By Eric Vandenbroeck
and co-workers
Political Chaos And The Long Shadow Of
Brexit
When Rishi Sunak
stood in front of the portable lectern outside No. 10 Downing Street to make
his first statement as prime minister, it marked a watershed in many ways. At
42, he is the youngest prime minister in modern British history; he is also the
first person of color to hold the post and the first
Hindu. But the significance goes beyond these symbolic attributes: he
represents a possible return to a stable government after 44 days of
unrelenting crisis under his predecessor, Liz Truss, and after six years of
political drama.
Truss is an unusual political
character: she lacks charisma or force of persuasion and yet still identifies
as a disruptor. Ultimately, however, all she disrupted was her premiership,
causing a catastrophe for the Tories. The Conservative Party is one of the
world’s most successful political organizations. Still, it is now in danger of not just
losing power in the next general election but fracturing beyond repair. The
task of rescuing his country and his party now falls to Sunak.
The downfall of Truss
has been a significant strain on a country already feeling the cost of the
economic and political uncertainty that has accumulated over the six
years since the June 2016 vote to leave the EU. The continual disruptions in
British leadership have rocked the United Kingdom’s standing worldwide. The
damage is not irreversible but will take effort to repair. The government needs
to show that it is still capable of consistency and coherence. It can begin by
mending its tattered relations with Europe.
How The Lettuce Won
Truss’s exit had
seemed inevitable almost from the moment she took office. The turmoil in
currency and bond markets following Truss’s “mini-budget” pushed up interest
rates and, in doing so, led to a spike in mortgage rates for every person and
business in the country. In response, Truss fired Kwasi Kwarteng as her
chancellor after only a few weeks on the job and appointed Jeremy Hunt to
replace him. In a joke reported worldwide, the tabloid The Daily Star ran
a picture of a head of lettuce, asking whether the prime minister would last
longer than the vegetable. She didn’t.
Enough of her MPs
advised her to step down that she could not have acted as prime minister or
gotten legislation through Parliament. That is how the famously uncodified
constitution of the British parliamentary system is supposed to work. Voters
pick a party, not a prime minister; parties have the right to change their
leader between general elections. The Conservative Party exercised the right to do this again, and Sunak
emerged as the winner.
But he still has to
battle the question of legitimacy. He is the third prime minister in 2022 (as
well as the fifth in six years), and the third since the last general election
in 2019. Many voters—and the Labour opposition—claim that Sunak lacks a mandate
for his policies and should call an election now. It remains to be seen whether
he can use the Tory majority in the House of Commons to get his legislation
through and win the market's approval. Cautiously, the markets are now bringing
interest rates down. However, they are still slightly above pre-Truss levels,
showing how jangled the world is in its expectations of the United
Kingdom and the enduring cost of those six weeks that Truss was in office.
Is The Party Over?
Of all the
destruction wrought by Truss, some of the greatest has been on her party's
reputation. Pollsters reckon Labour might get the kind of landslide it secured
in 1997 under Tony Blair if a vote were held now. But the Conservatives still
have a hefty majority; only if the party now fails to come behind Sunak with
enough unity to enable him to pass legislation and govern will the party be
forced to call a general election.
At least at this
point, that would amount to near obliteration of the party. The question the
Conservatives face is how to act like a party again, representing a clear
philosophy and a set of values around which voters and members of Parliament
can cohere. Long associated in voters’ minds with economic prudence, concern
for national finances, and the pursuit of balanced budgets, the party hitched
itself briefly to a high-spending, tax-cutting philosophy. Truss made tax cuts
and spending her priorities; her predecessor, Boris Johnson, had been leaning
that way before his spectacular implosion earlier this year. A clash over
economic principles is why Sunak gave for quitting as Johnson’s chancellor in
July, triggering the cascade of resignations that forced Johnson out. Hunt has
ripped up Truss’s strategy as chancellor and chief finance minister, apparently
returning to more conventional Conservative principles.
Finding a coherent
philosophy has been considerably more complex since Brexit. The turmoil of
the past six years may likely have arisen from the immensely close vote in
2016, which overturned decades-long relationships with the country’s closest
trading partners. Brexit has required politicians to profess what is not true:
that the British-EU rift—which adds paperwork, time, expense, and uncertainty
to trading relationships and the ability of people, goods, services, and
capital to flow back and forth across the border—would result in an economic
boom.
Brexit did not come
out of the blue; it reflected divisions between parts of the country. Some of
the discord arose from resentment of London’s glittering, cosmopolitan
supremacy in national life. Some stemmed from the chasm that had opened between
property owners and those without assets since the financial crisis of
2008; the practice of quantitative easing pushed up the value of houses but
left what is now called “Generation Rent” unable to move out of their parent's
homes at all, let alone afford a home of their own. Above all, perhaps, it
reflected anger at immigration, particularly outside the booming southeast,
where a ready supply of workers from the EU has long propped up the
restaurant and hotel industry and London’s construction boom. Immigration is a
subject that both main political parties still struggle to address with any
sense of control or plan about which people the country needs and wants to
attract.
On top of
that, Brexit brought new strains to the union of four nations,
exacerbating the differences that Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland already
felt from the English giant at the heart of the kingdom. The people of Scotland
and Northern Ireland had already voted heavily to stay in the EU. Those in Wales
voted narrowly to leave despite being a big recipient of EU development grants.
Still, they became deeply concerned about whether the British government would
stick to its pledges to maintain support for farming.
The COVID-19 pandemic
brought more tension. The four regions had the
power to set their own lockdown rules, and the government of Wales, led by
First Minister Mark Drakeford, effectively shut the border with England for the
first time in hundreds of years. Essential travel only was permitted over the
bridges and roads that generally link the highly integrated economies of
England and Wales. At certain points during the pandemic, pubs on the English
side could open, but those a few yards away on the Welsh side could not.
Drakeford’s measures, however, were trendy in Wales. Meanwhile, Nicola
Sturgeon, the first minister of Scotland, tried to upstage the government in
London with a stream of announcements over the frequently changing lockdown
rules, sometimes just a few hours earlier and with minor differences,
which strained the consultation process between the two governments.
In the end, it was the
lockdown restraints that led to the departure of Johnson. Reluctant to impose
them on the country, he proved unwilling or unable to impose them on himself,
and the torrent of revelations about parties and gatherings in Downing
Street—when the public had been prevented from gathering at funerals or
weddings—undermined his ability to lead.
Johnson's downfall is
its political tragedy, flaws of character exposed by exceptional demands—although
Johnson’s critics argued that even aside from the pandemic, his rhetoric never
compensated for his lack of the basic disciplines of running a government. But
Johnson’s rise illustrated the underlying political difficulty facing all parties
in the United Kingdom: it is becoming ever harder for a single big political
party to span all the country’s deep social divisions. Johnson
managed it through force of personality, relentless boosterism, and a fluid set
of political principles that created a coalition among enough voters to give
his party a majority. But even before the pandemic, the party’s inconsistencies
were becoming exposed. It was hard, for example, for the Conservatives to court
the poorer northeast, which voted heavily for Brexit, and their traditional
bedrock of support in the affluent southeast, which did not.
Johnson succeeded in the December 2019 election,
whereas Theresa May, who led the party from 2016 to 2019, failed. She struggled
to get a majority even within her own Cabinet, let alone among her MPs, for her
preferred version of Brexit, which leaned toward a clear break from the single
market garnished with detailed compromises. It satisfied neither the purist
Brexit tribe nor those who feared the economic hit of leaving.
But the problem of
leading a complex country dominated by London and containing people with widely
differing views and an increasingly strong desire for regional identity is bigger
than May, Johnson, or Truss. That has given new fuel to that perpetual
suggestion always hovering at the edge of British politics—whether it is time
to scrap the “first past the post” electoral system in favor
of a version of proportional representation. Its advocates say that would
enable the Conservatives to isolate the hard-Brexit voters in a different party
and avoid the Conservatives being tugged continually to the right to
accommodate them. Its critics say it would make little difference to the
stability of parties or governments because it would generate coalitions where
these voices still played a decisive part. It is possible, though, that a
change of the voting system would better represent the complexity of modern
Britain and give more voters, at a time of skepticism
about the value of government, a sense that their vote counted.
Labour has its
version of these problems in appealing to voters that span the United Kingdom’s
many regions and ethnicities. Keir Starmer, the
Labour leader, has spent much of his time battling hard-left elements within
his party. But having struggled for years to open up a single-digit lead in the
polls, the Labour party is now enjoying an undreamed edge over the
Conservatives and the possibility of an outright majority. No calls for
proportional representation will come from there at this moment.
Restoring Trust
Sunak now steps into
this mess. As he does, it is important to recognize that some of the
country’s institutions have been strengthened by the Truss turmoil. Parliament
has done its job in holding a leader to account and enforcing the principle
that governments must explain where they will get the money they plan to
spend. Truss’s failure to do that was the reason the markets and members of
Parliament rebelled at her budget. It will be a long time before a prime
minister tries, as Truss did, to avoid the comments of the Office for Budget
Responsibility, the independent watchdog of the national finances, and push
through an irresponsible but politically attractive spending and tax plan.
The Bank of England
has retained its independence and the goal of tackling inflation in the face of
Truss’s apparent desire to give it a second objective of targeting growth, which
could have made defeating inflation even harder. It is important that the bank
continues to do that because of the threat that inflation, once embedded, poses
to people’s everyday lives as well as the governability of the country. Fear of
inflation is already pushing up wage demands and triggering strikes. Yet there
are also calls for the bank to justify its actions more clearly; there is more
public awareness in times of high-interest rates that the decisions of its unelected
technocrats have a huge impact on people’s lives. Sunak needs to be sensitive
to that in explaining the importance of the bank’s independence and the need to
beat inflation quickly.
Moving Into No 10
Any wider plan by
Sunak for restoring confidence starts at home, with a credible account of taxes
and public spending. All the choices are tough, as Hunt has already warned.
Like many democracies with aging populations, the United Kingdom does not have
the money for the public services that people want. On top of that, however,
the country faces rising costs from the National Health Service, where waiting
times for treatment are at record highs.
Sunak will also need
a plan for curbing energy costs, which are a source of fear and hardship for
many people. Hunt has pledged to extend the cap on energy bills that Truss introduced in September. He has said that
he will look for ways to shield the poorest people from high energy costs,
which would be a sensible modification of the policy. At the moment, the
benefit goes to every household regardless of income or wealth. Beyond that,
Sunak will have to fashion a coherent energy policy out of the motley
assembly of initiatives that his predecessors have assembled. New nuclear
stations are years behind desired plans in their construction; he needs to
decide whether to commission more—and how to pay for them, given the new
concern about taking funding from Chinese companies. Fracking for natural gas
is hugely contentious within Parliament, both because of local fears and
because it offends the United Kingdom’s climate change commitments; Sunak must
decide whether the need for cheaper supplies independent of Russian gas
outweighs this controversy, and, if so, see if he can build the support in
Parliament. To show a commitment to the United Kingdom’s climate change
targets, he might consider reversing Truss’s reported direction to King
Charles III not to attend the UN Climate conference known as COP 27 in
Egypt in November.
Although the
credibility of the government at home needs to be the basis for repairing the
United Kingdom’s reputation abroad, Sunak will also have to refashion some of
its key relationships. On this, the road leads first to Europe, given how close
the trading and cultural ties still are. The priority is to come to a
resolution on Northern Ireland in which both sides say they are close to a
series of compromises that will let most goods traded between Northern Ireland
and the mainland flow without onerous checks. That is also the bare minimum for
improving relations with the United States, where the Biden
administration has made clear that it wants an end to strains that could
jeopardize peace in the province. Talks with the EU on whether there are
measures to improve the passage of people, goods, services, and capital with
the United Kingdom—the EU’s “four freedoms”—might become more feasible if
the question of Northern Ireland is resolved. But these issues will remain
difficult for years; the EU is alert and unsympathetic to British attempts to
secure some of the benefits of being part of the single market without
accepting its constraints.
Immigration—including
students and visa workers—remains hugely contentious in the Conservative and
Labour Parties. Sunak’s victory was greeted with huge delight in India,
including by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who offered his
wishes to “the ‘living
bridge’ of UK Indians.” But Sunak may test that affection by reappointing
Suella Braverman as home secretary. She provoked
fury in that post under Truss by singling Indian migrants for overstaying their
visas.
In
his recent call with Biden, the United Kingdom’s support for Ukraine and
counter China may offer Sunak the most solid basis to rebuild an international
reputation. Johnson, who loved appearing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr
Zelensky on camera, staked out this position, sending weapons and aid from the
start of the war. That support has reinforced London’s standing with its
allies. It has also reasserted the United Kingdom’s commitment to defending
freedom and protecting sovereignty and the rule of law. Those are the country’s
core values and the basis of its standing in the world. The country will be in
an even better position to argue for them if its prime minister proves capable
of lasting a full term in office.
For updates click hompage here