The race to succeed Rishi Sunak as Tory leader could be won and lost in Birmingham over the next few days.
The “beauty contest” involving the remaining candidates at the party conference has the potential to transform one of the not-so-famous four from also-ran to front-runner.
Robert Jenrick, ahead among Conservative MPs, has the early momentum and is a slick performer. But could one of his rivals – Kemi Badenoch, James Cleverly or Tom Tugendhat – dramatically upset the odds?
It has happened before, spectacularly, when outsider David Cameron made the speech of his life at a leadership “beauty contest” in 2005 and overtook the early favourite, David Davis, to snatch victory and seize the Tory crown.
Looking ahead to Birmingham, one conference veteran has told Sky News it’ll be “shine – or crash!” and is almost salivating at the prospect of the foursome facing Tory activists under the glare of live TV cameras and the scrutiny of party grandees and power brokers.
No pressure, then, on the one lady and trio of gentlemen on parade. This is crunch time in the leadership battle: a penalty shoot-out in a long – critics claim too long – and bruising campaign.
Or to use another footballing analogy, as Sir Alex Ferguson used to say to describe buttock-clenching tension, it’s “squeaky bum time”.
In 2005, the now Lord Cameron shone with a brilliantly delivered, upbeat speech: no notes, no lectern and a relaxed, casual stroll around the stage of Blackpool’s iconic Winter Gardens. The ovation was long and loud.
Mr Davis didn’t crash, to be fair. But in comparison, his speech, though respectable, was workmanlike. The two contrasting speeches were a turning point in the leadership campaign.
Advertisement
Image: David Cameron sought to be leader of his party after the 2005 election. Pic: PA
This time, the contest begins with a “fireside chat” and members’ questions for an hour with each candidate. On Monday, it’s Mr Tugendhat and Ms Badenoch, and on Tuesday, Mr Jenrick and Mr Cleverly.
Then Wednesday is the big day, with four “stump speeches” of 20 minutes each. This time the order is expected to be Mr Tugendhat, Mr Cleverly, Mr Jenrick and Ms Badenoch.
Recalling the 2005 conference in his memoirs, Lord Cameron wrote: “The week in Blackpool was undoubtedly one of the most exciting of my life.
“The acoustics were good, the hall was packed and the audience was close to the stage. The atmosphere and the potential were tangible.”
Surprisingly, given the reception his speech received, Lord Cameron believed it wasn’t as good as the one he made at his campaign launch a few days earlier.
“But many more people saw it,” he acknowledged, “as it was carried live on television and reprised on the evening news.”
Indeed it was.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
I vividly remember reporting on the speech for Sky News and describing it as “electrifying” – a verdict Mr Cameron’s team gleefully reported in their leadership campaign newsletter the following morning.
The speech was what we later grew accustomed to. Classic Cameron, full of hope and optimism, all sunny and cheerful. It included these lines:
“I joined this party because I love my country…
“I joined this party because I believe in freedom…
“I joined this party because I believe in aspiration…
“I want people to feel good about being a Conservative again.”
And in words that could have been spoken by Sir Keir Starmer about changing the Labour Party, he added: “We have to change… we’ve got to change our culture so we look, feel, think and behave like a completely new organisation.”
Reflecting on the speech in his memoirs, Lord Cameron wrote: “What impressed many people was that I delivered it without notes, having memorised it as we drafted it. Watching it now, I find it rather wooden, but it worked.”
It certainly did. “Within a single day,” Lord Cameron wrote, “the polls were transformed: support for me surged from 16% to 39%, while for Davis it collapsed from 30% to 14%”.
It was a stunning turnaround. Could something like that happen this year in Birmingham?
Image: David Davis saw his supporters wearing ‘it’s DD for me’ T-shirts ahead of his conference speech in 2005. Pic: Reuters
In 2005, although leadership candidates Kenneth Clarke, Liam Fox and Malcolm Rifkind were also on parade in the Winter Gardens, the contest was seen as a two-horse race, with Mr Davis – still in the Commons to this day aged 75 – out in front.
But Mr Davis wasn’t all that was out in front. Mr Cameron’s reputation as the moderniser in the race was helped by his rival parading young women supporters in tight-fitting T-shirts proclaiming “It’s DD for me”.
Headline writers called it “a storm in a DD-cup”. And nearly 20 years on, we’re unlikely to see a repeat of that sort of campaigning.
But will one of the four leadership candidates repeat Lord Cameron’s Tory conference triumph of 2005 that propelled him to the leadership?
It’s entirely possible. Don’t bet against it. But which candidate will it be?
Though the House of Representatives may soon be able to consider the three bills, President Donald Trump didn’t get all Republicans to fall in line to support the legislation.
The EU has sanctioned multiple entities for using cryptocurrencies to evade restrictions, channel funds, and propagate pro‑Russian disinformation and election interference.
Sir Keir Starmer has said former Tory ministers have “serious questions to answer” about how the names of Afghans who worked with UK forces were exposed.
Nearly 7,000 Afghan nationals are being relocated to the UK after their names were accidentally sent in an email in February 2022, when Boris Johnson was prime minister, but the leak was only discovered by the British military in August 2023, when Rishi Sunak was PM.
A super-injunction, preventing the reporting of the mistake, was imposed that year in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak.
The Conservative government at the time then started transporting thousands of Afghans to the UK in secret as they were in danger.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:56
Victim of Afghan data breach speaks to Sky
Kicking off Prime Minister’s Questions, Sir Keir said: “Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen.
“The chair of the defence committee has indicated that he intends to hold further inquiries.
“I welcome that and hope that those who are in office at the time will welcome that scrutiny.”
The data breach saw a defence official accidentally release details of almost 19,000 people seeking to flee Afghanistan after the return of the Taliban.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch avoided mentioning the data breach, but Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said it was “shocking” how it had been kept secret for three years.
Sir Ed said the prime minister will have the Lib Dems’ support if he decides to pursue a public inquiry.
Mr Healey’s Tory predecessor, Sir Ben Wallace, said he makes “no apology” for applying for the initial four-month injunction and insisted it was “not a cover-up”.
The scheme, which had been kept under wraps until yesterday, has so far cost hundreds of millions of pounds.
However, the total cost to the taxpayer of existing schemes to assist Afghans who are deemed eligible for British support, as well as the additional cost from the breach, will come to at least £6bn.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
He said: “I’m really deeply uncomfortable with the idea that a government applies for a super-injunction.
“If there are any [other] super-injunctions in place, I just have to tell you – I don’t know about them. I haven’t been read into them.
“The important thing here now is that we’ve closed the scheme.”
Mr Healey was informed of the breach while in opposition, and earlier this year he commissioned a review that led to the injunction being lifted.
He said “accountability starts now” and added Labour had to deal with the risks, court papers, intelligence assessments and different schemes when they came to power last summer before they could lift the injunction.