Parliamentary Conservative Party Research Articles

The Downfall of Boris Johnson: Analysing Patterns of Opinion among Conservative Parliamentarians in the Confidence Motion and Mass Resignations

ABSTRACT This article provides the first systematic analysis of the confidence motion against the Conservative Party leadership of Boris Johnson in June 2022 and the mass ministerial resignations in July. I have constructed a dataset of the parliamentary Conservative Party and used logistic regression to test hypotheses relating to Conservative parliamentarians’ behaviour in the confidence motion and ministerial resignations. My findings demonstrate that the long-running divide within the Conservative Party on Europe was statistically significant in the confidence motion, with MPs who voted leave in the 2016 EU referendum being more likely to have confidence in Johnson. Ministers’ university education was also significant in driving support for Johnson. My research findings contribute to existing academic debates as they show how Conservative MPs’ behaviour in the downfall of Boris Johnson compares with the selection and ejection of other Conservative leaders. I also contribute to emerging discussions on Johnson’s leadership of the Conservative Party within the context of governing degeneration.

Trusting Truss: Conservative MPs’ Voting Preferences in the (First) British Conservative Party Leadership Election of 2022

ABSTRACT This paper identifies the candidate preferences of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary ballot and the membership ballot of the Conservative Party leadership election of 2022. We code each parliamentarians’ candidate preference within a wider dataset on the parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) and test a range of hypotheses covering the following: a). personal factors relating to gender, sexuality, ethnicity and education b). political factors, relating to constituency marginality and type, as well as prior support for Johnson, and c). ideological factors, covering for example, attitudes towards Brexit, cultural debates, levelling up, economic liberalism, net zero and Covid restrictions. Our research findings demonstrate that despite common media narratives at the time of the party leadership election, variables capturing loyalty or opposition to Johnson did not structure patterns of support for candidates in either round. A parliamentarian's position on levelling up, as well as the UK's membership of, and relationship with, the European Union (based on whether they were remainers, leavers, or a member of the European Research Group) were more important in structuring support. However broader measures of ideology, as evidenced through the membership of extra-parliamentary groups, was found not to be important.

Selecting Sunak: Conservative MPs’ Nomination Preferences in the (Second) British Conservative Party Leadership Election

Abstract This article utilises an original dataset covering all members of the Parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) to analyse the basis of support for Rishi Sunak, Boris Johnson and Penny Mordaunt in the October 2022 British Conservative Party leadership election. The significance of our findings is that they form the basis for a new understanding of how conservatism in the UK is changing post-Brexit. Our political variables include constituency majority size, red wall status, constituency support for leave, an MP’s position in the June 2022 vote of confidence in Johnson’s leadership of the Conservative Party, ministerial status and rebellion rates on key legislation. Our ideological variables include EU referendum position and membership of the European Research Group and the Conservative Environment Network, along with whether MPs are classed as socially liberal, socially conservative or pro-levelling up. We find that candidates appealed to different, often rival, sections of the Conservative Party. In line with previous studies of this nature, social liberalism still represents a key dividing line within the party, and the European dimension of intra-party conflict has remained significant in light of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union.

From Maastricht to Brexit : Mapping the European Divide within the Parliamentary Conservative Party from Major to Johnson

This paper charts the evolution of the dividing line within the parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) over European policy. Using datasets of opinion amongst their parliamentarians since 1992 - based on extensive and long-standing research on their voting behaviour and public statements - the paper tracks the numeric strength of the different factions. In doing so, the paper notes how the dividing line over European policy reconfigured over time, from Europhiles versus Eurosceptics; to soft versus hard variants of Euroscepticism; to remainers versus leavers; and then a three-way division between soft and hard Brexiteers and Bremainers. The paper then places these debates within their wider context, noting the centrality of positioning on the European divide to leadership selection within the Conservative Party.

Intra-party dissent over Brexit in the British Conservative Party

This article seeks to map the evolution of intra-party dissent over Brexit in the parliamentary Conservative Party between July 2016 and January 2020. It shows that dissent was primarily due to the relentless intra-party disputes over the fact that the Conservative Government failed to deliver Brexit during Theresa May’s premiership. Brexit could not have been settled if Boris Johnson had not managed to reunite the party through the 2019 general election. This article gauges the intensity of intra-party dissent by drawing on three representative indicators, including the number of Conservative MPs quitting the party, the number of ministerial resignations and parliamentary voting records of the Conservative MPs over Brexit. Three dominant factional groups, namely hard Brexiteers, soft Brexiteers and Bremainers, competed to shape the government’s handling of Brexit. They diverged over issues of sovereignty, economic implication of Brexit, and the UK–EU future relationship. The research also finds that the hard Brexiteers and the Bremainers appeared less compromising over Brexit, while the soft Brexiteers with a pragmatic mindset were relatively flexible and ready for concessions.

Prime Ministerial powers of patronage: Ideology and Cabinet selection under Margaret Thatcher 1979–1990

This article will examine how Margaret Thatcher utilised the Prime Ministerial power of Cabinet ministerial appointment between 1979 and 1990. The article will utilise the Norton taxonomy on the Parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) to determine the ideological disposition (non-Thatcherite versus Thatcherite) of her Cabinet members across her eleven years in office. It will assess the ideological trends in terms of appointments, promotions and departures from Cabinet and it will use archival evidence to explore the advice given to Thatcher to assist her decision-making. Through this process the article will demonstrate how Thatcher was more ideologically balanced than academics have traditionally acknowledged when discussing her Cabinet selections. Moreover, the article will also demonstrate the significance attached to media presentation skills to her decision-making, thus challenging the emphasis on ideology as a dominant determinant of Cabinet selection.

‘A place apart’, or integral to ‘our precious Union’? Understanding the nature and implications of Conservative Party thinking about Northern Ireland, 2010–19

ABSTRACT An unusual combination of factors meant that Northern Ireland featured prominently in British Conservative thinking during the course of the extended efforts by the UK governments led by Theresa May and Boris Johnson to implement Brexit, following the 2016 referendum. Opposition among Conservative backbenchers to the differential treatment of Northern Ireland under the proposed ‘backstop’ arrangement contributed to the defeat of the Withdrawal Agreement negotiated with the EU by May. However, after Johnson became Prime Minister, a deal involving greater divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland secured overwhelming support from these same Conservative MPs. This paper explores the origins of, and influences upon, these debates on Northern Ireland within the parliamentary Conservative Party. Drawing on interviews with decision-makers and advisers, it identifies the lines of thinking that shaped Conservative positions on Northern Ireland after the party returned to government in 2010. It argues that two distinct modes of thinking about Northern Ireland co-exist within the party's collective mind: the notion it constitutes a ‘place apart’ from Great Britain, and the belief it remains integral to the UK. The circumstances of 2018–19 meant Conservative MPs were forced, reluctantly, to choose between the implications of these ultimately incommensurable perspectives.

The Conservative Party Leadership Election of 2019: An Analysis of the Voting Motivations of Conservative Parliamentarians

Abstract This article provides an empirical analysis of the voting behaviour of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary ballot of the Conservative Party leadership election of 2019. We construct a dataset for the parliamentary Conservative Party and then put forward hypotheses that will consider the possible Eurosceptic, party political, economic and/or ideological motivations for the voting behaviour of Conservative parliamentarians in the final parliamentary ballot. Our findings demonstrate that support for Johnson and Hunt was structured around age and voting behaviour in the European Union (EU) membership referendum, with support for Gove drawn from those who voted for May’s Withdrawal Agreement in the first meaningful vote. Other factors, such as the economic impact of Brexit on constituencies and social liberalism, were not found to be statistically significant.

Theresa May and the Conservative Party leadership confidence motion of 2018: analysing the voting behaviour of Conservative Parliamentarians

This article provides the first systematic academic appraisal of the confidence motion against the Conservative Party leadership of Theresa May in late 2018. We construct a detailed dataset of the parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP), and then test the significance of a range of hypotheses about how Conservative parliamentarians voted in the confidence motion. Our findings demonstrate how the original remain or leave divide on continued membership of the European Union (EU) was not statistically significant—i.e. our findings demonstrate that whether Conservative parliamentarians voted remain or leave themselves, or whether they held remain or constituencies, did not have an impact upon their vote in the confidence motion. Our findings demonstrate that the lack of confidence in May was dependent upon whether Conservative parliamentarians supported her Withdrawal Agreement (WA) and whether they were members of the European Research Group (ERG). Our research findings contribute to existing academic debates as they show that the drivers of the vote in the confidence motion of 2018 differed from the drivers of the vote in previous Conservative Party leadership elections—i.e. unlike previous contests non-ideological considerations were not statistically significant in terms of explaining voting behaviour.

The UK government and the 0.7% international aid target: Opinion among Conservative parliamentarians

This is the first article to use a detailed dataset of the 2010 - 2015 Parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) to identify the drivers of MPs’ positions on legally enshrining a commitment to spend 0.7% of gross national income on foreign aid. We position every Conservative parliamentarian into three different categories on international aid - (1) aid critics, who openly opposed and/or voted the 0.7% target; (2) aid sceptics, who abstained in parliamentary divisions on the 0.7 target and (3) aid advocates, who voted for the 0.7% and spoke out for it. We then draw on a range of political and ideological variables to determine drivers of support or opposition to aid. By doing so we identify that Cameron achieved remarkable success in transforming opinion towards aid amongst Conservative parliamentarians. This article represents a quantitative challenge to the prevalent qualitative assumption in the academic literature, which claims Cameron’s modernistion project was a failure.

Policy, Office and Votes: Conservative MPs and the Brexit Referendum

The division within the Parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) over Britain’s membership of the EU has been one of the most significant intra-party divisions in European political history. The 2016 Brexit referendum campaign offered a unique opportunity to consider legislative motivations as almost every MP declared a preference and frontbench MPs were free to back either side. This article uses logistic regression analysis in order to consider MPs’ motivations in terms of Muller and Strom’s policy, office and votes trichotomy. It is argued that all three motivations affected MPs decision making on the EU referendum. However, vote-seeking motivations were less influential than either policy or office-seeking.

The United Kingdom Referendum on European Union Membership: The Voting of Conservative Parliamentarians

AbstractThis article considers the attitudes of members of the parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) during the European Union (EU) membership referendum held in the United Kingdom (UK) on 23 June 2016. First, the article identifies the voting positions – remain or leave – of each Conservative parliamentarian in order to assess the strength of opinion within the PCP and place it within its historical context. Second, the article uses multivariate analysis to test a series of hypotheses about the voting of Conservative parliamentarians. Through this we will aim to identify whether any associations existed between advocates and opponents of Brexit and social variables such as age, schooling, university, occupation and gender; political variables such as constituency marginality, and whether they were a minister, an ex‐minister or a permanent backbencher; and the ideological variable of morality – such as support for or opposition to same sex marriage.

Conservative ministers in the Coalition government of 2010–15: evidence of bias in the ministerial selections of David Cameron?

ABSTRACTThe article uses a data set of the 2010–15 Parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) to test a series of hypotheses in order to determine whether those selected for ministerial office during the coalition era were representative of the PCP as a whole. The findings show no significant associations or bias by Cameron in terms of age, schooling, regional base, morality, voting for Cameron in the Conservative Party leadership election and, most significantly, gender. Significant associations or bias were evident in terms of Cameron’s patronage with regard to university education and electoral marginality. The findings demonstrate that any critique of current Conservative ministers based on their supposed elitism stems from the institutional and structural biases within the Conservative Party at candidate selection level, and cannot be attributed to bias on behalf of Cameron.

Ministerial Selection and Portfolio Allocation in the Cameron Government

This paper examines how David Cameron has utilised the Prime Ministerial power of ministerial selection and portfolio allocation within the context of the relationship between party expectations and coalition constraints. Specifically, the paper considers the significance to the Parliamentary Conservative Party of Camerons use of patronage in terms of proportionality (numbers); portfolio distribution (prestige) and reshuffles (renegotiation of numbers and prestige). It argues that Cameron has been relatively astute in terms of his allocation of portfolios to the Liberal Democrats. However, it notes that the constraining impact of coalition has been detrimental to three groups within the PCP: first, those made ministers at a lower level than expected; secondly, those who held shadow ministerial posts in opposition but were overlooked when fewer ministerial roles were available; and, finally, the new intake of 2010 whose career progression has been slower than in previous administrations as fewer reshuffles have occurred.

Arrogant Posh Boys? The Social Composition of the Parliamentary Conservative Party and the Effect of Cameron's ‘A’ List

AbstractIn the light of the recent controversy over Andrew Mitchell's alleged ‘pleb’ comments to police officers and Nadine Dorries’ characterisation of David Cameron and George Osborne as ‘arrogant posh boys, this article examines the social composition of the parliamentary Conservative Party. It looks at previous attempts to widen the social base of the PCP and analyses the effect of Cameron's priority or ‘A’ list of candidates on the composition of the 2010 PCP. The article asks whether the perception that the Conservatives are the party of the rich has damaged the party's electoral appeal and if so what can be done to rectify the situation.

Cameron and Liberal Conservatism: Attitudes within the Parliamentary Conservative Party and Conservative Ministers

Research Highlights and Abstract This article: Contributes to the development of academic research on the internal dynamics of the Conservative Party under the leadership of David Cameron. Contributes to the development of academic research on the processes of ministerial selection within British Government. Contributes to the development of academic research on cohort effects within parties, and the analysis of comparisons and differences between different parliamentary cohorts. Contributes to the development of academic research on the constraints upon Prime Ministerial power when in coalition. This article identifies the ideological composition of the parliamentary Conservative party (PCP) in order to determine the location and numeric strength of the critics of Cameron. By constructing a data set of attitudes across two ideological divides—the social, sexual and morality divide and the European divide—the article identifies the following. First, despite Cameron's social liberal emphasis both the PCP and his ministerial team is predominantly Thatcherite—i.e. socially conservative. Second, despite numerically having a Eurosceptic PCP and ministerial team, with Europhilia now an inconsequential rump, Cameron faces a minority ‘hard’ Eurosceptic faction of rebels who oppose his ‘soft’ Euroscepticism. Third, the influx of new parliamentarians elected in 2010 may increase social liberal strength, but they are overwhelmingly Eurosceptic, with a significant tranche of hard Eurosceptics amongst them. Finally, through a process of ideological mapping of these two ideological divides the research identifies a core of 50 socially conservative and hard Eurosceptics who are the critics of Cameron.

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.

‘Mother's Boy’: David Cameron and Margaret Thatcher

It is argued here that David Cameron has been heavily influenced by the example that Margaret Thatcher set with regard to leadership style, approach and rhetoric. The influence that she has exerted upon him may have become more marked in recent times, in response to the economic downturn and debt crisis, which has allowed Cameron to be more openly Thatcherite in his language, but he has always tried to follow in at least some of her footsteps. This was because of the dominance of right-wing views in the parliamentary Conservative party, which it has been necessary for Cameron to appease in the interests of party unity, and because he shared Thatcher's scepticism towards the state, seeking to express it in the more voter-friendly concept of social responsibility.

‘A Tiny Little Footnote in History’: Conservative Centre Forward

In May 1985, two years after he had returned to the back benches, Francis Pym launched the first organised display of dissent within the parliamentary Conservative Party against Margaret Thatcher's leadership: Conservative Centre Forward. Those Conservative MPs who joined the group were very much believers in One Nation Conservatism. Conservative Centre Forward survived for barely a week after going public; it rapidly collapsed amid accusations of disloyalty and inept leadership. The group proved to be a short-lived experiment which achieved little of note and exposed those who were involved to widespread ridicule. Yet, it was precisely because Conservative Centre Forward collapsed so quickly and achieved so little that it was significant. In its own way, the short life of the group provided a revealing commentary upon the character of the mid-1980s Conservative Party. It was a party which, on the one hand, was moving inexorably to the right and therefore ever further away from the values of One Nation Conservatism which Conservative Centre Forward espoused. On the other hand, it was a party which was still traditional enough to view open displays of dissent, of whatever magnitude, as a threat to the unity upon which its continued electoral success depended.

The Passage of the 1962 Commonwealth Immigrants Act, a Case-Study of Backbench Power

This article considers the concepts of corridors of power and the locus of power, within the specific context of the backbench committee structures of the House of Commons. Taking as its case study the passage of what became the 1962 Commonwealth Immigrants Act, the article considers the level of influence that should be attributed to these committees, and whether or not they should be considered as significant fora of power and influence. The committees in question are those backbench structures within the parliamentary Conservative party, principally the 1922 Committee, and the subject committees that shadow the work of government departments. While this article argues that it is indeed the case that these committees should be considered significant fora of power and influence, it proposes the notion of ‘influential impotence’ to describe the exercise of this power : while the committees are well suited to the expression of influence in general form, they often fail to translate this into power over specific policy proposals, and thus fail to realise their full potential.