Conservative Divisions (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes

Conservative Divisions

Introduction to divisions under Major

Although John Major's replacement of Thatcher altered the political dynamic to some degree and allowed the abandonment of unpopular policies, deep divisions within the Conservative Party had been developing for many years. These tensions would dominate Major's premiership and ultimately damage the party's electoral prospects.

The poll tax

Poll tax refers to the community charge introduced under Thatcher that proved deeply unpopular and contributed to her downfall. Major and Heseltine abandoned this policy, which neutralized the issue as a source of immediate political damage. However, the underlying divisions that had allowed such a miscalculation to occur remained within the party.

European divisions and the Maastricht Treaty

Background to the divisions

Relations with the European Economic Community had plagued every Conservative leader before and since Thatcher. These divisions represented one of the most persistent sources of tension within the parliamentary party and the wider membership.

The Maastricht Treaty negotiations

The treaty was signed in the Dutch city of Maastricht in February 1992, shortly before the general election. The treaty created substantial debate among Conservatives, provoking a revolt by backbenchers who were least sympathetic to EEC membership.

The parliamentary ratification process

The treaty required ratification by parliament to become law. This created a foreseeable problem: members of Major's own backbenches were bound to vote against it.

Initial parliamentary response appeared positive, and prompt ratification might have caused few difficulties. However, postponement meant the vote came after a Danish referendum on Maastricht in June 1992, in which Danish voters rejected the treaty. Denmark only accepted it in a second referendum following further negotiations. This delay allowed Conservative opponents to call for a British referendum.

The rebellion unfolds

At the second reading of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill, 22 Conservatives opposed the measure. The committee stage, where detailed line-by-line examination occurs, was postponed. The government attempted an intermediary stage in November, but this time more Conservatives voted against and some abstained.

The debate became increasingly difficult to control. Opponents put forward amendments intended to slow the bill's progress. In total, a staggering 600 amendments were proposed in committee. All were defeated. By April 1993, opponents attempted to write in the necessity of a referendum as a condition.

The third reading was reached in May 1993 and passed, but with 46 Tory rebels voting against their own government. Opposing your own government represents something MPs rarely do; the scale of the rebellion demonstrated the depth of division and strength of feeling within the party.

The bill then moved through the House of Lords before returning to the House of Commons for further discussion. This process of readings, movement between the two houses, committee stages, amendment votes, and multiple discussions represents normal parliamentary procedure. What proved unusual was the length of the process, the intensity of the debating, the number of amendments, and the size of the rebellion from the government's own side.

Outcomes of the ratification battle

The process produced two clear outcomes:

1. The European Communities (Amendment) Act was passed, meaning Britain had ratified the Maastricht Treaty

2. Conservative divisions on Europe became clear to every voter. The electorate dislikes divided parties. The extended process of signing, debating and ratifying the Maastricht Treaty damaged the standing of the Conservatives considerably. This represented another blow to their prospects in the forthcoming election.

Continuing divisions over the single currency

Even after the 1992 treaty, the EEC continued to present the Major government with difficult decisions. The prospect of a single currency created particular tension. Supporters of closer European integration included Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd, Chancellor of the Exchequer Kenneth Clarke, and Deputy Prime Minister Michael Heseltine (all previous leadership contenders). However, widespread hostility to the entire concept existed within the parliamentary party and the wider membership.

As Prime Minister, John Major refused to rule out the UK joining the single currency. Nevertheless, in the 1997 election addresses, many individual Conservative candidates stated their opposition to joining.

The Conservative leadership election of 1995

Europe remained a divisive issue in Conservative politics. Aware of hostile critics in the parliamentary party and government, especially regarding European policy, John Major resigned as party leader in June 1995. This forced a leadership election, challenging those who opposed his policies to 'put up or shut up'.

Only one candidate stood against Major and was heavily defeated. Others, perhaps mindful of Michael Heseltine's fate in 1990, were reluctant to stand in a second ballot. Major's victory proved crushing: he won 66% of the vote, ensuring no second ballot occurred.

Key figure: John Major

Defending the Maastricht Treaty, Major told the Conservative Group for Europe:

"Fifty years from now Britain will still be the country of long shadows on county grounds, warm beer, invincible green suburbs, dog lovers and – to quote George Orwell – old maids bicycling to Holy Communion through the morning mist. And – if we get our way – Shakespeare will still be read even in school. Britain will survive unamendable in all essentials."

Remember!