The Tories can avoid electoral annihilation if they change leader

Many Tory MPs have recently been spending a lot of time discussing history, especially the events of the mid-90s. They are all asking the same question. Is the Conservative party now once again doomed to drift helplessly, a process which will inevitably culminate in electoral destruction? Few Tories would deny that their party is in a serious mess. That said, exact comparisons about events a quarter of a century apart are always tricky.

When Margaret Thatcher was overthrown, the consequences were psycho-dramatic as well as political. Her party had committed matricide. For years, it was pursued by the Furies – or at least by one Fury – Lady Thatcher herself, regina quondam, regina futurus. The Tories not only required a leader. They also needed an exorcist. Although John Major had many qualities, that was not one of them.

Moreover, Margaret Thatcher’s destructive intensity drew on policy as well as on her personality. The party was hopelessly split on Europe. An increasing number of Tories would rather have lost an election than won it on the wrong European terms. Some Tories even started talking about “revolutionary defeatism”. When he heard fellow Conservatives using Leninist terminology, John Major would have been justified in sending for the men in white coats. Nicholas Monsarrat wrote a book entitled “The Tribe That Lost its Head”. Although he was not referring to the Tories, he might well have been. Major did his best, but his tribe had become ungovernable. 

That was no longer true on the opposite side of the Commons Chamber. Bennery and other forms of leftist insurrection had come close to destroying the Labour party. In Nietzsche’s words, “if you stare into the abyss for long enough, it will stare back at you.” By the mid-90s, even most of the Left was ready to crawl back from the abyss: ready to be led by a charming moderate who could easily appeal to middle-class voters – above all, Labour was fed up with losing and determined to win. The pitch had been rolled for Tony Blair, and there was nothing that John Major could do.

In the early 90s, the British economy made a rapid recovery from the travails at the beginning of the decade. But the voters were not interested. And anyway, if Chancellor Ken Clarke or Premier Major had a favourable development to announce, some Euro-headbanger could be relied upon to start a row about Maastricht and drown out the good news. 

In 1995, Major tried shock treatment, resigning as party leader and offering himself for re-election. He told Tories that their response to trouble was to form a circle, raise their rifles to their shoulders – then turn inward and open fire. For about five minutes, the party listened, and seemed to have been jolted towards rationalism. Then normal service was resumed.

Twenty-seven years later, there are some stronger grounds for optimism. Europe no longer has the power to inflame disunity and incite madness. Keir Starmer is a decent fellow, but where is the excitement? He also keeps on failing O-level biology. If he cannot qualify on that part of the syllabus, he will have no hope of passing common-sense. There is only one way to describe a party whose leader seems to think that a girl could have a penis: a man, a cervix. That party is stuffed. 

So among Tories, despair would be premature. Yet complacency would be disastrous. (To be fair to the Tories, there is little sign of that outside 10 Downing St – which in itself is a good argument for a radical change of personnel in that building, starting at the top.) For there is one rule governing British elections which has proved its utility in every contest since 1945. A government which is about to be defeated, or at least suffer a haemorrhage of votes and seats, will already have suffered a catastrophic decline in public respect. From that, there can be no recovery.

Does anyone believe that Boris Johnson is the PM to break with those precedents? “Respect?” Boris could only prosper at a time when respect was very low in the electorate’s priorities. That will not be the case in the foreseeable future. On both inflation and living standards, the government could make a good case. Like most other counties, we are the victim of adverse international circumstances and there are no miracle cures.

If those arguments were set out clearly and with conviction – no cakery, no clowning – the Prime Minister who did so would command a respectful hearing, especially up against Sir Stumbler. His only contact with conviction came in the days when he was director of public prosecutions.

But the government is all over the place. Its stumblings over the energy windfall tax have been painful to watch. Ministers seem to have lost the ability to think anything through.

So it remains for the PM to follow John Major’s example in 1995. Boris Johnson should also stand down. But he should not run for re-election. With him out of the way, the party could recover morale, momentum and above all, electability.