
With Cleverly centre stage, the Tories have a new look – but that isn't the same as a plan
Yet Kemi Badenoch's shadow cabinet reshuffle this week should not be totally dismissed. See it instead as an inadequate recognition of an indisputable problem for any contemporary centre-right party, as well as an incoherent attempt to address it. If the Conservative party is very lucky, the reshuffle could be the start of better times. But it is nowhere near that point today. Right now, the reshuffle counts as the merest glimmer amid the Tory gloom. But a glimmer all the same.
The reshuffle's headline event, in as much as there was one, is the return of James Cleverly to the Conservative frontbench. The official opposition party is, of course, a shadow of what it once was, with only 120 MPs at the last count, and Cleverly is not quite the political heavyweight he pretends. Yet he came within a whisker of leading the party last October. He also has far more spirit and public recognition than most of his colleagues. He stands for a form of continuity conservatism with what remains of the party's one nation instincts and pragmatic traditions that brought it such success for so long.
He was also, until this week, his party's most underutilised backbench asset, and potentially the biggest backbench threat to Badenoch's rocky leadership. Unlike ex-ministers such as Rishi Sunak or Jeremy Hunt, Cleverly also still has a future. It made sense to have him back in the tent. From Badenoch's perspective, because Cleverly, a seasoned operator, has repeatedly made effective backbench attacks on Labour which should be better made from the frontbench. From Cleverly's, because he would once again be the most plausible candidate to stop the shadow justice secretary, Robert Jenrick, in the event of yet another Tory leadership contest.
If Cleverly is to consolidate that position – which he must do to take momentum away from Jenrick's efforts to steal Nigel Farage's clothes – he will need to make an impact in his new role. It helps that housing, where he will now shadow Labour's Angela Rayner, is an issue on which Cleverly touched – perhaps with private foreknowledge about the reshuffle – in his IPPR speech this month. He has strong instincts on housing. He is against nimbyism. He says the party should not be afraid of making the case for new housing to people who already have houses.
This points to why Cleverly's return is important more generally. Unlike Jenrick, he stands against cosying up to Reform UK. In June, speaking to the Conservative Environment Network shortly after Badenoch had ditched the party's 2050 net zero target – a move widely seen as a bending of the knee to Farage – he insisted that economic growth and 'environmental obligations' must go hand-in-hand.
At the IPPR this month, his central argument was that the Tory party must stop aping Reform UK by pretending there are easy answers to difficult problems. The party had to be honest about the need for, and the challenges of, delivery. The key lines in his lecture came at the end: 'We don't need a revolution,' said Cleverly. 'We need a restoration – of competence, of delivery, and of trust.'
Cleverly's return therefore raises an important broader question for the Tory party. Is Badenoch's decision to bring him into the shadow cabinet an attempt to pivot the Conservative party away from the populist right and towards the kind of more traditional centre-right stance that Cleverly embodies?
In electoral terms, is it an attempt to move away from a concentration on working-class voters in the so-called red wall of Labour seats where Reform UK has established itself as the main contender? Or does it instead imply a renewed focus on more middle-class voters in the so-called former 'blue wall' where Ed Davey's Liberal Democrats have swept so many Tories aside?
This is a big choice for the Conservatives – there is none bigger, in fact – and it is therefore important not to oversimplify it. It is not a choice about returning to the past. It is one that involves making judgments about almost everything that the party thinks it stands for in a fast-changing world – including social order, economic prosperity, individual freedom, cultural traditions, competence, global standing and more. It is also a UK variation of a question that simultaneously faces all former centre-right parties in the established democracies, all of which confront similar sets of issues. Only this week, Japanese voters handed out a rare electoral rocking to the centre-right government of the prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba.
Plenty of Conservatives have been grappling seriously with these questions. In a joint project earlier this year, the Bright Blue thinktank and Germany's Konrad Adenauer Stiftung came up with a list of 10 priorities for the European centre right. These included an emphasis on shared national identity, simplified regulatory regimes, avoidance of zero-sum thinking, re-established competence, individual responsibility, shared values and customs, civility towards others, the state's role as carer, support for families, and environmental conservation. None of these is doctrinaire or narrow.
Up to now, Badenoch has preferred to avoid such choices. She still seems to believe that moderation is not cool and therefore not effective. She prefers to fight on cultural issues rather than hard policy choices. She presents herself as the embodiment of contrarian cleverness, not as a strategist or problem solver who can run things well – the precise opposite of Cleverly's own self-presentation. She focuses her disdain on white-collar workers in state institutions – a large group of voters the Conservatives have been steadily losing and which her approach does nothing to reverse. She goes out of her way to praise Donald Trump and JD Vance, both of whom are unpopular with UK voters. In reality, one of the smartest things she could do would be to become a Trump critic.
If bringing Cleverly back is indeed meant as a pivot to the traditional centre right, then it is an extremely cunningly camouflaged one. Such a shift is not inherently impossible, and the Bright Blue-KAS report shows many ways in which it could be attempted. But it is exceptionally hard to believe in when the party is so battered by defeat and so frightened of Farage. With the Conservatives now averaging just 17% in the polls, there is a lot of ground to regain, but no sign under its current leader of any serious strategy for doing so.
Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Sun
13 minutes ago
- The Sun
Angela Rayner's department spends thousands in taxpayers' cash on woke diversity training
ANGELA Rayner's department has spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers' cash on woke diversity training. Her housing department splashed £47,272 on the coaching — including nearly £5,000 to a firm that advises on the dangers of banter at work. Inclusive Employers Ltd teaches how to 'decolonise the workplace' and offers 'inclusion allies' training. The Deputy PM's department refused to give full details of what this training involved when quizzed in parliamentary questions. But the company provides courses on unconscious bias and micro aggressions, according to its website. It warns workplace 'banter, when unchecked, can escalate into harmful behaviour including bullying, harassment and discrimination'. The website also provides tips on how to 'navigate the anti-woke backlash' and suggests many Baby Boomers are anti-woke. It states boomers 'may be uncomfortable with the rapid shifts and evolving language associated with being woke' and have a 'nostalgia for the values and beliefs' of the past. The Tories, who helped to uncover the near £50,000 spend, bashed it as a waste of taxpayers' cash. Shadow cabinet office minister Mike Wood said: 'Angela Rayner seems determined to push through her divisive Equality, Diversity and Inclusion agenda by any means necessary — even though it's clearly not in the national interest. 'This is part of a wider pattern of taxpayers' money wasted across Whitehall under Labour on woke virtue-signalling. It must be stopped.' Ms Rayner is in charge of steering the new Employment Rights Bill, which massively beefs up the powers of trade unions, through parliament. Angela Rayner says lifting 2-child benefit cap not 'silver bullet' for ending poverty after demanding cuts for millions It will force businesses to recognise union 'equality representatives' and let them have paid time off for their trade union work. A government spokesman said: 'The vast majority of this spend went on accredited, practical training to help managers better support disabled colleagues.' 1

Western Telegraph
33 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Rachel Reeves making ‘even bigger mistakes' than Liz Truss, says Kemi Badenoch
The Tory leader hit out at the Chancellor and the Prime Minister for their economic decisions as she drew a critical comparison to her predecessor at the top of the Conservative Party. 'For all their mocking of Liz Truss, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have not learnt the lessons of the mini-budget and are making even bigger mistakes,' Mrs Badenoch wrote in The Telegraph. 'They continue to borrow more and more, unable and unwilling to make the spending cuts needed to balance the books.' Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch hit out at the Chancellor and the Prime Minister (Paul Marriott/PA) Short-lived Conservative prime minister Ms Truss's mini-budget spooked the financial markets in 2022 and led to a spike in mortgage rates. 'As we all saw in 2022, the Chancellor and the Prime Minister are reliant on the bond markets,' Mrs Badenoch added. 'Yet those bond markets are increasingly jittery about the levels of borrowing today with no balancing spending decreases. 'Rachel Reeves's unfunded series of U-turns have only added to the pressure. She is boxed in by her party on one side, and her fiscal rules on the other.' The Chancellor earlier admitted Labour had 'disappointed' people while in Government, but said that the Government had got the balance right between tax, spending and borrowing. Rachel Reeves said she could not please everyone as Chancellor (Yui Mok/PA) She told an audience at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival that balancing the books meant making tough decisions, even if the are unpopular. Appearing on the Iain Dale All Talk Fringe show, she said: 'The reason people voted Labour at the last election is they want to change and they were unhappy with the way that the country was being governed. 'They know that we inherited a mess. They know it's not easy to put it right, but people are impatient for change. 'I'm impatient for change as well, but I've also got the job of making sure the sums always add up – and it doesn't always make you popular because you can't do anything you might want to do. You certainly can't do everything straight away, all at once.' Ms Reeves pointed to Labour's £200 million investment in carbon capture in the north-east of Scotland, which she said was welcomed by the industry. The Chancellor defended Labour's windfall tax on energy companies (Andrew Milligan/PA) At the same time, Labour's windfall tax, she said, was not liked by the sector. 'I can understand that that's extra tax that the oil and gas sector are paying, but you can't really have one without the other,' she said. Defending Labour's record, she said her party had the 'balance about right'. 'But of course you're going to disappoint people,' she added. 'No-one wants to pay more taxes. 'Everyone wants more money than public spending – and borrowing is not a free option, because you've got to pay for it. 'I think people know those sort of constraints, but no-one really likes them and I'm the one, I guess, that has to sort the sums up.' Ms Reeves said Labour had to deliver on its general election campaign of change, adding that her party did not 'deserve' to win the next election if it does not deliver the change it promised.


The Independent
42 minutes ago
- The Independent
Yvette Cooper's fast-track asylum plan revealed after protests across UK
The Home Secretary plans to introduce a fast-track scheme to tackle the asylum backlog that aims to turn around decisions within weeks. Yvette Cooper said Labour was planning a 'major overhaul' of the appeal process in the hope it would help to make a significant dent in the numbers. 'We need a major overhaul of the appeal [process] and that's what we are going to do in the autumn… If we speed up the decision-making appeal system and also then keep increasing returns, we hope to be able to make quite a big reduction in the overall numbers in the asylum system, because that is the best way to actually restore order and control,' Ms Cooper told The Sunday Times. The aim would be to compress the process so decisions and returns could happen 'within weeks', the newspaper reported, citing a source familiar with the plans. The Government faces pressure to cut how many asylum seekers are housed in hotels while awaiting the outcome of a claim or appeal. The Home Secretary has previously said she was eager to put a fast-track system for decisions and appeals in place so that people from countries considered safe would not sit in the asylum system for a long time. 'We should be able to take those decisions really fast, be able to take those decisions, make sure that they go through the appeals system really fast and then also make sure they are returned really quickly as well,' she told the Home Affairs committee in June. 'That would mean a fast-track system alongside the main asylum system, I think that would be really important in terms of making sure that the system is fair. 'That will require legislation in order to be able to do that, as well as a new system design.' The Government is also seeking to reduce the number of Channel crossings. More than 25,000 migrants have arrived in small boats this year so far. Tensions over asylum hotels have flared up in recent weeks, with a protest and counter-protest taking place on Saturday outside the Thistle City Barbican Hotel in north London, and also in Newcastle. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has pledged to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament. Asylum seekers and their families are housed in temporary accommodation if they are waiting for the outcome of a claim or an appeal and have been assessed as not being able to support themselves independently. They are housed in hotels if there is not enough space in accommodation provided by local authorities or other organisations.