When Rishi Sunak accepted Dominic Raab’s resignation back in April, the prime minister seemed to leave open the possibility of Raab’s return to frontline politics. As a longstanding ally of Sunak, it seemed plausible enough that the outgoing justice secretary might return to government at a future reshuffle, penance paid. Perhaps he would even get his old job back, and call the British bill of rights back from the grave for a third time.
We will never know. This week, Raab announced that he intends to stand down as a member of parliament at the next election. He is not yet 50, and has been an MP for just 13 years.
Explaining this doesn’t take any more detective work than an online search for his constituency. In 2015, the Conservative majority in Esher and Walton was 28,616; in 2017, a still hearty 23,298. In 2019? Just 2,743. Over the past year, the Tories’ polling collapse has led some to wonder whether all the talk of a post-Brexit realignment was overstated. But it is seats such as this that suggest they are wrong.
The last time Esher and Walton or any of the constituency’s predecessors returned a non-Tory MP was when a Liberal scraped home in Chertsey by 99 votes … in 1906. Ian Taylor, Raab’s predecessor, held this seat for the Tories by more than 14,500 votes in 1997.
A seat such as this suddenly becoming marginal while Boris Johnson was securing the first comfortable Conservative majority since 1987 is exactly what a realignment looks like. It would have taken remarkable reserves of public spiritedness for Raab to fight on, just for the sake of providing my generation with our “Portillo moment”.
But the announcement of his departure means there is now a vacancy for the unenviable role of the person widely expected to be convincingly defeated in 2024. Liberal Democrat activists are likely already working on a shortlist: “Where are you up for … ?”
Will the prospect of such an ignominious place in the history books (and the extra attention from headhunting opponents) lead even more Tory MPs to join the 10% who have already decided to retire at the next election? It’s not the sort of thing people readily admit to, even in strictest confidence. But we can do a little rune-reading.
Take Jacob Rees-Mogg, the man most often talked about after Raab as a potential election-defining scalp. His current majority is relatively healthy at almost 15,000 – and it went up, rather than down, at the last election. He has denied any suggestion that he is stepping down, and was unanimously readopted as the candidate.
Yet he has also taken on a new job presenting a current affairs programme on GB News, from Monday to Thursday at 8pm. I provide the scheduling details not by way of advertisement, but to highlight how difficult it may be to combine such a role with his duties in the house (a fact that hasn’t escaped people at the channel, either).
Then there’s Boris Johnson. Assuming he avoids suspension and a byelection, his majority in Uxbridge and South Ruislip is just 7,210 and it’s an unhappy time to be a Conservative in London. He has repeatedly denied suggestions that he will make a so-called rat run to a safer seat.
Yet the rumours persist. And who can blame him? To lose his own seat just one election after winning a historic majority would be a personal disaster from which surely, even for him, no political recovery was possible – and irresistible red meat to the historians, too.
Meanwhile, so divided is the Conservative party at this point that even some Tories are holding out for scalps. There will be many shots sunk by younger activists, for example, if Iain Duncan Smith and Theresa Villiers – both of whom hold London marginals and have worked very hard to kill the government’s attempt to build more houses – finally lose their battles against the inevitable next year.
But perhaps trying to predict in advance who will furnish the Portillo moment defeats the object; the very power of the original was that it was a surprise, after all. It also distracts from the bigger, sadder story: it is not good for parliament to have such a high rate of churn among MPs.
In the age of social media, the role can be deeply immiserating. Westminster life does put pressure on families and marriages – even more so now that MPs are forbidden from employing their spouses, which used to be a sensible safety valve.
Setting aside my cynicism, we shouldn’t just dismiss Raab’s stated reason: he does have young children, and it can’t be easy having your dad being a hate figure. Parliament is the poorer for fewer former ministers and secretaries of state sticking around to offer their experience to the Commons – however you personally feel about Raab.
Henry Hill is deputy editor of ConservativeHome
