By the end of today we will know whose challenge Boris will have to defeat to become Prime Minister. Yesterday saw the end of the energising campaign of Rory Stewart, brought down for the very reasons set out in my previous posts, in which I opined that his was the pragmatic realism the country needed now.
In the unlikely event of Javid the contest would have an authentic attraction representing two very different parts of our multi-cultural society. If Gove, it would be one long row between the candidates, fulled by revenge and distrust after the two fell out hours after the 2016 referendum. If Hunt, his detractors are already calling him Theresa in trousers.
This is wishful thinking. Certainly Hunt is not colourful nor a clown, but he does have a forensic grasp of detail and a realistic understanding of both the clear perils and alleged opportunities of Brexit. He answers questions with unusual candour and directness, in sharp contrast to the whimsical optimism and confusion of facts which have become Boris’s trademark. Hunt took over a foreign office in some disarray after Boris’s disastrous tenure and has proved very much better at the job. There is no reason to suppose Hunt would not make the better prime minister.
It is worth remembering that the front runner rarely wins a Tory leadership contest. Most wanted Halifax, but it was Churchill. After Eden, Butler was the favourite, but it went to Macmillan. After him, Butler was again the favourite, but it went to Home. Maudling was the next favourite, but Heath won, in the first Tory leadership election with MPs formally voting. When Thatcher challenged, Heath was expected to win, but Thatcher beat him and he never got over it. When the Iron Lady fell, it was Heseltine out ahead, but Major who finally won.
The rumours are that Boris’s people would prefer Hunt, whom they believe their man could trounce. They may be making a big mistake.