Coffee House Shots
Tory leadership latest: 'Melmentum' runs out
Subscribe to The Spectator in September and get free months of website and app access absolutely free. Follow the Tory Leadership Campaign, Labor's Inaugural Budget and the US Elections with Britain's Best Informed Journalists and get your first free months free only in September. Go to www.spectator.co.uk/sale24 Hello and welcome to Coffee House Shots, The Spectator's Daily Politics Podcast. I'm Oscar Edmondson and I'm joined today by Katie Balls and James Heel. So it's been a busy day in Westminster today, we've had the vote on the Winter Fuel Allowance, another round of voting in the Tory Leadership Contest, not to mention the sale of a certain weekly politics magazine. But we should probably start with the Tory Leadership Contest where Mel Stride is the latest person to be eliminated from the running. Katie, can you take through it? Yes, so as you say, Mel Stride is out. When it comes to the numbers, Robert Generate was in the lead again on 33 MP backers, Kamehamehameh knocked in second place on 28 MP backers, James Cleverley was on 21, Tyde was on 21, and Mel Stride was in fifth place with 16, so he was knocked out. Now Mel Stride held firm on the number of MPs he had from the last round, as we have said previously, quite a loyal 2010, largely male bunch behind him, but he has not been able to do it. I do think it was always broadly the case that Pretty Patel and Mel Stride seemed the most likely not to make the final four, so there isn't a huge level surprise. I think as we spoke about previous on the podcast, Tom Tugenhatt had a really shaky first knockout round because he was only one MP ahead of Mel Stride, and James Cleverley looked at the time quite significantly further ahead, they of course disclaim a small number of MPs in the parties, so I think looking at this result, my initial thoughts are Tom Tugenhatt has had a good round because he has got himself back in contention with James Cleverley and they're going for a similar pool of the party, so the race is on to use the party conference to almost establish up as the centrist candidate. If they got all their numbers together, if Mel Stride's backers, and you know, most of that 16 went behind one of them, as some of the others in between, you can see a path to one of those two making the final two, but it does take some horse trading, some decisions as to who is going to the one going for it to get there. I think the Tugenhatt lot think that Mel Stride's back is maybe more sympathetic to him, but I think it's been John P. between the different rounds, and then I think when you go to the two in the lead, Robert Jenner and Kimmy Bajanog, largely seem to be the candidates on the right, at the moment, could they both make the final two? I think it is possible they both make the final two. The sense amongst these campaigns is when it comes to almost the Cleverley Tugenhatt, there might be a decision by the leadership camps, but a decision really has to be made as to which one MPs get behind. If one has a commanding lead, then before you know it, it gets really tight between the Cleverley/Tugenhatt candidate, Kimmy Bajanog from Robert Jenner, and it could, I think, in some of the modeling they'd be doing, just come down to it, you know, just a handful of MP votes. Robert Jenner keeps his lead. I think Kimmy Bajanog has advanced by one MP when you look at the numbers here, so I think it isn't a way quite a good result for Kimmy Bajanog, but I say that because this morning some of the talk, and of course these are anonymous ballots, and everyone has a line or a bridge to sell you something to spin, but there was talk from various camps saying that they thought Tom Tugenhatt can be knocked out, that James Cleverley could go into second ahead of Kimmy Bajanog. Now this result I think means the race is more open than in that scenario, and actually you can see a path really for every candidate there to make the final two still. I almost think that this would have been the result we'd have predicted a fortnight ago, so we had going into, I think, the first round. There was the expectation at that point the final four would be a generic Badenot Cleverley/Tugenhatt in some order, and then of course it was last week where Tom Tugenhatt was one vote ahead of Mel Stride, and there was all this expectation. I reckon that if you just asked people before the first round was cast how the second one would be, you get something like this, so almost after the upsize of the upsurprise of last week, and the sense perhaps going into today's ballot, there was some talk that Tom Tugenhatt could be knocked out from Mel Stride. This is actually a kind of reversion, a course correction to what we had previously. As Katie sort of talks about that, I reckon that of the four teams you surviving, three of them have a good story to tell. From a generic is still in the lead, and it's getting close now to those sort of 40 MPs you need to ensure you'll be in the final two, and become mathematically possible, because you've got the third of the party, but you will get to the final two. So he's picked up five MPs, so he's until Emily, that's good for him. Katie Badenot, she's picked up sixth, the most of anyone. She is second now with 28 MPs, a good strong showing for her, happy with that after last week. Then of course Tom Tugenhatt goes from being just one ahead of Mel Stride to getting 21 MPs neck and neck with James Cleverley, good for him after that, and of course he now goes in, and there's a real battle on that kind of wing of the party for who's going to be the sort of standard bearer for it. I think if you look, for instance, at how they could five candidates shake out, Badenot and generic has 61 between them. Cleverley Stride and Tugenhatt have 58, so that's real neck and neck he can kind of see to make the final two win as many of those over as possible. It's going to be interesting if they're kind of considered to be fishing on the same waters. And of course the real question I think was for James Cleverley, which is he picked up two public backers from Priti Patel, Greg Smith and Mike Shelbrook, and yet he has the same number of MPs as that, so I think there'll be questions asked about what went on there. As for Mel Stride, he came exactly the same as last time. As Katie says, he had 16, they were true and loyal, they were the sort of Spartans of this contest of fortunately. Mel meant him as over, and you know, Mel meant him and meant that meltdown. So he now leaves. He'll be interested to see who he chooses to back. The one point I'd also say, as well as sort of people backing, as well as Bann Houch, for instance, the most senior elected Tory and government in the country, I'll be interested to see how Penny Bordon backs, because of the seven public backers for Mel Stride, three of them backed Penny Bordon to 2022. So I'll be interested to see how they split out as well. And Katie, these four now go towards conference season where they get to put forward their respective manifestos. How do you expect that to play out? So it's obviously a chance for all the candidates to try and show that they have favor with the membership because the calculation amongst MPs who still get two more rounds to get them down to a final two is not just about who you wouldn't like to be the next Tory leader. It's about balancing of that with who you think you would like the most, but also realistically has the best chance in a final two against a candidate you might not want to get through. And therefore, a scenario where it looks as though the grassroots queuing outside your room and so forth is a scenario which could work in your favor when it comes to making that argument. For Kenny Baidonok, I think she needs to show that the membership is so behind her that could actually be a Tory association backlash if she was not offered to the grassroots as a choice. Could she get that level of momentum? I think that would be quite helpful to her calls at the moment. And of course, the membership have not got to have a say on, you know, recent leaders of the party. And I think that there is a potential risk of disillusionment on the associations if they feel as though their clear favor doesn't get there. So that means candidates like Robert generic really, you know, you can see him going up a bit in the Tory membership. But really, you want to be pretty close to Kenny Baidonok. So you risk this idea of a scandal that she has not put forward. And then I think for James Claverly and Tom Tugenhart is of course trying to, you know, show that one is more convincing taking on the others because there are some of the MPs in the center and on the left who effectively do not want, they don't really want Robert generic or Kenny Baidonok. They might prefer Tom Tugenhart. But if they concluded James Claverly was in better place or vice versa to stop the other, that could be the decision between which one you back. And, you know, we're obviously expecting speeches, questions of how long they are in the final day. But they're almost cosplaying being Tory leader at this conference over four days. And, you know, a level to see, can they hold a room? Can they maintain some excitement? Of course, the comparison is with David Cameron. And this is partly how it's all been set up and how that Tory leadership contest shook out, where David Cameron is not the favourite going into conference, but managed to use that stall to really change things. And I think that'll be hope for some of the other candidates. I think there's a question for Tom Tugenhart, which is, he's got a bit of momentum today. Can he start to skew the debate to talk more about lived-end voters? And everything seems to be reform voters on more so that way, and say that he's in a better place to do that, or is it the case that has a debate, the Tory party, just isn't the mood for at the moment? So can you use the platform to do something like that? And elsewhere, James, Labour have managed to avoid any sort of large-scale rebellion over the winter fuel allowance. Is this a success? There was a lot of reports over the weekend about the kind of numbers they would have voting against this. In the event, only one Labour MP braved the entreates of the whips and went and voted for me against this. John Tricket, who is very much of the same mindset as those seven Labour MPs, who voted against child benefit a few weeks ago, and very much on the old left of the party. So we're interested to see what happens to him. Does he also, for instance, lose the whip on that? A number of extensions was 53. Now, Labour government sources are stressing that a lot of these obviously had understandable reasons for not being there. For instance, David Lamé, meeting Anthony Blinken, et cetera, some of them were paired, or would have been nothing. I think so the government is stressing that it was only around actually sort of 12 or so, who actually went and abstained as a vote of protest on this. So I do think that it's a reasonably good day for the government. I think that in terms of the Labour whips, for instance, they have a good effective whipping operation over a whole new bunch of MPs, a larger intake they've just taken in. In terms of debate, 90 minutes or so, I think it's probably always interesting to see where political wind is blowing by the fact that all the opposition parties were united against it. It remains to be seen, of course, if it's going to actually lead to the kind of savings the government wants, because Harriet Baldwin, for instance, in that debate, should often make the point that if a 100% of people who are eligible for pension credit claim pension credit will that completely wipe out the savings? Although Liz Kendall, who is speaking with the government, didn't dress that point, the answer is yes, that's true. So we wait to see about that, but I think it's a test of things to come, and this is really about sending a message that particularly given perhaps those comments by Lucy Powell about a run on the pound, that Labour is serious about taking these decisions and is willing to fall through cuts, even though a lot of MPs both privately and one or two publicly really didn't want them to happen. I think you also had a situation on Monday night where Rachel Reeves had what could have been quite a difficult parliamentary Labour party meeting her parents. Obviously, Germans like to play it up, but lots of talk of show dams rising on happiness. Obviously, the time we were at the TUC Trade Union Conference and all these union leaders coming out all against the cut, like adding to the sense that she was going to have a really tough showing. And actually, I think that speaking to MPs who were in their room and not just your usual suspects who might be the most pro-Rachel Reeves, there was a sense that she hadn't given impressive performance. And I think one of the problems I've had on the Winter Fuel Lands is that they have not been landing the argument for a long time in advance, preparing the ground for it. You get all these comparisons between Rachel Reeves' tactics and the 21 billion black hole, and then Osborne and Cameron and that Osborne Cameron playbrick on the deficit. But of course, they were warning about the deficit and, you know, talking about cuts before they were elected. So it isn't a complete transport over. And I think on Winter Fuel, James mentions to run the pound comment. She started to make the argument which, again, our plug Saturday Coffee House shots, Jonathan Ashworth made, when we had our live event, which is ultimately to say, well, look how much the pensions are coming in here, look at these increases. There is a way of saying that pensioners are actually doing not amazingly well-being. And not being hard done quite in the way some of this has been characterised, though, of course, there's a question on timings that I think this Winter specifically. But I think that perhaps more of that earlier on might have brought some MPs with them. I think the other thing you see is just Kistalmer has a very large majority, and therefore he can afford to face down the rebels and the previous punishment of saying, well, spend the whip. It appears to have at least persuaded some to be very busy today and not be able to make it to Parliament for a busy day. But it probably does bode quite well for Kistalmer that he can push through a difficult budget, he can push through potentially a difficult spending review next year, potentially the bigger problem for Kistalmer is going to be the voters if they feel they're misled or these measures really hurt them. Great. Well, thank you, Katie. Thank you, James. And thank you very much for listening. And if you do enjoy the podcast and you listen on Spotify or Apple music, please do give us a follow.