With the Conservative Party’s recent leadership contest heating up, candidates James Cleverly, Tom Tugendhat, Kemi Badenoch, and Robert Jenrick have been working overtime to capture the hearts and minds of party members at the summer conference. Following one of the party’s worst electoral defeats, the stakes have never been higher, prompting multiple contenders to carve out distinct visions for the future of the party and, by extension, the UK economy.
One of the central themes of the conference has been economic policy, with Cleverly proposing to abolish stamp duty for first-time homebuyers to stimulate the housing market. During his appearance on BBC Radio 4’s Today, he argued, “Stamp duty stifles growth,” pushing for tax reductions to invigorate the economy and win over disillusioned voters who feel burdened by rising costs.
Indeed, cleverly echoing the policies of former Prime Minister Liz Truss, he proposed reviving the notion of tax cuts as pivotal to turning around the party’s fortunes. Cleverly stated, “At the last general election, my party was criticized for taxing too much. If we don’t start cutting taxes, we stifle the economy.” The strategy is bold, especially considering the turmoil surrounding Truss’s brief leadership, which ended with significant backlash.
The conference also highlighted contrasts between the candidates. Tom Tugendhat emphasized the need for what he termed “a New Conservative Party,” aiming to reach out to the electorate and address pressing societal problems with modern solutions. Drawing parallels with Tony Blair’s reinvention of Labour as “New Labour,” Tugendhat urged the party to adapt its messaging and policies to reflect the current times.
While Tugendhat and Cleverly leaned toward tax reductions and housing reforms, Kemi Badenoch sparked controversy with her remarks about maternity pay. She expressed the view during her speech at Times Radio, describing statutory maternity pay as “excessive” and implying it placed undue burden on taxpayers. “Tax,” she stated, “comes from people who are working. We’re taking from one group and giving to another.” Her comments drew widespread criticism and laughter but also underscored her tendency to provoke debate on fiscal policy.
Meanwhile, Robert Jenrick made headlines for using video footage of a deceased soldier to bolster his claims about UK special forces operations. The backlash from Tugendhat, who served alongside the fallen soldier, was immediate and intense. Tugendhat labeled Jenrick's comments as misleading and “simply not true,” emphasizing the emotional toll of dragging fallen comrades’ memories through political mudslinging.
Outside of these key moments, the conference atmosphere was lively. Liz Truss, whose 49-day stint as PM was globally viewed as chaotic, even suggested Britain might benefit from adopting ideas from Javier Milei, the controversial President of Argentina known for his radical and right-leaning policies. Truss’s praise for Milei, whom she dubbed “The Madman,” raised eyebrows and showcases her unwillingness to let go of the spotlight.
Another eyebrow-raising comment came from Badenoch, who provocatively declared the UK “not a dormitory,” urging migrants to come with commitment rather than as temporary sojourners. Her comments tapped deep-seated sentiments among some party members about immigration and national identity.
Despite the individual controversies, the overarching sentiment at the conference was one of urgency and desperation. The candidates understand they’re not just vying for leadership but attempting to reclaim relevance for the party itself. If they fail to reconnect with the electorate, they risk being sidelined at the next general election.
The day of reckoning for the Tories looms, as the party seeks to redefine its identity amid shifting economic landscapes and societal expectations. With rising discussions surrounding issues like civil service accountability, economy reform, and immigration, the candidates must align their strategies to these key voter concerns.
Indeed, Badenoch’s call for the imprisonment of “5-10% of civil servants” for alleged misconduct caused quite the stir, leading to criticism from unions and political analysts alike. The talk of jail time for public servants seems outlandish, yet reveals the hostility existing within party ranks as they grapple with accountability and performance.
It is clear from the pitch sessions and debates occurring during the conference, each candidate hopes to carve out their legacy, not only for themselves but for the Conservative Party’s long-term direction. But how each candidate plans to merge ideology with practical solutions remains to be seen.
With Prime Minister Rishi Sunak making only one scheduled appearance and offering little apology for the party’s previous failures, the pressure is on his potential successors to outline coherent strategies to win back lost trust.
Overall, the Conservative Party conference lent itself to moments of absurdity and fierce contention, yet it encapsulated the very essence of current UK politics. The electorate's expectations are changing, and the candidates must adapt if they are to rise from their electoral ashes.
The outcome of the leadership race will have lasting consequences—not just for the contenders and their political aspirations but for the voters they aim to win back, and the very fabric of contemporary British society.
