Conservative Candidates Committee! What is going on?

 

Dinah Glover: Our leader has handed the party a proper Conservative blueprint, but are the candidates team onboard?

The following article (edited) was published on the ConservativeHome website on 10 October 2025

It is joked amongst us on the right of the Party that at least a third of the current Parliamentary Party are Liberal Democrats, in which case they may be reluctant to scream our policies from the rooftops. 

Well if there are that many of our MPs who are not fully on board with the project, we have to ensure that next time our Parliamentary Party is fully Conservative.

Candidates need to be put through their paces so we understand their views, philosophy, able to debate cogently, have the ability to have original policy ideas, as well as be a good campaigner and constituency MP which, to be honest, is the easy bit.

It is crucial we build this talent for the future.

It can be argued that the most ‘dangerous’ man in the Conservative Party has been Gareth Fox, the former Head of Candidates. He stands accused by many of ensuring that only ‘soft’ or One Nation Conservatives got selected to seats. He seems to have delivered a Parliamentary Party which is a Liberal Democrat tribute act, no wonder they are all so silent.

The Rt Hon Grant Shapps has set up Conservative Together – I think he prefers the cooler name CTog – for potential candidates.

I find it worrying that its mainstay seems to be campaigning, delivering more nonsensical leaflets and probably a re-run of Team 2015 and we all know where that ended up! I do hope that we can produce a more intellectual grouping of our candidates to allow them to explore their ideas, passions, philosophies and test out ideas for Government. Surely that would be more likely to lead to a Conservative Government that can deliver.

My warning to the Party is clear:

The Candidates Committee needs to be at the forefront of providing the talent for ‘Our Great Comeback’.

I have severe reservations this is the case.

In the interest of transparency I was a Parliamentary Assessor of 4 years standing but was sacked back in late June by the Hon Clare Hambro, Current Chairman of the Candidates Committee for being too political.

I had always been told how highly valued I was as an Assessor, especially since my background was as a Recruiter, so I brought all those skills to the table. The very odd point is that after I was sacked, I submitted a Subject Access Request to the Candidates Team about myself. There was literally no evidence to sack me; not one complaint against me. When I asked Clare if she had viewed the recordings of my interviews, she said she had not. She was literally basing her decision on no evidence whatsoever, just the say so of her Deputy, who is a committed Remainiac.

Having myself worked closely with the ERG during the Brexit battles and led the Voluntary Party petition against Theresa May for attempting to deliver a non-Brexit Brexit; I can only assume my sacking was political. Since then, I have asked our Chairman what the process is to have my case reviewed. Silence was the reply. I have also asked Julian Ellacott, with the same reply.

My huge concern is the quality of the Candidates Committee going forward.

After Kemi has delivered her barnstorming speech, LOTO needs to ensure she has a team behind her fit for purpose.

During the last Parliamentary session I always felt the assessments were a little too much geared towards recruiting Project Managers rather than politicians. I understand the current team wants to make the process more political and combative which is a move in the right direction. However, that’s where my confidence stops. I understand that right wing former MPs went for the role of Chairman of the Candidates Committee. Instead it went to the Hon Clare Hambro, a former London Region Chairman, who I have never heard espouse a political opinion and strikes me as an obedient party loyalist. I fear it’s a consolation prize for not getting the Vice President role of the National Conservative Convention.

I would also question her judgement, having sat on a panel with her when Edmond Yeo, who it subsequently turns out allegedly has links to the China, applied to be a London Assembly candidate, but was rejected as he came unprepared and dressed in joggers and t-shirt. Clare as she knew him, begged us to change our minds, luckily, we didn’t.

Kemi has complained, in Government we talked Right and governed Left.

The Candidates Committee appears to be making the same mistake.

The Conservative Party should be the home of conservative thought, economic soundness, individual freedom, rolling back the state, opposing woke, securing our borders and patriotism. We need a Parliamentary party totally committed to these ideals. My sacking is just one example that the Candidates Committee may not be signed up to the same ideals.

In order for the Conservative Party to be in shape to win and govern in 2029, Kemi needs to get a grip on the Candidates Team. If she does not the alternative is that our Parliamentary party remains a weak imitation of the Liberal Democrats.

That is not a route to power.

Conservative Party Leadership Election 2024

 The following article in the Independent by John Rentoul on 12 November 2022 has been brought to my attention and I wondered what would have happened if my suggestion had been taken up?

In the 2024 Leadership Election the final vote of the MPs was as follows:

Badenoch    42

Jenrick        41

Cleverley    37

Cleverley was eliminated so his votes would have been spread between Badenoch and Jenrick.   It is possible Jenrick would have won!   How different things might have been!

Extract of a article by John Rentoul in the Independent 12 November 2022:

The important question now is whether either or both parties can go back to the election of leaders by MPs alone. The Conservatives seem more likely to. It is significant that Conservative Home, the activists’ website founded by Tim Montgomerie and now edited by Paul Goodman, a Tory former MP, has proposed a deal by which members give up the right to vote in leadership elections in exchange for the right to elect the party chair, who has a seat in the cabinet.

Even more significant was that this was supported this week by John Strafford, who is a `a junction-box in the hidden wiring of the Tory party. He runs an outfit called the Campaign for Conservative Democracy, and for decades he has been a mirror image of the Bennites in the Labour Party – except that he is no ideologue and is not promoting a faction within the party. He is a sincere advocate of members’ rights, but he can see that the idea that such rights are advanced by a vote in leadership elections is “fatally flawed”. He rightly focuses on the right to select candidates free of interference from Tory HQ, a form of party democracy that is  compatible with constitutional principle.

Unfortunately, it will never be a prime minister’s priority to change the rules back. Rishi Sunak will not want to antagonise the majority of Party members who want to retain their vote in leadership elections. A rule change depends on a cluster of people, including Nadhim Zahawi, the party chair, Peter Booth, the deputy chair, and activists such as Strafford: they have to accept that it is in the party’s and the country’s interest to make the change.

Tribute from Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg to John Strafford

 

A Great evening by Beaconsfield Constituency Conservative Association.  Many thanks to David Moore and Kathy for organising this memorable evening

Lovely to see Sir Jacob pay tribute to @John Strafford at our Edmund Burke dinner on Thursday.

Changes to the Conservative Party Constitution

 

Review of the Conservative Party Constitution - Phase 2

Document sent to Party members by the Chairman of the National Convention, Julian Ellacott 29 September 2025

Suggested changes

II-1

Membership of the Party is not compatible with membership of, association with or support for, any other registered political party in the UK except where the Board permits otherwise.

Note; Such as in relation to Unionist parties in Northern Ireland, where there has been a history of support.

The Note undermines the Conservative Party in Northern Ireland.   Delete “Except where the Board permits”.

11.3

Be bound by this Constitution, the Rulebook and any other decisions of the Party Board (including, where the Board establishes such, a code of conduct)

Work to sustain and promote the objectives and values of the Party and not unreasonably hinder any other Member doing so; and

What is the Rule Book and where is it? What are the "objectives and values" and where are they?   How do you "hinder any other member"?  What about freedom of speech?

X11-2

The Board shall establish a Disciplinary Committee of suitably qualified members, which shall from time to time propose to the Board a Code of Conduct for approval, which shall set requirements applying to all Party Members in relation to ethics, conduct and standards.

Will the Code of Conduct be sent to all Party members?