X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Blogs

Talk of a leadership challenge to David Cameron is reckless self-indulgence - Spectator Blogs

22 January 2013

1:03 PM

22 January 2013

1:03 PM

For reasons I do not wholly understand, Labour partisans appear reasonably pleased with Ed Miliband. Liberal Democrats may not be especially gruntled with Nicholas Clegg but they do appear to appreciate that there’s little point in changing leader now. Which brings us to the Conservative party. And there we discover madness aplenty. Again. For it seems as though more than 50 Tory MPs are sufficiently dissatisfied with David Cameron’s leadership that they think a change of leader something worth considering before the next election.

This, for all the reasons Robert Colvile suggests and many more he doesn’t, would be folly. Madness. Lunacy. Proof that the party is unfit for office. Whatever his shortcomings there are only two things that really matter here:

1. Mr Cameron is more popular than his party.

2. There is no credible replacement leader who will improve rather than hamper the Tories’ electoral prospects. And, yes, that includes Boris.

[Alt-Text]


Nevertheless, the myth persists that Mr Cameron would be better placed if only he were more obviously right-wing. If only he was more in tune with the Tory membership, this theory posits, he’d have a) won a majority at the last election and b) be more likely to win one at the next.

Neither of these propositions is true. Again, individual policies favoured by the Tory right may poll well but, collectively, their positions are box office poison. And since the Tory part exists to deny the Labour party power it’s a rum brand of Toryism that insists upon a slate of policies that make a Labour victory more, not less, probable.

No good can come from questioning the Prime Minister’s leadership, not least because doing so reinforces the sense, always dangerous, that the Tory party is, to use the technical term, dominated by self-obsessed headbangers keener on policing their own ranks and rooting out heretics who fail to meet their preferred standards of ideological purity than it is on actually governing the country.

It is not as though this government is not attempting some quite large things. The public finances may remain a mess but, setting that aside, its programmes for welfare and education reform are large challenges that are sufficient to make its re-election a worthwhile objective.

Besides: who would do better? As a persuasion or matter of temperament Toryism is supposed to take a reasonably – even generously – sanguine view of matters. Perfection is impossible; making the best of what must be is about the best that can be expected of any government. It is in the nature of governments that they disappoint but mere disappointment is an insufficient justification for regicide or revolution.

To govern is, inevitably, to be frustrated. But the compromises imposed by office are, generally speaking, endlessly preferable to the loneliness and impotence of life on the opposition benches. Which makes it all the more mysterious that so many Tory MPs seem so keen on trashing their own leader. The more they undermine Mr Cameron the weaker he must look and the weaker he looks the more probable it is that the Conservatives, already up against it, will lose the next election.

If nothing else you might think that the prospect of Prime Minister Miliband might concentrate Tory minds but that reckons without the virus of self-indulgent recklessness that once more seems to be spreading through the Tory party. Some habits, it seems, die hard and, like the scorpion, the Tories sting themselves because they cannot help doing so. It is the way they are.

 

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close