Conservative Leadership

Don’t think of problems – view problems as opportunities say the professional motivators.   Still pinching myself over the result of the referendum, my euphoria is tempered by the enormity of the task ahead.  So far, predictably, the BBC has focussed on problems but I feel sure wiser heads in the Conservative party are already eying up the opportunities.  However, the optimum path out of the EU for United Kingdom is unlikely to be defined without firm political leadership.

Those of us who have been utterly dismayed by David Cameron’s remain campaign will feel it right that he has signalled his intention to leave office and grateful that he has, at least, allowed time for an orderly succession.  Lord Hill, the “Brussels Miscalculator”, has wisely followed suit and there should be more of the PM’s limp cohort of European advisors who should consider their EU pensions.  But at some stage the score-settling must be halted and political energy focussed on the considerable task ahead.  Accordingly, it is to be hoped that the Conservative leadership issue is settled quickly (unlike the application of “Article 50”).

So far, all the talk of leadership candidates has concentrated on Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Nicky Morgan and Theresa May (I do not underestimate the role paid by Pritti Patel and Andrea Leadsom and I hope they are suitably rewarded).  Let us dismiss the Education secretary straight away, despite her early application, since no one could be sure what she believed in from one day to the next.  The remaining three candidates are commanding political figures with the intellect, effective intelligence and leadership qualities sufficient for the highest office.  However, the incoming leader would face 2 huge problems.  Firstly, the need to unite the party behind the defined policy.  Given that the majority of Conservative MPs did not support Leave, for one reason or another, it will be a formidable task to bring them willingly onto the new team.  Indeed, even within Leave there will be differences of opinion on the way forward.  Secondly, it will be important to maintain the public support for Leave and the momentum for change.  In this regard it will be vital to show some immediate reward – some red meat for the expectant supporters of the campaign.

Both Boris and Michael, towering figures though they are, have blood on their hands and may not be easily forgiven by the losers who must now be rehabilitated.  Neither could win outright. A contest between the 2 would be an unnecessary distraction to a party which already has its hand full.

Theresa, on the other hand, appears to have made few enemies during the campaign.  She is a respected and commanding figure who could heal wounds and, if necessary, knock heads together.  She is a woman which could be an enormous electoral advantage, should that become necessary.  Most importantly, as a very long serving Home Secretary she knows all about immigration.  Some demonstrable measures on immigration to show that the Government had heard the message from the referendum vote could provide the “quick win” that a large proportion of the Leave vote expect.  Theresa May will know what is both eye-catching and practicable and will have the personal credibility to deliver.

A leadership selection process is inevitable but it is, nevertheless, a distraction from immediate business so a short and sweet process will serve the interests of the UK best. Despite their obvious claims to the throne, both Boris and Michael should put the interests of the country first.  The whole party must put aside tribalism for the good of the country.  Surely all Conservatives could rally to that banner?  Specifically, Boris and Michael (and any other candidate) should be flattered to be considered and then stand gracefully aside allowing Theresa May to assume the leadership unopposed.

And not by eastern windows only,
When daylight comes, comes in the light;
In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly,
But westward, look, the land is bright!