The real reasons MPs change party
It’s a funny word, traitor. Like gallant or noble, it feels as if it belongs to a previous age, rarely found outside story books or, occasionally, war reporting.
And yet it does, from time to time, crop up in British politics. This weekend Andrew Mitchell, the Deputy Foreign Secretary, branded his former colleague Natalie Elphicke a “traitor” for skipping over to the Labour benches and joining Sir Keir Starmer’s party in the middle of last week.
For good measure he also branded Elphicke a “turncoat” in an interview on Times Radio, warning she will be “despised” by her former colleagues and never trusted by her new party because of her decision to defect.
Like Labour MPs who proudly wear “never kissed a Tory” T-shirts, I have always found this kind of behaviour deeply strange, given that, to win, every party must convince voters who don’t support them to change their minds.
It would clearly be counterproductive to walk into a room full of prospective new supporters, call them all names or suggest you wouldn’t touch them with a bargepole and then expect them to put a cross in your box on polling day.
It also shifts focus in the wrong direction. Defections are less about the party an MP is leaving for, and far more about the one they have chosen to leave.
They are also deeply political and often come after many months of soul-searching. The answer is to look inward and ask why, not take aim at the person jumping ship.
Elphicke, Dan Poulter, who left the Tories for Labour just weeks before, and Lee Anderson, who joined Reform, all posed questions about the identity of the Conservatives, what the party stands for and what it wants to achieve as reasons for departure.
This warning provides Rishi Sunak with an opportunity to really consider what his party is and to define it clearly. And while getting the answer right it is unlikely to turn the electoral tide this time, it could help shorten the years in opposition and form a blueprint for the party to rebuild itself.
Labour has faced questions about whether it is left-wing enough too, largely from its own MPs, who worry that accepting Elphicke dilutes its identity.
Starmer has sought to ease these fears by capitalising on the idea that if someone as right-wing as Elphicke can move towards Labour the party must be doing something right but his commitment to this line of thinking will be tested this coming week.
It is the strongest political argument to make, but it also forces him to be clear about where his red lines are or risk being branded Tory-lite.
But retreating to the extremes on either side would be a mistake
– it narrows the field of potential votes available and ignores the key to winning: convincing supporters of the other side that you’re the better bet.
This warning provides Rishi Sunak with an opportunity to really consider what his party is