After the last three elections, ConservativeHome has produced successive profiles of the new Conservative intakes: ‘Cameron’s Children’, ‘May’s Men and Women’, and ‘Boris’s Boys and Girls’. Our list of Tory candidates for ‘winnable’ seats published on Wednesday – ‘Sunak’s survivors’ – is different for the obvious reason that it features people who have not yet been elected as MPs.
Our definition of ‘winnable’ seems optimistic. We defined ‘winnable’ as based on the 80/20 strategy that CCHQ was supposed to use for this election. We raised our eyebrows to that approach, for the simple reason that we are sufficiently literate and numerate to read the opinion polls. It has de facto been abandoned. Majority under 7,000? “Sorry, but give up”, is CCHQ’s advice.
Indeed, with the latest MRP polls suggesting the Tories could be anywhere between 150 and 50 seats, the assumption must be that many of those profiled will not be on the green benches of the House of Commons after July 4th. It also makes speculation about the post-election make-up of the parliamentary party more difficult. We cannot open a window into candidates’ souls.
Nonetheless, there is value in examining the honourable individuals who are out campaigning for themselves and the wider party. Not only to show them the appreciation that their efforts deserve, but also because it illustrates the direction in which local associations and the wider party are going when choosing candidates. How might ‘Sunak’s survivors’ compare to previous intakes?
****
When writing the profiles, one feature was consistent. Of the 112 individuals profiled, a whopping 63 served or had served as councillors or alternative/devolved legislators of some description. This is not a new development. In 2019, 45 of the 107 new Conservative MPs were former councillors or devolved legislators. In 2015, that was more than two-thirds.
Candidates are not always standing in the same area they have represented. Aphra Brandreth, was a councillor in Richmond, but is now standing in Chester South and Eddisbury. Similarly, Chris Carter-Chapman was a councillor in Tower Hamlets, but is up for election in South Cambridgeshire. Roberto Weeden-Sanz serves in Kensington, but is running in Scarborough and Whitby.
But, crucially, each could claim some form of connection to the area of their new constituency. Brandreth’s father had been the MP for City of Chester. Carter-Chapman grew up in the area he hopes to represent. Weeden-Sanz comes from long-standing Yorkshire stock, and previously stood for Doncaster Central. The importance, it seems, is locality – and campaigning experience.
But three are exceptions. Time and time again, one finds a candidate is a long-standing councillor and campaigner in the seat they now hope to represent, such as Marc Bayliss in Worcester, Pauline Jorgensen in Earley and Woodley, or Faye Purbrick in Glastonbury and Somerton. With the polls as they are, this makes sense. Evidence suggests that ‘local’ candidates over-perform.
When assessing the make-up of the potential parliamentary party, one must remember the exigencies of the selection process. Unlike in 2017 and 2019, there was a much greater lead-in time, meeting that many ‘winnable’ seats had selected a candidate before Rishi Sunak stepped out into Downing Street. This is a process I have long been chronicling.
Nonetheless, CCHQ still played its traditional late-term role in selections, leading to short-cutting of the traditional selection process, the imposition of greater central control, and the ballad of Richard Holden. The impact of this is debatable. Would Will Tanner still have been selected without election rules? The picking of Nick Timothy – amongst others – suggests he could.
The reason? Some definitions of ‘locality’ are stronger than others. Both Tanner and Timothy – known, not unfairly, for more than being from Suffolk – have stressed their local ties. Ed McGuiness – a Northern Ireland native – has made frequent references to his connection to Sandhurst, in the Surrey Heath constituency. Some form of connection seems key. The “LibDemification” is real.
Of course, ConservativeHome has not always been uncritical of the tendency towards ‘local champions’. That’s for the twin reasons that a parliamentary party of local councillors might be more effective in keeping seats, but is less likely to produce future ministers, or take difficult decisions in the national interest. Sometimes local A & Es must be closed and houses built.
A tendency towards choosing ‘local’ candidates must also reflect the obvious frustrations amongst members with CCHQ, the party leadership, and the last fourteen years. So those who are more SW1-focused – SpAds, former staffers, and other politicos – will be heartened to know some have still slipped through the ‘local’ net. 24 of ‘Sunak’s survivors’ are ex-SpAds or staffers.
Again, these candidates are not all identical. Compare Katie Lam in Weald of Kent with Hannah Ellis in Harlow. The former plots a traditional route: President of the Cambridge Union, a career in finance, adviser to a Home Secretary, with a stop-off in the West End. Ellis, by contrast, is Harlow born and bred: from working in the pub, to Robert Halfon’s staff, to serving as a councillor.
About one in ten of the 2019 intake were former staffers. Four MPs had been in 2017. More strikingly, in 2019, almost half of those elected – 51 – had run for a seat previously. In 2017, that had been two-thirds of the intake. That figure is substantially down this time around in terms of candidates, with only 33 of the 112 profiled having previously run for a seat.
These included Helen Harrison, Neil Shastri-Hunt, and Faye Purbrick, who have all lost recent by-elections. They also include Tim Barnes, James Clark, and Jack Rankin, who have all enjoyed the dubious honours of having stood against Keir Starmer, Jeremy Corbyn, and Angela Rayner. Nigel Gardner and Debbie Soloman previously stood for Labour and the Brexit Party.
The volatility of the opinion polls – admittedly, in one direction – makes it harder to calculate the extent to which former candidates are concentrated in safer seats: that they have claimed their traditional reward after the customary flit with a no-hoper. But failing to be elected now seems less valuable. You stood and lost in London in 2017? Who cares! That doesn’t help in Fulchester.
Then again, since being an MP is such an appalling job, it may be the case that fewer former candidates are interested in standing again – especially when the chances of the party being back in government are so slim. How many of those currently running will want to do so again in 2028 or 2029? It’ll have a lot to do with the opinion polls and the speed of Labour’s inevitable implosion.
****
The candidates are of a relative piece with previous intakes. Around 17 – more than one in ten – are from ethnic minorities. In 2019, under 5 per cent of those elected were, compared to 7 per cent in 2017, and 9 per cent in 2015. 40 are women, 2019 doubled the share of female Tory MPs elected from 2017. CCHQ was worried that this election would mark an undoing of 20 years of work.
Occupation-wise, 11 have served in the armed forces, another 11 have worked as lawyers, and 12 have worked in the public sector. Having previously been fertile sources of Conservative MPs – a quarter of the 2015 intake were former lawyers, for example, compared to under a fifth of the 2010 parliamentary party – these routes have diminished at successive elections.
****
From all this, what can we surmise about the likely shape of the post-parliamentary party? Some factors are obvious. Whatever the new cohort’s size, it will be shaped less by ideology than geography. Some political positions are easier to guess than others. Mhairi Fraser appeared at the PopCon launch. Timothy has written many columns explaining his views, as have Tanner and Alex Deane.
But the vast majority have not. If one had the time, you could trawl through the voting records of local councillors and try and project their views on bin collections and potholes into an over-arching philosophy. Yet it would tell you little not readily surmisable. These are traditional local Tories: not ideological, reflexively pro-business, and fundamentally committed to their areas.
Various attempts have been made to guess the political composition of the next crop of Tory MPs, especially considering the probable post-election leadership election. It is difficult to tell. But one tendency is clear. As being a Conservative MP becomes ever-less glamorous, the tendency to fall back on local councillors, SpAds, or staffers will only grow. Who else would want the job?
The post Sunak’s survivors. Conservative candidates show an obvious trend towards localism – and towards politicos. appeared first on Conservative Home.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: William Atkinson
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, http://www.conservativehome.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.