Firm hand of the 1922 ushers party leader towards the exit
When the moment she had been dreading finally came, Theresa May raged against the dying of the light.
The Conservative Party’s most powerful backbenchers had just made it clear that her premiership was at its end, but the Prime Minister pleaded with them to be given more time.
Tears welled in her eyes as she made her argument for just a little longer in Downing Street. She dabbed at her nose with a handkerchief. Yet the sympathy and patience of the 1922 Committee had run out.
“She voiced her view about Brexit, which she regards as a debt of honour,” said one of those present. “She was emotional – a lot more emotional than I have ever seen her before.
“There was a bit of tearing but she quickly got back to a strong view about what needs to be done.” What needed to be done, however, was for her to leave No10 within the next six weeks, and preferably sooner.
“It was a very frank discussion,” Sir Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 Committee said later, confirming in his own understated way just how much tension was in the room. “I tried to make sure that all the views represented on the executive were expressed and we had a very frank exchange with the Prime Minister.”
In the next hour, Mrs May and the MPS hammered out a deal that means she will join Sir Graham and Brandon Lewis, the party chairman, in the first week of June to agree a timetable for the election of her successor.
In practical terms, it means Mrs May must resign by the end of June to allow time for a leadership election to run its course before Parliament rises for the summer. She would stay in Downing Street until her successor was appointed, giving the new prime minister the summer recess to plan and organise before the party conference at the end of September.
It was not the result Mrs May had hoped for when the meeting began. As the executive of the 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers – the infamous “men in grey suits” – filed into the Prime Minister’s office behind the Speaker’s chair in the Commons at 11.30am, Mrs May tried to project power by ranging her most senior
aides around her. Alongside Mrs May was Julian Smith, the Chief Whip, Brandon Lewis, the party chairman, Andrew Bowie, her parliamentary private secretary and a private secretary to take notes of the meeting.
For months now, though, power has been nothing more than an illusion in Downing Street as the Prime Minister suffered defeat after defeat, paralysed by the Brexit conundrum she herself had constructed.
Sir Graham, who had always given her the benefit of the doubt, was joined by 16 other members of the 18-strong executive: only John Lamont, the MP for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, was absent through a pre-arranged visit.
Mrs May bought herself a little extra time in March when she survived a hostile meeting of the full committee by promising to quit once the Brexit “divorce” deal was voted through.
A week ago, when Sir Graham gave her 24 hours to set out the “road map” of her departure, she managed to kick her own personal can a few yards further down the road by agreeing to yesterday’s meeting.
Then on Tuesday she tried to pull another trick by announcing she would put the Withdrawal Agreement Bill – the legislation allowing Britain to leave the EU with a Brexit deal
– to a vote in Parliament in the first week of June.
Surely, she told the MPS, discussions on her future should wait until after then?
This time, however, the backbenchers would allow no more prevarication. Regardless of whether or not her Bill passes, a leadership election would need to be announced in time to get a new leader in place before the summer recess.
One of those present said Mrs May argued for more time, saying she did not want her departure to be linked to the defeat of the Bill as it would give MPS an incentive to vote it down. Another said: “What we don’t want is her saying, ‘OK, I will keep going, keep going and keep going’ and then we will start trying to elect a new party leader in the autumn. That is too late. We are not having that. We made clear we want to complete the parliamentary processes of electing a new leader before we rise for the summer. It was made clear that the minimum period of time given the field for that to happen would be three weeks – which takes us to the end of June at the latest.”
One member said: “We invited her to outline her position then we made comments and asked questions. It is fair to say strong views were expressed about the leadership, what point she will vacate it and the process of getting the Withdrawal Agreement through.”
Mrs May was told that after a vote is held on the Withdrawal Agreement Bill – expected to be on June 5 – she must agree a timetable for the election of her replacement.
The source said: “That may be sooner or later depending on what the outcome is of that second reading.” She was told: “You can continue as Prime Minister, we can then get on with electing a party leader when there is a vacancy.”
After the meeting, the executive retired to a room on Parliament’s lower ministerial corridor, close to the Prime Minister’s office, to finalise the details of her future in her absence.
It was left to Sir Graham to put out a statement announcing that Mrs May would “agree a timetable for the election of a new leader” once the vote on the Brexit Bill had been held.
As Mrs May was escorted to her waiting car by a close protection officer and a chauffeur, she could reflect on one tiny consolation: by staying in office until next month she will have outlasted Gordon Brown’s term in office of two years and 319 days – but only just.
‘We made clear we want to complete the parliamentary processes of electing a new leader before we rise for the summer’