Tory bosses ‘lost the plot’ in London by picking Susan Hall
The sight of Sadiq Khan seeing off his Tory rival to secure a third term as Mayor of London was greeted with little surprise from Conservative quarters.
Susan Hall, the party’s surprise choice to challenge Labour for one of the biggest political positions in the country, had struggled throughout the election to make an impact, while her campaign style – often described as Trumpian – was doomed to fail among a largely young, liberal electorate.
During the long gap between polls closing on Thursday evening and the announcement of the election’s result on Saturday afternoon, wild rumours suggested she was running Mr Khan close and could even win – but in the end that proved a mirage as she picked up just 33 per cent of the vote, 11 points behind the incumbent. She failed to make major progress in the Tory-backing outer London suburbs while going backwards in more central areas.
“The really bad news would have been if she won,” a member of Boris Johnson’s City Hall team told i. “She has never run anything, let alone a city the size of London.”
Even before the defeat, marking up a hat-trick for the Conservatives in the capital, figures within the party were scratching their heads as to how ie ended up fielding such a weak candidate for such a plum role once again.
Since Boris Johnson left City Hall in 2016, Sadiq Khan has seen off Tory peer and environmentalist Zac Goldsmith, London Assembly Member Shaun Bailey and most recently Ms Hall, whom insiders say ended up securing the candidacy by accident.
While some Tories insist Lord Goldsmith was a good candidate, the fact that he allowed himself to head up a viciously toxic campaign that prompted his own sister to publicly state that she did not recognise him suggests that he was not the best person for the job.
Insiders said the recently elevated Lord Bailey looked good on paper, and despite a weak campaign only lost the mayoralty by around 100,000 votes, which suggested to some that the job to run one of the world’s biggest cities was winnable for the Conservatives.
But after a risible campaign led by Ms Hall, figures inside the party have once again been left to question why the Tories have struggled to find a viable candidate to challenge Mr Khan.
“It’s hugely frustrating,” the Johnson ally said. “If the party had got its act together, there could have been a scenario where the Tories could have pushed Labour close in London, and with other results that could have piled pressure on [Sir Keir] Starmer and possibly changed people’s outlook for the general election.
“Instead, one of the most successful political forces in history completely lost the plot and took its eye off the ball allowing Susan Hall to become the candidate.”
Blame for Hall’s selection as candidate has been laid at the door of veteran Tory “fixer” Dougie Smith, whom it is claimed blocked other viable candidates in order to position Daniel Korski as No 10’s preferred option to the party membership. But after Mr Korski was forced to drop out of the race having been accused of groping TV producer Daisy Goodwin back in 2013, the Tory candidacy landed in Ms Hall’s lap.
Another Tory, who was closely involved in the Conservative mayoral race, told i that too many within the party refuse to accept the demographic changes taking place in the country, particularly in London, which led to them allowing Hall to run.
“The problem is the Conservative party don’t want to accept or acknowledge the changes that this country is going through,” the insider said. “The median age in London is 35, while around 35 per cent of people living in London were not born in the UK. If you don’t get London then it’s very unlikely you will get the rest of the country in 10 to 15 years’ time. This is the kind of existential threat facing the party.”
With the Conservatives predicted to lose the forthcoming general election, the suggestion is that candidates of a higher calibre may emerge once the party is in opposition and the prospect of running the capital could appeal to former Cabinet ministers.
One Tory said that existing politicians were the most likely to step forward, adding: “The Conservative brand is so toxic now, the head of a museum or a CEO of a major corporation are very unlikely to want to associate themselves with it.”
Conservative pollster Lord Hayward agreed that the Tories stood more of a chance of winning London when they are in opposition, and suggested that the prospect of London being currently unwinnable was a factor in putting off better potential candidates.
“I’m not convinced that London is that winnable for the Tories,” he said. “In fact, it has been moving against them for about the last five years. When the Tories are in power the London mayoralty tends to be out of reach for the party. So any candidates are going to have to be prepared for a protracted campaign – it’s a big ask.
He added: “It could become a more attractive option for if Labour are in government and the Tories are in opposition. Even then you will have to be a very big personality, such as a Boris Johnson or a Ken Livingston.”
Lord Hayward suggested that because the chances of the Tories winning in London were slim, it meant lesser known, local government politicians were putting their names forward to boost their profiles.
The Conservative peer also warned that a more recent phenomenon was leading to a lower quality of politician putting themselves forward, saying: “There is the wider issue of who would want to enter politics. I think we will see fewer and fewer people who will be willing to put themselves and their families through it. This will have serious consequences for our democracy.”
