Tories in turmoil
After unceremoniously dumping their leader, Britain's Tories look to a party stalwart to reverse their sagging fortunes. Alistair Alexander reports from London
For all Tony Blair's troubles, it is ironic indeed that their direct consequences have been visited on his principal opponent, the hapless -- and now former -- leader of the opposition Conservatives, Ian Duncan Smith. Yet, after being brutally sacked by his own MPs last week, it is clear that Duncan Smith's principal failing was not so much his own unpopularity (he was barely well-known enough to be unpopular), but his chronic inability to take advantage of the prime minister's.
Conservative MPs believe that staging a coup against Duncan Smith sends a signal that they have rediscovered their appetite for power. Yet it remains to be seen whether their chosen successor -- veteran right-winger Michael Howard -- will lead them out of the political wilderness or lead them even further astray from the path to government.
In fairness, Duncan Smith's problems began long before Blair's approval ratings nose-dived in the aftermath of the Iraq War; they date back to when he became Tory leader two years ago. His election in 2001 was seen by most MPs as a disastrous turn of events -- under a third of them had actually voted for him. But, owing to election rules used for the first time in that election, the 250,000 Tory Party members were the ones who had the final say in Duncan Smith's ascension to the leadership.
As a result, the party was saddled with a leader who's right-wing anti-Europe credentials appealed to the party's reactionary rank and file, but couldn't hope to win back the millions of voters who deserted the Tories for Tony Blair.
With no coherent political programme and even less charisma, Duncan Smith was never likely to secure the confidence of MPs, much less the voters. Disgruntled MPs had been grumbling about IDS -- as Duncan Smith likes to be called -- for at least a year.
As summer brought with it the precipitous decline in the government's approval ratings, but no equivalent gain from the Tories, plotting began in earnest. The campaign against Duncan Smith gathered momentum after allegations surfaced that IDS was employing his wife in his office despite her doing conspicuously little. This was hardly Watergate -- employing spouses is a popular ruse among MPs looking to bolster their own salaries -- but the furore that followed underlined the determination of a growing number of his own MPs to oust him.
After a typically flat speech at the Conservative Party conference a month ago, it was all too obvious that Duncan Smith's time was up. Twenty-five MPs wrote privately to the leader of the backbenchers -- who is responsible for the MPs without shadow government positions -- in order to force a vote of confidence on Duncan Smith's leadership. Although the end result was closer than predicted -- 75 for the leader and 90 against -- Duncan Smith was humiliated nonetheless.
Just as the Westminster journalists were contemplating another deliciously divisive Tory leadership battle, however, three senior MPs representing all wings of the party announced their support for shadow chancellor Michael Howard. Not long after that, one of the main leadership contenders -- and, according to some, plotter-in-chief -- David Davis also announced he would be backing Howard. One by one all the likely candidates ruled themselves out in favour of Michael Howard, apparently leaving his candidacy for the leadership unopposed.
The virtual coronation of Michael Howard as new leader is uncomfortably reminiscent of the Tories' distant past, when the party's leadership was decided in 'smoke-filled rooms' from which a new leader would 'emerge'. The Conservatives were eventually forced to introduce leadership elections in the sixties and put an end that embarrassingly antiquated process. Now though, after over 30 years of elections, Tory MPs seem to have reverted to type, snubbing their party members by simply ejecting the party's chosen leader.
The Howard bandwagon, however, had an inexorable logic to it. An election would bring further division, undermine the party's credibility and leave the Tories without a leader for months.
David Davis somewhat piously let it be known that in supporting Howard he was placing the party's interests before his own. He also must have known that had he challenged Howard and won in a leadership election, he might have suffered the same fate as his predecessor; of being forced on ungrateful MPs by Tory Party members. At least Howard will enjoy the support of both MPs and party members.
That the majority of Tory MPs should support Howard is in some ways unsurprising. Mr Howard certainly has all the qualities that his predecessor lacked: previous experience in high office as home secretary under John Major, a formidable intellect and a fearsome capacity to damage his opponents in debates.
On the other hand, Howard has one particular quality that the Tories appear to have overlooked; he is possibly the most loathed politician of his generation. As home secretary Howard was seen as ruthlessly cynical, pandering to the worst prejudices of the right of his party with a string of opportunistic and mean-minded policies.
When Howard last ran for his party's leadership in 1997, his campaign was sunk after former minister and colleague Anne Widdecombe memorably declared that he had 'something of the night about him'. The description stuck and Howard placed fifth in the leadership race.
So it is to some degree an indication of the Conservatives' desperate position that they should emphatically unite around such an unloved figure. Howard will clearly have to reinvent himself before he can reinvent his party.
Even if Howard can rehabilitate himself, the problems facing his party run deep. The Tories talk of offering the electorate a vision of 21st century conservatism. Unfortunately for them, the Labour Party beat them to it. Tony Blair's 'New Labour project' has proven to be far more successful at packaging conservatism than the Tories ever could manage.
Like all recent Tory leaders, Howard has begun by reaching out to the 'centre' of mainstream politics. If things don't go smoothly, however, he may revert to his hard-line instincts and shore up support among the numerous aging Tory Party members.
For most Conservatives then, Michael Howard is precisely the shock therapy the party needs to embark on the long road back to power. Privately however, many forward-looking Tories fear that Howard is simply a palliative, providing comfort to the core supporters as the party slips into terminal decline.
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 6 - 12 November 2003 (Issue No. 663)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/663/in13.htm