Suchergebnisse

Why did it take the Conservative Party so long to recover power? After a landslide defeat in 1997, why was it so slow to adapt reposition itself and rebuild its support? This title addresses these questions through a contextualised assessment of Conservative Party politics between 1997 and 2010

AbstractThis article uses the statecraft framework outlined by Andrew Gamble to analyse the Conservative government of Boris Johnson. It argues that under Johnson, the Conservative Party is pursuing its most far‐reaching statecraft strategy since the Thatcher era, aimed at re‐establishing the conditions for Conservative hegemony. At the heart of Johnson's statecraft lies Brexit itself, which serves as a national cause around which to organise the politics of support. Leaving the EU demands a renewal of the national community which, for the Conservatives, is framed as a narrow Anglo‐Britishness, centred on an essentially English understanding of the Union of the United Kingdom and of Britishness itself. This assertive politics of national identity shapes the party's approach to territorial statecraft and its ideological struggle to ensure that the dominant narratives of British politics are once again Conservative ones.

This article analyses the extent of party change in response to the vote for Brexit in the Conservative Party and the Labour Party. It focuses particularly on how both parties struggled to manage internal divisions and ideological conflict, and how each sought to manage the issue in terms of party competition. It argues that the Conservative Party victory at the 2019 UK general election was the result of an ultimately more effective response to the electoral dynamics unleashed by Brexit, as the party adjusted its position to successfully mobilise the coalition of Leave voters into party competition, while Labour struggled to do the same with Remain voters. In short, it suggests that substantial party change, particularly by the Conservatives, effectively averted major party system change and the realignment of British politics many analysts predicted. This case study analysis consequently contributes to the wider theoretical literature on external system shocks and party change.

Following the referendum on membership of the European Union (EU), this article assesses the ideological legacy of David Cameron on Conservative politics in Britain. It focuses on three areas of ideological tension in contemporary conservatism, namely, European integration, the divide between social liberals and traditionalists, and the future of the Union post-Brexit. Applying the concept of heresthetics to offer a theoretically informed account, it argues that while Cameron enjoyed some successes in 'the art of political manipulation' with electoral benefits, his desire to modernize conservatism was ultimately undone by his failure to restructure the key issue dimensions animating his party's ideology. Ultimately, this failure undid his premiership, leading to his downfall.

The rise of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) has been one of the most dramatic and widely discussed features of British politics in recent years. This article argues that one vital but largely overlooked facet of this phenomenon has been the politics of national identity. It argues that despite UKIP's ostensibly unionist stance, Englishness is an important pivot around which key elements of the party's appeal revolve, notably in terms of its Euroscepticism, its opposition to immigration and its anti-establishment narrative. It argues that the Anglo-Britishness promulgated by UKIP allows space for the celebration of English identity rather more easily than of other sub-state national identities, as it does not challenge the legitimacy of the UK state, which is itself seen as the expression of Anglo-British identity and sovereignty. Scottish nationalism, on the other hand, is seen as a threat to the Union and therefore anti-English.

In the United Kingdom (UK), under the leadership of David Cameron, the Conservative Party has been keen to stress the value of marriage and stable families. However, in practice, the policies of the coalition government he has led since 2010 – particularly the emphasis on austerity – have arguably undermined family life. In addition, by offering financial support to those who are married and disadvantaging those who are not, the government may serve to reinforce the 'marriage divide' in the UK.

AbstractFor much of the 2010–15 Parliament the English Question was not a conspicuous feature of political debate in the UK. However, the issue of English votes for English laws (EvfEl) was thrust to centre stage by Prime Minister David Cameron in the aftermath of the Scottish independence referendum, when he announced that fulfilment of the promise of further devolution to Scotland must be accompanied by an answer to the West Lothian Question at Westminster. This article analyses these events and explores their possible consequences. It argues that a reform of parliamentary procedures along the lines outlined in the report of the McKay Commission looks increasingly likely, but that this will not mark a resolution of the broader English Question, and the future of the Union remains in doubt.