toryleadership

How many Tories have voted?

"Around half of the 253,689 eligible party members are now estimated to have voted in the leadership contest, even though the deadline is Dec 5.  Party sources said, however, that as only 79 per cent voted in the last full membership ballot in 2001, effectively 60 per cent of votes had probably been cast."

My own information is very slightly different from that of The Telegraph - from which the above quotation comes.  I understand that only a little over 40% of members have voted.  Nonetheless. if those who have already voted have voted in line with last week's YouGov poll we can expect David Cameron to be enjoying a 2-1 lead.  All of those yet to vote will have to vote in at least that proportion for David Davis to have a chance of winning this contest - a scenario that now seems very unlikely.

David Davis has one best, last chance to produce something dramatic tomorrow lunchtime when he goes head-to-head with David Cameron on ITV1's Jonathan Dimbleby programme.  The programme goes out at 12.35pm tomorrow (Sunday).  I'll blog the debate immediately afterwards.

If you haven't entered the run-off stage prediction competition it's not too late to do so.  Click below to vote in ConservativeHome's own leadership ballot...

Hustings begin today

The leadership hustings begin today with meetings in Leicester and Solihull.  ConservativeHome readers have volunteered to report from those meetings for tomorrow morning.

The Times reports that the hustings meetings will be surrounded by the kind of "hoopla witnessed at the Conservative Party conference".  Volunteers for David Cameron will be handing out packs of mints to attendees.  The mints will carry the slogan "a breath of fresh air" and form one part of the final leg's "Win with Cameron" campaign literature.

The Times suggests that about a third of Tory members will have voted by this morning:

"Although ballot papers were posted ten days ago, and Conservative members are notoriously efficient in returning them, as of last Thursday night only one in six of the 250,000 members had cast a vote.  According to the rate of replies received by the Elec- toral Commission, this was scheduled to rise to about one in three by this morning."

Given that something short of 100% will vote, the one-third that have voted may account for 40% to 50% of the total votes that will be cast.   If David Cameron has done as well as Saturday's YouGov poll suggested amongst the 'already voted' (68% to 32%), David Davis must  beat Mr Cameron by at least as big a margin amongst those still to vote.   It is a little surprise to see today's Telegraph reporting that Camp Cameron 'scent victory'.

Anyone attending the Leicester or Newport hustings?

Volunteers have kindly signed up to report from 9 of the 11 leadership hustings for ConservativeHome.

The two gaps in coverage are Monday's meeting in Leicester and the Welsh hustings - in Newport - on the 29th.

Can anyone help?  Budding reporters are invited to volunteer by emailing [email protected].

My ballot paper has arrived...

...along with two A4-sized leaflets for each candidate; a note from Michael Spicer (Returning Officer) and a financial appeal from Michael Howard.  Sir Michael's note contains the warning to call 020 7984 8233 to reserve a place at one of the hustings - seats will be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis.

At first glance Mr Cameron's leaflet looks superior.  The text is broken up into bite-sized chunks - with subtitles and key messages emboldened.  It has more policy statements than Mr Davis' leaflet - although most are pretty vague.  On the back page it carries endorsements from the likes of Bruce Anderson, Charles Moore, Steve Richards and Mary-Ann Sieghart.  The front of the leaflet carries a photo of Mr Cameron giving his conference speech - an obvious reminder of his finest moment.

Mr Davis' leaflet has a more colourful centrefold and messages like "Substance", "Experience" and "Winning beyond the south" are printed in larger type.

DC signs his leaflet with a simple "David" - the older Mr Davis has a "Yours sincerely, David Davis".

I won't be voting yet.  What about you?

The hustings

CCHQ has just announced the locations and timings of the hustings.  The events will be closed to the media but I hope that - with your help - this blog will be able to report from inside the meetings.  If you are interested in filing a report from one of the events please email me at [email protected]. 

Monday 14th November

Morning: Leicester
Evening: Birmingham (now covered by one reporter)

Tuesday 15th November

Morning: Newcastle (now covered by one reporter)
Evening: York (now covered by one reporter)

Wednesday 16th November

Evening: Bolton (now covered by one reporter)

Monday 21st November

Evening: Perth (now covered by one reporter)

Tuesday 22nd November

Evening: Cambridge (now covered by one reporter)

Wednesday 23rd November

Morning: Frimley (now covered by one reporter)
Evening: London (now covered by two reporters)

Tuesday 29th November

Evening: Newport

Wednesday 30th November

Evening: Exeter (now covered by one reporter)

[Conservatives in Northern Ireland will be provided with a TV link to one of the hustings].

Tory membership down to "over 250,000"

That fact has been revealed during a furore over the rules that state that married couples who took out joint Conservative Party memberships will only have one vote.  Christopher Montgomery, a leading activist within the summer's pro-democracy movement, suggests that this 'disenfranchisement' of married couples will hurt David Davis.  His suggestion is that husband-and-wives will be more traditionalist in outlook and less likely to support the modernising agenda of Mr Cameron.

Party Chairman Francis Maude issued a "special bulletin" last night to clarify the situation.  I attach it for your enlightenment.

Download special_bulletin.pdf

The basic fact appears to be that those couples who haven't paid an amount at least equal to twice the basic membership  fee of £15 will not get more than one vote.  There are exceptions to this rule for 'foundation members' who have maintained their membership since before 1998 and under-22s who only have to pay £3 for membership (and their vote).  These rules governing husband-and-wife memberships are not new rules that Francis Maude has just imposed but existing rules.

Any contest issues of principle can be referred to the Returning Officer for the election - Sir Michael Spicer MP.

To me it does seem wrong that joint memberships should not qualify for a vote but rules cannot be changed once a contest is underway.  This is something to look at for the next time.

The reduction in membership from over 300,000 - only four years ago - to "over 250,000" (according to the special Bulletin) is worrying.  The decline in membership may reflect (1) the deaths of an ageing membership; (2) resignations from a party that dumped the members' last choice for leader and attempted to take the vote away completely this time round; and (3) the failure to produce very regular member products like the much-once-vaunted Heartland magazine.  We'll have to wait and see how much "over 250,000" means in order to understand the extent of the decline.  The drop is, nonetheless, a further sign that mass membership organisations are difficult to sustain in the 21st century.   This cultural change - part of the Bowling Alone phenomenon - is almost certainly (IMO) the biggest factor.  The building of a looser conservative coalition and the use of primary systems of election must be put on the incoming leader's agenda.  The creation of a mass membership party is now probably beyond our reach.  A mass connections party should not be.

Round two: The result

David Cameron: 90 (56)
David Davis: 57 (62)
Liam Fox: 51 (42)

(Round one results are in brackets).

Third-placed candidate could legally challenge coronation

Since yesterday's lunchtime post on conservativehome.com (about David Davis folding if he comes a poor second in today's ballot) there has been a lot of media speculation about 'a coronation'.   A statement issued yesterday by David Davis on the speculation was no where near as emphatic as the one issued by Team Fox:

The LF campaign: "After all the consultation of recent months, it would be unthinkable if our members were denied their say in the leadership election. Those who favour such an approach demonstrate an astonishing arrogance. I campaigned to defend our members participation in that ballot. I will do all I can to defend that right."

The DD campaign: "David Davis is fighting for every vote. He is confident of going through to the next round and intends to take the contest to the party membership and win.''

On this morning's Today programme Damian Green, speaking for the Davis campaign, insisted that Mr Davis would exceed expectations and perform well in today's ballot.  He would then go on to win in the country.  He refused, however, to rule out the possibility of DD folding if he comes a poor second.

The Davis campaign is privately furious about this row and believes that Cameron supporters at Central Office are promoting the idea of a 'Cameron coronation'.

A coronation would (quite understandably) suit the Cameroons who could avoid the scrutiny that a six week contest would engender.  A leader in today's Telegraph notes that the contest in the country is essential to probe Mr Cameron on policy issues where his campaign has been "far less impressive" than on the 'big issues'.

Because Dr Fox has not won many new public supporters since Tuesday (although he appears to be the second choice of members in the country and today's Sun argues for a Cameron-Vs-Fox contest) he appears likely to come behind Mr Davis.

ConservativeHome.com believes, however, that should a second-placed David Davis fold, Dr Fox will have the legal right to be the candidate that opposes David Cameron in the country.  For the sake of the next leader of the Conservative Party to be fully scrutinised - and for the sake of party democracy - we urge that that right be exercised should it be necessary.

Charles Moore proposes extra ballot of MPs

This time next week we’ll know which of the two leadership candidates that ‘we rank-and-file members’ will have to choose between.  Your Editor had hoped that we would have a choice of three candidates.  Such a wider choice would reduce the scope for disappointment amongst the supporters of, say, Dr Fox and Ken Clarke (the two men most likely to be eliminated by MPs).  Unfortunately a choice of three now looks very unlikely.  Also unlikely to be accepted by the 1922 Backbench Committee of MPs – but an interesting idea – is Charles Moore’s proposal for an additional ballot amongst MPs.  The final ballot, under current rules, is held to decide which two (of three) candidates are presented to the membership.  In this week’s Spectator 'Notes' Mr Moore suggests that MPs should vote again so that grassroots members have a clear idea as to which candidate enjoys the support of those MPs who voted for the eliminated contender.

Mr Moore (an eleventh hour opponent of the disenfranchisement of party members) bases his proposal on the fact that, in 2001, IDS never had (or never knew if he had) the support of more than a third of MPs.  Political anoraks have long debated whether most of Michael Portillo’s 53 supporters would have supported IDS or Ken Clarke.  An extra ballot would certainly establish which of the two candidates had most parliamentary supporters but it might presage new problems if the rank-and-file vote for the candidate with the backing of the fewest number of MPs.  Things are probably best left as they are.

PS Sometime soon it will be important for the candidates to be asked if (or how) they’ll reform the election process should they become leader...

Is your MP consulting you?

For those readers who are fortunate to have a Conservative MP it would be good to know if any are making special efforts to seek your opinion on who they should support in the first round of voting...

If Michael Howard's disenfranchisement proposal had succeeded there would have been a formal consulation of rank-and-file members.  That is not so necessary now - given that we all have a vote in the final round. The question remains, however, as to whether we will get the opportunity to vote for our preferred candidate in that final round?  Those of us/ you who are enthusiastic Clarke-ites or Cameroons, for example, may fear that our/ your choice could be excluded from the pair presented by MPs. 

Crispin Blunt, who was Malcolm Rifkind's campaign manager until the former Foreign Secretary dropped out of the race earlier today, has promised a proper survey of his Association members' opinions.  He told BBCtv's Daily Politics programme:

"I'm going to take the opportunity to consult with my constinucncy on which two candidates they would like to be choosing between. Today I'm sending 1,500 ballot papers to establish which choice they would like."  

Is any other MP doing anything half as good as that?