Why Tory MPs are increasingly defiant
2 March 2021
A familiar ritual played out between Westminster and Fleet Street last week. When news broke that Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the exchequer, could include an increase in corporation tax in the upcoming budget, newspapers were quickly abuzz with warnings of a looming “Tory rebellion” — Conservative MPs ready to vote down their government. It does not come as a surprise.
From the Brexit agreement to anti-COVID measures — there is now barely a vote where Prime Minister Boris Johnson does not face the threat of opposition from his MPs. Most recently, 65 of them refused to vote with the government on a trade bill. Compared to the turbulent May era, where a record-breaking 118 Tory MPs at once voted against their government, the current situation seems harmless. But the inflation in rebellions on the Conservative benches is an anomaly that should worry the party leadership.
The “Westminster model”, Britain’s trademark institutional system, was once famed for its high level of submission to the whip. However, relevant statistics show a sharp rise in cases of resistance among the Tories during David Cameron’s premiership. The concluding parliament had been “the most rebellious parliament in the post-war era” so far, declared Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart, professors of political science and chroniclers of rebellion in the Commons, in 2015. Ms May’s parliament would even topple that record.
Both prime ministers had to fight structural factors that, according to Mr Cowley, tend to promote rebellions invariably. By contrast, Mr Johnson was blessed with perfect conditions: a single-party government, a comfortable majority, a fresh batch of new MPs. Yet oddly, the rebels seem here to stay. This hints at a more general trend. Tory backbenchers have simply become more defiant.
Two developments may explain that. Research has found that there are more rebellions in political systems which promote intra-party competition for popularity with voters. In so-called open-list systems, voters, not lists assembled by leaders, determine which politicians of a party get a seat. So, MPs benefit much more from standing out to the public through dissent rather than through pleasing leaders with loyalty.
The UK does not employ such a system. However, the rise of social media may have had a similar effect. Facebook and friends have given grey-suited backbenchers a platform to build their own brand. And Jacob Rees-Mogg has shown that this online popularity can earn them a seat at a Tory cabinet table. As the party leadership rewards public attention, it becomes worthwhile to boost one’s profile through rebellion — or through the threat of it.
The more specific explanation is that the Conservative Party continues to be deeply divided post-Brexit. Newly elected Northern MPs, mouthpieces of “the little guy”, sided with business-friendly, upper-class Tories on leaving the European Union. But beyond that, there is little agreement. That makes it likely that a bill will provoke the dissent of at least one faction. The Prime Minister finds himself caught in between, sympathetic to libertarian-leaning causes yet unwilling to lose his new stronghold up north.
Deep ideological divisions would not be good news for Mr Johnson regarding the durability of his government. The two last Conservative prime ministers, Mr Cameron and Ms May, were forced to step down due to the pressure of constant rebellions grounded in ideological disagreement. An anonymous MP points out on PoliticsHome that a failing Ms May still won a vote of no confidence, finding it thus “not likely we’ll ditch the guy who got us a generation-defining majority because he won’t open the pubs quick enough.” Yet the examples of his predecessors should be a warning to Mr Johnson.
