Better Off Out? Britain and Europe

The largest ever rebellion of Conservative MPs on Europe took place in October 2011 with 81 Conservative MPs defying the Conservative whip to vote for a referendum on Britain's continued membership of the European Union. This resurgence of dissent over Europe has been fuelled by the crisis in the eurozone. The Conservative party is now an overwhelmingly Eurosceptic party, but Conservative Eurosceptics are divided over whether the Government should use the opportunity of the eurozone crisis to take Britain out of the European Union, or whether it should seek to negotiate a looser arrangement, or do nothing at all. Conservative policy on Europe has been further complicated by the coalition with the Liberal Democrats, and by the consequences for the British economy if the eurozone disintegrates. Public opinion is also divided. British policy on the European Union remains ambivalent and muddled because British aims are inconsistent, and because there is no consensus on where Britain's interests truly lie.     

Conservative Party Modernisation and David Cameron's Politics of the Family

A key feature of David Cameron's electoral appeal is his carefully cultivated image as a ‘family man’. Cameron has repeatedly stressed the importance of the family to his political views and stated his desire to see marriage rewarded through the tax system. At the same time, Cameron has presented himself as a modernising leader, keen to demonstrate that he and his party are in touch with contemporary society. Central to this effort to detoxify the Conservative brand has been an emphasis on social liberalism. The potential conflict between these two objectives reflects the division in the party between social liberals and traditionalists, which has become increasingly apparent over the past decade. This article examines Conservative party policy and rhetoric on social and moral issues since 1997, particularly gay rights and family policy. It notes that a significant divide remains in the Conservative party between social liberals and traditionalists, so in this respect Cameron's modernisation project remains far from complete.     

Vote Blue,Go Green? Cameron's Conservatives and the Environment

How genuine is the Conservative party's rediscovery of the environment? Would a Conservative government led by David Cameron implement a wide‐ranging and progressive environmental policy? This article explores why Cameron has embraced the environment so enthusiastically when Conservative governments have had a poor record of environmental protection and the Conservative party has traditionally shown little interest in the issue. It assesses the impact of Cameron's strategy both on his own party and on the wider world of environmental politics and it evaluates the continuing commitment of the Conservatives to the issue by assessing what kind of policies a future Conservative government might implement. Although Cameron remains committed to the issue and he has already had a positive impact on Labour government policy, he has not yet convinced his party or its supporters, so a future Conservative government would probably represent continuity rather than significant change in environmental policy.     

Attention to Detail: The Conservative Policy Agenda

Since 2001 (if not since 1997) the Conservative party has struggled to develop a coherent set of policies with which to provide a credible alternative to the Blair government. A second successive crushing election defeat fuelled the ongoing debates in the Conservative party, between those who were convinced of the need to steer towards the centre ground, thereby reviving the Conservative's 'one nation' tradition, and those who wanted to place clear blue water between themselves and New Labour, and thus adhere to Thatcherite radicalism. The Conservatives have therefore appeared to struggle in developing clear, alternative policies on such issues as 'tax-and-spend' and public service reform and delivery. They have, however, inched hesitatingly towards a more socially liberal stance on various issues. A major problem for the Conservatives has been that the Blair governments have actually continued with, or consolidated, many policies inherited from the Conservatives in 1997, thereby making it even more difficult for the Conservatives to articulate their own distinct policy agenda. This is likely to contribute towards a third heavy defeat for the Conservative party in the next general election.     

The Feminisation of the Conservative Parliamentary Party: Party Members' Attitudes

Under David Cameron's leadership reforms have been made to the Conservative party's parliamentary selection procedures and distinct women's policy initiatives have been developed. This article, based on focus group data with party members, explores attitudes towards measures designed to recruit more women Conservative MPs. Broadly, we find that, despite widespread support for the principle of greater social diversity among PPCs, members are uncomfortable with the specific measures that have been introduced. This is largely on the grounds that anything approaching 'positive discrimination' should be eschewed in favour of the 'meritocratic' selection of candidates. Further, the members tend to resent central party 'interference' in what has traditionally been the domain of local Constituency Associations.     

Michael Howard: The First Jewish Prime Minister?

Initially, Michael Howard seemed the saviour of the divided and disheartened Conservative party, reuniting it in the hope of victory at the next general election. Initially, also, he seemed a match for his fellow barrister, Tony Blair. Though successful at winning over Tory MPs, he was much less effective in relation to all those ex-Tory voters who deserted the party in 1997 and 2001. This failure was confirmed after less than nine months of his leadership, when his party polled poorly at the European elections of June 2004 (where a large slice of the anti-European vote went to UKIP) and came an ignominious third in the Parliamentary by-elections of July 2004. These results, combined with Howard's lacklustre response to the Butler Report, sapped Howard's personal ratings and reopened civil war within the Conservative party.     

Echoes of Butler? The Conservative Research Department and the Making of Conservative Policy

Although it remains a comparatively little known institution, the Conservative Research Department (CRD) has played an important role in modern British political history. The last few years have seen a remarkable revival in its fortunes. In several important respects, this revival echoes that of the Department under the chairmanship of Rab Butler following the election defeat of 1945. This article examines some of the parallels to be drawn between the experience of the CRD between 1945 and 1951 and between 2001 and the present. It concludes by drawing some general conclusions about how the Conservative party should develop policy when in opposition.     

Assessing Party Effects on Local Policies: a Quarter Century of Progress or Eternal Recurrence?

There is substantial evidence of a significant link between parties and the overall scale of council activity. However, party effects vary considerably across services: the impact of parties is stronger on redistributive policies than on infrastructure or on the police and fire services. The evidence offers little support for the view that the primary policy making role of parties is mediative: additive party effects are far more significant than mediative party effects. As far as measures of party strength are concerned, the results for seat share are usually more significant than the results for outright control. Finally, policies are more strongly influenced by Labour party strength than by Conservative party strength, and left and right party effects are particularly strong when central government is controlled by Labour and the Conservatives respectively.     

Déjà vu? Conservative Problems in Historical Perspective

Since 2001, the Conservative party has found itself in turbulent times. Yet the party has survived similarly difficult periods in the past, eventually recovering its strength and returning to power. Can it do so again? The problems for today's party exist along four key dimensions: leadership, policy, organisation and political circumstances. How grave are contemporary difficulties in each of these areas in comparison to past experience? To what extent is the party now in uncharted waters? Where are there valid historical parallels? The article offers a brief sketch of the lessons that the party needs to learn to recover its election winning formula ‐ an appetite for power and an impressive ability to adapt to changed circumstances. Today's problems are not insurmountable, but the party still has a huge mountain to climb if it is to return to government.     

Transcending Thatcherism? Ideology and the Conservative Party Leadership Mandate of David Cameron

This paper examines the voting motivations of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary ballot of the Conservative Party leadership election of 2005. By constructing a data set of the voting behaviour of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary party ballot, and by determining the ideological disposition of the 2005 PCP this paper examines the ideological disposition of the candidates' vis-à-vis their electorate. The paper identifies the increasing Thatcherite nature of the PCP across three dominant ideological divides of contemporary British Conservatism-economic, European, and social, sexual and moral policy. Through such an analysis the paper demonstrates how the modernising David Cameron, who came first in the final parliamentary ballot and then won the membership ballot, transcended the traditional ideological voting motivations of candidates' vis-à-vis their electorate. Most significantly, the paper demonstrates that the European ideological policy divide was not a factor in the succession contest, unlike the succession contests of 1990, 1997 and 2001.     

Thatcherism and the Conservative Party

Neither spatial models of party competition nor the 'Westminster' model of British politics explain the phenomenon of Thatcherism. One explanation of its success, examined by Crewe and Searing, suggests that Mrs Thatcher sought to convert the Conservative party and the wider electorate to her distinctive brand of liberal Whiggism and traditional Toryism. They found little evidence of the success of this, however, among the British electorate as a whole. In this paper, data from the first national survey of Conservative party members demonstrates that she had little success in converting the Conservative party to these ideas either, although she did have a secure ideological base within the party. The results also suggest that her successor, John Major, has a rather different support base within the party from that of Mrs Thatcher. The implications of these findings for spatial models of party competition and the Westminster model of British politics are discussed.     

The Future of Conservatism*

British Conservatism embodies certain basic, though not always compatible, tenets of belief. They have underpinned the Conservative Party, which has been the most successful political party in the history of western Europe. The party was the ‘in’ party in British politics in the 20th Century; the reasons for that success shifted in the 21st century to it principal opponent party. Attempts by Conservative leaders in the first two parliaments of opposition constituted quick‐fix and ultimately doomed approaches to restoring electoral dominance. The party under David Cameron has shifted to a long‐term, grounded approach, learning the lessons of earlier periods of opposition. Though the process remains incomplete, the Conservative Party is placed for the first time in the 21st century to return to being a party of governance.     

The Voting Motivations of Conservative Parliamentarians in the Conservative Party Leadership Election of 2001

This article examines the voting motivations of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary ballot of the Conservative party leadership election of 2001. By constructing a data set of the voting behaviour of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary party ballot, this article seeks to test a series of hypotheses relating to the ideological disposition and political characteristics of the candidates vis-à-vis their electorate. The article examines how and why the eliminative parliamentary ballot ensured that the party membership was presented with a face-off between the europhile, Kenneth Clarke, and the eurosceptic, Iain Duncan Smith, and why the modernising and socially liberal Michael Portillo was rejected. It will demonstrate that while arguments based on ideological factors are valid, the political characteristics of age and career status were also significant motivational influences that contributed to the rejection of Portillo and the delaying of the modernisation of the Conservative party.     

Preferences,loyalty and party choice

The paper analyses the electorate's voting intentions with respect to the Labour and Conservative parties in Great Britain. Almost all policy issues are found to be endogenous, i.e. to be influenced by party choice within a simultaneous relationship. Socio-economic factors which influence choice through the endogenous policy issues include education, geographical location, age, gender, income and wealth. Parental, particularly maternal, influence is also found to be important and not to decline with age or education. The paper also highlights the importance of competence, rather than policy, issues.     

Safe as Houses? Conservative Social Policy,Public Opinion and Parliament

Social policy is of key importance to contemporary society, accounting for two thirds of public expenditure and, through provision such as the NHS, pensions, benefits, schools, universities and social care, touching on the lives of much of the population on a daily basis. It has also been one of the areas where the Conservative party have sought to change their image, and to some extent policies, under David Cameron. Drawing upon a range of evidence, including interviews with more than ten per cent of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, this article examines the potential challenges for a Conservative government of either stance, focusing on the extent of possible support for the Conservatives' approach to social policy amongst three key groups: the public, MPs, and members of the House of Lords.     

‘Cometh the Hour,Cometh the Dave’: How Far is the Conservative Party's Revival All Down to David Cameron?

While one can overstate the extent to which the Conservative party has changed since 2005, especially in the light of its response to the recession, the upturn in its electoral prospects is undeniable. Not surprisingly, the Conservative leader, David Cameron, is widely credited with turning around his party's fortunes. In fact, he started with several advantages over his predecessors: New Labour was well past its prime; the economy was running into trouble; and an increasingly desperate Conservative party was more willing to listen to the message that it needed to modernise and moderate. That said, Cameron has been crucial. His communication skills are unparalleled. Early success bought him time and 'permission to be heard'. Most important though, has been his determination-despite media criticism-to stick with a staged strategy focused on conveying change and a move to the centre ground while at the same time reassuring and dividing the Tory right.     

From Broken Families to the Broken Society

This article traces the development of the Conservative party's 'broken society' narrative, from its roots in William Hague's early invocations of 'social justice' to the evidence-based approach adopted by David Cameron. It considers relevant social trends over the period since 1970; summarises the Conservative party's attitude to family policy in government between 1979 and 1997; and shows how the Conservatives in opposition from 1997 onwards have become more focused on support for the marriage-based family, now a central tenet of Conservative social policy under David Cameron's leadership.     

Enoch Powell and the Conservative Party: Reflections on an Ambiguous Legacy

This article examines Enoch Powell's ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech in relation to the Conservative party. Powell's speech created an additional challenge to a Conservative party already weakened by the loss of the 1964 and 1966 elections and by the failure of the newly elected leader, Edward Heath, to impress his authority decisively on the party. Powell had some parliamentary support but his real following was concentrated in the Conservative grass roots. Powell lost the support of the liberal‐minded Shadow Cabinet; but after 1968 the Conservatives nevertheless moved to the right on the issue, especially after Mrs. Thatcher became leader in 1975. His speech has cast a long shadow as the party has sought to modernise in more recent times and to appeal to a more racially diverse electorate.     

Treating Poorly Healed Wounds: Partisan Choices and Human Rights Policies in Latin America

Despite the common trauma of systematic human rights violations under military rule, Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay have responded in markedly different ways to their troubling pasts. This paper explains differences in human rights policies over time and across countries by looking at varying domestic conditions, including the ideological orientation of the governing party and the structure of party competition, as well as constraints and opportunities presented by external events. Government support for human rights derives in part from ideological proclivity but even more from the ability to build popular support for such a policy. Conservative and center-right politicians lack credibility among voters on human rights and therefore have little political incentive to adopt an activist stance on this issue. Leftist politicians are ideologically predisposed toward championing human rights but may be hamstrung by concerns about alienating centrist voters. Leftist politicians will only come out strongly in favor of human rights when they enjoy a clear political majority; leftist leaders who rely upon centrist allies will adopt a low-profile approach to human rights. Conversely, centrist political leaders who rely upon leftist allies have a strong political incentive to emphasize human rights. Once political momentum begins to shift to the right, however, centrist politicians will downplay human rights. Finally, external events may significantly alter national discourse on human rights, allowing cautious governments to gain political cover for more progressive human rights policy. By drawing attention to the important role of ideology and the structure of party competition, this paper offers a more complete explanation of the sources of human rights policy. It also provides a novel perspective on the ways in which external and international influences are filtered through national political systems.     

Reluctant Coalitionists: The Conservative Party and the Establishment of the Coalition Government in May 2010

The Conservative party has been the real awkward partner in the Conservative‐Liberal Democrat coalition government because its backbench MPs have rebelled more frequently than their Liberal Democrat counterparts since May 2010. This reflected the fact that the Conservatives were reluctant coalitionists to begin with: they would have preferred to see a minority Conservative government, they had made far too many concessions to the Liberal Democrats, they had been bounced into accepting a coalition deal by a controlling party leadership, and they had lost out on those ministerial positions now held by Liberal Democrats. There was thus no great enthusiasm for the establishment of a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats in the parliamentary Conservative party in May 2010. Conservatives merely resigned themselves to an outcome which they had been given little opportunity to influence and which David Cameron had made it very difficult for them to reject.