The Tory Calamity Part 3
The case for a Conservative-Reform UK electoral pact
We have seen that the current state of party politics on the right in the UK bears strong resemblances to that in Australia, but that unlike the situation on the southern continent, in the UK it is one that presents a clear and present danger to the two halves into which it has divided, Reform UK and the Conservative Party. Without redress this unprecedented state of fragmentation represents electoral calamity for the right.
What, then, is the remedy for this challenge, assuming that Reform is not going to disappear any time soon? There are at least four possibilities:
1. a change in the voting system
2. a merger
3. a coalition agreement
4. an electoral pact
Whilst perhaps being the most effective option, we have already ruled out a change in the voting system that was the remedy to party political fragmentation in Australia, and not only because the UK firmly rejected this in the AV referendum of 2011. The political dynamics that would determine whether such a change were possible are also very different in the two cases. Most notably in the Australian case, Prime Minister Billy Hughes held the levers of government before, during, and after The Calamity at Swan that provoked the fracturing of the Australian right, and so commanded the legislative agenda which ultimately enabled him to avoid further calamity at the 1919 general election. This, however, is manifestly not the case with the Conservatives who now find themselves in opposition. The chance to avoid electoral calamity via legislation, then, is simply not available to them. Indeed, given the prospect of continued division of the right, and with the Greens presenting a much smaller version of the same threat to Labour, Keir Starmer’s government has every incentive to keep the current first-past-the-post system in place.
A merger or coalition agreement
What about a merger between the Conservatives and Reform UK? According to a poll for The Daily Telegraph carried out soon after the election, up to 40% of Conservative party members are in favour of this option. However, it is far too early to tell whether this would be viable. Put simply, Reform have at least for the foreseeable future too much to gain from remaining a separate party whose very existence bestows invaluable political leverage over its rival, and especially if it maintains a 15-20% vote share in the opinion polls, and gains further representation at Westminster via by-elections on the back of this. Moreover, a merger would be most likely as unthinkable as it would be premature for the Conservative Party, one of the most successful anywhere, and which sees itself as “the natural party of government.”
The third option would be a coalition like that which exists between the two right-wing parties in Australia, and which has precedent in the UK in the form of the SDP-Liberal Alliance of the 1980s.
A Conservative-Reform coalition agreement, however, is probably as unlikely as a merger, at least for the foreseeable future. Because they are not just agreements about candidates and elections, but about government and the apportionment of ministries, it is unlikely that the senior partner would be willing to give its insurgent rival such a boost.
If a coalition agreement before the next general election is a non-starter, a more likely possibility is a coalition like that agreed between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats after the 2010 election. But the example of 2010, of course, shows that that does not necessarily mean that the Tories would conclude one with Reform UK. Whether that came to pass would depend largely on the numbers and the political mood music of the day.
An electoral pact
All of this leaves what is the most likely outcome, should the Tories not take a wait-and-see approach and hope that Reform simply disappears.