It’s fair to assume that, when the 1922 Committee and board of the Conservative Party were hammering out the details of the leadership contest, they did not expect the speeches on the final day of conference to be dominated by foreign policy. They probably didn’t expect the field to be so open by this point either.
I was watching Kemi Badenoch being interviewed by the Spectator’s Fraser Nelson on Tuesday afternoon, when an audience member put her hand up to nervously say she’d just had a breaking news alert on her phone that Iran had started bombing Israel.“So what would be your response as Tory leader?” Nelson asked. Badenoch, whose focus has been more on domestic politics than some of her more internationally-minded rivals, quickly responded with confirmation of her support for Israel. But it’s clear this wasn’t the topic on which she was planning to fight for the leadership. With the situation between Israel and Iran suddenly threatening to escalate into a full-blown regional war, her comments moments earlier – about how “CCHQ makes no sense anymore”, that we have “HR running the economy” and suggesting that five to ten per cent of civil servants “are very, very bad – you know, should be in prison bad” – were put sharply into perspective.
This has been a mixed conferenced for Badenoch. Going in as both the members’ favourite and the perceived frontrunner (even if Robert Jenrick is leading in terms of MP preferences), she has struggled to maintain momentum. First came her comments about maternity pay having “gone too far” – an assertion which, when challenged, Badenoch did not seek to explain or defend, instead accusing journalists of misquoting or representing her. Then came a similarly provocative attack on the level of the minimum wage – something Conservative voters either support or think should be higher.
Her relaxed attitude was further evidenced by the merchandise on offer at her campaign stand. Other candidates had gone all out: Robert Jenrick had branded umbrellas and “We Love Bobby J“ hats; James Cleverly had clocked the overheated convention centre and offered fans (fans for fans), as well as T-shirts and reusable coffee mugs; Tom Tugendhat had gone all-out with name-branded fake tan, temporary tattoos of his name in a big red heart, and hats with the slogan “I’m a Tugend-hat”. Badenoch’s team, meanwhile, had bought a bag of apples and stuck stickers with her name on them.
By midway through the conference, the assessment was that the mantle of frontrunner had been passed to Jenrick, who seemed the most in control of proceedings. He was catching up in the members’ polls too. But then came the former immigration minister’s bombshell statement in a campaign video that “Our special forces are killing rather than capturing terrorists, because our lawyers tell us that if they’re caught, the European court will set them free.” Maybe the constant referrals by Tugendhat and Cleverly to their military experience had got to Jenrick, spurring him into machismo mode. Maybe he saw the attention Badenoch had been getting for her own provocations. Either way, to say it divided opinions is an understatement. “I think he’s fluffed it” one member told me on Tuesday afternoon. “The party have lapped it up,” said another.
Over on the slightly more centrist side of the contest, Cleverly and Tugendhat have both been performing strongly. Cleverly roused the auditorium to cheers and boisterous applause during his Q&A session on the main stage, and is by far the most relaxed when answering questions or dealing with the media. (“He’s the only one who can actually land a joke,” one member – notably not committed to supporting Cleverly – told me.) His insistence on not going after his rivals and fighting a positive campaign has been noticed and appreciated. It’s hard to find anyone with a bad word to say about him.
Tugendhat, meanwhile, has the most enthusiastic supporters. His hawkishness and focus on defence (“Did you know Tom used to be in the army?” is a frequent refrain) is helping to balance his more moderate record on other issues and the perception that he is in some ways softer than the other candidates. Recent developments in the Middle East help him – rows about wokery suddenly don’t seem so important.
If that makes it sound like the waters are muddy, it’s because they are. While lanyards and tote bags bearing the candidates’ name abound, I found far more members who were yet to make up their minds. Even at the self-selecting Badenoch event, a show of hands showed that undecideds outnumbered Badenoch fans. “I want to give all of them a chance and hear what they have to say,” I got told, again and again.
Obviously, members don’t get a vote yet – it’s for Tory MPs to pick the final two. But the very real sense that the contest is wide open will have an impact when MPs consider who to back. There isn’t an obvious winner here – Jenrick is probably the closest, but the speeches today could change everything, especially now foreign policy and the security of our nation – and, indeed, the world – are top of the agenda. Or they could change nothing, and send MPs back to Parliament with no clearer an idea of what it is the membership wants.
Overall, the main takeaway is that despite the endless hustings, interviews, speeches and media grilling, both the candidates and the Conservative party are only beginning to scratch the surface when it comes to understanding what went wrong in the last election and working out how to rebuild. If you hoped to come away from Conservative Party Conference knowing who to put your money on for the next Leader of the Opposition, think again.
[See also: Did the Just Stop Oil soup-throwers deserve their sentence?]
Content from our partners
Related
