John Major resigns as PM in 1995

[Deleted]

Result of the Conservative leadership election of 1995: John Major 214, John Redwood 89, Abstentions 10, Spoilt 6, Did not vote 2. John Major thus resigns as Prime Minister, having fallen short by a single vote of his private mimimum target of 215.

So who succeeds him? Yes, the party is still destined to defeat at the general election, but could the scale of the defeat have been less severe than it would otherwise have been - ie. Con hold Enfield Southgate? It might not seem important but it certainly was - getting 215 MPs would be better than getting 165, and would strengthen the kind of Opposition the party would be able to provide against Blair, plus set a higher base for the election after.

Probable candidates: John Redwood, Michael Heseltine, Michael Portillo, Kenneth Clarke, Michael Howard, Malcolm Rifkind.

[john07]

John Redwood absolutely not. I don't see the Conservative Party being stupid enough to elect anyone like Redwood who had absolutely nothing to commend him.

Michael Portillo at least has a touch of flamboyance about him and possibly a sense of humour. Unlikely to be elected however.

Kenneth Clarke was far too sensible to get the vote. He would have antagonised too many on the right. a shame as he could have done a job.

Michael Heseltine would never be forgiven for finishing off Thatcher by many on the right. Maybe the election would have been too late for him anyway.

Michael Howard might have been seen as a safe pair of hands by many on the centre and right but not by the vampire phobic elements within the party.

Malcolm Rifkind had many of the qualities needed but was probably seen as too 'wet'. Also sounded like he had a snooker ball in his mouth when talking.

It would have been a thankless task anyway facing Blair at some time within the next two years so to an extent it matters little. I suspect Howard may have got the nod.

[The Bishop]

I agree - Hezza might have managed to up the Tories to 200 seats or thereabouts. No more.

[Devil Wincarnate]

Regardless of leader, I wonder what happens in the event of an early general election, say in November 1995.  I especially wonder what happens regarding some of the seats lost by the Tories in the by-elections at the fag end of the Parliament- for example, does a replacement for a retiring Barry Porter hold Wirral South and keep it?  Does Chris Davies hold on to Littleborough and Saddleworth?  Does Bob McCartney hold onto North Down?

And then there are the real outlying events: does Martin Bell stand against Hamilton in Tatton, or do Labour and the Lib Dems come to an agreement?  Is Brighton Pavillion held only to become a damaging surprise loss to Labour at the following election?  Do the Lib Dems hold onto Rochdale and Christchurch?

[Deleted]

It would have had to have been a pretty big boost. I can't imagine any Conservative prime minister calling an election that year in any circumstances. 1995 was, and remains, the Conservatives' worst ever year in terms of opinion polling (18.5% from Gallup in early January).

[Deleted]

Nov 13, 2014 10:02:15 GMT The Bishop said:

I agree - Hezza might have managed to up the Tories to 200 seats or thereabouts. No more.

I don't think Heseltine had any desire to be Leader of the Opposition and would have stepped down as leader after a defeat, having at least fulfilled his lifelong ambition of being PM.
Getting 200 seats would have opened the door for Michael Portillo to contest the leadership election that followed.

[Davıd Boothroyd]

Just after the 1997 election there was speculation that Heseltine would run for the Conservative leadership - which quickly ended when he had a health scare and ruled it out.

[neilm]

He had a heart attack in Italy I think.

[The Bishop]

That was in 1993 IIRC - he claimed to have made a good recovery from that, but when John Smith keeled over the following year (after having had a major scare a few years earlier, let's not forget) it gave many Tories another reason to be wary of him.

I still expect he would have become PM had Major indeed been forced out in mid-1995, though.

[jonarny]

As no-one is posting on this board at all, I thought I'd have another go...

No-one could win for the Conservatives in 1997, but John Major had an appearance of being somewhat out of his depth. I don't think history has judged Major that harshly, but at the time it was an impossible task leading the Conservatives to an election after 18 years in government and them riven with infighting.

Whoever takes the poisoned challice from Major if he resigns in 1995 is no longer obliged to resign after the expected election defeat in 1997.

But in 1995 there's something of a vacuum if Major goes; the Conservatives would probably vote for whoever was best placed to top Heseltine or Clarke. But who is that? Howard and Lilley barely scraped 20 votes apiece in 1997, Hague is probably too young for the job in 1995 and they're electing a PM not a leader of the opposition. Redwood won't get it because of his politics and because he wielded the knife. Rifkind is unconvincing. Portillo isn't massively liked, but he has some charisma.

I think the 1995 Conservatives are in a panic about Blair's oratory skills. Could they perhaps go for the non-Clarke/Heseltine candidate with the most charisma, and hold their noses and vote for Portillo? Portillo loses badly in 1997 - no-one really expected him to do otherwise - but holds his seat, remaining as Leader of the Opposition for a (tighter than in real life) election defeat in 2001. A more seasoned William Hague takes on the job of Leader of the Opposition and gives Blair a real run for his money in 2005.

[carlton43]

Deck-chairs..........Titanic. The iceberg is still there....whatever.

[paddypantsdown]

Ken Clarke was their only hope for a decent result, not that the euroidiots on the right would've ever have accepted him.

[Tangent]

Nov 14, 2014 12:30:21 GMT The Bishop said:

That was in 1993 IIRC - he claimed to have made a good recovery from that, but when John Smith keeled over the following year (after having had a major scare a few years earlier, let's not forget) it gave many Tories another reason to be wary of him.

I still expect he would have become PM had Major indeed been forced out in mid-1995, though.

He had an angina attack on the weekend after the 1997 election, and had to be admitted to hospital. He was still considering his options before the attack, but there was no chance afterwards.

[tim]

Portillo said that the two favourites to succeed Major after 1997 were said to be Portillo himself and Heseltine before the election. Then Portillo unexpectedly lost his seat and Heseltine even more unexpectedly had an angina/heart attack a few days later. Howard was originally the favourite to succeed Major with Hague as his deputy then Hague decided to run on his own. He might have won but I don't think that did him any favours as given the state of tory party and labours majority it was always going to be a long haul to overtake them again.

Major lost over 200 conservative MPs as PM. In party terms must be a strong candidate for worst party leader ever.

[Devil Wincarnate]

Apr 5, 2015 17:44:55 GMT tim said:

Major lost over 200 conservative MPs as PM. In party terms must be a strong candidate for worst party leader ever.

I can't imagine anyone doing a vastly better job in 1992-1997.  That Conservative government was tired, worn-out and in need of fresh ideas- and everyone knew it.

[Richard Allen]

Apr 8, 2015 20:26:04 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

Nov 4, 2014 20:38:27 GMT john07 said:

John Redwood absolutely not. I don't see the Conservative Party being stupid enough to elect anyone like Redwood who had absolutely nothing to commend him.

Michael Portillo at least has a touch of flamboyance about him and possibly a sense of humour. Unlikely to be elected however.

Kenneth Clarke was far too sensible to get the vote. He would have antagonised too many on the right. a shame as he could have done a job.

Michael Heseltine would never be forgiven for finishing off Thatcher by many on the right. Maybe the election would have been too late for him anyway.

Michael Howard might have been seen as a safe pair of hands by many on the centre and right but not by the vampire phobic elements within the party.

Malcolm Rifkind had many of the qualities needed but was probably seen as too 'wet'. Also sounded like he had a snooker ball in his mouth when talking.

It would have been a thankless task anyway facing Blair at some time within the next two years so to an extent it matters little. I suspect Howard may have got the nod.

Ken's onloy real problem in all of it was his position on the EU. He would have even signed us up to the Euro, which even Gordon Brown wasn't crazy enough to do and set some unattainable targets to make sure we didn't and kicked the ball into the long grass.....for ever, I suspect.

Ken still refuses to admit that he called it wrong on the Euro, as does that idiot Paddy Pantsdown, instead alluding to the position that it would all have gone swimmingly well had we been in their to sure it up.

I have always liked Clarke. He is not on the wing of the Conservative Party that I identify with and I loathe his pro-EU views but I still like him. He was a good minister and an excellent Chancellor and unlike many of the spineless twats he had the balls to tell Maggie to her face that she should resign. He was also one of the very few Tory MPs to make the right call on the Iraq war and made a strong case against it. Most importantly however he has never taken politics too seriously, he has a life and interests outside of this dubious pursuit. It might shock some people to know that I came very close to voting for him in the 2001 leadership election.

[The Bishop]

Maybe not *so* shocking given the alternative, tbh

[neilm]

I voted for IDS in the end but very very nearly voted for Clarke. The sole factor persuading me was the Euro issue