Wedding Blues

Although, like most people (including Tony Blair), he is wrong about what Clause IV really said and really meant, Andrew Pierce writes:

When he became Tory leader seven years ago, the youthful and telegenic David Cameron pledged to transform the blue-rinse image of his party and boost its membership by attracting thousands of young, ethnic and gay members.  In doing so, he would destroy forever the Tories’ reputation as the ‘nasty party’ as these new ‘inclusive’ members joined the 300,000 activists whose average age was 64. ‘I was elected Leader of the Conservative Party on a mandate to change and modernise the party,’ he said. ‘I want to increase membership. I want to see a broader base. I want to see a significant increase in the number of members from all communities.’ He hugged hoodies, embraced huskies in the Arctic Circle and placed a daft wind turbine on the roof of his Notting Hill home in an attempt to woo new Tories.

But the bitter and ineluctable truth is that, far from increasing numbers, Mr Cameron has presided over the sharpest decline in membership in the Conservative party’s history.  Today, I can reveal that the number of Tory party members has fallen below 130,000, a drop of around 60 per cent since he took over in 2005. The party’s U-turns over a referendum on Europe, its failure to reform the loathed Human Rights Act and the Tories’ infuriating tendency to give ever more ground to the wretched Lib Dems have contributed to the decline. The revolt in the shires over the ‘reform’ of planning policy in the green belt also led to numerous members withholding their subscriptions in protest. But the issue that has been the single biggest factor in this membership crisis is Mr Cameron’s unwavering commitment to gay marriage — which he reiterated at the annual Downing Street reception for members of the gay community this week.

Last year in his conference speech, he astounded traditional party supporters when he declared: ‘I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I’m a Conservative.’ It was a slap in the face for the vast majority of Tory members who happily accepted the introduction of civil partnerships for same-sex couples, but baulked at the idea of a Conservative government redefining the ancient institution of marriage. The uncompromising language deployed by Mr Cameron who, in another sop to the Lib Dems, has cynically dumped his repeated promise to reward traditional marriage through the tax system, enraged Tory MPs and activists alike. Thousands ripped up their membership cards and refused to renew their subscriptions.

The alarm bells sounded in the Tory HQ, which in January launched a national appeal to try to persuade waverers to return to the fold. The appeal was a dismal failure. In a tense meeting in Downing Street last month between Mr Cameron and 20 of the party’s most senior members, he was given a stark warning that membership will plunge below the psychologically crucial 100,000 mark if there were no change of heart on same-sex marriage. One source revealed: ‘The Prime Minister was told bluntly that gay marriage was causing membership to haemorrhage. Cameron was unmoved and said the members were out of step with the country. He doesn’t seem to care that it’s the party members who canvass on doorsteps across the country in all weathers. They lick envelopes, hold fundraisers and at elections drive our older supporters to polling stations.  These people are our mainstay and they are abandoning us. Our party is dying on its feet.’

The crisis was discussed at last month’s meeting of the Tory Party Board, chaired by Lord Andrew Feldman, Mr Cameron’s closest friend from their time at Oxford. Feldman, the joint Tory chairman, is, of course, a supporter of gay marriage. Dubbed the ‘crony chairman’ as he got the job (and his peerage) only because he is Mr Cameron’s chum, Feldman presented a gloomy report from the membership sub-committee he chairs. Indeed, the situation is so desperate the board has authorised cut-price admission for the first time for the Tory party conference in Birmingham in October because the fear is there will be hundreds of empty seats for Mr Cameron’s keynote speech.

The damage done by the gay marriage proposals is not confined to within the party. Potential Tory voters don’t like them. A national poll by ComRes on the likely effects of allowing gay marriage — which, incidentally, was not in any of the parties’ manifestos — revealed the Conservatives could lose 1.1 million votes and 30 parliamentary seats in an election because so many supporters would stay at home or switch to UKIP. A ComRes poll also revealed that 56 per cent of Mr Cameron’s constituents who voted for him at the election oppose his plans to make redefining marriage a priority.

Andrew Hawkins, the chairman of ComRes, said: ‘It’s the way it has been handled that has done so much damage. The Government has a consultation, but says it is pressing ahead whether people like it or not. ‘One of the scariest things for the Tories is that three in four of those people who voted for Cameron in 2010, but say they won’t again, cite gay marriage as the reason. It’s all very well for the Tory leadership to dismiss their critics as the old guard. But older voters are the ones who used to be certain to vote most loyally for the Tories.’

Confidential figures compiled by Tory HQ reveal that mass desertions pose a serious threat to the party’s ability to fight elections in crucial marginals. Since Mr Cameron became leader, the number of full-time paid party agents who run Conservative associations in seats held by Tory MPs or in marginals they are fighting to win, has fallen from more than 150 to less than 50. In Harlow, which the Tories recaptured with a 5,000 majority last time, association membership has more than halved to 100. The figure is the same in Enfield Southgate, where Tory MP David Burrowes is leading his party’s opposition to gay marriage. There are only 100 activists in neighbouring Enfield North — another key marginal. It’s even more grim in the marginals of Crawley and Pendle in Lancashire, where combined membership is less than 100.  True blue Bournemouth’s two constituencies can muster only 300 members between them. Even Margaret Thatcher’s Finchley stronghold has only 300 members, down from more than 1,000 in her heyday.

One senior party official said: ‘Gay marriage is the final straw. In London, Bristol, Birmingham and other major cities, there are dozens of constituencies with no party organisation at all. ‘The voluntary party is virtually extinct in Scotland and in parts of Wales. We are relying on a dwindling band of volunteers, the majority of whom are in their 70s. It’s the most desperate situation the party has ever faced.’

Dissent is spreading in the parliamentary party, with opposition expected to be even higher than the 91 MPs who voted against House of Lords reform this month.  David Mowat, Tory MP for Warrington South, is a typical dissenter. ‘What matters is jobs, growth and the economy: everything has to be done to fix that.  I had a letter from a former chairman of Warrington South Conservatives saying he was leaving the party. We haven’t got so many members that we can lose them.’ Mr Mowat, while ‘moderately in favour’ of gay marriage, said: ‘It’s a pity we have chosen to potentially alienate our activists. I would be happy if the whole thing got dropped.’

On top of all this woe, the issue has also caused a revolt among donors who flocked to Cameron in 2005 when they thought he had the charisma and policies to win a General Election. Michael Farmer, an evangelical Christian who runs a metals-based hedge fund, gave £640,000 to the party the year after Mr Cameron took over. He gave £928,000 the year before the election and £750,000 the year Mr Cameron entered No 10. Last year he gave only £255,000. Donations have dried up from Michael Hintze, a devout Christian and billionaire property developer, whose charitable foundation has given more than £20 million to good causes. Since Mr Cameron became leader, Mr Hintze has consistently given more than £200,000 a year. Last year he gave only £34,000.

For their part, supporters of Mr Cameron believe his backing for gay marriage will be seen by ordinary voters as the defining issue of how he has modernised his party. They compare it to Tony Blair’s abolition of Clause IV in 1994, when he became Labour leader, which committed his party to the nationalisation of industry. But abolishing Clause IV was hugely popular. Afterwards, Labour membership rose by 100,000 to 320,000 — a figure Mr Cameron can only dream of.

The irony is that the man who pledged to modernise the Tory party could go down as the leader who destroyed it.