A Very British Coup? 9/17
If there has been a policy coup within the British Government, then Liz Truss is a full participant
Overview
The last 72hrs since Jeremy Hunt’s appointment as Chancellor have seen a dizzying array of announcements. They range from “U-turns” on tax policy, to a scaling back of the government’s flagship energy subsidy, to hints that the both pledges to raise the defense budget to 3% and to ringfence pensions may be on the table.
Reporting in the British media has largely focused on these announcements in terms of what they represent for Liz Truss’ economic project, namely its total abandonment. This is to be behind events. Liz Truss all but ceded power last week, before she appointed Hunt. Everything that has happened since should be seen in the context not of Liz Truss trying to save her Premiership, except perhaps for a short-time, but to save the party, and determine her departure and the succession on her own terms.
The presence of a de facto “lame-duck” Prime Minister has allowed Jeremy Hunt freedom to pursue radical honesty and aggressive reforms beyond the dreams of a government concerned for a political future. A Prime Minister Rishi Sunak would not dare to raise questions about pensions, especially if he had come to power through consensus among 85%+ of MPs, and it is unlikely he would have been able to win a confrontation with Ben Wallace over Defense Spending nor could he afford to undermine his polling position by scaling back energy support when it was the polls which had brought him to power and could remove him. In effect, party grandees through Hunt, and with the acquiescence of Truss are making markets an offer they will struggle to refuse. Abandon demands for their pet candidate to be installed in No10, and they will get policies beyond what they dared dream of. Or force the government out, and face a successor with too many mouths to feed to do anything.
This economic offer has been paired with a political one. Penny Mordaunt, the leader of the House of Commons, filled in for the Prime Minister on Monday in response to an urgent question over the firing of Kwasi Kwartang. Mordaunt, like Kemi Badenoch, both whom were rivals to Truss for the leadership, were denied high profile departmental roles by a Prime Minister seemingly paranoid of allowing any possible rivals to establish a profile. No one has been able to explain why Liz Truss was not present today(with some talk of a meeting with the chair of the 1922 Committee which could have waited an hour) nor why Mordaunt was. She was not involved in economic policy, nor in the decision to remove Kwartang. The Deputy Prime Minister, Cabinet Office Minister, or Treasury Secretary would have been better qualified. This can only be read as a deliberate decision by Truss to allow Mordaunt to cosplay as Prime Minister knowing full well what the media response would be. Namely stories about how the party made a colossal mistake this summer.
Discussion of whether Truss is behind these moves or out of power in favor of some behind the scenes “junta” misses the point. Truss would never undertake these actions willingly if she felt she could avoid it, and to that extent they were carried out by a wider party elite. Nonetheless, they could not have taken place without her acquiescence. She could have resigned on Friday, or denied Mordaunt the right to fill-in on Monday and dared the party to force her out. The question then is not whether she initiated them or not, but why she is going along with them and what they are intended to achieve.
The answer appears to be a broad consensus extending from the Prime Minister herself, and throughout the cabinet and party that she is finished, but an equally strong one that Rishi Sunak, installed on the back of a media campaign and market pressure is not the answer the party or country needs. By allowing Hunt to make a bid to the markets, and Mordaunt to MPs and voters, Truss is allowing an alternative future to be presented. One which will become stronger the longer Truss survives even if it is a matter of days or weeks, as Rishi is not in the cabinet, while Mordaunt and Hunt are.
Elements of self-interest and personal vengeance may play a role in Truss’ cooperation, but no such effort could be undertaken unless her hostility to the prospect of a Sunak premiership was shared by elements of the party across ideological and factional lines(Mordaunt is in the center of the party, Hunt the left). Whether they hope to block Sunak entirely or merely to force him to the table from a position of strength is unclear, perhaps even to themselves. But the real struggle over Truss’ future is about what follows.
Sunak and his allies desperately need to remove Truss as soon as possible. Not because they wish to restore market confidence but because they fear it being restored without them. While the media is correct that Truss cannot benefit from overseeing the success of polices 180 degrees from her platform, Hunt can. And the Cabinet has a much greater platform.
Sunak and allies will leak to the media that Truss must go and try and orchestrate a series of public no confidence announcements by MPs. In turn, his rivals will attempt to promote the opposite. Both will accept Truss will be gone within a few weeks, perhaps months at most. But whether it is this week or next month is critical for the succession.
Dynamics of Succession
The succession situation is determined not just by timing but by how timing determines the format. If the situation is stable enough for Truss to nominally remain Prime Minister during a leadership contest, in other words if Hunt has stabilized the economy sufficiently, then the arguments for installing a new PM through a coronation fade away.
This is critical. There is a reason supporters of Rishi Sunak were so aggressive in briefing stories about such a program. They are rightfully concerned about their ability to win another membership vote. But what is missed from this summer is that even with bandwagoning, Sunak lost support of MPs over the course of the campaign this summer. His prospects of getting MPs to accept a coronation largely came not from personal support but from de facto blackmail. Suggesting only he could could stabilize markets.
Any stabilization allowing for a delay therefore weakens his position in two ways. First, even if Truss is forced out quickly, his argument for why he should be the one coronated vanishes. If Truss is the problem rather than Rishi the solution, then all the arguments for why the party needs a coronation are also arguments for why Rishi, divisive with colleagues should not be the one coronated. He was not just the preference of markets but the only man they would accept.
In turn, if a full election seems viable, he is placed in the position of arguing that the members and MPs should not be given a choice rather than that they cannot be. That is a much harder one.
What is the Alternative?
There is a decent chance it has yet to be determined. Mordaunt and Hunt are definitely cooperating with each other, with at least the tacit approval of the Prime Minister, and it seems from this evenings’ statement of opposition to an immediate resignation that they have the support of figures in cabinet including Jacob Rees-Mogg. The three would be a triumvirate of Right, Center, Left.
Defense Secretary Ben Wallace also appears to be part of this “cabal” ruling out any role as a unity candidate. As he had pledged to resign if the pledge to increase defense spending to 3% was not kept this indicates a willingness to prioritize other factors.
It is possible they have not decided on a full plan even between themselves. They share an interest in raising their leverage with Sunak, Gove, Grant Shapps and other backbench forces. If they were to cooperate Mordaunt seems the most plausible PM, perhaps with Hunt as Chancellor and Rees-Mogg either remaining in his current role or moving to the Foreign Office. But odds are things are moving too quickly.
Truss herself, however, appeared a defeated woman in her appearance today. It stretches credibility that she still believes she will lead the party into the next election regardless of what she said to the BBC tonight. The divisions are no longer policy or ideological but personal and factional.
(I may update this during the evening)