I posted this thread on Twitter this morning:
At the time of writing it seems very likely that Rishi Sunak will become prime minister today. Some thoughts on what we might expect from him seem appropriate. A thread…..
As I predicted, Johnson pulled out of this race. The suggestion that he was ever in it was never reality confirmed. The claim that he had 100 nominations was almost certainly a lie. His suggestion that he will still be back is just a fantasy. He is finished.
So too, I think, are Penny Mordaunts' chances. I have a fear that she will gain 100 nominations and force a vote, with the racist Tory membership then repeating the Truss fiasco by voting her in against MPs' wishes. That would create more mayhem. But I hope it doubt it'll happen.
So, we will get Sunak. If that happens he has one thing going for him, which is that a majority of Tory MPs might want him in office. That might give a few weeks of stability, at least. Thereafter everything about his premiership looks likely to be grim.
The likelihood that the warring factions in the Tories will unite around Sunak is remote. In an effort to appease them he will accommodate many far right-demands. I expect Braverman to be back. I fear very strongly for human rights. He will buy the Tory members by abusing them.
Economically, he will deliver austerity. I suspect he will keep Hunt in office. They agree on crushing public spending. Fear for the NHS, education, benefits, pensions, public sector employees and so much else. Destruction is their chosen path for public services.
Fear too for borrowers. These two will not challenge the Bank of England plan to increase interest rates with devastating consequences for millions of households, whether in mortgage or rent payments. Businesses will fail and unemployment will rise. This will be Sunak's choice.
What else will happen in this wasteland Sunak will create? Brexit will be pursued. There will be conflict over Northern Ireland.
Scotland's wishes will also be defied as part of a flag waving exercise to prove loyalty to England.
And what there will not be is any policy to tackle the other problems we face, in addition to those Sunak will create all on his own. Covid? Forget it. Climate change? Leave it to the grandchildren. Productivity? For business to solve. And inequality? More, please, he will say.
Anything necessary to address any real issue we have will be sacrificed to austerity.I forecast a terrible two years with Sunak as a result.
But, and I can't stress it enough: there will be wins for him. In particular, if he lasts two years inflation will be down. It will not because of anything he has done or will do. It will just fade away, as it always does.
But do not doubt that in 2024 he will use this as the basis for his claim to re-election, saying all the damage was a necessary price to pay for something that was always going to happen anyway. And people will believe him. Labour will have no easy ride by then.
All those who look at polls now and think Labour is guaranteed 2024 are, I suggest, seriously mistaken. I don't think so. The English like being punished by the wealthy. And large numbers will be persuaded by the claim inflation was the enemy Sunak will have beaten.
So Labour had better have something good to say. Talking about incidental tax changes, which is their current policy line, will not work. Nor will talk of sound money, because Sunak will win that one by 2024. So they really had better say what they will do now.
It's that, or Sunak could destroy vast amounts of value in this country and leave us devastated and still win in 2024 because all Labour would, on current trajectories do is offer more austerity to follow Sunak's whilst saying how sorry they were to do it.
Sunak is a pure neoliberal. He is going to unleash its power to destroy more than any other prime minister to date. But we have an opposition too frightened to use the government's power to create money to unleash the potential in our economy for public good.
If that is the case neoliberalism might win with Sunak despite all the harm he will do, because Labour's wholly inadequate and similarly wholly neoliberal economic policy will permit that.
That is my fear this morning. Without any form of effective economic opposition (and that fairly describes Labour right now) Sunak promises to be the most terrible and simultaneously electorally successful prime minister imaginable. Worry. ENDS
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I fear your analysis is spot on. Labour are using the “ we need to see the books” line to avoid making some clear statements about what they will do differently. Emily Thornberry seemed aware of the need to differentiate Labour this morning on Today however she merely repeated the tactical policy positions which will not address the fundamental issues.
The most revealing thing about the Emily Thornberry interview on this morning’s Today programme was when Nick Robinson asked her with barely concealed contempt, “So what would the Labour party do?”
She responded by saying “If you will give me time to tell you, I will tell you what the Labour party have already said we will do”. She then started to list all the rational and fair proposals the Labour party had proposed.
Within seconds Nick Robinson brought the interview to a car crash end, snarling completely dishonestly, “We have given you the time to tell us, (in reality about ten seconds) and now we must end.”
I repeat this story not because I think it proves that Labour have all the answers, nor because it is some sort of aberration, but rather because it is a perfect example of the great difficulty that any views that are not right-wing orthodoxy have of ever being heard in the national conversation, let alone being listened to and then rationally explored.
I head some of the interviews as I did Starmer yesterday, who likewise said nothing. Sure, Kuenssberg and Robinson interrupt, bit so would I someone who says nothing
Labour remain utterly hopeless
Sorry, but unless you can tell me what the policy is (and no one knows it) then they are.
You wrote: ‘Without any form of effective economic opposition…’ Is there going to be any opposition to the ending of effective protest?
The Police Bill has gone through all stages in the Commons. It’s Second Reading in the Lords is due in seven days’ time (1 November). After which, protest defined by the bill as acts causing “serious disruption to two or more individuals, or to an organisation” will be illegal.
As Monbiot wrote ‘Given that the Police Act redefined “serious disruption” to include noise, this means, in effect, all meaningful protest.’ https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/19/van-gogh-sunflowers-just-stop-oil-tactics
Agreed
I have been regularly retweeting George
This may well be the tories final undoing – if there is a winter of discontent (& this seems to be on the cards – given Sunak & his financial “views”) then I can see people taking to the streets, civil disobedience etc etc. The police will act in their usual brainless manner & things will accelerate. Would not be surprised to see the Uk tearing itself to pieces.
Drakeford was interesting in the Sennedd the other week – with the Tories trying to pin on him NHS Wales problems – he was shaking with anger at the hypocrisy of the tories (in fairness they do buy the stuff wholesale). I give Sunak a couple of months – max.
Grant Shapps was asked by Sky News if it was reasonable to have four Prime Ministers in three years without a general election. Shapps conceded it was unusual; “I’ll give you that”. Well, that’s all right then.
Enough MPs will, as you suggest Richard, probably rally round Sunak (notice how two thirds of the parliamentary party didn’t support him, until Sunak was a shoo-in); and will now shoo him in to Downing Street, if they can block out the membership; an imminent hanging concentrates the mind wonderfully. Leadsom, however is still claiming Penny Mordaunt can give us “stability”. Who on earth does she think destabilised Britain? Penny Mordaunt sat in Lizz Truss’s Cabinet! The casual insult to the public’s intelligence this absurd misrepresentation of the facts is quite breathtaking, even for a Conservative; but that is mainstream Conservatism in a nutshell. Say anything – Johnson taught them that, and it seems to work.
Under Sunak we will now have Government on the strict Goldman Sachs model: Britain is now an offshore subsidiary of the investment banking and hedge fund industry. That will go well; the Goldman Sachs tendency has worked so well over the last twelve years. Look how successful Britain now is; a veritable triumph for Conservatism. We should be celebrating. Guess who will benefit from the consequences of the Conservatives remaining in power?
Sunak will not even unite the Conservative Party; that ship has long sailed. Neither Johnson nor Sunak are unifying candidates; they are part and parcel of the problem. We have had twelve years of Conservative austerity and a failed economic ideology; no growth, rising poverty and now rising interest rates. Prepare for more of the same. Endlessly; but it is still nothing to do with the Conservatives, after all – they are just the Government. It is all the Opposition’s fault. The British electorate may yet persuade themselves their misery is all for the best; or it is all someone else’s fault; probably Labour, for something that happened twenty or even forty years ago, or the SNP for not just giving up, and disappearing altogether; or immigrants: Oh, and don’t mention Brexit. Brexit is done, and Brexit has done Britain. That’ll fix it.
Sorry to disagree but high energy prices and increased mortgage rates and failing NHS will not be gone by the time of the next election and there is also the powerful idea that “it is time for a change” which should help Labour
They will still be hgh
But inflation will not be
And so he will claim he won
Spot on Richard. Very worrying.
There are some out there who I think believe that a lot of what Starmer, Reeves and the front bench are saying on the economy is merely messaging in a way palatable to business and supposed swing voters. Same around their messaging on the Police Act (his LBC interview this morning was grim listening on this front) and generally on immigration. That they have to say these things in order to get elected but once they do, out will come the progressive spending on public services and green infrastructure and he’ll reverse all the human rights abusing laws the Tories have rammed through.
Let’s leave aside the fact if they are lying about what they’d do, the public tend to really resent being lied to.
I’m of the opinion you believe what they are telling you and that if they are saying this to get the backing of the right wing press, big business and swing voters then they will be forced to stick to those things in order to retain power.
I see no reason not to take them at face value
I think they mean exactly what they say
Sorry, but I see nothing to make me think otherwise
What’s your evidence for thinking that Starmer might be more progressive than he appears?
The reason I find this hard to believe is that his positions are mostly quite unpopular ones. He’s also gone after the progressive wing of the Labour party with gleeful viciousness.
I think that far from this being an obviously winning political strategy, his centrist strategy actually please very few and makes him look unimaginative and weak.
His relative success in the polls can be more than explained solely by the complete shit show that is the Tory party right now. He’s just been lucky.
I agree with you entirely.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I think those believing he’ll become more left wing once he wins power are naive in the extreme.
[…] Sunak will be terrible, and unless Labour changes tack he could win despite that Richard Murphy, Tax Research UK […]
The person running this particular site (Naked Capitalism) is quite clearly demented. You might want to consider removing it since it is clear that he sees Ukraine as the agressor and he is clearly pro-Russian. A very nasty piece of work by any standards.
I have no control at all
What a comically bad take on “Naked Capitalism” and what’s worse you don’t even know the slightest thing about it nor its writers.
I have been living in the hope that at some stage Labour might step up.
I thought that the current Police/public order bill might have been a good moment for Labour to stand up and say no more.
What we have instead, or so it seems, is collusion. They may differ on the economy, but not by much and they certainly don’t differ when it comes to democracy.
Collusion indeed – especially on democracy where Starmer’s charge sheet is one of a recidivist offender.
Support for strikers – bans Shadow Cabinet from even appearing on picket lines – Failed
Scottish referendum for which there are multiple democractic mandates – denied – Failed
PR instead of FPTP – refuses to support even when backed by conference AND Unions – Failed
Police/public order bill – feeble in HoC and today whooping it up for big senetnces for road block protesters – Failed
If this is his reocrd on core democratic issues – there’s damn all chance he’ll be any use as an agent of economic change. Oh – and he’s just gone out of his way to double down on Labour NOT touching rejoining the EU, for which there is now a well established and rising majoirty support – even in England – and another report today that without rejoining that market, the so-called ‘U’ K is economically doomed.
What is the point of Starmer’s ‘Labour’ Party? Anybody?
The only answer, I’m afraid, is to provide careers and expense accounts for ‘Labour’ politicians loyal to the Party leadership. So, not much difference from the Tories.
Get Scotland out of here – please, and the sooner the better. We’ve a much better chance of slipping the neo-liberal dogmatists (‘Growth Commission’ – indeed!) on our own – and we’ll start from a much better social and political base.
Nigel wrote “Get Scotland out of here – please, and the sooner the better.” Given the growing media acceptance that Brexit was a colossal mistake (something which has only recently become apparent), Scotland better get a move on to extricate itself from the failing UK before the English public revokes its Brexit obsession and starts to demand closer association with the EU.
Brexit failure and the undemocratic nature of UK politics make a strong argument for independence, but absent Brexit and the case for independence is weakened, especially as it’s doubtful whether enough of the English electorate actually accept that UK politics is undemocratic.
I don’t disagree with what you say – if we look to end 1980s – it was clear that the tories would run out of steam – those wanting a political career hopped into the Labour party, which was in transition becoming under Kinnock quasi-Tory-lite and under B.Liar fully tory-lite.
We can see a similar process now, albeit with the hiccup of the Corbyn years – with tories embedded in the Liebore administration making sure it was short. Starmer is now annointed as the “safe pair of hands” & Reeves is the continuity candidate to keep the UK’s financial reptiles in the stlye to which they have grown accustomed. The media is unreformed & has more or less decided that Starmer & co is OK.
At the risk of repeating myself: it is no different to the latter part of Ragged Trousered Philanthropists – in which the 1906 election was parodied – by that point the broad outline of the media (absent TV) was laid – the Daily Mail was proto-facist (although the term had yet to be invented), the Daily Telegraph was one stop short of Barking and the Times was 100% establishment.
I do not blame Scotland wanting to leave & the best of luck if you do. However, I predict serious social unrest.
Nothing to disagree with here at all – fully agreed.
Toynbee, as much as she criticised Sunak, she still does not seem to ‘get’ MMT. What is her difficulty here?
Oh, the Tories will easily win the next election. Wait and see. They have plenty of time to woo the public with whatever magic and flimflammery they and their pals in the media can come up with.
There is always the possibility that Labour is guarding its plans until after it is elected, otherwise it is the target of the usual “loony left” insults. Get the gig first, then you can play your own tunes.
Do you trust a party that won’t tell the truth?
Don’t you think that labour needs the loony left votes as much as those in the centre?
One problem with Starmer is he thinks he can do without them. Lots of them won’t be doorstepping for votes next election, which will be a big problem. There are only so many constituencies that his acolytes can go to.
I take exception to the term “loony left”. Who are they.? I resigned my membership of the Labour Party when Corbyn was denied the Whip. I am an unashamed socialist. Every Labour membership card bears the legend ” The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party”. The 2017 manifesto was by no means extreme. The 1945 Manifesto was far more radical . The plans in the document are common place in Northern Europe.. The assassination was carefully planned and brutally carried out. Most of it was visceral lies. He was accused of wanting to get rid of Western capitalism. A lie. The charge of anti semitism was proposterous. There is no real proof he was antisemitic. His whole career has been anti racist. The Aljazeera documentary and the Forde Report have blasted the accusations out of the water. The Aljazeera report should have been banner headlines everywhere. He was criticized for meeting the IRA yet just a few weeks after becoming PM Blair was holding talks with the IRA. That lead to the Good Friday agreement. Convicted murderers were released from prison. Where was the criticism? If Labour don’t adopt a radical manifesto they may attain office but not for long. Tories will be back. Voters need more than promises of sound money and fiscal prudence. They don’t understand what they mean. What they want is the replacement of fear with hope and security. People make decisions on emotion. Labour must give them that hope.
Mike, the person running Naked Capitalism is a female going by the nom de plume of Yves Smith. She is assisted by Lambert Strether and others. You don’t need to know more, do you.
Was listening to the Bow Group mutterings today. They want an election because as far as they are concerned there has not been a conservative government since Thatcher. I wonder at what point the Tories become fractured enough that the party will finally split and we can gladly cast the right off into the open ocean.
Could someone remind me – what is the status of Dishi Rishi’s Green Card? Is he still signed up to becoming a US city?!
Cancelled
It’s been awful watching the media chiding Labour(ed) on the fact that the Tories have now put a Hindu into No.10 and then watching their eye lids fluttering searching for an answer.
Hindu or not, Sunak was not democratically elected. I could not give a jot about what colour, ethnicity etc the PM is as long as I’ve been able to vote for them if I think he/she is the right person for the job. He’s not my prime minister.
And the gushing about his intellect on R4 early this morning! The intellect that gave us Eat Out to Help Out and a rise in Covid infections!!
But still the media does not get that the Tory party is the party of The Rich. and, if you are rich, it does not matter what colour you are, it does not matter if you are Russian – you could have an eye in the middle of your forehead and walk around on cloven hooves – no, none of that would matter to the Tory party if you had a big wad.
Wealth makes the Tories blind to such small issues as race, colour etc., because wealth is THE social leveller for them. Even issues of national security can be overlooked, can’t they Boris?
All that has happened is that we’ve got rid of the Tufton Street candidate and replaced It with the the City of London candidate.
Can someone tell me the fundamental difference? No taxing of the City’s excess profits from the drop in value of the pound then? Oh no!
And all this identity politics guff – a new relationship with India, a Hindu in No.10 representing progress etc.
What has to be remembered is not that Sunak is a Hindu, or Asian even; he’s a Tory – another one selected not elected. Another nasty, malfunctioning human being runs the country. Great! How much of him is truly Hindu and how much of him is Tory has yet to be seen. Let’s see what his policies are like shall we?
And Labour(ed) has no answer to any of this to offer at all and in doing so, normalises it.
Your comment on candidate replacement is correct
Would you agree that the OBR was set up by Osbourne in oder to entrench neoliberalism and the household analogy as the guiding principles of the economy and to squash any hint of heterodoxy? Should it be abolished?
Yes and yes