Why Labor shouldn't be happy about Badenoch v Jenrick

Is Labor the real winner of the Conservative leadership contest? That is the consensus at Westminster after James Cleverly was eliminated from the competition, leaving a final between Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick.

Labor ministers and MPs rejoiced at the defeat of the candidate they feared most. “Just the news we needed to cheer us all up!” said one. One minister told me that they enjoyed the result for Machiavellian reasons. “I wonder if we have to declare this a gift,” quipped a third Labor MP.

It is certainly true that Cleverly would have made the most vigorous efforts to detoxify the Tories' brand. “The candidate I feared most was the one who would basically apologize for his mistakes and say never again,” noted a No. 10 aide.

In his Conservative conference speech, Cleverly declared: “Let's be enthusiastic, relatable, positive, optimistic – let's be more normal.” And polls gave him a remarkable lead with the public: 21 percent said he was most likely to become prime minister, compared with 10 percent for Jenrick and 7 percent for Badenoch.

But instead of moderation in defeat, conservative MPs have opted for radicalism. Rishi Sunak was not a centrist (as I wrote when he was elected), but both candidates positioned themselves to his right. Does this mean Labor has nothing to fear? Skeptical people in the party aren't so sure.

“The certainty that Cleverly was the one we had to worry about and that we can clap our hands after he’s gone is SW1 talk,” a Starmer ally told me. Recall that the Prime Minister himself has long identified the populist right as the key threat to Labor.

He said this back in July New statesman's Summer Festival: “You only have to look across the English Channel to Europe and you see nationalism and populism in all its forms and with all its strengths.” And don't think for a minute that that could never happen here. This could and could be the case even if we fail in our project to bring about change.”

In different ways, Jenrick and Badenoch would challenge Labor from the populist right. The former calls for withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights; The latter is waging a cultural rebellion against the “progressive left” and the “bureaucratic class”: human resources departments, liberal lawyers, university staff.

Some in Labor see Badenoch as the biggest threat. She understands, they say, that part of the job as opposition leader is getting noticed in the first place, and will try to drag the party into uncomfortable territory: free speech, trans rights and diversity politics. A More in Common focus group found she was the preferred choice of former Tory voters who voted for other parties in the July general election, who described her as “sincere”, “energizing”, “likeable”, “strong”. “ and “strong” described “fresh”.

The risk for the Conservatives is that both Badenoch and Jenrick have too little to say on the issues that lost the party the election: economic competence and the decline of public services. They may repel the Liberal Democrats while failing to reunite the right. These are all reasons why the Westminster consensus favors Cleverly. But there was also a consensus at the time that Margaret Thatcher was doomed as opposition leader, that Remain would win the 2016 EU referendum and that Keir Starmer was facing defeat.

Novelty is often overrated in politics: remember those who argued that Labor should “fear” the ultra-Thatcherite Liz Truss. But either Badenoch or Jenrick will face an unpopular government in a volatile environment. After the electoral shocks of recent years, Labor should be cautious rather than jubilant.

This article first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; Get it every morning by subscribing to Substack here

(See also: Sue Gray ran afoul of Keir Starmer's ruthless streak)