For me, every new speech by David Cameron brings an intense sense of deja vu.

It’s commonplace that the Cameron Conservative strategy is based on a detailed study of how Tony Blair and New Labour seized the centre ground and won elections. However, it’s increasingly clear that what Cameron has borrowed from Blair is not only an electoral strategy, but his entire philosophical baggage-train.

Blairism was never ideological. But in “New Britain”, a collection of speeches made in 1994-96, Blair laid out the philosophy behind his vision of a new politics and a new society. Economic security would be assured, from both recession and exploitation. But more importantly, a Labour government would build a new society based on mutuality and common values; and a new sort of politics which would give power back from Whitehall to ordinary people.

At its heart, Blairism as laid out from 1994-1997 was about the power of the community to solve the problems of the market. If a stakeholder society could solve problems through collective action, there was less need for the state itself to step in, and there was no need for Old Labour solutions.

Now, David Cameron is using remarkably similar language to talk about the problems of Britain after ten years of Labour government. Cameron wants a ‘cohesive society’ and ‘social responsibility’ rather than a ‘stakeholder society’; but the difference in the rhetoric and the underlying philosophy is wafer-thin. Cameron accepts – in a way which makes many conservatives uncomfortable – that markets can fail and hence there are problems to be solved. To capture the center ground, he offers solutions. To reassure the right, he denies it is the role of the State to provide them directly. The solutions he sees must come from community, civil society and local government. It is the same balancing act on the same political and rhetorical high-wire as Blair.

For some, the similarity between New Cameron and Old Blair will be damning enough in its own right. The basically identical approach also causes problems for the Conservatives’ attempt to cast themselves as a party of change. What solutions can Cameron suggest which haven’t already been tried, or considered and rejected, by Blair? Of course we don’t know, because the Conservatives haven’t told us their policies yet.

And what will happen when the Conservatives revert to type? Labour once displayed a liberal side. They became authoritarian because, as socialists, they were happy to put the needs of the community above the rights of the individual. What will stop the Conservatives doing the same? The Conservatives oppose ID cards today. Labour once supported freedom of information, voting reform and an ethical foreign policy, all of which turned out to be fashionable ornaments to opposition rather than matters of fundamental principle.

I don’t think many Lib Dems mourn the passing of Left and Right. Perhaps we should be more worried about “different” turning into “the same”.

* Chris Keating blogs at The Diary of Chris K.