WI Ken Clarke wins in 2001

As it says on the tin, what are the consequences if Ken Clarke is made Tory leader in 2001?

As to the "how" this could happen, I think the 1998 Tory rule changes are a good POD. Say the rules are never changed to give the Conservative membership a vote on the Tory leader.

If this is the case, then we get Michael Portillo eliminated at the third ballot as we did in our timeline. Given that this is 2001, Portillo is much less of a "darling of the Right" (he had admitted in 1999 that he had had "homosexual experiences") and ran on a fairly socially liberal platform.

I think this means on a hypothetical fourth ballot, they break disproportionately for Clarke over IDS.

Does Clarke last until 2005?

If so, does he do better than Howard at the GE?

Does he resign after losing it?

Is Cameron butterflied?

If so, who takes his place? Davis? Liam Fox?
 
Last edited:
As it says on the tin, what are the consequences if Ken Clarke is made Tory leader in 2001?

As to the "how" this could happen, I think the 1998 Tory rule changes are a good POD. Say the rules are never changed to give the Conservative membership a vote on the Tory leader.

If this is the case, then we get Michael Portillo eliminated at the third ballot as we did in our timeline. Given that this is 2001, Portillo is much less of a "darling of the Right" (he had admitted in 1999 that he had had "homosexual experiences") and ran on a fairly socially liberal platform.

I think this means on a hypothetical fourth ballot, they break disproportionately for Clarke over IDS.

Does Clarke last until 2005?

If so, does he do better than Howard at the GE?

Does he resign after losing it?

Is Cameron butterflied?

Clarke could last until 2005 and do better than Howard, but the Tories would still lose to Labour in '05. The Tories needed to pick up 158 seats in order to win a majority in 2005 and that simply was not on the cards that year no matter who was leader.

However, Clarke could put the Tories in a better position to win an outright majority in 2010.
 
Makes a huge difference if just because it means it's less likely Sean Gabb and his allies are as successful in placing Euroskeptics into winnable Conservative constituencies.

I don't think that would stop the Party being friendly to new Euroskeptic candidates or MPs it might just reduce the cohort. Which makes it a little less likely the parliamentary party pivots
 
It would be interesting to see if he maintained his public opposition to Iraq. Clarke was never one to shy away from expressing his views, so my guess would be that he still speaks against the war, but grants his MPs a free vote on the issue. That in itself might be enough to trigger a coup attempt against him. Even if he survives, to have the leader of the opposition at odds with the overwhelming majority of his MPs on the biggest issue of the day is not a recipe for success, especially given he is already in the same position on Europe.

So my guess is that Clarke would either lead a divided party to a similar result to OTL, or go the same way as IDS. The first situation could well mean a David Davis or IDS leadership in 2005 rather than Cameron. The second would be more similar to OTL-although another run by Clarke in 2005 after being proven right on Iraq is intriguing to me, I don't think he'd be able to take back the leadership.
 
It would be interesting to see if he maintained his public opposition to Iraq. Clarke was never one to shy away from expressing his views, so my guess would be that he still speaks against the war, but grants his MPs a free vote on the issue. That in itself might be enough to trigger a coup attempt against him. Even if he survives, to have the leader of the opposition at odds with the overwhelming majority of his MPs on the biggest issue of the day is not a recipe for success, especially given he is already in the same position on Europe.

So my guess is that Clarke would either lead a divided party to a similar result to OTL, or go the same way as IDS. The first situation could well mean a David Davis or IDS leadership in 2005 rather than Cameron. The second would be more similar to OTL-although another run by Clarke in 2005 after being proven right on Iraq is intriguing to me, I don't think he'd be able to take back the leadership.
It'd be very interesting to see what Clarke would do if he was still Leader and PM after 2010.
 
It'd be very interesting to see what Clarke would do if he was still Leader and PM after 2010.

Somehow, I don't see Clarke lasting until the 2010 general election. He will have lost a GE in 2005 and the Tories have proved pretty ruthless in the last couple of decades when it comes to leaders who can't deliver wins (Major, Hague, Howard, even arguably Theresa May and Maggie).

Also, I don't think the rifts in the Tory Party over Europe can be healed my him. David Cameron kept a lid on it for a bit by talking tough on Europe, but he was forced to concede a referendum in order to get the base back on side for the 2015 GE. Even then, UKIP sliced a pretty big bite out the Tory majority.

Can a divided Tory party really win the 2010 GE?
 
Somehow, I don't see Clarke lasting until the 2010 general election. He will have lost a GE in 2005 and the Tories have proved pretty ruthless in the last couple of decades when it comes to leaders who can't deliver wins (Major, Hague, Howard, even arguably Theresa May and Maggie).

Also, I don't think the rifts in the Tory Party over Europe can be healed my him. David Cameron kept a lid on it for a bit by talking tough on Europe, but he was forced to concede a referendum in order to get the base back on side for the 2015 GE. Even then, UKIP sliced a pretty big bite out the Tory majority.

Can a divided Tory party really win the 2010 GE?
I was operating on the idea of Clarke making a comeback after being deposed IDS style. Not the most likely outcome, but not ASB.
 
Top