting sight to see Nick Clegg, Cameron and Brown leapfrog over each other on who can be the most despicable. This weekend may mark the beginning of the end for that unholy sport.

If this shifts the ground towards an emphasis on saving public services rather than wrecking them, then it could soften the approach of all three main parties as they recognise that the public suffering caused by these cuts could provoke a serious revolt.

Our movement is scarred by the legacy of Thatcher. Painting Cameron as her heir is wrong because he doesn't have the conviction, the guts or the brains to mimic her style of leadership.

More importantly he does not have a coherent strategy for taking apart the workers' movement, just the instinctive contempt for ordinary people shared by his party and his class.

His political philosophy is just as nauseating as Thatcher's was, but the idea that he has the backbone or the tactical nous to take on a serious industrial offensive lacks evidence.

Thatcher saw us lose hard-fought battles over the course of a decade and this wiped out the memory that we'd taken apart the previous Tory government in the space of a couple of years. We should aim to do that again.

This Conservative wobble is the chance to build confidence in our movement that, even if the Tories do win the election, we are not destined to lose the war.