Conservative Party (UK) leadership election, 2005

The 2005 Conservative leadership election was announced by party leader Michael Howard on May 6 2005, when he announced that he would be stepping down as leader in the near future. However he stated that he would not depart until a review of the rules for the leadership election had been conducted, given much dissatisfaction about the current system.

The rules of the contest

Much speculation surrounded the review of the rules, as it is widely estimated that the system eventually adopted could prove a help or hindrance to particular candidates with strong support in certain areas of the party. However on September 27th 2005 the proposal to change the rules was rejected. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4285182.stm

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The current rules

Under the rules adopted in 1998, under which both Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard were elected, a leadership contest can be initiated either by the incumbent leader resigning or by the Parliamentary Party passing a vote of no confidence in the present leader. The latter is called if 15% of the Parliamentary Party write to the Chairman of the 1922 Committee. If a vote of no confidence is passed, a leadership election is called and the incumbent is barred from standing in it.

Related Topics:
1998 - Vote of no confidence - 1922 Committee

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The returning officer is the Chairman of the 1922 Committee. Candidates must be nominated by any two MPs taking the Conservative whip. If only one candidate stands (as happened in the 2003 leadership election) then they are elected nem con.

Related Topics:
1922 Committee - 2003 leadership election

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

If two candidates stand then the election immediately proceeds to a ballot of all members of the party. If more than two candidates stand then MPs first hold a series of ballots to reduce the number to two. On each round the candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated. (If two or more candidates tie for the bottom place, as happened in the 2001 contest, then the ballot is repeated and if the tie remains all bottom placed candidates are eliminated.) Candidates may also withdraw between rounds (this also happened in the 2001 contest).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The series of ballots by MPs continues until there are only two candidates remaining. At this point the all-member ballot begins and lasts for some weeks. To be eligible to vote an individual has to have been a paid up member of the party for at least three months. The candidate who tops the poll is declared leader.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Criticisms of the current rules

Many criticisms have been made of the rules, in light of some problems encountered in previous elections. Amongst the concerns raised:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Technical

• The provision for resolving a tie was originally lacking and hastily devised during the 2001 election.
• The tie breaking mechanism is arguably clumsy.
• In the contests in both 1997 (although taking place under previous rules) and 2001 the position of Chairman of the 1922 Committee was vacant for some weeks owing to the previous holder either retiring or being defeated in the recent general election. Many felt that this prolonged the contests unnecessarily and have called for the Returning Officer to be a party office bearer that is unlikely to be vacant in the aftermath of a general election.
• Errors in the party's membership lists can lead to individual members being disenfranchised.

Structural

Many have criticised the system as being devised to try to answer those who believed that a leader should have the backing of the bulk of MPs, demands for ordinary party members to have a say and to allow for the removal of a failing leader. It is possible for a candidate to reach the final two with the support of barely a 1/3 of MPs in the final ballot (or even less if the rival candidate has overwhelming support in the Parliamentary Party) and then be elected leader by the party members. Conversely they are then vulnerable to being removed as leader by the MPs.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Some have argued that party members are unrepresentative of the electorate at large and are prone to elect a leader reflecting their views rather than the country at large.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Proposed new rules

In late May 2005 a proposed new system was formally circulated by the party http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4574685.stm. The rules were as follows:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• If one candidate was proposed by more than half the MPs they would be automatically declared elected.
• A candidate must have the support of at least 10% of the Parliamentary Party (20 MPs) to stand.
• The candidates would go forward to the National Convention, made up of senior figures in the voluntary wing of the party. Here the candidates would be ranked in order of popularity.
• MPs would vote on the list through a series of eliminative ballots and select the leader.
• The candidate who receives the most votes in the National Convention would be immune from elimination and would be guaranteed a place in the final round.
• A campaign spending limit of £25,000 would be imposed. These funds would be supplied by the party, but any money raised by individual candidates will be deducted from this fund.

The proposed new rules would have given MPs the final say on the leader and replaced the all member ballot with a vote at the National Convention of senior party figures. Both this and the caps on spending limits were widely believed to be most likely to harm the chances of David Davis.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The proposed changes led to disputes http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4574685.stm and were rejected on 27th September 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4285182.stm

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~