Are Conservatives looking at another 1997?

It is intriguing that the three main factors which will decide the country’s destiny at the next election are all as yet undecided and all three lie in different hands.

Those of us veterans of the years 1992-97 recall what made a difference during the course of that Parliament as we headed towards the election. The three factors essential in removing a government are a governing party publicly at odds with itself, a credible leader of the Opposition and a sense among the public that a government had “done its time”. None of these factors have quite yet crystallised.

Only the Conservative Party itself can decide whether it is cohesive or not. Between 1992 and 1997, it was Europe which marked obvious differences between colleagues. Before, during and after the Maastricht debates, colleagues poured onto College Green to demonstrate their differences in front of the cameras, long after it became clear that the divisions were having a catastrophic impact on how the Government of John Major was being seen. Once the public think your principles are more important than governing effectively, then they tend to tell politicians: sort yourselves out, but do not try running the country at the same time.

Last time it was Europe. This time the dividing lines appear to be whether or not the Government is “Conservative enough” for some MPs, Ministers and newspaper backers — and, of course, the leadership of Boris Johnson. The former issue may be the more difficult one to resolve, as the Chancellor struggles with a gargantuan task post the Covid disruption, in the teeth of what may be a protracted conflict in Ukraine which will bring much more heartache and economic damage in its wake than we have yet seen. As always, not all MPs will get what they want in difficult times, but there had better be a plan they can all get behind. The brewing argument between “conservative” and “unconservative” policies, hiding the usual ideological divisions, will be seen through, and titbits of “red meat” will not hide the need for proposals to combat acute financial hardship for too many people.

The Johnson leadership issue is threatening the core of the party. Although personalities are vital at top level, no one is bigger than the Conservative Party. I suspect many supporters are now working for each other locally, and for their lifetime’s commitment, rather than for the Prime Minister himself. If Boris Johnson is to turn this around, he will have to demonstrate that personal loyalty is no longer the yardstick. He should bring into Government the sort of individuals like Jeremy Hunt, Greg Clarke and Tom Tugendhat who were excluded — possibly more by those around him at No 10, who had a vindictive streak towards the appointments of those they consider unworthy — at the start of his premiership.

Neil Kinnock was not judged a credible Opposition leader ready to govern in 1992, but by 1997 Tony Blair certainly was. And so the Conservative Government lost their second electoral card. I recall Sir Tony Blair (as he now is) being described regularly and credibly as “the Prime Minister in waiting”. For all his qualities, Sir Keir Starmer does not yet have this moniker. His party and supporters need to find it if this element of the equation is going to work. Jeremy Corbyn could never achieve it, but Conservatives recognise that Starmer certainly could, as an individual whose grounding in public life as an effective DPP suggests competence and respectability at a high level. But the star quality of leadership to break through is almost impossible plan for. Events may create it, just as Boris Johnson’s ability to have grasped the significance of Ukraine has added a quality to his leadership that could not have been anticipated. There seems to be enough raw material — it is up to Sir Keir, the Labour Party and their supporters to attend to this. So, this second factor in electoral change is still open to question.

The third, that shift in public mood to say “it’s time for a change”, is also not quite yet present, as polling and the local government elections suggest. Most of us in Government in the run up to 1997 knew the game was up, not least in a marginal northern constituency. There they said goodbye to a homegrown MP with pleasantness and no rancour, but with a ruthless inevitability forged on Black Wednesday, which no amount of hard work and recovery by John Major could gainsay. Matthew Parris memorably described it recently as that slight change in note of an aeroplane engine as the descent begins a long way from landing, missed by many but recognisable instantly to regular travellers.

My experience of the public, after nine general elections over forty years, is that they usually get the big call right. They know when to stick, and when to twist. Nothing is yet inevitable, but for those whose job it is, and ought to be, to put the public and their problems first, an already difficult Parliament is about to get even harder.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation.