This morning's Telegraph says that David Davis' camp puts his support at 'north of 50' MPs with David Cameron and Ken Clarke each enjoying the support of about 25 MPs.
Listed below - in bold - are six extra MPs who have gone public with their choice for the next Tory leader. David Davis and David Cameron both get two more backers - Liam Fox has one more supporter. Quentin Davies has also been added - to the Clarke-Lansley-Rifkind block. For background on this list please read last week's entry and its explanatory notes.
David Davis (27)
Richard Bacon, Henry Bellingham, Graham Brady, Derek Conway, Philip Davies, David Davis, Nadine Dorries, Jonathan Djanogly, Nigel Evans, Eric Forth, Roger Gale, Paul Goodman, Damian Green, John Greenway, Philip Hammond, Nick Herbert, Julie Kirkbride, Greg Knight, John Maples, Andrew Mitchell, Andrew Murrison, Richard Spring, Ian Taylor, Shailesh Vara, Peter Viggers, Bill Wiggin, David Wilshire.
David Cameron (9)
Greg Barker, David Cameron, Michael Gove, Michael Howard, Boris Johnson, Oliver Letwin, George Osborne, Hugo Swire, Ed Vaizey.
Liam Fox (8)
Liam Fox, Chris Grayling, Justine Greening, Greg Hands, Oliver Heald, Eleanor Laing, Daniel Kawczynski, Stephen O’Brien
David Willetts (4)
Charles Hendry, Mark Hoban, David Lidington, David Willetts.
Clarke-Lansley-Rifkind (30)
Peter Ainsworth, James Arbuthnot, Tony Baldry, Richard Benyon, Crispin Blunt, Alistair Burt, Kenneth Clarke, David Curry, Quentin Davies, John Gummer, John Horam, Nick Hurd, Michael Jack, Robert Key, Jacqui Lait, Andrew Lansley, Anne McIntosh, Anne Milton, Malcolm Moss, Richard Ottaway, James Paice, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, Keith Simpson, Nicholas Soames, Anthony Steen, Andrew Tyrie, Robert Walter, Ann Widdecombe, Tim Yeo, Sir George Young.
I'm guessing that there's a lot of crossover between the Cameron and Clarke/Lansley/Rifkind supporters. If there isn't, there's really no evidence here to suggest that Cameron is a more credible candidate than either of those three or than Dr Fox.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 07 July 2005 at 09:27
Davies & Camaeron are getting virtually all the publicity at the moment, and yet neither of them seems to have gained a decisive advantage. That seems to suggest that they haven't managed to convince yet, and that many in the parliamentary party are reserving their judgement, to see whether there are other alternatives who might catch the early hares.
Posted by: Simon C | 07 July 2005 at 10:09
Remember the bookies now give DD a 67 per cent chance of winning. Cameron has inched up to 20 per cent, but everyone else is nowhere.
Say what you like about bookies, but they do accurately reflect the hype-free world of folding money. And since we can sure those rascally MPs are laying down a few quid, the prices will incorporate the very latest and very best inside info available. Normal FSA rules on insider trading do not apply.
(And yes, I know the bookies got the Olympics wrong, but...grr...no, actually I'm too upset by the monstrous burden on taxpayers to discuss the Olympics any further)
Posted by: Wat Tyler | 07 July 2005 at 10:32
Be proud that we've won the Olympics Wat, and just for once don't think about money all the damned time.
The only people I've heard moaning and groaning about the Olympics are fellow Conservatives,no wonder most people think we are completely out of touch!
Posted by: malcolm | 07 July 2005 at 16:40
It shows how sensible most Conservatives are, Malcolm. We don't like squandering public money on prestige projects.
Posted by: Sean Fear | 07 July 2005 at 17:33
No Sean,it doesn't show how sensible we are,it shows yet again how completely we have misjudged the national mood.Don't believe me?Read ANY national newspaper of whatever political persuasion.Every one of them is delighted.
Posted by: malcolm | 07 July 2005 at 19:05
It's the same mental attitude, Malcolm, that sees governments pour millions into keeping loss-making industries going because they are "national champions."
We'll see how happy Londoners are over the next few years to see even more money added onto their council tax bills to back this white elephant.
Posted by: Sean Fear | 08 July 2005 at 10:29
You're probably right Sean.Maybe we shouldn't bid for the Olympics,maybe we should not put any public money into sport or the arts or museums or events like the Trafalgar celebrations or the 60th anniversary of VE/VJ.
We will be able offer tax cuts with all the money we save,no doubt this will get us millions of extra votes!
Posted by: malcolm | 08 July 2005 at 11:22
Malcolm,
being concerned about the likely overruns, wastage and corruptionis entirely legitimate. Experience with the Dome, and the criminal verdicty this week, cast doubt on our government's ability to manage capital projects of any scale.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 08 July 2005 at 12:03
"being concerned about the likely overruns, wastage and corruptionis entirely legitimate."
Absolutely, but it doesn't need to be translated into opposition to the project. It is entirely possible to be enthusiastic about doing something, and be determined to get it right.
Since Sean is looking for examples, I would postulate being in favour of the war in Iraq, but being able to criticise the way in which the "peace" was handled.
Posted by: Simon C | 08 July 2005 at 13:08
The figures you show about the latest support is extremely good news as they show that there looks like there is a majority in the parliamentary party for a leader from the sensible wing of the party.Once the choice comes down to a straight fight between Davis and probably Daid Cameron from the sensible wing of the party DC should stand an excellent chance of winning.
If I was a Davis backer I would be quite worried that despite all the Conway, Forth hype Davis is still looking like things will go the same way they usually do with leading contenders in Conservative Party leadership contests!
Posted by: Jack Stone | 08 July 2005 at 21:28