The race for leadership within the Conservative Party has taken a dramatic turn, with a new “dossier” surfacing that targets one of the candidates, James Cleverly.

The document, filled with claims and half-baked allegations, has been making rounds, reportedly commissioned by a rival or a third party seeking to manipulate the contest. Although the Conservative Party has taken measures to ensure a clean race, it appears backroom tactics are still in play.

To promote integrity, the party had introduced a “yellow card” system aimed at discouraging direct attacks between candidates. Under this system, public warnings will be issued to any participant seen engaging in mudslinging.

Despite these efforts, Cleverly seems to have been caught in the crossfire from an anonymous adversary, as the dossier emerged with allegations ranging from his business career exaggerations to his connections with Colfe’s, a private school in Southeast London.

What makes this dossier particularly curious is that it contains no groundbreaking revelations or damning evidence. Instead, it features trivia, such as Cleverly’s participation in school plays and a light-hearted description of a geography field trip from 1987.

According to the trip’s parody write-up, “Everybody was jolly chuffed because all of our rooms were within sneezing distance of everybody else – except for J Cleverly who was banished to the tower because his boots were wet.”

Opposition Research Escalates Behind Closed Doors

The firm responsible for the dossier has refused to name its client, citing confidentiality agreements, but the timing is raising questions about its origin.

Cleverly is currently third in the Tory leadership race, trailing behind Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch, while sharing the position with Tom Tugendhat.

In response to the circulation of the dossier, a source close to Cleverly’s campaign remarked, “You only try to do a hit job on people you’re scared of. We wish them well.”

Cleverly’s spokesperson also emphasized that their campaign is committed to running cleanly. “James is running a clean campaign and will continue to do so,” the spokesperson asserted. Meanwhile, spokespeople from Jenrick, Badenoch, and Tugendhat firmly denied any connection to the dossier.

In political circles, “opposition research” is a common tactic in US campaigns but is less prevalent in the UK. However, one insider within the opposition research industry mentioned that such activity is not unusual in British Tory leadership races, often initiated by those who might not even be direct competitors. Instead, corporate or political third parties might commission these projects with their own agendas in mind.

While the Conservative Party’s rules officially prohibit “blue-on-blue” attacks, the rise of these covert tactics suggests that some candidates’ backers may be circumventing the system.

The higher campaign spending limits — up to £400,000 — may have also played a role in facilitating such aggressive strategies.

Bob Blackman, the chair of the Conservative 1922 Committee, which oversees the leadership contest, has warned candidates to adhere to party guidelines. He reiterated that any candidate who indulges in personal attacks will be issued a “yellow card” and publicly rebuked.

“Constant backbiting and attacking colleagues during the last parliament was a key reason why the party did so badly in the general election,” Blackman said, underscoring the need for decorum.

As the race intensifies, the party is keen to avoid further infighting, mindful of how internal conflicts have affected previous elections. Blackman has stated his intention to step in if necessary, issuing public warnings to candidates who violate the rules.

“If a yellow card is issued and a statement made to the public and the members, that a candidate has infringed on the rules, that will be extremely detrimental to their chances of getting elected.”
Bob Blackman

As such, one thing is certain – shadowy political strategies remain alive and well in this high-stakes Tory contest.