December 30, 2024 - 2:00pm
A new year in British politics will begin with a radically revised electoral outlook. The latest electoral model from More in Common, for the Sunday Times, shows Labour losing 183 seats, which would wipe out the majority it won in July. These findings are bolstered by a similar new study from JL Partners, which also shows a triple-figure seat loss for Keir Starmer’s party.
On the face of it, this is encouraging news for Kemi Badenoch. Starmer, unlike Tony Blair in 1997, is already crumbling. However, Badenoch has a problem that previous Tory leaders never had to face in Opposition — a rival party on the Right. Reform UK already has five seats and would, according to both electoral models, win more than 70 next time.
The detailed analysis from More in Common shows another remarkable feature of the new electoral battleground, which is that 271 of the 650 constituencies would be won with less than a third of the vote. With things so finely balanced, Badenoch doesn’t have to reassemble the entirety of the 2019 Conservative electoral coalition, just some of it.
As to how this might be achieved, the Conservative leader isn’t short of unsolicited advice. Newspaper columns put forward policy prescriptions which, we’re assured, would bring the Tory tribes back together — and just happen to coincide with the authors’ own agendas. A more basic piece of advice would be to pick a strategy and stick with it.
Right now, all Badenoch is doing is picking fights — most recently by rising to Nigel Farage’s bait over party membership numbers. This is not strategic: it just gives her Right-wing rivals more publicity and allows them to set the agenda. It also puts off the decisions that actually matter. For instance, does Badenoch want to concentrate on winning back ex-Tories from Reform — or does she want to target those who defected to the Liberal Democrats and Labour?
If she’s picking the Reform path, then why such a sour attitude towards a party which provided a safe haven for so many alienated Tories? Badenoch would do well to realise that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. If, however, she’s intent on winning back centrist voters, then why are the likes of Tom Tugendhat and James Cleverly missing from her shadow cabinet?
There is another path: not a messy compromise between the other two, but an effort to strike out in a direction that’s distinct from populist simplicities and centrist complacency. Given the hole in which the country finds itself, the Conservatives could position themselves as the party of hard truths and tough decisions. However, in Opposition, that would require a seriousness about policy that the Tories never had during 14 years of government.
In 2025, it will be easier for Badenoch to take this Tory third way than to force her divided party to the Left or the Right. It’s also a better fit for her own ideological instincts. But where are the signs that she’s redirecting party resources — and her own attention — accordingly?
The Tory leader should remember that her three predecessors — Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak — were each, in their own fashion, undone by a lack of discipline. If she wants to avoid the same fate, she needs a strategy — one which doesn’t just set a direction, but enforces consistency of thought and action.
Peter Franklin is Associate Editor of UnHerd. He was previously a policy advisor and speechwriter on environmental and social issues.
peterfranklin_
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeTo me Badenoch represents the best of what Conservatism has to offer in UK. If I had to pick a path for her to follow, it would be to continue to represent that. Also, if we’re going to pick candidates based on their races and genders (not a good idea in general), she’s a far better candidate than Kamala Harris ever was – and Britain has to be recognised for that.
I don’t judge her chances of winning an election very high though not impossible. The first-past-the-post election system was supposed to provide UK with a strong executive but with the existence of 3-4 equally favoured parties as today, it ends up creating more uncertainty than certainty with wild swings possible every election.
Agree with you generally – but what really separates Kemi from the vacuum that is Kamala is that she wasn’t chosen on the basis of gender and colour.
Oh sure, I don’t mean to say that she was chosen for her race/gender, only making a hypothetical comparison. That said, there may be some grand theory of politics somewhere which could explain why Labour keeps talking the talk of equality while still mostly churning out middle-aged white men as leaders, whereas the Tories have given Britain what may be one of world’s most diverse set of leaders throughout their history.
Not just middle aged white men, but married men, mainly from North London!! Labour talks the talk but cannot walk the walk.
Are you sure about that? The previous leader, that political nonentity called Sunak came out of nowhere. Read the interviews in Dorries’ books.
He was chosen… by someone. The trail leads back to Dougie Smith.
Gove will know all about this. Why does no one ask him? His office is next door to Unherd’s.
Badenoch was mentored by Gove. Why did he choose her?
She is almost certainly the best that the Conservative Party has to offer. This is faint praise.
FPTP creates uncertainty? Labour got a massive majority. So just factually your point way off the mark. One can argue that may not repeat, or perhaps unfair.
I should perhaps clarify – it creates uncertainty because it potentially creates large majorities for a party that in reality has limited support. So this may mean every election cycle due to minor differences in voter sentiment the country may be getting very different representation with different ideas and priorities.
She is, politically, a clueless child. I doubt that she will improve.
You are very likely right. Let’s hope she is not going to do a Starmer and do/say nothing till the next election, otherwise, should she come out victorious, that would prove a Starmer-like sort of win.
Whatever she does, she’ll be gone before the next election unless Labour completely implode in 2025.
More nonsense from Unherd claiming the Tories are a Right wing party and Reform are their rivals on the Right.
This is all a lie propagated by Unherd to deflect from how the Conservatives were sabotaged and gutted by Gove and his weird friends.
Give it a rest will you, you post the same nonsense on every article that mentions the Tories.
In Britain the Tories are the centre right party, and Reform are slightly to the right of the Tories. Just because you believe they’re not right wing enough doesn’t change that fact
I think we should agree to disagree on this one.
Do you think, like me, that Unherd is a stupid name for this media outlet? Or do you like being one of the Unherd herd?
No I don’t think it’s a stupid name, as it posts a variety of views across a variety of subjects.
It does unfortunately have many stupid commentators, who throw a hissy fit whenever they read an article that doesn’t align with their preconceived opinions
You would be happier if I, herd-like, agreed with everything in Unherd?
I’ve never said you should agree with every opinion put forward. My criticism is that on multiple occasions you post multiple complaints completely ignoring the premise of the article and focusing solely on a trivial details such as the author describing the Tories as a centre right party, which whether you like it or not is the position they occupy in British politics. Just because they’re not right wing enough to for your personal preference is irrelevant to the subject being discussed
I don’t think that is a trivial detail at all. It is a political tactic of the Left. It is their way of gaslighting the Right. I believe Unherd does this quite knowingly. That is why I comment on politics here.
There doesn’t seem to be very much point arguing with Mr Tinyboner. It’s not clear that his brain is the organ he’s thinking with.
Ah a bedfellow who doesn’t agree with everything published on UnHerd. Welcome.
I have to say though this schism on the Right, especially the arguments about what is ‘Right’, rather than on the inherent contradictions in Right wing thinking per se that must be thought through, is jolly pleasing – electorally at least.
Hello JW. So you like and support the present government?
Don’t support every decision for sure, but most I support given the circumstances and limited options. There are few big ones though we need to see more on in NY – approach to NHS & crucially Social Care, approach to Welfare and the c8-9m economically inactive etc etc. And of course the TCA needs renegotiating and won’t be straight-forward esp given Trump will have an impact too.
Proper mess they inherited in just about every sphere.
Fair enough. Yes they inherited a mess. Let’s hope they can sort some of it out and make a difference.
Happy New Year to you and anyone scrolling through.
Then why are you here?
They were. They certainly are not now. They are centre left.
Oi, get them off our lawn.
More seriously, I think a view like that exactly why Reform will top-out at a number that makes them unelectable as the Govt of the UK. I would suggest you rattle round in an echo chamber far too much if you really believe that statement you’re doomed to never quite understand what happens or why.
I am not sure Right and Left have clear differences. The Left is about taking money from the taxpayer to fund all those who vote for them and the Right is about keeping money from The City.
The Left and Right neither have the interest or ability to solve most of our problems.
Zeus said ” Humans will needs gods as long as they are cowardly, venal and lazy” I would add incompetent.
The various problems which need to solved in Britain are unlikely to be achieved because the problem is that the vast majroity of middle management and directors are inadequate. To solve these problems would require massive pruning of the middle and upper management.
I give you the following examples: Hillsborough, cost over runs on defence projects, The Olympics cost over runs, Grenfell, The Post Office, a bloated Welfare State and NHS compared to NW European countries ( Austria and Switzerland for example) comprehensive education, humanities education in most universities, inadequate and poor quality vocational training, The Police, immigration, people who are not entitled living in council and social housing,water companies, railways, etc
We need realistic assessment of the character and skills people need and they have to be trained to two levels above which they operate. This will require rigorous selection, prolonged smart and hard training, followed by rigorous testing. Training Captains in the RN between 1793 and 1815 is the approach we should take to selecting managment. Remember Admiral Byng was executed for failure, not promoted and all crews and officers were rewarded with prize money.
Was 22yrs RN CH. I wouldn’t recommend all of how we went about things be transferred to other spheres. Many proper balls ups but not reported as widely.
Interestingly though my sons are in RM and the training now includes things I, and they when they joined up, never imagined because technology and nature of warfare changed. Point being one can stay wedded to an old way a little too long.
In days of sailing ships mistakes cost people their lives. By the time an officer was appointed captain of a ship they had considerable experience of what the sea could do. As N Monsarrat wrote in The Cruel Sea the strength and fury of that ocean, it’s moods, it’s violence, it’s gentle balm, it’s treachery.
Captain Tom Woodfield in Polar Mariner p190 describes being in hurricane with 120 kn winds and above, 70 ft waves and with loss of radar for 3 days.
Nowadays what is the price for failure , promotion ?
What needs to be achieved is maintaining toughness of mind and body, keeping traditional skills while keeping abreast of technology . What is ignored is that to keep abreast of technology the period of training may have to be extended.
Whatever you say, Gove’s demolition of Corbyn in the vote of confidence debate was the finest ten minutes or so in the history of televised Westminster debate.
Can we agree that while the Tories might not be a ‘right wing’ party they have taken votes on that basis?
Yes of course. But most of those votes are long gone now. Reform will pick them up.
The vast majority of those who shape public opinion and policy have allowed Britain to rest on her oars since 1945 with regard to trade and technology, all the while creating vast number of tax payer funded jobs and allowing cost of the NHS and Welfare to expand massively.Perhaps Peter Shore of Labour; Chapple , Hammond, Laird, Jordan, Jackson of the Unions , Thatcher, Redwood of Conservatives understood trade and technology is competitive and survival depends upon agility and speed of response.
A good example of evolution is the development of technology which most humanities educated graduates ignore.
I have yet to read of any politician who understands these basic facts.
Ironically, Kemi is a computer science graduate, so you’d hope she understands some of this. But I am not optimistic.
I’d suggest all she needs to do right now is stick to running a tight ship, not making needless enemies, looking vaguely competent and picking the strongest possible team around her (if there’s any talent left to pick from). I’ve said it before – I just don’t think the electorate want to hear from the Conservatives for some time yet. Nothing – absolutely nothing – is expected from them right now – so take the opportunity to clean up the internals and do nothing in public. Absolutely no need to be out there making unforced errors (a domain where even she can’t compete with Starmer and Reeves).
One sensible reasoned comment amongst the Farage adorers who really need to think through Reform’s policies (none) and personnel (very dubious).
Peter Shore!…a blast from the past, who should have been Labour leader. And the others mentioned were all realists who understood how the world actually works.
Peter Shore’s Separate Ways which was highly rated by Shirley Williams persuaded me to move from a pro EU to Brexit position along with reading Orwell and listening to people who had a experience of the 1920s to 1980s .
Separate Ways: Britain and Europe by Peter Shore | Goodreads
Shore was a son of Merchant Navy Captain from Liverpool, served in the RAF at the end of WW2 and took a First in History from King’s Cambridge when degrees were a sign of scholarship not just time spent in higher education. His intellect and breadth of experience far exceeds anyone today in politics.
This is what is lacking; intellect, breadth of knowledge and experience, especially of leadership.
To make matters worse those inadequate individuals in authority who are rancid with resentment, are spiteful and seek to destroy those with the necessary qualities of leadership who outshine them.
Yes an excellent book which reinforced my views on the EU.
As you say there’s nobody like that in any party currently…a huge missed opportunity by and for Labour.
It’s because candidates for MP are selected from a tiny pool of parliamentary “advisers” (dogsbodies who can afford to work for free as aides to MPs straight after school/college) with very little understanding of how the world works.
Youth is not a great asset in politics. Experience and wisdom are
Politics today simply isn’t an attractive field for competent, intelligent potential candidates. It chews up anyone who demonstrates integrity and dumps them on the sidelines, desiccated by the constant battering from internal and external (media) critics. Who would choose to be operating in this arena when its possible to be more effective in the “real” world?
The reason I transferred my allegiance to Reform after 54 years Conservative Party membership was entirely due to the fact that the Centre right Party I joined in 1968 had more resemblance and morphed into a Lib Dem/Green coalition.
Badenoch may produce as many policies as she wishes but unless she achieves a huge sea change in her current Parliamentary Party, (I intend to win the Lottery at least 5 times before that) then I suspect she hasn’t a hope in hell of winning back the many former Conservatives like me who have found a political home in Reform.
I’m another ex tory voter who is now a Reform member for exactly the reason you describe. There are people in the Tory party that l like but I don’t see any way of ever trusting the party itself enough to vote for it again – their complete betrayal of this country and it’s people is something l will not forgive in my lifetime.
Whether Ms Badenoch is a good leader for the Tory Party or not depends on what one thinks should be done to this organisation.
After Johnson’s and Sunak’s record on immigration alone, why should this party survive, even if ‘reformed’? What facts have changed about it?
To be sure, the promise at the EU referendum and in the general election of 2019 that confirmed the referendum result was to ‘control’ immigration. ‘Control’ being achieved, but just not in a way that many among the electorate would have expected, or in a way that was explained at that time.
If Ms Badenoch achieves the final and irrevocable emasculation of this political organisation, she will have done the country a great service. One worthy of a knighthood.
Kemi Badenoch lacks a strategy to see off Nigel Farage
How do you know? She’s only been in post for a few weeks. Let’s wait and see. I’ve a feeling she may surprise us all. Farage clearly isn’t any more capable of addressing the country’s problems than the lamentable Starmer and his little cohort of midwit third-raters. At least Kemi has some intelligence and some appreciation of the real issues. Let’s give her some time.
“only been in post for a few weeks. Let’s wait and see.”
Well said!
I have no problem giving her as much time as she wants to come up with a wizz-dang policy platform. My question is, assuming she does come up with something dazzling, why would you trust her to keep whatever promises she makes?
because I was a big supporter … and I just joined reform
Boris Johnson wasn’t undone by a lack of discipline. He was plotted against by a group, one of whom, Cummings has admitted to doing it.
Why isn’t Cummings in jail?
Why the silence around this?
Why does Unherd deflect from what Cummings did?
Thank you Mr Tinyboner. Your flaccid rantings never fail to disappoint.
I’ve got my own troll! Hello!
Why would Cummings be in jail, Wee Willy?
Let me explain why Badenoch is on a hiding to nothing, from the perspective of someone who was “Tory bedrock” for three odd decades, but will not vote Conservative again. There are several points to make, and Badenoch would need to address each one to make headway on credibility.
(i) Imagine the Conservatives under Badenoch win in 2029. Who will be in her cabinet? You can bet you bottom dollar it will be… Cleverly. And, erm, Hunt, and Patel, and Coutinho… And a whole host of old sweats who lost their seats in 2019 but managed to regain them. Yeah, thanks but no thanks.
(ii) What possible reason could there be to trust that a Badenoch government will keep it’s promises when we know what we have experienced the last 14 years? https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx0h6VlLnWsGnB26vRvYh0aNPaHnKBhSlR?si=n7QUC-YDatZbEw0E
(iii) On migration specifically, why would anyone unhappy with the current disaster accept a bunch of policies from Badenoch that are to the left of Reform (which themselves are way too soft)? The point being, having experienced the surge in migration over the last three years, and knowing that it will continue more or less unabated through Labour’s reign, how does Badenoch propose to claw back the numbers? The only possible solution is a hard stop so the numbers actually start to drop, otherwise there would a tacit acceptance of that surge as fait accompli.
(iv) Which leads to my next point. If basically if Badenoch is going to end up saying on migration, ‘oops our kockup, but it’s too late now so we’re not going to fix the mess we made’, then what possible reason would there be to accept anything Badenoch claims she is going to do to improve the economy and living standards? As in, Badenoch would already have admitted that the recent migration spike cannot be undone, so then claiming that she would be able to repair the economy and reverse the 30-40% drop in living standards the Conservatives gave us over the last decade and a half is simply not credible.
What rubbish. The Tories are effectively Liberal Democrats now and the centre ground is where political parties go to die today.
They need a ‘sea change’ so structurally profound that it is frankly inconceivable with the present bunch of thick spineless liars.
They stand for nothing except weakness, spin and excuses. They are doomed. A fact that they (and clearly the author) don’t yet comprehend.
It doesn’t matter that they do or say as no one will believe them. In reality they are deservedly finished for a generation.
“The Tory leader should remember that her three predecessors …. were each, in their own fashion, undone by a lack of discipline.”
But that requires Badenough to decide on a strategic direction and that will split the party – Again. The ‘broad church’ will ensure the Tories will never be able to instil discipline as the various factions will never come together.
If Farage can avoid the ‘broad church’ BS he’ll prevail.
The people who voted conservative because they thought that the tories would reduce immigration have hopped onto reform especially as the tories ramped up immigration in their last years. So they will have to run on the economy, yet brexit is not economically shrewd so they can’t completely dominate that line either. Plus some probably won’t vote for her as a person.
What a delightful end to the year – another article about the Right fighting amongst itself. Deservedly so of course after a disastrous decade and a half.
We’re close to ‘peak’ Reform. Peak will probably be May local elections. After that they’ll start to slide. It’s policy portfolio will be further illuminated and implode on contradictions. Crackpots will characterise more of it’s strata behind Farage. And meantime Trump will be imploding across the pond mired in corruption whilst Right wing Populists in Europe also demonstrate big difference between policy implementation/good governance and rage amplification.
Doesn’t mean Kemi isn’t toast though. Tories change leaders at least once before next GE. Shame as quite like Kemi just because she swings back and in many ways that authentic even if sometimes unwise. Will enjoy while it lasts though.
It isn’t the Right fighting against itself, it’s the Right, Reform, fighting the Uniparty which operates under three different names.
And outline a Reform Policy please. Not just the objective i.e reduce legal immigration doh, but rather how they propose to do it, to what level and how they propose to handle the visa requests from Businesses and ameliorate any costs that flow to customers. My scepticism is Reform hasn’t, deliberately, put any meat on the bones of what it would do in reality across a broad range of policy sectors. You ought to be asking and checking given what you should have learnt last 14yrs. Until they do it’s just rage amplification and a form of Grifting for Nige.
Starmer won an election by having no policies, just “aims”.
The reality is that he wasn’t voted in, the Tories were voted out. I expect the same will apply to Labour at the next election.
the tough truths are populist Peter. that’s wh y you don’t spell them out … and why kemi won’t either
What exactly is the problem with a Conservative and Reform coalition? At the very least it would allow for a discussion of issues ( immigration, social welfare reform, NHS etc) without every centerist, left winger, BBC journalists labelling those who wish to raise these matters as ‘extreme right wing’s.
The Conservative Party needs a new vision beyond “rational self interest”. I’d propose a grand balance between “rational self interest” and “rational selfless interest”.
I say this because after the election of Boris and the potential to augment the great realignment, the right of the party (rational self interest) was unable to temper its selfishness to align with the left of the party (rational selfless interest). This failure to share and redistribute for the good of the country doomed the great realignment and ultimately cost the party the election.
In this respect, individual wealth needs to be balanced with community wellbeing. For example, rather than mansion style houses being built on precious scarce land which maximises profit potential for greedy developers or provides greedy individuals with opportunities to display their wealth, the land could be used more selflessly to build high quality sound proofed terraces with gardens despite the lower potential to maximise profit for individual gain.
Arguably rational selfless interest is the very basis of traditional British cultural mores with consideration for others and community spirited philanthropy being the core basis of common sense and responsibility. These are being lost to rights and multiculturalism with both serving rational self interest more than rational selfless interest despite the woke memes around “be kind”. Be kind in this context is more of a negative right than a positive right in terms of tolerating minority cultural mores even if they are inconsiderate and not community spirited.
Conservativism has lost its traditional moral moorings to the economic logic of rational self interest and this is the weakest link within the Reform libertarian worldview and the Labour/LibDem progressive worldview now that politics is dominated by rights at the cost of responsibility.
Kemi seems only concerned with self responsibility as an extension of rational self interest but what about community responsibility and societal responsibility within the context of rational selfless interest.
This is a niche that needs exploiting and only Kemi and Conservatism in particular is positioned to exploit that niche within a demoralising and decaying societal environment of increasing selfishness of which Wokeism and right libertarianism are an intrinsic part.
Multiculturalism is inherently selfish.
Wokeism is inherently selfish.
Modern Conservativism is inherently selfish.
No wonder British Society and British cities in particular are in a state of decline.
When people act rationally in their own self-interest, it does not benefit everyone in society. It just creates a selfish decaying society in which the pursuit of wealth trumps the pursuit of wellbeing and the pursuit of celebrity status and the idolatry of the ego trumps the moral fabric of society.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_egoism
KB is new in the role and it will take time…but hopefully not too much. We all know she likes a fight but she should steer clear of too many. IMHO, the Tories got the kicking they deserved for drifting way too left but I do not hold to the belief that they cannnot tack back – it needs the ‘home truths’ the writer mentions. The real villains are Reform. I am amazed that any true conservative considers them for their new home. No-one who believes in conservatism, as all the leaders of Reform say they do, would ever have damaged it astey did by boosting Labour at the GE. It was a wanton, petulant act borne out of spite and opportunism – they knew the consequences and didn’t care and now NF is supposedly also going to help out Mandelson. Hardly a good look going forwards for someone who says they believe in coservatism! What happens when the next situation arises that needs a mature approach – ‘nah mate let’s just split the right vote again, I ‘ate ’em those Tories’? I do not see how this makes them any more trustworthy than the Conservatives. The right certainly needs to coalesce but it should be around a ‘reformed’ and renewed Tory party.