Conservative Party (UK) leadership election, 1965
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
The Conservative Party leadership election of July 1965 was held to find a successor to Sir Alec Douglas-Home.
It was the first time that a formal election by the parliamentary party had taken place, previous leaders having emerged through a consultation process. This procedure had fallen into disrepute following the manoeuvrings over the leadership at the 1963 party conference which had led to the appointment of Douglas-Home, then a hereditary member of the House of Lords. The plans for how the election would work were published in February 1965, and agreed upon by the parliamentary party thereafter.
Sir Alec Douglas-Home triggered the election on 23 July 1965, by resigning at a full meeting of the 1922 Committee in committee room 14.
It was widely assumed that both Edward Heath, Shadow Chancellor, and Reginald Maudling, Shadow Foreign Secretary, would stand. Members of the "magic circle" of old Etonians chose not to contend the election, with widespread agreement that a younger and modern face was needed to front the Conservative Party.
Another potential "modernizing" candidate, Iain Macleod, ruled himself out immediately. He might have received 40-45 votes had he stood, but he instead endorsed Heath.
Other names that were seen as possible contenders were Quintin Hogg, Peter Thorneycroft and Enoch Powell, Shadow Transport Minister (who eventually did stand). Some were angered by Powell's candidature, as a complication in an otherwise clear contest.
Maudling, the most experienced and publicly known of the candidates, was generally considered to be the favourite. Heath's prospects were seen as either tie-ing or preventing Maudling from reaching the 173 votes needed to win outright. It was also thought that Powell would take support away from Heath whose backers predominantly came from northern England and industrial cities (such as Birmingham and Wolverhampton), as opposed to Maudling's geographically wider support. Heath, however, fought a more effective leadership campaign, organised by his young lieutenant Peter Walker, and by the eve of the election, the Heath camp believed they had a clear lead. Maudling, by contrast, fought a lacklustre campaign. He assumed, for example, that William Whitelaw would vote for him, but he voted for Heath.
...
Wikipedia