Main Edition
US
FR
September 5, 2024 - 7:00am
Two months after the worst election result in Tory history, the first votes have been cast for the next leader of the Conservative Party. The headline is that Priti Patel is out. After finishing bottom of the pack with 14 votes, the former home secretary’s bid for the Conservative crown is over.
The result was reminiscent of the tight margins of previous leadership battles. When MPs first voted in 1997, just four votes separated the bottom three candidates. In 2001, there was a tie for last place. And in 2005, the backing of only four MPs was the difference between dead last and fighting another day. It proved similarly close today. Patel was only two votes behind Mel Stride and three behind Tom Tugendhat.
Chief among Patel’s problems was her ratings with the public. In spite of being off the front line for over two years, she was the least popular candidate in the contest. Two polls last month told the story: one from Savanta, which gave her the lowest net favourability score of any candidate (-30), and an Ipsos-Mori survey which showed she was rated as the least likely to do a good job as leader (a net score of -27). Too many MPs concluded that a party reduced to 121 MPs and less than a quarter of the vote couldn’t afford to take on a leader with such poor ratings.
Riding high after the first vote is Robert Jenrick, who is now the frontrunner. Jenrick, who resigned from Rishi Sunak’s government over immigration and has made restoring trust on the issue a key part of his campaign, had been expected to top the poll having attracted more public supporters than any other candidate. But the result was better than expected: his two-MP lead over Kemi Badenoch in declared backers (17 vs 15) grew to six when MPs voted (28 vs 22).
It’s perhaps unsurprising that for the first time in a Tory leadership battle the two leading candidates — Jenrick and Badenoch — are widely seen as being on the Right of the party. What’s not yet clear is whether they will stay out in front.
History offers an ominous warning for Jenrick in particular. In all three contests the last time the Conservatives were in Opposition, the candidate who led on the first ballot always lost their lead by the final one. Worse, they never went on to win the contest. The risk for Badenoch is that she slips into third and loses out on what was widely assumed to be her rightful place in the decisive members’ ballot. Both will now be seeking as much support as possible from Patel’s former backers.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeBut will whoever is elected as Conservative leader ever fight an election? No idea, but doubt it. far too much can happen in over 4 years.
The disconnect between the Tory MPs, Conservative members and the Tory voting public can be seen in full force in this first round of voting.
None have expressed a mandate that resonates with voters and that is why there are only 121 MPs battling to extinguish the oldest political party by the next GE.
Because they have to appeal to the Tory membership – a cohort that has bought into ‘cakeism’, in large part because they are generally well insulated whatever from the growing inequality that has rippled across the UK.
And to win their approval they will inevitable stuff themselves down a cul de sac.
While this saga is grinding on, are any of the Tory MPs, like, you know, opposing the government?
“Cleverly….had just six public backers, but finished the day with 21 MPs in his column“. Sounds like tactical voting by Jenrick supporters to ensure a members’ run off vote against Cleverly (which Jenrick would win) rather than Badenoch (which he would lose). Like so much the Tories have implemented in recent decades, their leader election system is unfit for purpose, open to gaming, and satisfies nobody.
Picking a leader in any political party involves different groups of votes manoeuvring. It’s politics.
And we all end up losers!
The Left’s oft quoted feminist saying, “The personal is political’ is an acknowledgement of the fact that government policy affects individual lives. Yet people who hold strong views about so called ‘culture wars issues’ are seen obsessives who distract politicians from more important issues. This is so muddle headed and short sighted. Why shouldn’t citizens respond to policy decisions that affect their lives personally? Why shouldn’t they push back against big social changes that have been represented to them as progress when they see clearly that this just isn’t true. I see Kemi Badenoch as someone who believes that the personal is political but see it as fair that it should be so as much for social conservatives as for progressives.
The problem is these issues don’t override the priorities folks have related to other things – cost of living, finding a home, the quality of the kids school, how quickly can they see a GP or get an operation if needed, the worry a criminal won’t be locked up as no prison places etc.
Folks can also just smell/sense Britain has become more unequal and the dice is increasingly loaded in favour a small minority.
The Right wing problem is it’s got itself way too distracted but alot of other stuff, some of which folks aren’t as bothered about as much as you might be.
Perhaps those people have been ill informed about new changes to the national curriculum and about what new protocols relating to children’s mental health GPs are being asked to follow.
Again down a rabbit hole that is not what the majority experience or worry about.
Having forsight about how misguided policies will shape people’s lives as they take affect over time is not going down a rabbit hole.
You’re still getting this wrong JW. The dice is actually heavily loaded in favour, not of a small minority, but of the small majority who own some capital and thereby get richer every year without doing anything at all to merit it, even as public services crumble and the forty percent who have no assets at all sink into penury.
Marx got most things wrong, but he sure was right about false consciousness. The problem isn’t someone else.
Let’s for a mo assume it is majority that own a house as an asset that has accumulated value (and I think this the primary point you make). What is the trend on that ownership? Only heading one way isn’t it. And that’s point.
I’ll give you one thing – you’re quite good at this non sequitur deflection technique.
The houses will continue to get more and more valuable as a smaller proportion of the population own them. The problem will get worse.
Folks can also just smell/sense Britain has become more unequal and the dice is increasingly loaded in favour a small minority.
A minority which, at current levels of legal and illegal immigration, will be a majority within a few decades and a politically influential voting block in less than a decade.
V confused point you make there IW. Not sure you have much sight of the wealth distribution in the UK and the trend. Go look it up.
But what you demonstrate is that v rich minority can be thankful for useful idiots who’ll deflect it all onto immigrants.
As you seem to suggest, there also is a set of dice increasingly in play that favours newer non-indigenous U.K. residents. They might reasonably be called the “two tier dice”
Jenrick the same Housing minister who announced a large fund to remove Grenfell type cladding but then rate of removal snail-pace? Offered loans to those affected rather than proper legal redress etc.
That aside, Starmer will not be quaking in his boots about this non-entity.
Always thought Cleverly the best option, but Tory members will see to him.
The person Keir will not want to see across the dispatch box is Kemi. He’s terrified of her.
Badenoch is the only candidate who will appeal to ‘old’ Labour voters. She plays neither the ‘race’ nor the ‘woman’ card and is anti-identity politics in general. The Tories will be missing a trick if they don’t make her leader. If they don’t, it will show just how out of touch they are with the groundswell of opinion.
“anti-identity politics in general”
She literally never shuts up about identity politics.
Not sure that giving David Tennant a dose of his own medicine counts as never shutting up about it…
Your opinion merely confirms the fact that the left are terrified of Kemi becoming the leader of the opposition.
Which is by far the best reason for her to lead the Tories.
The current nadir of the Conservative Party that gave the country Boris Johnson and Liz Truss is far from over. Looking at the hopefuls standing in the leadership election, it’s clear that the wilderness days are going to be very, very long.
Don’t do what you want most to do. Do what your energy least wishes you to do.
Kemi. She’s Labour’s worst nightmare come true. Anti-woke. Lucid. Bright. Sensible.
That’s why the Conservative Party, if it wants to survive, must appoint her as leader.
And Labour know this. That’s why they have so much animus for her. They’d sooner have anybody other than Kemi leading the Tories.