The Conservative Party under Cameron, May, and Johnson: Power throughout Chaos

The Conservative Party has enjoyed a long period of power between 2010 and 2024. The tenures of David Cameron, Theresa May, and Boris Johnson have had a significant impact on the party and on the country. This period of the Conservative Party is a tipping point for the tenures of Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak, and the party’s 2024 electoral defeat. The party under Cameron, May, and Johnson has not been the subject of a dedicated research project. There are outstanding questions about the leadership of May and Johnson, ideological developments throughout their tenures, and the behaviour of the parliamentary Conservative Party (PCP) over this time. The objective of this thesis is to understand why the party has been so unstable, despite a long period of electoral dominance. In doing so it contributes to understanding of leadership, ideology, and institutional behaviour. Historical institutionalism provides the theoretical basis of this research. Within this framework this thesis uses social network analysis, innovative approaches to leadership selection, and the Greenstein model. The literature review of the Cameron era finds that his modernisation project saw only limited success; Cameron mostly failed to move the party away from his Thatcherite inheritance. He was a skilful leader who managed the coalition well, but failed to settle the Scottish question and to prevent the Conservatives from banging on about Europe. This research finds that May intended to move the party in a One Nation direction, but failed to remake the party’s ideology. She displayed poor leadership in the 2017 general election, in progressing Brexit through parliament, and in managing her party. Under May the PCP was divided. Elements of the PCP demonstrated group behaviour, but the parliamentary party cannot be described as factional. This research also finds that Johnson was a poor leader who was unsuited to high office, although he did well to get Brexit through parliament. His ideology was confused and had little lasting impact on the party or country. Under Johnson the PCP was difficult to manage but MPs did not display factional behaviour. This research has implications for the understanding of the Conservative Party between 2005 and 2022, and it helps us to understand Truss and Sunak. It also helps us to understand the party’s defeat at the 2024 general election and its trajectory thereafter.