We are due to see a new head of the Tory party. The two schools of thought are that this can either be a fast election or a slow leadership election. We will look at the merits and otherwise for each choice as well as the likely contenders and what this might mean for the future of the party.
The argument for a quick leadership race is because of the very real threat from Nigel Farage and the reform party. In so many ways one fo the reasons for the snap election called by the soon-to-be ex-leader Rishi Sunak was to thwart the Reform party. The party was nowhere near ready for an election, there were rumours it was going to get a fresh impetus to prepare with the return of its talismanic leader and give them a few months and they’d have something close to a political machine ready to fight an election. This decision, kept from the entire cabinet, was made in haste (though there are other factors at play, probably used as ‘filler reasons’) in a bid to see of Reform’s actual chances. Why? If the Tories had to spend most of the election arguing with Reform and the right it thought it would waste too much time doing this and not arguing with the left, Labour. Call a quick election now and you don’t have to really worry about Reform UK floundering for candidates, money, structure and a leader. Then you get to only really focus on Keir Starmer and you have a chance to sneak in perhaps in a hung parliament. That was the idea.
The idea failed AND the threat of Reform remained, if only in a diminished state (which according to the numbers actually HELPED Labour e.g. constituencies in Wales). Far from putting Nigel Farage off, he’s now in the House of Commons. The Tories have lost their 2019 conservative coalition (1/3 going to Reform - without that vote the Tories will NEVER be in government again without being in a coalition). The Tories lost over 4 million votes that might have been theirs and indeed they spent the election IGNORING their voting base in a bid to save the centre (which they did as symbolised by the shock re-election of key centrist Tory Jeremy Hunt).
A quick leadership election though would maintain Sunak’s original plan, albeit AFTER an election rather than before. Have a quick leadership election and you can maintain focus on the Labour Party. If you waste any more time you only give time to the Reform party who will professionalise, organise and coax wavering Tory MPs to their side (which looks likely). Quick, clean and something similar to how Rishi Sunak was appointed might do well in nipping the 2024 election in the bud and going back to doing what the Tories do best.
The pitfalls of a quick election are huge and possibly could undo the party. Another election where essentially the wider Conservative Party gets to choose either just 1 or an option of 2 centrists leaders might just tip rightist Tory MPs over, would further alienate the Tory base and could damage the party to such an extent that it is no longer an effective political force. The party would need more time to learn its lessons. A quick election would see those lessons effectively ignored and the David Camerons and George Osbornes of the party would maintain their grip on the nether-regions of the soul of the party. Only a long election would give insiders time to actually change the party. A short election breathes life into the very mechanisms that landed the Tory party with the worst electoral defeat in its history.
A long leadership election would be something like 6 months rather than a month or so. It would be long and drawn out. A period of a civil war might ensue, though in fairness the party has been in a civil war since 2006. The party would go through a similar process to the one that got Liz Truss elected as leader and Prime Minister in 2022 where there are many candidates, the process takes a long time and the end result is a gamble depending on the wishes of the wider Tory party. A candidate from both the centre and the right would be up for election and the likely winner would be the one on the right. The party would get breathing space and use the time as a time of reflection and contemplation. Strategy can be thought through and the Tories could metamorphosise like they did in the 1830s, 1920s, 1940s, the 1970s and in the 2000s. They had the time, they had the influence and they had the money to spend this time. BUT, in all of those times they were still electorally relevant with a chance of winning the next general election regardless.
In a long leadership election you get a chance to build another coalition in real time and in the open. Not only Tory voters but the wider public would see this election unfolding and candidates could pitch their arguments to the country more widely. We’d see the political equivalent of a beauty contest and the next leader would more likely have a greater amount of popular support even outside the party itself. The elected leader could even flex their oration knowing full well their opponent is Sir Keir Starmer, man of the people who read newspapers in North London with a severe disdain for the general public (never forget the face he pulled when people laughed at him when he said his dad was a toolmaker for the 900th time). Keir Starmer would fold under the pressure of a charismatic opponent. The size of Labour’s majority is so vast that a full term is more than likely anyway, so why rush when you basically have 5 years to make your case?
The pitfalls are also numerous and wide-ranging. During a long leadership election you essentially hand a blank cheque to the Labour Party to do whatever they like without an opposition voice. Labour can smash the constitution, enact draconian laws that would make George Orwell’s 1984 book look like an anarchic paradise and the Tory party would be far too engaged in its own politics once again. The infighting of the Tory party is what got itself in so much trouble anyway and the leadership context is likely to be as mud-slinging as it has been before. The Tory brand is so destroyed that when the rats fight amongst themselves in a barrel the public will just look away and not give it a second glance. Donors will see the brand as only being made more toxic and a leader elected after a long campaign might be popular to a wider section of voters but it might only further entrench different sides of the party anyway. No one votes for split parties and the experience of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss has shown us that Tories don’t take defeat within their own party lying down; they wait to pounce, to snipe and to bring down if they have to. Reform UK will have the time to professionalise and by the time the Tories vote someone in Farage will be too big a beast to take down, nullifying the easy ride with Keir Starmer. By the end of a long leadership election won’t Nigel Farage be seen more and more as the true voice of opposition and conservatism (especially after poll after poll shows conservative voters see Nigel as the best leader for the voice of the right?)
The likelihood is that the Tories are going to go for a short election. They will maintain course set by Sunak (or set behind Sunak’s back) and elect someone seen as a unifying figure FROM the centre. Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman and Priti Patel from the right of the party will make their bids but the short campaign will make them unable to make their very different cases to the Tory MPs they have to get to support them enough to get into the quick next rounds and their likelihood for getting to the final two (who are then and only then offered to the Tory members to vote on) will be greatly diminished. In the meantime a Tom Tugenhaght or even Jeremy Hunt will be able to much more easily get Tory MPs on side and be able to show a more ‘united parliamentary front’ to Tory voters who will see this as a way to better oppose the Labour Party in parliament. The leader will then try to discredit the right (as they have done before) in a hope that platitudes and insults might still win them the day.
It’s clear that neither approach is ideal but then again it shouldn’t be after losing an election so badly and become so ideologically bankrupt that your own voters would rather stay at home in their millions than prevent a Socialist radical-progressive woke party from sweeping to unassailable and undisputed power. Could the die already be cast? Is it too late to stave off the worst-case scenario?
If what is likely comes true then we predict the end of the Tory party as an electoral force for ever. If what is less likely comes true then the Tory party’s fortunes will be out of its hands and its fate will be decided by conservative voters, by Nigel Farage and by the possible but highly-risky re-metamorphosis of the Conservative Party once again.
This article first appeared on the TDL Times. For more information, articles and more please visit www.thetdltimes.com.
Comments