Not Howard’s end

The Spectator appears as the electorate goes to the polls, and any analysis of the outcome must therefore be hypothetical. Some points can be made with assurance. The first is that if Michael Howard wins, he will be rated a miracle-worker. Never in the history of magic would so colossal a rabbit have been pulled from such a battered old hat. A victory for Howard would be a stunning vindication of his courage, resilience, patience, powers of organisation and penchant for spasmodic acts of apodeictic ruthlessness.

Whatever happens this Thursday, the Conservative party owes Michael Howard a huge debt of thanks. At an age when his colleagues retire to wallow in their directorships, he has taken the fight to the enemy, often single-handed. He has soaked up the hysterical abuse of the BBC and left-liberal media. He has imposed discipline, on the good old principle of oderint dum metuant. And if Michael Howard loses — no matter by how much — his toughness is one of the reasons that it would be the best thing for the party and indeed the country if he were to remain in place for as long as it takes to draw the true conclusions of a third Conservative defeat. Howard must stay.

If the Tories lose, there will be the usual gleeful post-mortem. It will be asserted that the Tories once again contrived to sound nasty, and that the campaign focused too much on immigration. This was not an easy choice for Mr Howard. There were certainly voters who felt turned off by a party that seemed xenophobic; but then there were also a great many who felt angry and disfranchised because no politicians seemed to be addressing this question.