I suspect that he has come to believe that, even with a leadership election round the corner, the Conservatives cannot become the party he wants them to be.
If he decides for Brexit, he could frame the debate.
It will propose some centralisation, and that isn’t always a bad thing. But Party members on the ground need something back in return.
There may be a strange applicability for the future in the circumstances that led to the Liberals’ sweeping electoral triumph in 1906.
The processs in the safer seats is becoming like speed dating for a marriage that may last 20 years or more.
That’s to say, everything except election-fighting: increasing membership. Candidate selection. Targeting development seats. Growing support among ethnic minority voters.
The row over the Prime Minister’s remarks about local Associations has been mostly concocted. But the need for Party reform is real. We open a ConHome series.
First things first: Party members need more of a say on how money raised is spent.
The Chair of Conservatives for Reform in Europe replies to Paul Goodman’s article of last week arguing the opposite.
We want to ensure that you are not arbitrarily held back because of the colour of your skin, your sexuality or your religious beliefs.
They are using them as a tool for their campaign about public finances.
The number of them wanting to leave come-what-may could be as high as 100 but it could also be under 40.
Cameron’s leadership, the Coalition, Europe. It was meant to be a time of Tory schism. It hasn’t been, so far.
Plus: The turnaround success story of Ebbsfleet Academy. And: the Cecil Parkinson I knew.
At last we could pass a decisive parliamentary vote for cooperative action in Syria, and now lead a reform agenda in the EU which could make way for two-tier membership.