Tom Peterkin: Three-horse finish for Tory leadership

Just over a week ago, the conventional wisdom was that Murdo Fraser was the clear front-runner in a contest that looked as if it might be a bit of a one-horse race. That changed when Fraser dramatically announced his plans to split the party from London, change its name and create a separate, purely Scottish party.

His radical proposal has turned a one-horse race into a three-horse thriller. Fraser’s decision to go for such a bold approach is a high-risk strategy. None of the Conservative members can complain that they have not been given a fair warning that he intends to shake things up. But there is no doubt his determination to eschew the Conservative brand will not play well with a very significant proportion of the party’s membership. Given that it is the Scottish members who will decide the outcome of this contest, he has a battle on his hands to convince them. As one long-standing member of the party said: “Surely, it’s crazy trying to ditch the Conservatives.” But perhaps that’s the nub of Fraser’s problem. He believes that the only way for the party to succeed is by changing its identity, but in order to do so he has to win over a group of people who are not only Conservative by name but conservative by nature.

The contenders

If Fraser is the candidate for radical change, the two rivals he faces can be characterised as representing the traditional Tories and a far more modern version of the party. Jackson Carlaw is seen as the most right-wing and reactionary. He has not been the most visible of the Conservative group at Holyrood, but he is certainly one of the most ambitious. Crucially, he is well known within the party, having twice been appointed deputy chair of the Scottish Party. He has a strong base in the west of Scotland.

The third contender, Ruth Davidson, is an engaging character, who at 32 is the youngest of the candidates. By far the least conventional character of the three, she is openly gay and enjoys kick-boxing – a far cry from the traditional image of a Tory leader. She believes she is the person capable of transforming the Conservative fortunes because she appeals to the public at large. That may (or may not) be true, but her first task is persuading the 10,000 Scottish members, many of whom know little of martial arts and even less about the gay community.

How they are

doing so far

Carlaw was the first to officially open his campaign and must have been disappointed by the low-key launch. Perhaps that was to be expected given his reputation as the status quo candidate, but eyebrows were raised at an injudicious turn of phrase when he suggested that supporters of more powers for Holyrood wanted to “appease” nationalism. Fraser’s bombshell announcement that he would stand on a ticket to abolish the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party and replace it with a new distinctly Scottish party has overshadowed everything else. With a series of well-organised endorsements from MSPs and business people, it has so far been a slick campaign as well as the most talked about. However, much of the talking has been far from positive. Tory grandees such as former Scottish Secretary Lord Forsyth – revered by the members – criticised Fraser’s argument that breathing new life into a British party is the way to secure the Union. The wild card, Ruth Davidson, despite her relative inexperience, performed convincingly at her launch. Believed to have the silent support of David Cameron and the Tory donor Sir Jack Harvie, she is still very much in contention.

The issues

Almost inevitably given the SNP’s pre-eminent position at the moment, the constitution has already emerged as the key issue. Carlaw wants an early one-question referendum and has put the Union at the “heart and soul” of his campaign. He also wants to enact a new Act of Constitutional Settlement to secure the Union. Fraser is far more pro-change. His new, as yet unnamed, party would be far more comfortable with devolution, arguing that it is part of his decentralisation agenda. More financial levers would come to Edinburgh, although Fraser insists that the flow of powers would stop short of full fiscal autonomy. Unlike Fraser, Davidson has said that a “line in the sand” ought to be drawn on the constitution once the powers contained in the coalition government’s Scotland Bill are transferred to Holyrood.

The tactics

The candidates’ positions on the constitution have a bearing on how they see the vote developing. The One Member One Vote system will see members rank their favoured candidates “one” and “two” in order of preference. If the most popular candidate receives more than 50 per cent of the vote then he or she will be declared the winner. If none of them breaks the 50 per cent threshold, then the third placed candidate drops out and the second-preference votes come into play.

With a wide open contest, Carlaw and Davidson are banking on the second-preference votes being used, and being a decisive factor. Assuming Carlaw drops out, Davidson’s strategy is to get his “traditionalist” second votes by underlining her commitment to the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party. Similarly, Carlaw must be hoping to pick up her second preference votes if she trails after the first count. Carlaw’s firm hope must be that he appeals most to an ageing membership. Meanwhile, Fraser believes that, above all, the Scottish Conservatives want to back a winner. He must convince them that his is a winning strategy. It is a huge gamble.