| By the time his replacement is chosen, Rishi Sunak will have been leader of the opposition for longer than any defeated prime minister since James Callaghan lost in 1979. During his final conference address as Tory leader, he defended the party’s record in office. “We did not get everything right”, the former prime minister said, “but we should not forget what we have achieved these last 14 years. We must not, and I know we will not, let Keir Starmer rewrite history”. His words come three months after that devastating election defeat for his party, and the four contenders for Tory leader will be pitching themselves as the person who can most effectively repair the damage. However, the drawn-out race, which started officially in July, has thus far been painful for almost everyone involved – so much so that Jenrick and Tugendhat have called for the contest to be shortened by a week. There is frustration that the lengthy race has mean that the leaderless party has been unable to capitalise on Labour’s shaky start to government. Although each will be trying to differentiate themselves – One Nation Tory Tugendhat, hard-line right-winger Jenrick, culture war stirrer Badenoch, and unifier Cleverly – the lines remain blurred because no candidate has made clear their positions on the most substantive policy issues. The tone so far Following the 2022 leadership race between Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak, which at points became aggressive and acrimonious, it is understandable why there are guardrails this time around on what contenders can and can’t say. Introducing a yellow card penalty system, which is supposed to stop contenders from mud-slinging and personally attacking rivals, has regulated the tone of the race so far. It has also, however, made it somewhat difficult for candidates to assess the record of the previous government and what roles the other candidates might have played in it. “We have an adversarial political system and that’s not a bad thing,” Hill says. “We can police that and make sure it’s done in a sportsmanlike manner, but candidates holding other candidates to account is an important part of how most democratic systems work.” Because there has been so little back and forth, up until this point the race has seemed like “dead time”, Hill adds. The battle For the four hopefuls, the conference is going to begin with a “fireside chat” and members’ questions for an hour with each candidate today and tomorrow. On the last day, each contender will have 20 minutes to make their case in a speech that they hope will tip the scales in their favour. The quality and fallout of the speeches will solidify the frontrunners, but it will be another week before the candidates are whittled down to two. Then it will be a head-to-head to win over the Tory members, who will vote on 31 October with the winner announced two days later. Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty separated the four contenders into two camps: “Those for whom libertarian economics comes first, and those who speak golf-club identity politics.” Though the divide between these two camps is porous, Badenoch and Jenrick are comfortably in the latter category, while Cleverly and Tugendhat occupy the former. Badenoch was the bookies’ favourite for a while, but Jenrick pulled ahead in the first two rounds of MP voting. Once a middle-of-the-road centrist, Jenrick is now the only candidate calling for Britain to pull out of the European convention on human rights and has said that “woke culture” and immigration has put English national identity at risk. Badenoch’s blunt manner and her position on culture war issues has gained her significant favourability in some corners of the party, but has gained her some enemies, too. A full 24 hours of conference has not passed yet, and Badenoch is already in hot water after controversial comments on maternity pay, which she described as “excessive”, adding that people should exercise “more personal responsibility”. She has since walked back her comments, insisting that she was misrepresented. The comment followed a morning of uncompromising and provocative messages on the Middle East and immigration. “I think it’s possible to over-interpret what [the member support for Badenoch] means in ideological terms because Penny Mordaunt was, until [this year’s] election, among the members’ favourites,” Hill says. “On the grassroots side, there’s a real frustration because the last government wasn’t really doing anything to please anyone, so there is a sense that what the members want is somebody who will at least stand up for conservatism as they understand it. That’s to Badenoch’s advantage because she is out there and having those fights.” Cleverly is going ahead with what Hill has described as the “most vibes-based campaign”, trying to win people over by being a “nice person”. He performs well as a communicator and has been regarded as the unity candidate due to his ability to bridge the gap between the Tory right and the One Nation camp, but unity alone is unlikely to win him the leadership. Over the course of the next few days, he will have to set out a real political vision, which he has so far lacked. Tugendhat’s more centrist credentials have appealed to some, but his campaign has fallen flat in many ways and he has struggled to widen his net. His attempt to broaden his appeal has put off some in his One Nation camp, but he also recognises that without more support he will not defeat the frontrunners. Cleverly and Tugendhat’s challenge during this conference will be demonstrating that they have the numbers and momentum to get to the final round. What else is on the agenda? Without a leader there is no real policy agenda. Instead, the rest of the conference will be likely occupied with gauging the mood of the party and the membership, and understanding what their positions are now. “It will be interesting to see whether or not there are issues where the members’ understanding is actually running ahead of that of the parliamentary party,” Hill says. Although it will be unlikely, the main thing that Hill will be looking out for during this conference as an analyst is a “clear diagnosis of what went wrong”. “You don’t even need to know how to fix it at this point, but you at least need to know why it all happened. Most of the candidates haven’t really confronted that issue in clear terms yet.” | 