DOCSLIB.ORG

The Parliamentary Conservative Party: the Leadership Elections of William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Parliamentary Conservative Party: the Leadership Elections of William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenGrey Repository University of Huddersfield Repository Hill, Michael The Parliamentary Conservative Party: The leadership elections of William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith Original Citation Hill, Michael (2007) The Parliamentary Conservative Party: The leadership elections of William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith. Doctoral thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/741/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ The Parliamentary Conservative Party: The Leadership Elections of William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith Michael Hill A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Huddersfield Dedication This thesis is dedicated to the memory of my father, David Leyland Hill. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisory team: Dr. Timothy Heppell, Professor Brendan Evans and Professor Valerie Bryson for their help, support and guidance. I am also grateful to Dr. David Tyfa and Dr. Jon Blacktop for their assistance and advice with the statistical element of this thesis. I would like to express my gratitude to the Rt. Hon. Francis Maude MP for sharing his views of the 2001 Conservative Party leadership campaign. Finally I would like to thank my partner Corrina Rest and my mother, Pauline Hill, whose support made it possible for me to complete this work. Abstract The aim of this research is to investigate the post1997 Parliamentary Conservative Party, with particular attention placed upon the Conservative Party leadership election of 1997 and 2001. The thesis uses these two leadership elections as a lens which can be utilised to focus upon and analyse the ideological disputations of contemporary British Conservatism. This is done by identifying the voting behaviour of Conservative parliamentarians in the two leadership elections and then by putting forwards a systemic explanation of the candidates’ support. Three sets of variables are tested. First, the thesis analyses socio-economic variables (i.e. the occupational and educational background of conservative parliamentarians). Second, the research considers the candidates’ support in relation to electoral and political variables (i.e. electoral vulnerability, political insider / outsider status, age and experience). Finally the research will evaluate the candidates’ support with regard to the ideological disposition of the candidates and their supporters. This requires an extensive exploration of the attitudes of Conservative parliamentarians with regard to the dominant ideological divides within contemporary post- Thatcherite Conservatism – economic policy (wet / dry), European policy (europhile / eurosceptic), and social, sexual and moral attitudes (social liberalism / social conservatism). By analysing the patterns of voting in relation to social background, political attributes and ideological disposition the thesis locates and interprets the differing motivational influences on voting behaviour. The thesis argues the ideological disposition of the candidates and their supporters was the crucial factor in both the leadership elections. The final round of the 1997 leadership election was a straight ideological battle between the europhile and eurosceptic wings of the parliamentary Conservative Party. This benefited the eurosceptic William Hague at the expense of the europhile Kenneth Clarke. In 2001 both Clarke and Portillo attracted support from across the ideological spectrum of the parliamentary party, suggesting that a section of the parliamentary party had moved away from ideologically driven voting behaviour. However, Iain Duncan Smith reaching the final ballot was due to the support of an ideologically cohesive group of traditional Thatcherite MPs and indicative of the continued significance of ideology on the direction of the Conservative party. Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Rationale 1 1.2 Structure 3 1.3 Conclusion 8 2. Conservatism and the Conservative Party: Ideology and Politics 9 2.1 Introduction 9 2.2 Ideology 12 2.3 Conservatism 12 2.4 Dispositions of conservatism 13 2.5 Tenets of conservatism 15 2.6 Inherent tensions within conservatism 16 2.7 Strands of conservatism 16 2.71 Paternalism 16 2.72 Libertarian Conservatism 18 2. 73 The New Right 18 2.8 Is conservatism dead? 29 2.9 Structures and Mechanisms of the Conservative Party 21 2.91 The National Association of Conservative and Unionist Associations 21 2.92 Conservative Central Office 22 2.93 The Parliamentary Conservative Party 23 2.94 The Party Leader 24 2.95 The leadership selection process 26 2.96 A fresh future? The Hague reforms 28 2.10 Conclusion 32 3. The Conservative Party Leadership Elections of 1997 & 2001 35 3.1 Introduction 35 3.2 The Resignation of John Major 36 3.3 The Conservative Party Leadership Election of 1997 37 3.31 The candidates 40 3.32 The ballots 43 3.4 The leadership of William Hague 45 3.5 The general election of 2001 and the resignation of William Hague 53 3.6 The leadership election of 2001 53 3.61 The candidates 54 3.62 The ballots 58 3.7 The leadership of Iain Duncan Smith 59 3.8 Conclusion 66 4. The Social Background and Political Attributes of the PCP 69 4.1 Introduction 69 4.2 Social Background 70 i 4.21 Historical Background 70 4.22 Academic work on the PCP and social background 74 4.22.1Education 74 4.22.2 Occupation 82 4.3 Social Background of the PCP 1997 – 2001 83 4.31 Education 83 4.32 Occupation 84 4.33 Gender 88 4.34 Race 90 4.4 Political Attributes 90 4.41 Electoral vulnerability 90 4.42 Age and experience 95 4.43 Career status 98 4.5 Conclusion 99 5 The Ideological Disposition of the PCP 1997 to 2003 102 5.1 Introduction 102 5.2 The ideological composition of the PCP 103 5.3 One-dimensional typologies 104 5.31 Thatcherites 104 5.32 Party Faithful 104 5.33 Populists 105 5.34 Critics 105 5.4 Two-dimensional typologies 105 5.5 Three-dimensional typologies 108 5.6 Factions or tendencies? 110 5.7 Economic Policy 111 5.8 Europe 120 5.9 Morality 128 5.10 The Ideological Composition of the PCP 1997 & 2001 134 5.10.1 Methodology 134 5.10.1.1 Division Lists 135 5.10.1.2 Early Day Motions 135 5.10.1.3 Group Membership 135 5.10.1.4 Public Statements 135 5.10.1.5 Location of MPs 136 5.10.1.6 The Economy 137 5.10.1.7 Europe 138 5.10.1.8 Sexual & Moral Issues 143 5.11 Ideological Disposition of the PCP 1997-2001 (One Dimensional) 141 5.12 Ideological Disposition of the PCP 2001-2005 (One Dimensional) 145 5.13 Ideological Composition of the PCP 1997-2001 (Three Dimensional) 150 5.14 Ideological Composition of the PCP 2001-2005 (Three Dimensional) 153 5.15 Conclusion 156 ii 6. Voting Behaviour in the 1997 and 2001 Conservative Party Leadership Elections: The Impact of Social Background, Political Attributes and Ideological Disposition 161 6.1 Introduction 161 6.2 Methodology 161 6.3 Who voted for whom 163 6.4 Accounting for voting behaviour 167 6.5 Voting behaviour in the 1997 leadership election 168 6.5.1 The socio-economic hypothesis 168 6.5.2 The political characteristics hypothesis 170 6.5.3 The electoral vulnerability hypothesis 173 6.5.4 The economic policy hypothesis 174 6.5.5 The European policy hypothesis 175 6.5.6 The social and moral policy hypothesis 176 6.6 Voting behaviour in the 2001 leadership election 177 6.6.1 The socio-economic hypothesis 178 6.6.2 The political characteristics hypothesis 180 6.6.3 The electoral vulnerability hypothesis 183 6.6.4 The economic policy hypothesis 184 6.6.5 The European policy hypothesis 184 6.6.6 The social and moral policy hypothesis 185 6.7 Conclusion 186 7. Conclusion 190 8. Bibliography 201 Appendix A: Organisation of the Parliamentary Conservative Party 1997-2003 217 The Parliamentary Conservative Party 1997-2001 217 The Parliamentary Conservative Party 2001-2005 221 Shadow Cabinets 1997-2001 223 Shadow Cabinets 1997-2003 230 Appendix B: Chronology of Events 1997-2003 233 Appendix C: Evidence of European Policy Positions 239 Early Day Motions 296 Division Lists 398 Bibliography of public statements 299 Appendix D: Evidence of Social and Moral Policy Positions 303 Early Day Motions 390 Division Lists 400 Bibliography of public statements 401 iii List of Tables 2.1: Linear ideological spectrum 10 2.2: Three-dimensional ideological spectrum 11 2.3: Conservative Party Structure Post 1998 31 3.1: Daily Telegraph / Gallup Conservative leadership poll 1997 42 3.2: Changes in support between rounds, 1997 44 3.3: Monthly Mori polls for main party voting intentions June 1997 to May 2001(%) 52 3.4: Changes in support between rounds, 1997 57 3.5: Popularity of the candidates 58 3.6: Comparison between
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (Amendment) Bill
    Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill EXPLANATORY NOTES Explanatory notes to the Bill, prepared by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport with the agreement of Theresa Villiers, are published separately as Bill 182—EN. Bill 182 57/1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill CONTENTS 1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009: repeal of sunset provision 2 Extent, commencement and short title Bill 182 57/1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill 1 A BILL TO Prevent the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009 from expiring on 11 November 2019. E IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present BParliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— 1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009: repeal of sunset provision In section 4 of the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009— (a) in the heading, for “, commencement and sunset” substitute “and commencement”, and (b) omit subsection (7) (which provides for the Act to expire after 10 years). 5 2 Extent, commencement and short title (1) This Act extends to— (a) England and Wales, and (b) Scotland. (2) This Act comes into force on the day on which it is passed. 10 (3) This Act may be cited as the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Act 2018. Bill 182 57/1 Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) (Amendment) Bill A BILL To prevent the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009 from expiring on 11 November 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministers Quarterly Returns 1 April 2012 to 30 June 2012
    DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY INFORMATION 1 APRIL – 30 JUNE 2012 SECRETARY OF STATE ANDREW MITCHELL GIFTS GIVEN OVER £140 Date gift given To Gift Value (over £140) Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell MP, Secretary of State Nil return GIFTS RECEIVED OVER £140 Date gift From Gift Value Outcome received Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell MP, Secretary of State Nil return 1 OVERSEAS TRAVEL1 Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell MP, Secretary of State for International Development Date(s) of Destination Purpose of ‘Scheduled’ Number of Total cost trip trip ‘No 32 (The officials including travel, Royal) accompanying and Squadron’ Minister, where accommodation of or ‘other non-scheduled Minister only RAF’ or travel is used ‘Chartered’ or ‘Eurostar’ 03/04/2012 Belgium, World Bank Eurostar £462 – Brussels presidential 04/04/2012 candidates meeting with European Development Ministers. 10/04/2012 Brazil, To discuss Scheduled £7,837 – Brasilia and Rio +20 with 14/04/2012 Rio De high level Janeiro members of the Brazilian Government and take part in field visits. 19/04/2012 US, Attended the Scheduled £3,096 – Washington Spring 22/04/2012 Meetings of the World Bank and held a number of key bilateral discussions. 13/05/2012 Belgium, Meeting of Eurostar £572 – Brussels the European 14/05/2012 Foreign Affairs Council. 16/05/2012 Liberia, Met the Scheduled £8,355 – Monrovia President of 17/05/2012 Liberia to discuss issues of 1* indicates if accompanied by spouse/partner or other family member or friend. 2 mutual interest. 18/05/2012 US, Attended G8 Scheduled £4,578 – Washington Agriculture 19/05/2012 meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • The House of Lords in 2005: a More Representative and Assertive Chamber?
    The House of Lords in 2005: A More Representative and Assertive Chamber? By Meg Russell and Maria Sciara February 2006 ISBN: 1 903 903 47 5 Published by The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy UCL (University College London) 29–30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU Tel: 020 7679 4977 Fax: 020 7679 4978 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/ ©The Constitution Unit, UCL 2006 This report is sold subject to the condition that is shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First Published February 2006 2 Contents Preface............................................................................................................................................................1 Summary of key points................................................................................................................................3 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................5 Lords reform doesn’t happen (again)........................................................................................................5 Changing composition: a more representative chamber? ......................................................................7 The Prevention of Terrorism
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Thursday Volume 511 10 June 2010 No. 13 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday 10 June 2010 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2010 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 443 10 JUNE 2010 444 Friend the Minister, not only for his recent work in House of Commons developing the Government’s ambitious low-carbon economy programme, but for his long-term battle to Thursday 10 June 2010 give communities the power they need to stand up for themselves against inappropriate development. I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of The House met at half-past Ten o’clock State for his answer, but will he reassure the House and my constituents that he intends to repeal perverse rules PRAYERS that prevent local councillors from standing up for their constituents— [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] Mr Speaker: Order. I am sorry, but I must now cut off the hon. Gentleman. From now on, questions and answers must be briefer. Oral Answers to Questions Mr Pickles: I think I got the gist; I think my hon. Friend was referring to predetermination and I am delighted to inform the House that it is our intention to COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT repeal those regulations. That means we can give local councils the thing that Members of Parliament so desire— that councillors with opinions can actually vote on The Secretary of State was asked— those opinions.
    [Show full text]
  • Access. Engagement. Resolution. Post Brexit Opportunities for The
    20 February 2020 Post Brexit Opportunities for the UK in the Middle East Alistair Burt was Minister of State for the Middle East at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Minister of State at the Department for International Development from June 2017 to March 2019, and previously Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the Middle East from May 2010 - October 2013. Alistair also served as Minister of State for Community and Social Care at the Department of Health from May 2015 until July 2016. He entered Parliament for the first time in 1983, served successively as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State then Minister of State at the Department of Social Security 1992-97, and was Conservative MP for North East Bedfordshire 2001-2019. *************** As UK Government settles down, relationships in the Middle East and North Africa will remain key. As a recently released Parliamentarian, I have taken a keen interest in the fortunes of the new UK Government since its definitive victory in December’s General Election. Unexpectedly decisive, the election puts the UK on track for a period of domestic political stability, even if the challenges which it faces will be daunting. The consolidation of power at the heart of the Prime Minister’s office, as demonstrated through the recent Government shuffle of ministers, is evidence of a determination to deliver on the priorities set out by the Conservative Government to its voters. It is particularly keen to meet the aspirations of those it characterises as ‘new’, whose ‘lending’ of their votes to Boris Johnson won the larger than expected majority, particularly in the North and Midlands.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Her Majesty's Government
    • tl HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT MEMBERS OF THE CABINET (FORMED BY RIGHT HON. MARGARET THATCHER, 24:P, SEPTEMBER 1981) E— CRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—TheRt. HOD. William Whitelaw, CH, MC, Ise .1441u) CHANCELLOR—The Rt. Hon. The Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, CH OCRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND CommoNwEALTH AFFAnts—The Rt. Hon. The Lord Carrington, KCMG, MC OANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt. Hon. Sir Geoffrey Howe, QC, MP tiekRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION AND SCIENCE—The Rt. Hon. Sir Keith Joseph, Bt, MP yitORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE OFCommoNs—The Rt. HOD. Francis Pym, MC, MP RETARY OF STATE FOR NORTHERN IRELAND—TheRt. HOD. James PriOr, MP rECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE—The Rt. HOD. John Nott, MP ',MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES ANDFooD—The Rt. Hon. Peter Walker, MBE, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT—The Rt. Hon. Michael Heseltine, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ScoTLAND—The Rt. Hon. George Younger, T.D. MP PCRETARY OF STATE FOR WALEs—The Rt. Hon. Nicholas Edwards, MP PRIVY SEAL—The Rt. Hon. Humphrey Atkins, MP ,ORDCRETARY OF STATE FOR INDUSTRY—The Rt. Hon. Patrick Jenkin, MP tolIrRETARY OF STATE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES—The Rt. Hon. Norman Fowler, MP oncRETARY OF STATE FOR TRADE—The Rt. Hon. John Biffen, IvfP logkRETARY OF STATE FOR ENERGY—The Rt. HOD. Nigel Lawson, MP pitCRETARY OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT—The Rt. Hon. David Howell, MP "oef-DEF SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY—TheRt. Hon. Leon Brittan, QC, MP priANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER, AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF LoRDs—The Rt.
    [Show full text]
  • Government's Response
    House of Commons Liaison Committee Civil Service: lacking capacity: Government response to the Committee’s First Report of Session 2013–14 First Special Report of Session 2013–14 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 1 April 2014 HC 1216 Published on 2 April 2014 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £5.00 Liaison Committee The Liaison Committee is appointed to consider general matters relating to the work of select committees; to advise the House of Commons Commission on select committees; to choose select committee reports for debate in the House and to hear evidence from the Prime Minister on matters of public policy. Current membership Rt Hon Sir Alan Beith MP (Liberal Democrat, Berwick-upon-Tweed) (Chair) The Chair of the following Select Committees are members of the Liaison Committee: Administration – Rt Hon Sir Alan Haselhurst MP (Conservative, Saffron Walden) Backbench Business – Natascha Engel MP (Labour, North East Derbyshire) Business, Innovation and Skills – Mr Adrian Bailey MP (Labour/Co-op, West Bromwich West) Communities and Local Government – Mr Clive Betts MP (Labour, Sheffield South East) Culture, Media and Sport – Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon) Defence – Rt Hon James Arbuthnot MP (Conservative, North East Hampshire) Education – Mr Graham Stuart MP (Conservative, Beverley and Holderness) Energy and Climate Change – Mr Tim Yeo MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) Environmental Audit – Joan Walley MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent North) Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
    [Show full text]
  • New Peers Created Have Fallen from 244 Under David Cameron’S Six Years As Prime Minister to Only 37 to Date Under Theresa May
    \ For more information on DeHavilland and how we can help with political monitoring, custom research and consultancy, contact: +44 (0)20 3033 3870 [email protected] Information Services Ltd 2018 0 www.dehavilland.co.uk INTRODUCTION & ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................. 2 CONSERVATIVES ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Diana Barran MBE .......................................................................................................................................................... 4 The Rt. Hon. Sir Edward Garnier QC ........................................................................................................................... 5 The Rt. Hon. Sir Alan Haselhurst.................................................................................................................................. 7 The Rt. Hon. Peter Lilley ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Catherine Meyer CBE ................................................................................................................................................... 10 The Rt. Hon. Sir Eric Pickles ........................................................................................................................................ 11 The Rt. Hon. Sir John
    [Show full text]
  • Making a Hasty Brexit? Ministerial Turnover and Its Implications
    Making a Hasty Brexit? Ministerial Turnover and Its Implications Jessica R. Adolino, Ph. D. Professor of Political Science James Madison University Draft prepared for presentation at the European Studies Association Annual Meeting May 9-12, 2019, Denver, Colorado Please do not cite or distribute without author’s permission. By almost any measure, since the immediate aftermath of the June 16, 2016 Brexit referendum, the British government has been in a state of chaos. The turmoil began with then- Prime Minister David Cameron’s resignation on June 17 and succession by Theresa May within days of the vote. Subsequently, May’s decision to call a snap election in 2017 and the resulting loss of the Conservatives’ parliamentary majority cast doubt on her leadership and further stirred up dissension in her party’s ranks. Perhaps more telling, and the subject of this paper, is the unprecedented number of ministers1—from both senior and junior ranks—that quit the May government over Brexit-related policy disagreements2. Between June 12, 2017 and April 3, 2019, the government witnessed 45 resignations, with high-profile secretaries of state and departmental ministers stepping down to return to the backbenches. Of these, 34 members of her government, including 9 serving in the Cabinet, departed over issues with some aspect of Brexit, ranging from dissatisfaction with the Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement, to disagreements about the proper role of Parliament, to questions about the legitimacy of the entire Brexit process. All told, Theresa May lost more ministers, and at a more rapid pace, than any other prime minister in modern times.
    [Show full text]
  • THE 422 Mps WHO BACKED the MOTION Conservative 1. Bim
    THE 422 MPs WHO BACKED THE MOTION Conservative 1. Bim Afolami 2. Peter Aldous 3. Edward Argar 4. Victoria Atkins 5. Harriett Baldwin 6. Steve Barclay 7. Henry Bellingham 8. Guto Bebb 9. Richard Benyon 10. Paul Beresford 11. Peter Bottomley 12. Andrew Bowie 13. Karen Bradley 14. Steve Brine 15. James Brokenshire 16. Robert Buckland 17. Alex Burghart 18. Alistair Burt 19. Alun Cairns 20. James Cartlidge 21. Alex Chalk 22. Jo Churchill 23. Greg Clark 24. Colin Clark 25. Ken Clarke 26. James Cleverly 27. Thérèse Coffey 28. Alberto Costa 29. Glyn Davies 30. Jonathan Djanogly 31. Leo Docherty 32. Oliver Dowden 33. David Duguid 34. Alan Duncan 35. Philip Dunne 36. Michael Ellis 37. Tobias Ellwood 38. Mark Field 39. Vicky Ford 40. Kevin Foster 41. Lucy Frazer 42. George Freeman 43. Mike Freer 44. Mark Garnier 45. David Gauke 46. Nick Gibb 47. John Glen 48. Robert Goodwill 49. Michael Gove 50. Luke Graham 51. Richard Graham 52. Bill Grant 53. Helen Grant 54. Damian Green 55. Justine Greening 56. Dominic Grieve 57. Sam Gyimah 58. Kirstene Hair 59. Luke Hall 60. Philip Hammond 61. Stephen Hammond 62. Matt Hancock 63. Richard Harrington 64. Simon Hart 65. Oliver Heald 66. Peter Heaton-Jones 67. Damian Hinds 68. Simon Hoare 69. George Hollingbery 70. Kevin Hollinrake 71. Nigel Huddleston 72. Jeremy Hunt 73. Nick Hurd 74. Alister Jack (Teller) 75. Margot James 76. Sajid Javid 77. Robert Jenrick 78. Jo Johnson 79. Andrew Jones 80. Gillian Keegan 81. Seema Kennedy 82. Stephen Kerr 83. Mark Lancaster 84.
    [Show full text]
  • A Summary and Way Forward Youth Engagement Review a Summary and Way Forward Youth Engagement Review a Summary and Way Forward
    Youth Engagement Review A Summary and Way Forward Youth Engagement Review A Summary and Way Forward Youth Engagement Review A Summary and Way Forward CADE D T E N F I O B R C M E O C Contents Foreword by Rt Hon Andrew Robathan MP Minister for Defence Personnel Welfare and Veterans 2 SECTION 1 Defence Youth Engagement as it is today. 3 Case Study – Operation Youth Advantage + 5 SECTION 2 The need for a review 6 SECTION 3 The benefits to Defence of engaging Young People 8 SECTION 4 The benefits to Society of Defence Youth Engagement 9 Case Study – Aftermath of the August 2011 riots 11 SECTION 5 Analysis of youth engagement activity 12 Case Study – Cadet service improving life outcomes 14 SECTION 6 Implementing the YER and beyond 15 Case Study – Education Outreach 17 Case Study – Cadets striving for excellence 18 Youth Engagement Review 1 Foreword by Rt Hon Andrew Robathan MP Minister for Defence Personnel Welfare and Veterans his brief report summarises the Defence Youth Engagement Review (YER) and how the MOD intends Tto take it forward. I commissioned this Review in July 2010 in the wake of celebrations marking the 150th anniversary of the Cadet Forces. I wanted to ensure that we were making the most of not just the Cadet Forces but the many other youth engagement activities that the MOD, including the Armed Forces, undertake. I believe that not enough is done to promote the work that we do in this area. For too long we have been keeping Defence’s Youth Engagement activities to ourselves.
    [Show full text]