What Tory leadership candidates should learn from the mistakes of Boris Johnson – and Silvio Berlusconi

The Conservative party will elect a new leader, with four candidates still in the running: Kemi Badenoch, James Cleverly, Robert Jenrick and Tom Tugendhat. They are all targeting a party that desperately needs a new direction and the path ahead is far from clear.

Our recent research suggests that the candidates in the coming weeks can learn a lot from two phenomenally successful party leaders of the recent past – but probably more in terms of what not to do.

We looked at Silvio Berlusconi, who was Prime Minister of Italy three times between 1994 and 2011, and Boris Johnson, more briefly Prime Minister of Great Britain from 2019 to 2022. Both were unusual politicians, media-driven leaders who dominated with a combination of three “P’s”: personalization, performance and populism.

As political celebrities, they used and manipulated the media to create endless controversies (much easier for Berlusconi because he owned such a large share of it). At the ballot box, their approach proved to pay off. Berlusconi won three elections and transformed Italian politics, while Johnson won the largest conservative majority since Margaret Thatcher.

But for all their apparent power and opportunity, Berlusconi and Johnson have achieved little lasting change. Both promised national rejuvenation, whether it was a “new Italian miracle” or a “levelling up.” They left office leaving little more in their wake than a string of unfulfilled promises.

The four remaining Tory candidates each show signs of the three Ps. With a selectorate of party members to woo, each has sought to appeal to the populist right on issues of immigration and relations with Europe. Badenoch and Jenrick have created personal appeals that are somewhat bizarrely based on the qualifications of the manufactured working class. With little attention paid to the contest, candidates try to focus on the news agenda in hopes of making an impact.

This path could make things worse for the Conservatives. Johnson and Berlusconi used the media to be spontaneous and prone to blunders, making them appear authentic and anti-establishment. They hung cable cars, insulted minority groups and enjoyed the controversy and shock they caused.

Their media obsession made their governments an endless series of headlines. Johnson drove a tractor through a polystyrene wall to show he would get Brexit done. Berlusconi personally signed a contract with the Italian people on live television, in which he offered a five-point manifesto, promising that he would resign if he achieved fewer than four (reader, he did not achieve them, nor did he resign taken) .

The problem was that the media spectacle became a substitute for actually doing something. Announcements replaced policy, and words replaced actions. This was exacerbated by crises, Berlusconi’s great crash in 2008 and COVID for Johnson 2020. Both events required leaders with seriousness, attention to detail and decisiveness, the opposite of what Berlusconi and Johnson had to offer.

The battle for the Tories has so far been an unedifying scrap for the rest of the party, which is also strong in terms of positioning and headlines. The familiar right-wing touchstones of culture wars, immigration and Brexit show that candidates are still fighting the last election and not concerned with the new politics. They have focused on leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) rather than the cost of living.

Badenoch recently said that “real politics and real leadership is about showing the way and getting other people to follow you,” but did so by strongly voicing his support for Elon Musk, something that puts her at odds with both the public as its own party membership. It’s hard to imagine that her latest comments about overly generous maternity leave could win her any public support.

Are there cleanskins in the building?

Personality politics often proves to be a double-edged sword. When a politician puts himself first, he gets all the attention. But that inevitably means paying attention to all misdeeds and all triumphs.

Berlusconi came to power in 1994 amid a series of controversies. It was even said that, like Trump in 2024, he was seeking political office, mainly to avoid prison.

Berlusconi’s scandals quickly gained momentum, exposing a toxic mix of personal, political and financial improprieties that has its own very long Wikipedia page with (deep breath) “trials and allegations of abuse of office, bribery and corruption of police officers, judges and politicians, conspiracy, defamation, embezzlement, extortion, false accounting, mafia, money laundering, perjury, tax fraud.”

Johnson also brought a series of controversies to Downing Street, including regarding his personal life and the way he financed his lifestyle, as well as Partygate.

Once in power, questions, inquiries and investigations into integrity swirled around their premiership and they slowly came to dominate. Their popularity and poll numbers plummeted with each lurid revelation, causing loyal supporters to distance themselves from the chaos.

It appears the Conservative candidates have not heeded this lesson. They have all tried to personalize their leadership credentials. This has only drawn attention to scandals, from Jenrick’s questionable housing deals to offensive comments Cleverly made about sexual abuse. It is not clear whether Cleverly’s admission that he talks too much, made as an excuse for what he said, is really a useful trait for a future party leader.

The four candidates have seemingly avoided any reflection on the reasons for the Conservatives’ catastrophic election loss in July. There are a few signs that one of them is aware of the need to produce a credible and united opposition party by moving towards the centre.

Berlusconi and Johnson started from much stronger positions than these four, but even they soon discovered that their coalitions – both of voters outside parliament and of MPs inside – were too fragile to hold. The increasingly uneasy partners and supporters lost confidence in both leaders due to their corruption and inaction, as the weak electoral alliances that supported them came under pressure.

Whoever inherits the Conservative leadership must have enough allies across the many fault lines that divide the defeated party. Johnson, and then Liz Truss, had rather superficial support and quickly learned that unhappy parties could be disloyal and quickly rebel.