By way of an introduction to this special issue, our aim here is to bring together and interpret some of the main themes and issues to come out of the selection of papers presented below in order to make sense of the overall fate of David Cameron's attempted modernisation of the Conservative Party. Based on the evidence highlighted by each of the contributors to this issue, we make a number of arguments. Firstly, that Cameron's early attempts to steer the party into the centre ground of British politics can be judged to have been reasonably effective. Secondly, that in 2007-8, in the context of the emergence of economic difficulties leading to the financial crisis, the party found itself at a crossroads, and it chose to exit that crossroads with a turn, across a number of policy areas, back towards a more traditional Thatcherite or neo-liberal agenda. Thirdly, we argue that the financial crisis and the political instability it generated is not enough on its own to explain this turn to the right. Rather, these events should be seen as having acted as a catalyst for the exposure of three main fault-lines in the party's modernisation strategy: i) its lack of ideological coherence; ii) its potential for serious performance deficits due to a lack of consistency in the political leadership displayed by David Cameron; and, iii); its vulnerability to party management issues.
This article aims to evaluate the strategic positioning and ideology of the Conservatives in Coalition, under the leadership of David Cameron. In so doing, it seeks to shed light on the key drivers of the party's elite leadership strategy since entering government in 2010. The analysis is framed in terms of statecraft, namely the attempt to carve out elite control of the main fields of 'high politics', with the objective of devising a successful electoral appeal and image of governing competence. The analysis is structured around three phases of Coalition governance: civilised partnership, uneasy cohabitation, and divorce. The article argues that although the Conservatives have successfully dominated the government's agenda, key strategic dilemmas for the party remain ahead.
This article examines the performance of the UK Independence party (UKIP) at the 2009 European Parliament election, and asks whether the party's second-place finish indicates that it is now entering the political mainstream. It argues that while UKIP's success at these elections marks an important step in its development, the party continues to face significant barriers to further electoral progress. The article also considers the implications for the Conservative party under David Cameron, and cautions that UKIP's success could signal a more generalised shift towards the acceptance of the populist right in Britain. Finally, the article argues that the rise and recent success of UKIP is deserving of greater academic attention, and outlines possible research agendas to take this work forward.
This article provides the first systematic examination of the voting motivations of Conservative MPs in the final parliamentary ballot of the Conservative Party leadership election of 2016. We identify the voting behaviour of each Conservative parliamentarian as part of a unique dataset that we use to test, through the use of multivariate analysis, a series of hypotheses based around social background variables (i.e. gender and education); political variables (i.e. parliamentary experience, electoral marginality, the electoral threat posed by UKIP, and ministerial status); and ideological variables (i.e. attitudes towards same sex marriage and Brexit). Our findings demonstrate that ideology did matter in terms of voting. Attitudes towards Brexit were central to the appeals of both May (to Remainers) and Leadsom (to Leavers). We also demonstrate that in terms of support for Leadsom, Brexit was not the only significant driver as opinion on same sex marriage, year of entry and ministerial status also influenced voting behaviour.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.