The below content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss this daily briefing.
So much for the most “sophisticated electorate in the world” — a label haughty Conservative MPs have historically embraced. After yesterday’s leadership antics, try instead the most “unpredictable electorate in the world” — or “duplicitous” or “downright incompetent.”
Yesterday, I argued (alongside many of my lobby colleagues) that James Cleverly should feel the most confident about securing a place in the Conservative leadership race’s final round. The former home secretary had simply run the most effective campaign — culminating in a persuasive and widely exalted address to Conservative Party conference. He told Tory activists to be more “normal”; and they applauded. Suffice it to say, that demonstrated some real rhetorical flair.
But Cleverly is no longer in the running to be Tory leader. He secured the support of only 37 colleagues in the fourth and final MP ballot yesterday — down two on the total he recorded on Tuesday. Both Robert Jenrick (41) and Kemi Badenoch (42) muscled past the race’s last remaining Conservative moderate. Badenoch, after all, is the MPs’ choice to be the next Tory leader.
The plainest explanation for Cleverly’s decline (and the secret ballot contest means not all factors are knowable) is that Conservative shenanigans, rather than parliamentary will, denied him his place in the final two. Shenanigans on whose part? Well, that is less clear.
Cleverly’s campaign has dismissed rumours it told MPs to “lend” their votes to either Jenrick or Badenoch in a bid to stop one or the other. According to recent surveys, Jenrick was the race’s most vulnerable right-winger; Cleverly and his campaign manager “spreadsheet Shapps”, therefore, were incentivised to block Badenoch.
Of course, Cleverly’s denial could be face-saving — nor does it rule out the possibility that MPs freelanced and took matters into their own hands. Jointly, parliamentarians could have concluded that Cleverly was safely through and opted to back their “second preference”. Logically, these are conflicting considerations — which could explain both Badenoch and Jenrick’s rise.
But whatever the case, given Westminster’s collective crystal ball failed to foretell Cleverly’s shock fall, a pause on the prediction-making is probably wise. And yet everything we know about Jenrick and Badenoch points to a bitter, chaotic final leg of this leadership race.
***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***
The fight on the right continues…
There are a few prevailing theories as to how MPs conduct themselves in the infamous parliamentary stage of a Tory leadership contest. Do they, for instance, ensure the activists’ favourite(s) is/are safely positioned among the final two — to avert any grassroots groaning? Do they provide the membership with two distinct options by passing on an ideologically maximalist and minimalist candidate? Or should MPs disregard activists’ prospective objections and exercise their privilege to endorse only the best candidates, according to their unique (and surely wiser) perspective?
Such concerns have played on MPs’ minds in every leadership contest since the current rules were instituted by William Hague, elected Tory leader in 1997. And yet, whatever yardstick you use to judge Conservative MPs this contest, the parliamentary party utterly failed.
Let’s run through our measures. What did the activists want? Recent surveys suggested they preferred a Cleverly vs. Badenoch contest. What would have been the ideologically balanced option? One of Cleverly/Tugendhat vs. one of Badenoch/Jenrick. And what did the MPs themselves want? The parliamentarians, it would seem, wanted Cleverly in the final two.
The Jenrick vs. Badenoch outcome, simply put, does not reflect the logic of any of the considerations outlined above. But that is what MP chicanery has presented before the Tory grassroots.
Over the coming weeks, activists will have the choice of two ideologically maximalist options — candidates who have both positioned themselves to the right of Rishi Sunak (himself the most right-wing Conservative leader of his generation).
In opposition, therefore — whoever is elected leader — the Conservatives have shunned moderation in favour of radicalism. Precedent (Foot, Duncan Smith, Corbyn) doesn’t approve.
Now, this is not to say Jenrick and Badenoch will spend the remaining weeks of the contest relentlessly agreeing with each other. Far from it. Their critics (each other) tend to view Jenrick as “insincere” and Badenoch as “unpredictable”. This race, they have also been the most instinctively antagonistic of the leadership field — proving the fastest to criticise their competitors and respond to attacks on themselves with counter-criticism.
In this vein (and somewhat hypocritically), the Jenrick campaign is already seeking to foreground the view that Badenoch is too aggressive to be an effective leader. Sir John Hayes, a longstanding Conservative MP on the right of the party, yesterday rubbished Badenoch’s political manner as “irascible.” Jenrick, Hayes insisted, is “emollient.”
But this comment reflects the wider positioning of Jenrick’s campaign — which I think augurs well for him over the coming campaign. The former immigration minister’s general strategy, as acted on over months, has been to restyle himself as a trenchant but steadily competent right-winger — a politician whose principles mirror those of the Conservative selectorate, but who also exudes administrative nous. Tory MPs and the wider membership, especially those of the party right, surely accept that these traits were lacking in recent champions (Johnson, Truss, Sunak) — and are therefore needed to revivify the party cause.
As such, I think the campaign’s key debates will revolve more strictly around political style, than policy substance or principle. Badenoch’s rolling rows, Jenrick’s camp will propound, don’t exactly speak to the strict discipline and competence that many Conservatives consider necessary to the party’s electoral reassembly.
But on substance too, Jenrick intends to challenge Badenoch’s claim she best embodies the archetype of a Tory right champion. In the last 24 hours, Jenrick has made much of his vow to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Badenoch has not overtly repeated this stance; and so she “wants to remain”, Jenrick’s team asserts.
Depriving Badenoch of her long-held position as the grassroots’ favourite, however, will be a tall order indeed for Bobby J and co. This race, accordingly, remains wide open.
Subscribe to Politics@Lunch
Lunchtime briefing
Jenrick supporter says Conservative Party should avoid ‘irascible’ Badenoch leadership
Lunchtime soundbite
‘We know the out of touch Tories will oppose this every step of the way. Just like they opposed Labour’s minimum wage, and now – shamefully – want to take us back to the dark ages, when women were denied maternity pay’
— Angela Rayner says Labour’s Employment Rights Bill will deliver the “biggest upgrade to rights at work in a generation”.
Now try this…
‘Senior Tories worry leadership hopefuls are ignoring the economy’
PoliticsHome reports.
‘Everyone Boris Johnson throws under the bus to sell his new book’
The former prime minister has axes to grind with political foes, world leaders — and even the Great British public, writes Politico’s Noah Keate.
‘Labour mayors heading for clash with Treasury on housing, jobs and transport’
Via The i. (Paywall)
On this day in 2022:
Truss fights for unity as parliament returns
