In our latest entry on this summer's Conservative party leadership election to determine whether Liz Truss or Rishi Sunak will become Prime Minister, JayJackson argues that, contrary to the prevailing narrative, this contest is all about David Cameron's legacy rather than Margaret Thatcher's.
The Conservative Party leadership contest of Summer 2022 will surely go down as a historic episode of navel gazing, inertia, and abdication. The race to become the next Prime Minister has been brutal, both in its rhetoric and, more importantly, in its analysis of the state of the nation. The combination of hustings and debates with questions posed by the public and the press has laid bare the stark reality of the situation facing our next leader.
A combination of structural weaknesses in the UK economy, political turmoil, and contingent circumstances (such as the Covid pandemic) are conspiring to make this surely the least appealing time to enter Number 10 since the election of Margaret Thatcher in 1979.
Commentary abounds citing the influence - some might say stranglehold - that Thatcher and her political and economic agenda have had over this contest. These dusty, bromidic interventions have removed any and all attention away from the figure truly shaping this contest - its progenitor, David William Donald Cameron.
While Liz Truss might enjoy cosplaying as Thatcher - and Rishi Sunak consecrates the monetarist doctrine of her favourite Chancellor, Nigel Lawson - this contest isn't about which version of Thatcher the candidates are, or even Thatcher vs Reagan, it's much closer to home than that.
It's about the complicated legacy of Cameron's reign, as the Conservative Party grapples with the fallout from his demise in 2016 and struggles to reconcile itself with the politics and policies of the Cameron era.
The defining mission of the Cameron governments - austerity - has been rebuked and reversed, half-heartedly at first by Theresa May and Philip Hammond, but loudly and clearly under Boris Johnson. The fallout from Britain's departure from the European Union - Cameron's ultimate gamble and the cause of his downfall - is far from resolved. All of this is accompanied by the corrosive and discordant din of the bitter culture wars being waged by the Government in an attempt to disassociate themselves from Cameron's pursuit of socially liberal policies in the name of 'modern compassionate conservatism'.
Both Sunak and Truss owe their position as MPs in part to Cameron. It is almost unimaginable that Rishi Sunak would have secured such a safe seat without Cameron's efforts to reform the parliamentary selection process; while Liz Truss was a direct beneficiary of the 'A List' scheme, designed by Cameron to get more women and ethnic minority candidates into Parliament.
After winning selection in 2009, Truss then faced a battle to keep the position after details emerged of an affair with Conservative MP, Mark Field. Cameron firmly backed Truss during the process, issuing a grovelling apology to party activists, and went on to give her a role in his Cabinet, in which she has become the longest continuously serving minister since 2010.
Sunak, meanwhile, was parachuted into the super safe seat vacated by Cameron ally, William Hague, allowing him to be elevated to the House of Lords only months later. Sunak is a protege of Cameron's political soulmate and Chancellor, George Osborne, recently appointing a former Osborne strategist to his campaign team. Rishi Sunak has gained praise from the former Chancellor and has clearly taken Osborne's brand of tough talking and hard choices 'long term economic plan' to heart.
The contest itself can directly trace its origins back to Brexit - Cameron's last desperate throw of the dice to try and fulfil the pledge he made in his first party conference speech, after winning his own leadership contest, to stop the Party 'banging on about Europe'. Cameron and May were both forced from office as a result of Brexit wrangling, leaving the path clear for the man whose endorsement of Vote Leave - and betrayal of his old pal, 'Dave' - was one of the defining moments of the campaign - Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
Three years later, Johnson's inevitable implosion means that we now have another leadership contest, but one in which the Brexit divide has become inverted and confused. Truss, who backed 'Remain' (largely out of loyalty to Cameron), is now campaigning with the zeal of a convert, having to position herself as an ultra-Brexiteer to win the backing of the influential European Research Group (ERG).
Whereas Sunak - who went out a limb against Cameron and backed 'Leave', potentially imperilling his future prospects - now finds himself backed by the 'Remain' contingent of the Party and is getting no credit whatsoever from the membership nor parliamentarians for backing 'Leave' in 2016. Johnson may have 'got Brexit done' in 2019, but arguments about how best to deal with its economic and political consequences are alive and causing deep divides within the Conservative Party.
The Brexit battles and arguments about austerity are also accompanied by a tortuous and dogmatic focus on so-called 'culture war' issues. Cameron swept to victory in the 2005 leadership contest and settled debates about modernisation 'in favour of an inclusive social liberalism', telling members that 'we've got to change our culture so we look, feel, think and behave like a completely new organisation'.
After his famous 'Hug a Husky' trip in 2006, Cameron promised the 'greenest government ever', inviting voters in 2010 to 'Vote Blue, Go Green'. In Opposition, he also apologised for Section 28, got the Conservatives talking about 'social justice', and even flirted with drug law reform. Whilst much of this shamefully melted away in government, Cameron notably introduced gay marriage against the will of his party.
Fast forward to 2022 and the stark contrast with the rhetoric and the policies on show in the current leadership contest could not be clearer. Neither Sunak or Truss are willing to stake political capital on climate or LGBTQ+ issues and more likely to brand the other a 'social justice warrior' than take an active interest in matters of equity and equality.
David Cameron is the ghost at the feast, the former Prime Minister turned shed-dwelling lobbyist that neither candidate wants to acknowledge exists. For his part, Cameron hasn't been keen to intervene either, having thus far refused to offer his support to either of the candidates - perhaps to avoid plaguing his preference with the kiss-of-death from the most unpopular former Prime Minister of the modern era or, more likely, because the candidates are so keen to distance themselves from his agenda.
Ironically, the man who once proudly proclaimed himself the 'heir to Blair' has ended up with a similarly troublesome relationship with the party he once led with equal puissance and vitality. Having returned the party to government from the depths of electoral oblivion - as Blair did - Cameron has now been castigated by a party committed to disowning the legacy of the last twelve years.
Jay Jackson is Head of Policy and Public Affairs at Volteface and Secretariat of the Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform.