The threat facing Rishi Sunak on Friday has been clearly signalled for months. Disastrous Conservative performances in this week’s local and mayoral English contests – the last significant test of the political mood before the general election – could open the window of opportunity for his party to topple his leadership. Before a single local election vote had been cast, it was clear that a minority of MPs were determined to attempt this. Mr Sunak has known for months that this is a moment of vulnerability.
It is not yet clear whether the Conservatives’ results are sufficiently dire to trigger a more widespread revolt. The votes have not even all been counted yet. But this will not deter the prime minister’s committed opponents. Talk of MPs submitting letters to the chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, Sir Graham Brady, demanding a confidence vote will grow predictably loud over the weekend. Whether a confidence vote will actually happen remains a question for the future.
Two things can nevertheless be said with confidence, however. The first is that another leadership challenge would be a self-inflicted disaster for the Tory party, whether it succeeds in removing Mr Sunak or not. It would mean the third such contest in less than two years, and could result in the fourth Tory prime minister since 2019. It would make Britain a laughing stock.
A change of leader would be based on a fantasy – that some other Tory could swiftly unite the party, change its direction and rescue its popularity. No part of this is going to happen. There are no shortcuts, no magic bullets and, most relevant of all, no credible candidates. A putsch would merely send Tory credibility plummeting, not soaring. The Conservative party would have destroyed its last shred of credibility as a governing party.
The second thing to say is that the process for changing a prime minister in the middle of a parliament need to be looked at anew. The Conservatives have already tested their own rules to destruction. Under these, MPs narrow the contenders (who must be MPs) down to two. Party members then choose which of the two should be leader, and thus prime minister. But the members’ choice may not have enough support to command a majority in parliament. This was what happened after Liz Truss was chosen, and it may soon happen again.
This week, Sir Graham reportedly described the system over which he presides as a workable one for an opposition party, but “crazy” for a party of government. He makes a powerful argument, not least because such rules give MPs an inbuilt incentive to avoid a membership vote by stitching up the succession for a single candidate, thus doing away with any contest or debate at all.
This dilemma may again land on the Conservatives’ plate very soon if Mr Sunak’s enemies have their way. Yet other parties’ rules are not so different. If Labour were to govern for a decade, it may eventually confront something similar, just as it did in 2007. The Scottish National party is going through a similar process right now as it tries to avoid a contested election for Scotland’s latest first minister. Each party must make its own call in its own way, in ways that strengthen trust in democracy. But the election that this country needs right now is not another Tory leadership struggle. It is a general election, and it needs it as soon as possible.
