Revision Update: UK Politics: A Leadership Challenge to David Cameron?

“Damn your principles! stick to your party” So said the Victorian Conservative Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli. Yet it would appear that principles are being placed before party at the present time within the Conservative party.According to Conservative rules, 46 MPS is all it takes for a leadership challenge to be launched against Cameron. 15% of Conservative MPs must ask the 1922 Committee for an election and a simple majority secures the leadership. These were the rules introduced in 1998 which led to the ousting of Iain Duncan Smith in 2003. Given the size of the vote against the government on the proposed EU referendum and House of Lords reform, it would seem that this requirement could be easily met should Conservative MPs perceive Cameron to be an electoral liability in 2015.

Rather perversely however, Cameron remains more popular than the party, and given the proximity of the next election and the absence of an obvious rival leader[1], Cameron is likely to survive until the election at least. That is based on the supposition that the Conservative backbenchers do put party before principle.

There has been speculation that Theresa May and Philip Hammond have been positioning themselves for such a development. Hence May’s denunciations of the Human Rights Act.

It is normally the case that one expects a Conservative leader to exercise more power and authority over his party than his Labour counterpart. The Conservative party is more hierarchical and ideologically disposed to accept the edicts from its leader and consequently the level of opposition to Cameron has come as something a surprise. This is not only because of the structural arrangements and culture within the Conservative party but because of the potential electoral damage such disunity can cause. Internal political squabbles can cost a party dearly as Labour learnt to its cost in the 1980s. The overt opposition that Cameron has faced from his own backbenchers has not only curbed his own powers but also could potentially dent their electoral prospects in 2015. Unlike Labour in 1997, it seems that years in the political wilderness of opposition have not instilled a need for party unity.

It is argued that Cameron has not helped his cause in this regard. Rather like the US president, the Prime Minister needs use his power of persuasion in order to maintain support from his own party. It is often alleged that the whips are the sinister agents of party discipline who ensure that recalcitrant MPs toe the party line due to the fear of deselection and the diminished prospect of promotion to ministerial rank. However, it should be noted that the whips also serve as a two way communication channel. One of their purposes is to relay to the leadership the feelings of the backbenchers and the leadership needs to accommodate their views.

The organisation of the Conservative backbench MPs is called the 1922 Committee. This title commemorates the occasion when backbench MPs rose up to rid themselves of the then Prime Minister, Lloyd George, to select one of their own, Andrew Bonar Law.[2] The same fate could await Cameron as talk of leadership challenges has been circulating which bears testimony to the vulnerability of his position. Yet Cameron has done little to win over the hearts of minds of the Conservative backbenchers who may be unwilling to accept his policy positions. This lack of communication with his own MPs has left him isolated and lacking in authority and seems to have even resulted in a clearly stated dislike of him and his leadership. On the home page of Philip Davies, Conservative MP for Shipley, he proudly proclaims “My aim is to give the best service to my constituents and to vigorously hold the government to account”. This is some way epitomises the attitude of a sizeable proportion of Conservative MPs who seem more committed to their own right wing ideological principles that some of Cameron’s attempts at modernising. They provide a graphic illustration of the applicability of the old maxim that no Prime Minister cab ride roughshod over his own party.