With the starting pistol having been fired on the latest Conservative leadership election, we asked our peerless panel this month what they thought of the timetable agreed by the 1922 Committee, the decision to sift down to four candidates by party conference, and, of course, their thoughts on the candidates themselves, now that we have our confirmed final six.
First up, a majority of our 921 respondents agreed with the Committee’s timetable for the contest. This represents a shifting of views. Last month, a majority (51 per cent) wanted the contest concluded by conference, with 16.6 per cent wanting it completed by the end of August and 31.4 per cent were happy for it to go on to Christmas.
Now, only 34 per cent think the contest is too long and should have ended at or before conference, and only 5 per cent think it should have run into December or beyond. Perhaps this shows a welcome faith in the wisdom of Bob Blackman, or a realisation from some that going into the year’s end would have been too long to go without sticking it into Keir Starmer.
In a further vindication of the Blackman regime, 41 per cent of members back the decision to split the MP voting into two sections, with four progressing to conference, and then a final two being whittled down to afterward. Nonetheless, over half of members disagree. 27 per cent think a final two should have been reached pre-conference; 25 per cent feel it should have been all six.
As with the timetable, a fudge seems to have been achieved that pleases the most of our panel possible. A Goldilocks leadership election? Not quite. One imagines members each have their own faintly idiosyncratic timetables and structures in their head and are happy to follow the lead of a reasonable compromise. Early days, but this schedule seems to have achieved that.
Always keep the best to last. Don’t worry Mr Steerpike, Guido, and whichever unfortunate interns are manning the Politics desks wITH the big names are on holiday. The juicy one is coming next. I know you’ve scrolled past this already, but a few of you owe me a pint, so just a reminder.
Last month we had perennial favourite Kemi Badenoch in first place on 26 per cent, and Robert Jenrick and Tom Tugendhat in second and third on 13 per cent each. This month, the top three remain the same, as the final cast of this year’s contest has been confirmed.
It’s good news for Badenoch and Jenrick, as the pair are up 7 per cent and 6 per cent respectively. But it’s bad news for Tugendhat, who finds himself down 3 per cent, now level pegging with fourth place James Cleverly. Snapping at their heels is Priti Patel, up 5 per cent, whilst new entrant Mel Stride lags on only 2 per cent. The number of ‘Don’t Knows’ is up 2 per cent, to 18 per cent.
What to make of these figures? Last time, we had Suella Braverman in fourth on 10 per cent. As at the parliamentary stage, it looks like her vote has split to fellow right-leaning candidates, whether Badenoch, Patel, or Jenrick. Tugendhat’s unconvincing leadership launch may have meant he has struggled to capitalise on the removal of Victoria Atkins from this month’s poll.
He, Cleverly, Stride, and even Jenrick and Badenoch will all be fishing in a similar pool. Either way, whereas last month Tugendhat was level-pegging with Jenrick on 13 per cent, the gap between them has now opened to 9 per cent. The assumption was that the final two was likely Tugendhat versus Badenoch or Jenrick. Is that still the case? That is a lot of Don’t Knows to be eaten into…
The next month provides a ready opportunity for candidates to tour the country and make their cases to members. As this month has shown, the figures are able to change. But the contours of this contest are becoming clear. Whether MPs follow members’ lead is a different matter.
