We’re all in this together
Theresa May says that the Tory party should adopt US-style primaries for the leadership contest What is it about some MPs? Are they born thinking they know best, or does it just come with the title? Why do so many of them seem to think that they’re the only ones with the answers?
No, I’m not about to start talking about ‘the nasty parliamentarians’, but I am hugely annoyed and frustrated to see a group of Conservative MPs yet again trying to cut the party membership out of choosing our new leader. And before you glaze over at the thought of another Tory only interested in talking about what happens in Westminster, let me explain why this matters so much.
The current system for electing the Conservative party leader contains a powerful principle — one member, one vote. As people involved in democracy, you might think the principle would appeal to MPs. Sadly not. Instead, it is the view of the majority of Conservative MPs that they know best, and they would deny everyone but MPs any substantive say whatsoever in the election of our next leader.
Our members may be out there pounding pavements, delivering leaflets, knocking on doors, raising money, and manning polling stations; Conservative MEPs, MSPs and AMs may all be busy representing their constituents and making a real difference to people’s lives; and Conservative councillors may actually be running councils and services in towns and cities across the country — but heaven forbid that any of them might have a real voice in choosing their leader!
What message does that send to voters? If we aren’t willing to listen to and trust our own membership in the election of our leader, then how can voters believe that we will listen to them when it comes to understanding their problems and finding the right solutions?
That strikes at the heart of the current debate in the Conservative party. Much has been written and said about the need for us to change. One after another, leadership candidates have expressed their undying support for change — so much so that the party chairman told the Today programme that the need for change was now an accepted fact. But the painful truth, as the vote on the leadership rules showed us, is that the Conservative party is still in complete denial.
That’s why I say we need to divorce the debate about the future of the party (both its internal workings and its external face) from the outcome of the leadership election. As long as all discussion of change is seen through the prism of the personalities and characteristics of certain leadership hopefuls, then people will think that changing the leader is everything. It won’t be, it shouldn’t be, and we should stop kidding ourselves that it ever can be.
A review of the leadership rules gives us an opportunity to embrace and embed the right kind of change, and to send people exactly the right kind of messages. That’s why I would like to see the Conservative party adopt USstyle primaries for the leadership — open to Conservative supporters as well as members.
When I was party chairman, I introduced primaries for the selection of parliamentary candidates. The idea is simple. Exposing leadership candidates to a process involving a wide cross-section of Conservative supporters would help expose the Conservative party and its potential leaders to a far wider range of views and issues. Adopting primaries would also be part of the process of accepting that the days of party mass membership have gone. Primaries would instead reflect the need to embrace and encourage the concept of registered supporters, in part by making it worthwhile for people to register their support in order to have a say in the future of the party.
It is, of course, too late for primaries for this leadership election, but that shouldn’t prevent us from laying the foundations. That would mean, as has been suggested by one of my colleagues, establishing now an electoral college system for leadership elections one that would give primacy to the prefer ences of MPs, but also a fair say to all members of the party. In doing so, we would have demonstrated a commitment to fair and democratic principles. Future leadership elections could then distribute electoral college votes according to the results of a series of primaries. I believe this would generate far greater public involvement, excitement, and momentum for the party than any of the systems now on offer.
There are those who say that only MPs know the leadership candidates well enough to make a proper judgment. That might be true if it weren’t for the fact that general elections are decided by people who, on the whole, don’t know the leadership candidates at all. In fact, if my colleagues really want to limit the right to elect the next leader to a handful of well-informed political representatives who understand the scale of the problem we face, then they should give the job to the 400-odd Conservative candidates who lost on 5 May, and not to the 200-odd who won!
We must stop electing leaders because they have the right doctrinal views or perform well at the Dispatch Box. That means nothing to voters. People want to know if you share their values, understand their problems, and can do something to help solve them. Leadership isn’t just about dictating policy, it’s about inspiring people. Winning elections today is as much about the personality of the whole party as it is about philosophy and policies.
When I was party chairman, one senior member of the 1922 Committee told me that without the MPs there would be no Conservative party. Hey, guys — wake up and smell the latte! What about our councillors, MEPs, MSPs and AMs, not to mention our membership? The fact is that without the party there would be no Conservative MPs. We’re all in this together; that’s why everyone needs a real say in electing the leader.
MPs all too often deride the views of party members on the basis that they are elderly, right-wing and out of touch. Certainly many are elderly and have firm views, but there are equally entrenched views held in Westminster. Our party members and councillors up and down the country are in touch on a day-to-day basis with the problems faced by voters. They are grappling with the problem of finding affordable childcare, with the impact of family breakdown, and with the pressures of caring. They are school governors and teachers, doctors and nurses, businessmen and women. They are increasingly diverse — young and old, and from all religions, ethnic groups, backgrounds and cultures. In short, they are more representative of our country today than our MPs are. Let’s recognise them and their experience and ensure they have a real voice in choosing the next leader.
Changing the rules for electing our next leader gives us the chance to reform our party and take a massive step on the road back to power. We must not waste it. Or, worse still, start marching in the wrong direction.
Previous page
