EVER since she took charge of a government committed to a Brexit that she had once opposed, Theresa May has had a tough time winning over party colleagues.
The PM has now been left red faced after a leaked Tory memo which rates her successors suggested she will be made to step down “soon(ish)” after Brexit.
The remarkable document, published by the Telegraph, details the likelihood of successful leadership bids by everyone from Boris Johnson to Ruth Davidson.
Unfortunately, details were not scrutinised heavily enough to eliminate spelling errors, including one in the first line and another in the name of a Cabinet member.
Fittingly in the modern age, conspirators have taken to WhatsApp to plan the coup d'état, where the memo has been widely shared among Tory MPs.
The author is believed to be a Tory MP acting on the “assumption” that the influential 1922 backbench committee will “invite the PM to stand-down soon(ish) after March 2019”.
Made up of all Conservative MPs who are not ministers or working for ministers, the committee has the power to force a vote of no confidence on a Conservative leader (As Iain Duncan Smith found out in 2003).
Anticipating a similar ousting for Theresa May, backbench MPs have been advised by to “manoeuver [sic] immediately”.
But which member of the perpetually blundering Tory hierarchy does the misspelling author envisage taking over the wheel in post-Brexit Britain?
Top of the list is David Davis. Unfortunately for the martyred former Brexit Secretary the list is not ranked in order. The anonymous author comments: “Claims not be interested, but is. Won’t succeed. Too late.”
It seems the author thinks he has Trade Secretary Liam Fox’s number too. “Will repeat 2016 strategy to try to prolong frontline career. Fading."
Ruth Davidson will doubtless be pleased to be credited as having “saved the day in 2017”, but the Scottish Tory leader, who ruled herself out of the running last week, is not considered alongside the big hitters. It also mentions her not being in the Commons.
Environment Secretary Michael Gove “has consistently made noises suggesting he remains on manoeuvres”, the author writes as he nails the spelling on the second attempt. He then ponders: “Future chancellor?”
Non-Cabinet member Jacob Rees-Mogg also gets a mention. The hardline Brexiteer is deemed to be “the Party’s favourite”.
“Super ambitious” health secretary Matt Hancock is described as “hawkish on Syria with an eye on the Party in the country”.
Despite redeeming himself previously, the author is back to his old tricks in the case of poor Damian Hinds – referred to as Damian Hines. In fairness, the comment that Hinds has “no profile” seems well founded.
Next up is “dark horse” foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt. He has the honour of being compared to Margaret Thatcher’s successor. “Near the front of the pack coming up on the rail (note John Major 1990).”
Home Secretary Sajid Javid “wants it, trying to recover from Referendum positioning error” after campaigning in accordance with his principles before the Brexit vote.
Boris Johnson seems to be the favourite in the eyes of the author purely because he is not the literal favourite. He is the “bookies favourite after JR-M [Jacob Rees-Mogg], but the front-runner never wins”.
Andrea Leadsom, leader of the House of Commons, is considered to be “totally unsuitable” despite anticipated efforts to “correct her errors in 2016 leadership race”.
“Remainer, but not incredible” is the glowing reference for David Lidington, Minister for the Cabinet Office. “Would be deselected early,” the memo predicts.
International Development Secretary Penny Mordaunt is at least given a glimmer of hope, but only in the long-term. As it stands, she lacks the “authority and profile” to take Theresa May’s place.
Amber Rudd is given the honourable title of “credible”, alongside a massive caveat: “notwithstanding Windrush”.
Liz Truss, chief secretary to the Treasury, is suspected of being “on manoeuvres, probably replicating Fox’s strategy”.
Perhaps Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson could learn something from her more subtle approach. He is thought to be “in full campaign mode, but very reliant on PM controlling her own departure point”.
And as the Tories plot against each other in WhatsApp groups, we're being dragged into the Brexit mess they've created.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel