Main Edition
US
FR
October 8, 2024 - 10:00am
“Never interrupt an enemy when he’s making a mistake.” These wise words — or something like them — are attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte. From the Conservative Party’s perspective, the best thing that can be said for the current leadership contest is that it’s provided scant distraction from the ongoing self-sabotage of the Labour government.
With his first 100 days not even up yet, Keir Starmer has suffered the fastest loss of popularity of any British prime minister this century apart from Liz Truss. Amid a donor scandal, a cronyism scandal and a huge backlash to scrapping the winter fuel allowance, Starmer’s chief of staff Sue Gray resigned on Sunday, calling her role in the government “a distraction”. It’s therefore smart of the Tory leadership candidates to say so little for so long.
Or at least it would be, if tactical silence were the true motivation. But it’s not. From the outset, the contestants have sought to suppress debate within the Conservative Party by emphasising unity. That continues to be the case. Even during the political hothouse of party conference, tempers were artificially cooled. For example, when Robert Jenrick made unwise comments about UK special forces killing instead of capturing terrorists, his rival Tom Tugendhat expressed firm disagreement. What the other campaigns didn’t do, however, was go in for the (metaphorical) kill. If there was any judgement about Jenrick’s fitness to lead, it was distinctly implicit.
Similarly, when Kemi Badenoch got into a tangle over her remarks on maternity pay, the obvious conclusion — that she doesn’t watch her words sufficiently carefully — was not driven home by the other candidates. It happened again when James Cleverly condemned Starmer’s handover of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius last week. Cleverly could have been ripped apart for being the foreign secretary who had entered into these negotiations, but there was no Tory bloodletting. Rather, he’s become the bookies’ favourite and has gained key endorsements, while his rivals let it happen. They even let him get away with his statement that Tories should be “more normal”. He’s not wrong, of course, but it’s a bit rich coming from an old ally of Liz Truss.
The unity mantra, which proved impossible in power, has been reinforced by Conservative Party chairman Richard Fuller, who told GB News several days ago that removing Boris Johnson was a “mistake”. The implication is that infighting was the root cause of Johnson’s resignation. The truth is that Tory MPs tolerated month after month of mounting scandals — by no means limited to Partygate — until they were belatedly pushed over the edge. On an accelerated time scale, the same happened with Truss: party upheaval followed her downfall, not the other way round.
Disunity was never the core problem. Rather, it was a catastrophic failure of good governance and political vision. Whether made in the present or the past, the Conservative Party must face up to its actual mistakes before it can move on.
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.
Subscribe“a fixation with a non-issue in order to avoid the real problem” – sums up politics for a decade (at least).
‘the prime beneficiary is the Reform party’. This also applies to labour’s woes
Both major parties have shown themselves to be undeserving of the electorate’s trust and support. So far this century they have both behaved like social, cultural and economic vandals who are only obsessed with the approval of their peers and the promotion of questionable (and often discredited) ideologies regardless of the impact this has on those who elected them.
If you are happy with more of the same then fine – continue to vote lib/lab/con. On the other hand, if you believe that genuine change in our government’s priorities and aims are necessary then, l’m afraid, there’s only one game in town at the moment – Reform.
Seems an increasing number of people are coming to share that view and I expect that number to grow as the party matures into a viable alternative.
It seems to me that this malaise applies across all parts of western society including the private sector.
The wrong people get promoted for the wrong reasons. They have no values or vision. The only qualifications that count is to fit the identikit, say the right things, not hold the wrong views, be prepared to spout any nonsense that may constitute the company line from time to time and stands ready to crush dissent.
They are not prepared to make any innovative decisions and hand over responsibility for corporate strategy to consultants expecting this to absolve them of responsibility. The consultants produce some variation of the current management BS which they adopt like a new a new religion but which deep down they know is BS which is why the block out all doubt. And when it fails they find a new religion
Quite right. It’s officially referred to as an Idiocracy.
I’m convinced the Conservatives don’t want to be re-elected. They know it’s a sh*t show behind the curtain of government.
Much better to late Labour flounder and stumble their way through the next decade of disastrous net zero and brinkmanship geo politics.
The now more openly competing paradigms will have probably made Tories and Labour irrelevant before the end of 10 years. The nam of one or both may remain but the current feckless, circular, tweedle dee – tweedle dum “leadership” will be gone.
there’s no way they will manage 2 terms-they will be lucky to see out the current one.
All the better for the only party that actually supports Britain.
I personally think it is wise for the Tory leadership rivals to see where Labour is going with its self-immolation.
My impression was that Sue Grey was trying to lead the party towards the Blue Wall with Morgan McSweeney to the Red Wall but the decimation of the Red Wall following Starmer’s woke two tier approach to the ethnic riots and the Winter Fuel Payment fiasco has left his Red Wall flank wide open to the benefit of Reform whilst any Blue Wall takeover is dead in the water following doom and gloom pre-budget warnings.
This creates a dilemma for the Tories. Do they primarily focus on the Blue Wall or the Red Wall which I think is why the Tories internally fell apart following Johnson’s win. Not only because of his attempt to follow through with the Great Realignment but more importantly because the Blue Wall was trying to reassert power once it was revealed that the Red Wall held the balance of power.
As such, the Red Wall still do hold the balance of power, its just that the Blue Wall wasn’t willing to cooperate and compromise with higher taxation and planning reforms to help with Levelling Up and social care.
Ostensibly this is what Labour is forcing the Blue Wall to do now which will either bring the Blue Wall back into the Tory fold or strengthen the LibDems. This means Labour has to pivot back to the Red Wall hence the backgrounding of Grey and the foregrounding of McS who now has to take on Farage. So expect things to get dirty there.
Meanwhile the Tories only need to watch from the sidelines and keep their leadership battle cool with a view of doing a deal with Reform depending on the outcome of the fight between McS and Reform. This will probably see Cleverly selected.
“Disunity was never the core problem. Rather, it was a catastrophic failure of good governance and political vision.”
Or rather the problem related to lies, more lies, and even more lies, so blatantly of barn-door proportions and repeated with not even a hint of shame or, apparently, recognition that even the most gullible and cognitively challenged of the electorate could any longer be persuaded to believe in them.
Having just read about the ‘uproar’ when an advert for Heinz Baked Beans didn’t show a picture of the black bride’s father, I am starting to see things differently. The Conservatives need a leader to set things right but none of the candidates could do anything for a day without upsetting a few minority groups and then they would have to spend the next 5 days apologising for every word. What is needed is someone who speaks so precisely that every word is understood correctly and without upset but, at the same time, follows an agreed plan of action. A barrister, in fact.
I am starting to have a lot of respect for Two-Tier. If he does makes mistakes, they become forgivable mistakes, never to be repeated. As a barrister, a wrong word or syllable can change the verdict and he doesn’t make mistakes like that. To be so precise, you have to be very, very boring and totally lacking in character. Two-Tier is perfect. You might not like his politics but he is a safe pair of hands.
Which brings us back to the Tories. How to fight an automaton? Clearly, the only possibility if you can’t fight like with like, is a big character who pushes everything forward with great energy, somebody who inspires followers to get out of the trenches and charge the enemy. Not much hope then.
Sounds like you are describing a Trump at the end.