04 Jan 2019

New Year, New Prime Minister? A Conservative Party leadership contest in 2019 is very likely

E8AAD670-F3F8-4AFC-BEA4B67E9A25C350.jpg

It might seem a little impolite to start to speculate on the future of the Prime Minister a mere three days into 2019. Yet many if not most of Theresa’s May’s colleagues will have done precisely that in the Christmas/New Year break and will be comparing notes and thoughts when Parliament comes back next week. Although she survived the frontal assault of a formal confidence vote on 12 December, Mrs May will be well aware that there are, to borrow from Paul Simon, 50 ways to remove a Prime Minister. The bookmakers believe that she will fall at some point in 2019. BVCA Insight agrees.

The manner of her departure will, though, have an enormous influence over the succession process and whom that individual ultimately turns out to be. This will in turn affect the calculation of those who intend to throw their hat in the ring when the moment arrives.

The first test that Mrs May will have to face involves the fate of the Withdrawal Agreement, which itself was withdrawn before the Christmas recess but which she must now attempt to see enacted at the second attempt. The option of starting a parliamentary debate and then cancelling it again at the prospect of a serious defeat is not really a runner this time. It would almost certainly trigger a party revolt of a scale that she could not survive. This time round it truly will mean a vote in the lobbies of the House of Commons with no real chance that the same agreement could be brought back again for a third try at passage. Any substitute measure would have to be different, even if it were an explicitly temporary expedient.

So, the first question for Mrs May personally is whether it might be possible for her to win this vote the week after next without having to set out an explicit timetable for her own departure as part of the package required to win majority endorsement. It is possible but it seems somewhat unlikely. If she does not shift from her current stance, which is simply that she will not lead the Conservatives in to the next election (which is not scheduled to occur until 2022), then that makes it more probable that the Withdrawal Agreement will fail.

The next question for the Prime Minister, therefore, is how long could she remain in office if the Withdrawal Agreement sinks without a trace and some sort of Plan B has to be adopted instead of it. The most credible answer to that is not very long at all, and even that would depend on there being a clear Cabinet consensus that she should soldier on and attempt to clear up the mess, not least because no new leader might want to come in under these circumstances. Mrs May would be a form of caretaker Prime Minister with very limited authority.

As this is the backdrop, how might the succession process operate and what might be its features?

The exact manner and timing of Mrs May’s departure would influence the subsequent outcome

There are a number of different ways in which events may evolve for the Prime Minister. The end could come very quickly if she lost the Withdrawal Agreement vote in the House of Commons and with it the confidence of her Cabinet. She might decide that the most dignified response would be to resign swiftly and then set in motion the fastest possible timetable for electing a successor which, assuming that the Conservative Party membership is not excluded again from what should be the final stage of the contest, might be about a month in duration.

Alternatively, either if the Prime Minister won the Withdrawal Agreement vote (but having been compelled to indicate that she would stand down during 2019), or if the Cabinet implored her to stay on until a Plan B had been settled upon (either an extension of Article 50, or a set of mini-deals to allow the UK to leave the EU on 29 March in an orderly manner, or the ‘Norway Plus’/’Norway for Now’ formula), then the manner of her leaving would be less compressed.

The most plausible timetables would then be a formal resignation straight after the May local elections with the view to having a successor inside Number 10 before the summer recess starts in July, or a formal resignation in early July with the aim of completing the parliamentary stage of the election before that recess, and then holding a longer contest aimed at the membership in August with a successor in situ by mid-September before the Conservative Party conference at the end of that month. This is roughly what had been planned in 2016 after David Cameron’s departure but was curtailed when Andrea Leadsom threw in the towel.

Whether it is a relatively speedy affair or one which takes place over a longer period makes a real difference. The best known of the potential candidates would benefit from a quick vote in which name recognition and an established reputation at Westminster were key assets. A slower pace would allow a less well-known contender more time to build appeal in Parliament and the party. It has become a pretty reliable rule of politics for both the Conservatives and Labour that lengthy campaigns mean trouble for the initial favourite. Senior cabinet members should favour a snap race.

The number of potential candidates for the leadership is very large indeed

In 2016, the Republican Party in the United States found itself with as many as 17 active candidates for the presidential nomination. This proved a boon for Donald Trump who could divide and rule. It is highly unlikely that there will actually be anything close to 17 names on the first ballot paper to be cast by Conservative MPs but there are certainly in the range of 12-17 individuals who are allowing themselves to think about standing.

These fall into four broad camps. The first are what might be described as ‘insider insiders’. These are senior Cabinet members at the heart of this government. They include Sajid Javid, the Home Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, the Foreign Secretary, Amber Rudd, ex-Home Secretary and now Work and Pensions Secretary, and, if he is committed to standing (which is not certain), Michael Gove, the Environment Secretary.

The second category involves those who could be called ‘outsider insiders’. These are serving Cabinet ministers more distant from the core. Those mulling matters over here include Ms Leadsom, the Leader of the House of Commons, Penny Mordaunt, the International Development Secretary, Liz Truss, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and, as something of a dark horse, Damian Hinds, the Education Secretary.

The third contingent are the ‘insider outsiders’. These are people who have served at Cabinet level but are now outside of it. This set involves Justine Greening, former Education Secretary, who favours a second Brexit vote, Nicky Morgan, another former Education Secretary who is a more mainstream ‘Remain’ figure, and then the four souls who left the Cabinet last year over Brexit, namely (in order of departure) David Davis, Boris Johnson, Dominic Raab and Esther McVey.

Finally, there are a few ‘outsider outsiders’, who have never served at Cabinet level but might try to turn that to their advantage on the basis that they have no meaningful past in terms of the handling of Brexit since June 2016. This band includes George Freeman, a former junior health minister, Dr Phillip Lee, a former justice minister, and Tom Tugendhat, Chair of the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs. All three will not run but at least one of them might. After all, with no overwhelming favourite in the parliamentary party and with the requirement of just a proposer and a seconder to stand, why not?

Short-term ministerial performance is likely to have a disproportionate impact on events

It would be something of a surprise if the final two names in this contest do not include one of the four ‘insider insiders’ set out above (Javid/Hunt/Rudd/Gove) and it could easily be two of them. Unless Boris Johnson becomes a lot more trusted with his fellow MPs, if anyone from any of the other three groups listed above makes the run-off then it presently looks like Mr Raab may be that contender.

The short-term performance of these senior ministers will be the subject of scrutiny by MPs, party members and political commentators alike. That process has already started with Mr Javid finding himself briefed against for his alleged failure to tackle the Channel migrant ‘crisis’ with enough vigour and remaining on his family safari holiday for too long. Jeremy Hunt’s handling of the next foreign policy event of note will be put under the microscope. How Ms Rudd handles the ticking time bomb that is Universal Credit will be a matter of massive interest at Westminster.

This political ‘noise’ will doubtless be an irritation to the Prime Minister. Yet it could assist her if none of those supposed to be in the top rank of potential replacements impress others. A sense that she is still the least bad thing on the market is her best chance of being PM come 2020.

Tim Hames
Director General, BVCA


×

Update your login details

We updated our website and supporting systems on 12th December. 

If you previously had an account, please reset your password. If it's your first-time logging in, please register to create an account. For assistance, please contact the BVCA Membership Team

Login