The commentariat are all very excited by the return of David Cameron to front-line politics as Foreign Secretary. The sacking of populist Suella Braverman and return of David ‘call me Dave’ Cameron has been characterised as the Tories moving back towards the centre ground of politics. To my mind, there could be less politics in David Cameron’s appointment than one might think.
After a number of failed ‘resets’ including that incoherent conference speech which went from cancelling HS2, the banning of cigarettes for young people, to rallying against the political orthodoxy of the last 30 years, it is hard to imagine Rishi Sunak and his team thinking that the answer to their predicament was David Cameron.
Rather than being a part of some great masterplan, the return of David Cameron to frontline politics must have been instigated by Cameron himself, perhaps knowing that with Labour set to win the next election this is his last chance at meaningful public service. It is much more likely that having mulled it over, Rishi Sunak was persuaded that having someone of Cameron’s stature and experience in the post of Foreign Secretary was a good idea. More than anything, Cameron has likely been made Foreign Secretary because he will likely be good at it. Afterall, foreign affairs was one positive of his time as Prime Minister, evidenced in how he repaired Britain’s relationship with the US following the dour years of Gorden Brown - remember Cameron and Obama’s bromance?
If there was any wider politics at play in Cameron’s appointment, it comes into focus with how in making Cameron Foreign Secretary it freed up James Cleverly to become Home Secretary. Cleverly has proved a safe pair of hands as Foreign Secretary and is a serious politician. In a domestic portfolio he may well prove a real asset for the Conservatives for in this role he will be more visible to voters, allowing the Conservatives to deploy one of their best operators to speak on the key election issues of immigration and crime.
But perhaps I am oversimplifying it - it could be that the Tories have been spooked by the disastrous Mid-Bedfordshire by-election loss where Labour overturned a 20,000+ Tory majority and are making moves to shore up their core voter base by moving to the centre ground once again. One can see the logic: there is no point trying to win non-graduate and working class votes in the Red Wall if true blue seats like Mid-Bedfordshire are turning their backs on the party. The sheer scale of the Mid-Bedfordshire by-election loss, in conjunction with other high profile losses in Tory safe seats of North Shropshire and Chesham and Amersham, means that no Tory seat is safe at the next election. In bringing back someone like David Cameron, the Tories could be beginning a pivot towards a more liberal, centrist position to harbour their traditional voter coalition.
If the Tories are moving to shore up the support of traditional small ‘c’ conservatives, then they are in damage limitation mode and have all but given up on winning the next election. Perhaps now with Labour comfortably 20 points ahead in the polls this is the only place for the Conservatives to go, especially with the UK’s brutal first past the post electoral system. On current polling, the general election prediction website Electoral Calculus is currently forecasting the Tories to lose 232 seats, leaving them with 133 seats. This would be a worse performance than 1997 when in Blair’s great landslide victory the Tories held onto 165 seats.
David Cameron may now hold one of the great offices of state, but I am sceptical that the Tories will put Cameron centre stage at the next election on some sort of moderation ticket, especially as Cameron's past politics of austerity and neo-liberlism is a far cry from the needs and wants of today’s voters. The real focus should be on James Cleverly and his role in the party, particularly as his move to Home Secretary comes after he has recently topped a cabinet satisfaction poll of conservative party members (Conservative Home website, 6/11/23).
Comments