I wrote yesterday that:
In fairness to the Tories, it looks quite likely that they will split over [Rwanda]. The possibility that the supposed most effective electoral machine in democratic history might collapse under the weight of its own in-fighting looks to be very real. It could happen soon. The likelihood that the date of the next election is not Sunak's to choose is growing as he begins to lose his party's support in the Commons.
When doing so, I did not expect a ministerial resignation before the day was out.
Nor did I expect that the resignation would come because the already deeply offensive Rwanda Bill, published yesterday afternoon, was not extreme enough.
Sunak looks like a prime minister with a decidedly short sell-by date this morning.
Any realistic appraisal of his options would seem to require consideration of resignation, his sacking by his own party, or the calling of an election as a desperate way out of the mess that he is in - as he could do. But does he have the chance to make it into office until next October? I think that looks to be very unlikely. Frankly, May looks to be optimistic.
I am not going to predict what happens next. No one knows. But what can be said is that the Tories are now so out of control that they have no real chance of passing legislation any more. That might be true in the Commons, and it is almost certainly the case in the Lords, which can now use the twelve-month delay available to them on almost any law to prevent any controversial proposal from being enacted before an election. In other words, we are in a state of government paralysis. But given the state of the government that we have, that might be no bad thing.
And remember that all this is about seeking to deport a few hundred, at most, people to Rwanda out of the 80,000 or so people awaiting asylum decisions. In other words, it is all about an issue that has no real implications at all, unless your whole purpose is to divide society, which is exactly what fascists seek to do.
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:
Whoops typo Richard……. Commo0ns
Corrected. Thanks
I am unclear what Sunak’s personal aims are? Sure, nice to be PM but is it really worth all the aggro? Also, what about legacy?
“Managed the ferrets in the sack that are the Tory Party as best he could” may get some short term respect within Westminster but historians will dismiss it as irrelevant.
“Took a principled stand on Rule of Law and decency by calling a confidence vote on policy” would be much better…. but that ship has sailed with the publication of the Rwanda Bill; it is too far beyond the pale already.
I just don’t understand.
He is like Cameron
He wanted the job because he was told he ‘was worth it’.
He has clearly never known why.
And just like Cameron has been proved spectacularly wrong in their self-assesment – both being signal example of St Paul’s description of those who lack charity (definitely!) or self awareness, as being “resounding gong or a clanging cymbal” = a saying commonly applied in 1st century Greek to loud-mouthed braggarts and empty-headed idiots. Need I say more?
Meanwhile the NHS struggles, climate change accelerates, infrastructure collapses, the economy flatlines – need I go on.
And all the Tories can do is play performative politics with the lives of 20-30 thousand migrants, most of them fleeing conflict and most of who would be granted asylum. Just whom do they think gets excited by this stuff? Is the British public that callous and easily fooled?
Is the British public that callous and easily fooled?
Our MPs most decidedly are.
“about an issue that has no real implications at all”, except that once you’ve removed civil and human rights for one set of people, you’ve removed them for everyone?
In that sense, yes of oourse you are right
I was referring to the Rwanda policy in isolation
Some political commentators were saying last night that if Sunak makes the vote on the Rwanda bill a confidence vote, the right will vote for him and lob in letters of no confidence to the 1922 Committee the following day, and if it’s not a confidence vote and the right vote it down, he may be doomed anyway.
Having watched the press conference I would say he’s doomed
Doomed? Good. Should never have been PM in the first place, just like Truss and Johnson and Cameron.
But what replaces him?
Who knows?
Braverman thinks Braverman
The Guardian is reporting that Sunak is calling a surprise Press Conference at 11:00. Please let it be him be calling a GE on a ‘back me or sack me’ basis.
I have no more time than most here for Starmer’s labour, but for the love of God, this appalling “government” needs to go.
Nice to see the roasting Robinson gave the loathsome Braverman on the Today program.
The Tories are in meltdown and Sunak knows it
I get a strong sense that both Robinson and Hussein are thoroughly fed up with having to deal with the evasion, dishonesty and just plain unpleasantness of the current crop of Tory politicians. That and the Tories unremitting hostility to the BBC, and interference from the top.
Frankly Robin, can you blame them? The sheer awfulness of the 25th rate riff raff in this “government” would be difficult for any interviewer to deal with. And as you say, since these clowns have got it in for the BBC any BBC employee might as well go full in on them.
Sadly the useless Sunak didn’t call that press conference to resign or call a GE, but just to defend his pathetic Rwanda policy. Thinking he’s so important that he has to cling onto power at all costs, not just to the country he claims to serve (!!!), but to his own diginity.
He threw down the gauntlet to his MPs
I think they well take it and challenge him
Is all this fuss about the Rwanda bill to take the heat off Johnson in the covid inquiry?
If so, what will Johnson do in return for Sunak when he is questioned on Monday?
After all, the Rwanda scheme will only take about 200 people a year and we will be paying for them for five years while they are out there. It will cost us more per person than keeping them here.
On hearing of Jenrick’s resignation I briefly entained the thought that at last someone in that awful government was showing an ounce of decency in protesing against the Rwanda plan. Until I read more.
My next paragraph was descriptive in nature and used the turn arses a lot, I therefore deleted it in the spirit of more contructive discourse.
🙂
I was listening to Nick Robinson interview Braverman on R4 this morning.
That was after hearing Robinson opine (as if it were like the existence of gravity) that a country should have policy of deterrence for small boats as it was obvious and after calling someone ‘a Red’ after a bit of jocularity with his co-presenter.
Robinson really went for the jugular on Braverman in a way that seemed to me not to be in the public interest. It was more like Tory on Tory action – as if Robinson was using his BBC position to represent those in the party calling for unity.
Nick Robinson should not be employed by the BBC. The fact that he is tell us there is something really dark going on.
As for Jenrick, I think that the manner of his leaving is telling. His tail is up and his backers are forming.
You could well be right about Sunak Richard.
But I bet he is not short of friends or money either and he will be able to cut deals or at least try to. I can see him bringing back in many of those who were discarded by Johnson.