John Oxley is a consultant, writer, and broadcaster. His SubStack is Joxley Writes.
A few hours into the 2024 general election and it is hard to say that things are going well. Sunak’s first announcement, the one thing the Prime Minister had the most control of this campaign, was a farce.
Music drowned him out in front of a sodden Downing Street as he made his case for going to the country. A few hours later a journalist was manhandled out of the party launch event, and rumours circulated about a madcap push by backbenchers to oust Sunak and rescind the announcement.
It all points to what now seems the very real risk of the Tory campaign collapsing, taking the future of the party with it.
Most people who have been paying attention are braced for defeat. There’s a real threat now that it could become a rout in the truest sense of the word: a disorderly and chaotic withdrawal from government.
Though the Tory Party can be fractious, it is usually held together by the prospect of victory; now that is gone, it could be the end of unity and message discipline. There’s a chance the Conservatives could make the same mistakes as 2017, but worse, and starting from a poorer position.
One issue is Sunak himself. He has failed to find his feet as a campaigner. Indeed, the more the public sees of him, the less they seem to like him.
He was a relative unknown when the economic response to Covid-19 pushed him to almost unparalleled popularity. Since then, his star has waned and he has failed to find a flair for the narrative. His first leadership campaign was uninspiring, losing to Liz Truss by a wide margin. After replacing her, he has failed to find a convincing narrative and his personal polling numbers have plummeted.
The wider context of the campaign makes things even more difficult. Yesterday the Prime Minister not only called a general election but also fired the starting gun on the race to replace him.
Outside of an amazing upset, Sunak will be gone after the election. Even with the best will in the world, the potential successors will be thinking about what comes after. This could play into their moves during the campaign, especially if they sense where they want to distance themselves from a loss. It’s a recipe for major figures in the party being awkward with the central campaign.
For backbenchers, there is even more risk. Two hundred, perhaps more, are staring down the barrel of the end of their political careers. They will have their sense of where their local patch might pull. Ambition or desperation could lead to them pushing the edges of loyalty, for example producing things like personal manifestos designed to save them from the broader swing against the party.
These, combined with the pull of video and social media campaigns, could see the party effort fracture like never before.
None of this is helped by the weak command the centre already seems to have. Part of the advantage of calling an election now is that parts of the party were visibly disintegrating. Recent defections, plus the poor performance of the locals, showed this.
Yet now the party will lose some of the incentives it has of keeping people onside. Once candidates are in place there’s no chance of pulling them out – and when things are this bad, the threat of future consequences seems remote. Better to keep your seat while annoying a leader that will soon be gone than play ball and lose badly.
(That many will be cancelling holidays they’d planned in expectation of an autumn election will only add to the mutinous atmosphere.)
The tough decisions CCHQ will have to make worsen this problem. A cold-hearted look at reality means the party is playing deep defence in this election. Resources, both financial and human, are limited, and have to be deployed where they make the most difference. That is going to be seats with seemingly large majorities.
Others, even with perhaps five- or ten-thousand majorities, will be collateral here. That realism, however, won’t be shared by the incumbents, and this could further diminish the effectiveness of campaign fight if they refuse to be the ones giving, rather than receiving mutual aid. This situation won’t be helped by the already low morale of many volunteers.
This all belies a broader problem. The party’s current predicament stems largely from a confusion of what it is, who it stands for, and what it is trying to achieve. There is a lack of cohesion and harmony between the various traditions and factions, and a broader failure to have a collective narrative.
This has been bad enough when trying to govern, but in campaigning mode, it robs the party of a convincing message that everyone can throw themselves into. So far, it’s hard to see one emerging beyond “Don’t let Labour in”. This opens the door for riffing and freelancing.
Execution has also been an issue for the party. The magic of the 2019 campaign seems to be gone: often the attack lines look messy and fail to land; the ads are unconvincing and the spin underwhelming. The London mayoral campaign was undermined by botched material – like ads showing American cities in an attempt to make Khan’s London look bad.
The pressures of a 24/7 general election campaign are only likely to worsen these problems.
Labour sense that this is their time. They are hungry for victory, and it is helping them to overcome their own issues with discipline. They will be coming at the Tories like a cavalry charge. Forming up into tight infantry squares is the only way to salvage anything, back-to-back and side-to-side for the common goal. The real risk though is that the party bolts and scatters, to the detriment of all.
Right now, there’s every chance of that happening. The worst instincts of the party could combine into a historically poor campaign: noisy disagreements on messaging, with parts of the party trying to out-Reform Reform and others pulling towards the centre; open rejection of the party line in favour of personal commitments with a bit of party branding; briefing and counter-briefing at the top.
All of this might be set against a backdrop of rapid pivoting of campaigns as the entire organisation tries, and fails, to find something which connects with the public, wrapped up in poor messaging which fails to understand who it is hitting and why.
It’s a poor way to fight an election, especially one where the future of the party might be at stake. But before dismissing it, it’s worth remembering that each of these elements has been flickering around for the last 18 months or so. In many ways, a collapsing campaign would be the continuation of what has led up to this situation.
That things could get worse for the Tories from here on out seems almost absurd – but at the same time, so very plausible. Indeed, if the first afternoon of the campaign is anything to go by, a collapse is perhaps the predictable option.
John Oxley is a consultant, writer, and broadcaster. His SubStack is Joxley Writes.
A few hours into the 2024 general election and it is hard to say that things are going well. Sunak’s first announcement, the one thing the Prime Minister had the most control of this campaign, was a farce.
Music drowned him out in front of a sodden Downing Street as he made his case for going to the country. A few hours later a journalist was manhandled out of the party launch event, and rumours circulated about a madcap push by backbenchers to oust Sunak and rescind the announcement.
It all points to what now seems the very real risk of the Tory campaign collapsing, taking the future of the party with it.
Most people who have been paying attention are braced for defeat. There’s a real threat now that it could become a rout in the truest sense of the word: a disorderly and chaotic withdrawal from government.
Though the Tory Party can be fractious, it is usually held together by the prospect of victory; now that is gone, it could be the end of unity and message discipline. There’s a chance the Conservatives could make the same mistakes as 2017, but worse, and starting from a poorer position.
One issue is Sunak himself. He has failed to find his feet as a campaigner. Indeed, the more the public sees of him, the less they seem to like him.
He was a relative unknown when the economic response to Covid-19 pushed him to almost unparalleled popularity. Since then, his star has waned and he has failed to find a flair for the narrative. His first leadership campaign was uninspiring, losing to Liz Truss by a wide margin. After replacing her, he has failed to find a convincing narrative and his personal polling numbers have plummeted.
The wider context of the campaign makes things even more difficult. Yesterday the Prime Minister not only called a general election but also fired the starting gun on the race to replace him.
Outside of an amazing upset, Sunak will be gone after the election. Even with the best will in the world, the potential successors will be thinking about what comes after. This could play into their moves during the campaign, especially if they sense where they want to distance themselves from a loss. It’s a recipe for major figures in the party being awkward with the central campaign.
For backbenchers, there is even more risk. Two hundred, perhaps more, are staring down the barrel of the end of their political careers. They will have their sense of where their local patch might pull. Ambition or desperation could lead to them pushing the edges of loyalty, for example producing things like personal manifestos designed to save them from the broader swing against the party.
These, combined with the pull of video and social media campaigns, could see the party effort fracture like never before.
None of this is helped by the weak command the centre already seems to have. Part of the advantage of calling an election now is that parts of the party were visibly disintegrating. Recent defections, plus the poor performance of the locals, showed this.
Yet now the party will lose some of the incentives it has of keeping people onside. Once candidates are in place there’s no chance of pulling them out – and when things are this bad, the threat of future consequences seems remote. Better to keep your seat while annoying a leader that will soon be gone than play ball and lose badly.
(That many will be cancelling holidays they’d planned in expectation of an autumn election will only add to the mutinous atmosphere.)
The tough decisions CCHQ will have to make worsen this problem. A cold-hearted look at reality means the party is playing deep defence in this election. Resources, both financial and human, are limited, and have to be deployed where they make the most difference. That is going to be seats with seemingly large majorities.
Others, even with perhaps five- or ten-thousand majorities, will be collateral here. That realism, however, won’t be shared by the incumbents, and this could further diminish the effectiveness of campaign fight if they refuse to be the ones giving, rather than receiving mutual aid. This situation won’t be helped by the already low morale of many volunteers.
This all belies a broader problem. The party’s current predicament stems largely from a confusion of what it is, who it stands for, and what it is trying to achieve. There is a lack of cohesion and harmony between the various traditions and factions, and a broader failure to have a collective narrative.
This has been bad enough when trying to govern, but in campaigning mode, it robs the party of a convincing message that everyone can throw themselves into. So far, it’s hard to see one emerging beyond “Don’t let Labour in”. This opens the door for riffing and freelancing.
Execution has also been an issue for the party. The magic of the 2019 campaign seems to be gone: often the attack lines look messy and fail to land; the ads are unconvincing and the spin underwhelming. The London mayoral campaign was undermined by botched material – like ads showing American cities in an attempt to make Khan’s London look bad.
The pressures of a 24/7 general election campaign are only likely to worsen these problems.
Labour sense that this is their time. They are hungry for victory, and it is helping them to overcome their own issues with discipline. They will be coming at the Tories like a cavalry charge. Forming up into tight infantry squares is the only way to salvage anything, back-to-back and side-to-side for the common goal. The real risk though is that the party bolts and scatters, to the detriment of all.
Right now, there’s every chance of that happening. The worst instincts of the party could combine into a historically poor campaign: noisy disagreements on messaging, with parts of the party trying to out-Reform Reform and others pulling towards the centre; open rejection of the party line in favour of personal commitments with a bit of party branding; briefing and counter-briefing at the top.
All of this might be set against a backdrop of rapid pivoting of campaigns as the entire organisation tries, and fails, to find something which connects with the public, wrapped up in poor messaging which fails to understand who it is hitting and why.
It’s a poor way to fight an election, especially one where the future of the party might be at stake. But before dismissing it, it’s worth remembering that each of these elements has been flickering around for the last 18 months or so. In many ways, a collapsing campaign would be the continuation of what has led up to this situation.
That things could get worse for the Tories from here on out seems almost absurd – but at the same time, so very plausible. Indeed, if the first afternoon of the campaign is anything to go by, a collapse is perhaps the predictable option.