Beware the pursed lips of the new conservatives

THE new conservatives are the keepers of a new and growing list of rules and regulations that must be adhered to.

MEET the new conservatives. They are the keepers of a new and growing list of rules and regulations that must be adhered to lest we all face, not necessarily the fires of eternal damnation, but a less than perfect world.

There are some who subscribe to the view that we must repent now or face Armageddon.

Unlike maiden aunts, who signalled displeasure with a single raised eyebrow, the new conservatives are more forthright in chastising errant behaviour.

And, worryingly, they just know they have righteousness on their side.

Consider the most popular of the new conservatives' causes.

lThou shalt not despoil the environment. Years of rampant consumerism have built up a debt to the almighty that can only be cleansed by sacrifice and penitence. And if a sufficient number do not repent, at a later date an almighty flood, in the form of rising sea levels, will rise up and wash away the damned.

What the new conservatives need to insert here is something about the promise of a new and eternal life for those (chosen ones) who heed the word.

How about the notion of heaven for recyclers only?

Non-recyclers must do time in limbo or, for the truly recalcitrant, in purgatory.

lThou shalt not be obese. The same logic applies to the new sin of obesity, which is evidence writ large of indulgence. We must cast asunder obesity's instrument of evil: fast food. Get thee behind me thou fast foods. Tempt me not one more time Maccas, with your delicious cheeseburger and Coke combo delight.

lThou shalt not waste (or publicly store) water. There was a time when sinners and other infidels openly, wantonly, wickedly, watered lawns and concrete driveways in full public view and without shame. And while on this subject do not ever mention the d-word: dams. For it is dams that deliberately hoard the almighty's water in life- and soul-destroying catchments.

lThou shalt not burn leaves. A generation ago Australians happily, naively, raked autumn leaves into neat piles in suburban streets and set them alight. And then they stood around with neighbours chatting about how they loved the smell of burning leaves. Sinners!

lThou shalt not speed in a motor vehicle. Reckless behaviour endangering the lives of others is no longer viewed as bravado.

This shift in thinking formed the basis to our acceptance, and now reliance upon, the speed camera revenue stream. Indeed, for politicians reading these new commandments there are taxation opportunities associated with each.

lThou shalt not smoke. The same logic applies to smokers: they are the one minority that modern society is happy to discriminate against and that no one dares defend.

The reason why I say that these are causes of the new conservatives is because the causes of the old conservatives have receded.

Consider some of the beliefs that we now regard as twee (if not offensive) but that a generation ago would have incited passionate support and defence.

The Queen as our head of state is one such belief.

I don't fancy the chances of anyone even raising the issue, let alone arguing the case for a republic, in the 1950s or earlier.

To have raised the issue would have been contentious enough but to have used your right to free speech to question monarchy and its institutions would have been grounds for a charge of treason. Sexual relations condoned only between

married couples is another such belief.

Here is where the old conservatives did their best work.

There was a complex set of rules and regulations that governed courtship and that were policed, oddly enough, by maiden aunts.

An anachronism from this era is the concept of the chaperone.

Let me explain to generation Y the concept of the chaperone.

When a young man was courting a young woman, the couple sat in the parlour of her parent's house with a third person in the room. That third person was known as a chaperone. The presence of a third party ensured that the young couple did not get carried away with their affections.

But there was another purpose to the chaperone. If the courtship did not proceed to marriage,

the presence of a chaperone guaranteed the honour of the young woman for her next encounter. The chaperone was an insurance policy against the non-fulfilment of a contract. The old conservatives were an ever-practical lot.

The point of all this is that society seems to have an inbuilt need for conservative thinking.

This means a set of rules and regulations that preserve what are, at the time, considered to be the values of society.

Such values might be queen and country, sexual propriety, sustainable consumption, responsible driving practices or tolerance of minority views.

But here's the trick: the rules and regulations are -- not unlike the geological concept of plate tectonics -- always on the move.

The direction of these shifts can be plotted over time with the advent of new regulations.

God Save the Queen has not been played in cinemas before a film is screened for 40 years.

Smoking was banned from Australian restaurants just over a decade ago, and we are very close to accommodating some form of carbon tax.

With each new set of rules and regulations there is a dedicated band of conservatives who act as enforcers.

Just as a maiden aunt might signal her disapproval at a display of poor manners by the pursing of lips, or by uttering a discreet "ahem" to a chaperoned couple, so the new conservatives are equally adept at signalling their displeasure.

And so in this respect the new conservatives are much like modern maiden aunts, ever ready to issue a curt tut-tut to anyone who challenges prevailing mores and values.

The issue for business and government is to read the shifts in social values and to ensure they remain well clear of the tut-tut zone of the new conservative enforcers.

Edited extract from KPMG partner Bernard Salt's new book The Big Tilt; [e-mail] Twitter.com/bernardsalt Facebook/BernardSalt Demographer