by ‘Why is it so bad in politics?’ fumed any Tory MP after Rishi Sunak’s sudden cancellation of the prime minister of Greece over the Parthenon marbles last week. “This says everything about where her antennae are pointed: away from what ordinary MPs think, let alone ordinary voters.” Even the prime minister’s supporters see the row as unfortunate, not least because they suspect that until last week many “ordinary BPs” thought the statues were just highly prized fake marbles.
Sunak’s decision to arrange a meeting with Kyriakos Mitsotakis was not a calculated way to show that he was standing up to European countries: he was a personal responder to the “great understanding” about an issue that he feared could have implications for artefacts another. But there’s a lot to be said for the Main Star because of the way the series unfolded – and about his partner.
Sunak’s critics would much rather have spent the week leading up to talk about how the government is trying to solve its problem with Rwanda’s deportation policy. On Friday, Sunak admitted that British patience was “wearing thin”, and said he wanted to start flights of asylum seekers as soon as possible. But many MPs on the right of the party suspect that his heart is not really in the methods they claim are necessary for this, including giving ministers the ability to de-enforce aspects of the European convention on human rights. Ignoring the convention is a matter of confidence, for a good number of Dála Deputies, to the extent that the talk in the party about the number of letters asking for a vote of no confidence in the prime minister has given way to the ongoing attitude. usual time in the Tory party with higher spillage.
The emergency legislation is taking some time to work out, especially because, regardless of what it contains, it will leave at least one ministerial office. The brief across the bill has turned into a milkman’s order book, with immigration minister Robert Jenrick as untidy as he can be to boil down “full-fat” measures, and his new Home Office boss, James Cleverly , trying to skim the pieces that would risk getting the legislation stuck and put in the House of Lords.
He has to follow through on his promise to get flights going by the next election, and that means breaking some eggs
Jenrick and Sunak have held meetings to reach a compromise, but colleagues who feel the former is working for them still expect him to quit if their demands are not met. They assume that if a “full fat” bill emerges, Victoria Prentis will step down as attorney general. “Their positions are mutually exclusive,” says a colleague. That raises the question of whether Alex Chalk, the justice secretary, who has been so outspoken about the rule of law and allowing the limits of collective responsibility, might also have to consider his position. Sunak doesn’t like confrontation, but he has to keep his promise that flights will disappear by the next election, and that means breaking some eggs.
Many ministers are sympathetic to Sunak’s case; the phrase “doing one’s best at an impossible job” is very popular. But the wider party is not that supportive, which is why so many things the prime minister tries to do get such a flat response.
He lost his marbles battle because his party is unable to inspire any old habit. Precious few MPs were willing to go on the airwaves and explain why canceling the meeting was a brilliant move – something self-respecting politicians are often happy to do when they fully support a leader. They don’t trust him to stick to a position, either, on marbles or migration. “Why would you trust him when he went from his press conference saying [Rwanda] The key move for this week was that it’s just one of a ‘basket of moves’,” says one senior backpacker. A more charitable view could be that, in talking about the basket, Sunak and Cleverly are trying to show voters that they are not only working in Rwanda but on other measures designed to stop with the boats – and ones that are a little more successful. . The problem, however, is that there are not many Deputies with a charitable attitude at the moment.
His relaunch as the “candidate for change” at this autumn’s party conference did not help the impression that Sunak does not know what he is doing from week to week. That new branding lasted about a month before the launch, back to warn voters they shouldn’t risk it with Labour.
Polling at the end of the summer suggested to Sunak’s team that the next general election would be a “change election”. When their conference center didn’t work, they investigated the polling further, and realized that rather than painting Keir Starmer as the continuity voters should reject, it was the Conservative continuity and the painting of the Labor party as extreme and non -coherent was to claw. back support for the Tories.
Sunak appears more comfortable with the current position, including bringing in one of the key figures from the consensus of the past 30 years that he recently claimed to reject: David Cameron. Cameron will remind Sunak that before he won a majority in 2015 he faced relentless gambling from the Sheep backbenches. Sunak should probably remember that it was because of Cameron’s efforts to deal with that crap that he lost in the form of a referendum An EU he didn’t want and unexpectedly lost.
Even if Sunak is feeling more comfortable, continuity has made no difference in the polls. But Sunak’s allies say they did not expect a big response from voters, who are deliberately ignoring what they say is an even worse season in Westminster politics than in recent years. Isaac Levido, the party’s political strategist, told friends at the start of the year that he did not expect the polls to open at all in 2023. Some of his colleagues do not think the Conservatives will lead Labor again , but others argue that it has to happen at some point: “We just need the party to act as a team instead of all this fighting.”
Too many MPs have mentally checked out and can’t be bothered with the secrets of supporting Sunak up
Leaders whose troops think they have a good chance of winning the next election have a lot more leeway than Sunak: at the moment, too many MPs have mentally checked out and can’t be anxious to go through the supporting resolutions. Pleasant. Even when the prime minister launches into a slogan, he has little hope that his MPs will robotically chant it the way they did before the previous Conservative election victory. In 2015, it was a “long-term economic plan”, and in 2019 “Get ready for Brexit”. The “long-term economic plan” had the advantage of being meaningless enough that you couldn’t scrutinize it, while “Get ready for Brexit” was direct but also vague: there was no need for detail about how. “Long-term decisions for a brighter future” is too far-fetched, and requires MPs to believe that decisions are being made, when they clearly are not on some key issues, such as housing and social care.
Abolishing an already hotly contested rail line with its visibly bloated budget and supply-side issues preventing voters from owning their own homes is not a far-fetched decision. – or even rent ones with enough space to start with. family – or the NHS from being able to control when patients leave their hospitals. A crackdown on smoking won’t make much of a long-term difference either when teenagers walk into their classrooms under a cloud of nicotine from vapes. But even with the slogan and policies, Tory MPs are not really in the mood to sing: there isn’t enough team spirit for that.
For all the frustration shown against Sunak, the ministers have almost as much strength about their colleagues who are busy fighting with their own party. Many don’t understand why it hasn’t pulled together yet; they see all the briefings and counter-intelligence about Rwanda as completely counter-productive and the kind of self-destructive behavior you’d expect from a group that’s already simmering in opposition after winning the election. That is why the question of why Sunak is so bad in politics is not fair. Their “normal MPs” are also behaving as if they are not facing the most difficult election in their history. Marbles don’t win elections, but then parties don’t divide.
• Isabel Hardman is assistant editor of the Spectator
