Rishi Sunak seems powerless to prevent death by factionalism

Editorial: A new splinter group suggests the Conservatives are heading not only for another bout of civil war, but also a lurch to the right

Who is steering the Tory ship? Rishi Sunak faces more infighting (PA)

Like some kind of genetically-modified amoeba, the Conservative Party seems to be spawning factions and dissenting groups at an alarming rate. There are informal gangs of MPs and peers devoted to Boris Johnson stirring up trouble, and a few eccentrics still loyal to Liz Truss.

Even purged outcasts such as Michael Heseltine, Amber Rudd and Rory Stewart are regrouping and pushing a tract of their own, The Case for the Centre-Right. Older clubs such as the Bow Group and Conservative Way Forward have been joined by the European Research Group, China Research Group, Northern Research Group, the Conservative Democratic Organisation, the National Conservatives … and now, the New Conservatives, who on Monday published their contribution to the immigration debate. As yet another splinter group – including the party’s deputy chair Lee Anderson – this one seems especially determined to be a thorn in Rishi Sunak’s side.

With grim predictability, the New Conservatives’ pamphlet complains that immigration is too high but offers no new ideas. Its radical solutions run completely counter to government policy and, worse, draw further attention to Mr Sunak’s failure to “stop the boats”. Unlike the surviving sensible ministers trying to keep Britain going, the New Conservatives aren’t keen on lawful migration under a points-based system; they want a tight cap of 20,000 a year, which is probably in excess of what is practical let alone humane. The idea that Mr Anderson should be associated with such apostasy was clearly too much for the whips, and the supposedly straight-talking MP has suddenly gone uncharacteristically quiet.

The New Conservatives are to be congratulated for inadvertently highlighting that the British economy cannot prosper without what they call “mass migration”. For example, take their eye-catching proposal to scrap visas for workers in care homes; the New Conservatives argue Britain should be training its own staff, not relying on foreign labour. Even assuming British workers, of whom there is an obvious shortage in all areas, could be persuaded to take up such challenging and skilled roles, the required wages would vastly inflate the costs of social care and lead to cuts in services and higher bills for taxpayers and families. British jobs for British workers may be a handy populist slogan, but it would also mean a poorer Britain.

The New Conservatives believe there is a large pool of “economically inactive” people ready to flow into our understaffed hospitals and hotels; it is a misreading of the statistics. “Inactive” simply means those of working age (16 to 64) outside the workforce; well over half of the increase in this group in recent years is simply a function of our ageing population. There has also been an acceleration in long-term illness since Covid. Wealthy “boomers” are retiring early and there remains strong demand for higher and further education. Others want to stay home and raise their families. Recent demand and the squeeze on living standards has drawn more back to work. But the idea there are enough people fit and able to work full time in physically demanding occupations is an obvious fantasy. Britain, despite the hysteria about migration, hasn’t got enough workers.

One of the MPs now described as a rising star of the right, Miriam Cates, is a former biology teacher and evangelist for baby-making, declaring that the falling birth rate is “a symptom of serious societal malaise”. But it would take a couple of decades to benefit from a new cohort of workers, and in the meantime bigger families need more schools, better wages and bigger houses.

Less credible is the New Conservatives’ focus on “gross migration” – discounting those leaving or returning abroad. In a slightly sinister phrase, their paper mentions the “destabilising economic and cultural” consequences of migration and says Britain should ensure fewer migrants enter rather than encourage “our own people” to leave.

It all suggests the Conservative Party is not only heading for opposition and another bout of civil war but also a lurch to the right as historic defeat looms. Along the way, these splinter groups and private armies of various leadership contenders will intensify their mutually destructive hostilities, often as not stoked up by the culture wars against the left. Mr Sunak seems powerless to prevent death by factionalism; all four of his predecessors have been brought down by internecine warfare and he will be fortunate to avoid the same fate. It seems a long time since they boasted that “the secret weapon of the Conservative Party is loyalty”.