How will Sunak try to unite the party? With a tactic that Johnson and Truss did not use | Beth Rigby

Published

2 years ago

October 25, 2022

admin

But seven weeks ago, Rishi Sunak was cast on to the political scrapheap as he lost out to Liz Truss to become prime minister and retreated to his North Yorkshire constituency, his ambitions shattered and his hopes for political power now beyond his grasp.

But on Monday, Mr Sunak staged the most remarkable of political comebacks in modern times, as the 42-year-old politician won the latest leadership contest, after Penny Mordaunt dropped out and Boris Johnson decided not to stand.

He will soon become the country’s 57th prime minister after a series of plot-twists, feuds and cock-ups so preposterous that, at times, the Tory party looked like it had been commissioned to write the plot lines for the next Aaron Sorkin political drama box set, rather than running the country.

Rishi Sunak wins race to be prime minister – live updates

Beyond the drama over the past few months, his election has been remarkable in other ways too – he will be our first British Asian prime minister, our first Hindu prime minister, and our second-ever youngest prime minister.

His is a journey of near political annihilation to victory in a dizzyingly short period of time, as the mistakes of his rival changed his destiny too.

When I asked one of his supporters, Tory MP Stephen Hammond, whether he was – like me – rather “dazed and confused” by this discombobulating turn of events, he told me that he was “delighted”.

“We now have a prime minister who’s going to govern in the interests of the whole country,” he said.

“I think he’ll choose the best talents of the Conservative Party to make sure we do that. And it’ll be a competent, sensible government.”

For those who supported him, the Tory “experiment” of personality-driven populist leadership – Boris Johnson – and ideological zealotry – Liz Truss – is over.

Mr Sunak, they hope, will mark a return to sensible, solid leadership.

In a short statement after he was appointed party leader and prime minister elect, Mr Sunak pledged to serve with “integrity and humility” – two traits critics of his predecessors said they lacked.

He also acknowledged the “profound economic challenge” faced by the country and said his priority was to bring about “stability and unity” after the most fractious of times.

That might be the hope, what is the reality?

First up, when Liz Truss was elected in September, MPs agreed that she was facing the toughest in-tray since the 1970s, with the energy bill crisis, spiralling inflation, a worsening cost of living crisis, and pressure on public services and public sector pay.

That in-tray has got harder still following Ms Truss’s handling of the economy, which has only served to further imperil government finances and push up interest rates, leaving the new PM and his chancellor with some very difficult decisions to take over tax and spend policies.

It was hard to see how Ms Truss was going to get cuts in public spending through parliament, be it from rowing back on defence spending to lifting benefits in line with inflation.

You saw last week that she was forced to recommit to lifting pensions in line with inflation after a backbench rebellion just two days after her chancellor refused to do so.

One figure familiar with Treasury thinking told me last week that the new chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, was staring at a black hole in the public finances so big – despite the £32bn of tax cut reversals carried out by junking the mini-budget – that austerity cuts this time around might have to be even bigger than those imposed by George Osborne after the financial crisis in the early part of the last decade.

The prime minister might have changed, but the in-tray is still very much there.

The second big issue for Mr Sunak is whether the party, after all the bloodletting of recent months, can genuinely come back together or whether it is ungovernable.

The incoming PM has certainly made inroads into bringing the party together, picking up the support of voices on the right of the party – Suella Braverman, David Frost, Steve Baker, Sir Iain Duncan Smith – as well as those on the centre ground, such as Tom Tugendhat.

He’d totted up nearly 200 public nominations – well over half of the parliamentary party – before Ms Mordaunt withdrew from the race, as well as picking up senior Johnson supporters, from Priti Patel to James Cleverly.

His backers say this reflects a party that is prepared to come back together, but don’t forget that Mr Johnson did – and these figures were independently verified by the 1922 committee – garner support of 102 MPs.

A rump of those could be irreconcilable to a Sunak premiership, given that they blame him for ousting Mr Johnson in the first place.

If a block of 35 or so MPs consistently refuse to play ball, Mr Sunak will soon be hamstrung in trying to get policy through parliament.

As those MPs who backed him cheered on the steps of Conservative Campaign Headquarters on Monday afternoon, there were a number of others staying away from the action, nursing grievances that may not be easy to bury.

A tweet from Nadine Dorries, Mr Johnson’s most ardent backer, when the former PM withdrew from the race, was ominous.

“Boris would have won members vote [and] already had a mandate from the people,” she wrote. “Rishi and Penny, despite requests from Boris refused to unite which would have made governing utterly impossible.

“Penny actually asked him to step aside for her. It will now be impossible to avoid a general election.”

How many more might feel the same?

‘Big tent cabinet’

One way Mr Sunak is expected to try to avoid schisms with different groups within the party is to create a big tent cabinet – something that Mr Johnson and Ms Truss did not do.

That has the effect of binding those with different views into the government, but also means the PM really will have to rule by cabinet government rather than trying to steamroller decisions through.

And the final controversy, picked up by Ms Dorries, is legitimacy.

Three prime ministers in three years – two of them in less than two months – raises the question about legitimacy and mandate.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Mr Sunak might try to answer the latter by returning the principles of the 2019 manifesto upon which the Tory party was elected.

But what of legitimacy? The party is trailing 20+ points in the polls and have changed leader twice without putting it to the British public.

Labour will argue that he has no mandate to govern and might well – as it did on the matter of the fracking vote that ended up toppling Ms Truss – try to divide the Tory party with votes on wedge issues.

Mr Sunak could also find himself coming under heavy political fire over his personal wealth, his wife’s historic tax arrangements (she was a non-dom but has now changed that arrangement) and his partygate fine.

Labour might well try to paint him as another public school prime minister who is out of touch with ordinary people and their lives.

Mr Sunak, for his part, will argue that he wasn’t born into great wealth and instead had parents who made sacrifices for him to succeed.

But Labour believe this is a weak flank for Mr Sunak: this is a reason why party operatives thought Penny Mordaunt was a tougher opposition for Sir Keir Starmer.

What he has got going for him is that the bar has been set so low by his predecessor.

Ms Truss had to junk her entire policy platform, lost any authority within her parliamentary party and became the most unpopular leader since polling began in a matter of weeks.

Mr Sunak might conclude from that the only way is up. But even if he can somehow begin to repair and even reunite his party, can he convince the country to look at him and the Conservatives again?

World

Canadian PM criticises Trump over tariffs – and sends bold message to Americans

Published

2 hours ago

March 5, 2025

admin

Canadian PM criticises Trump over tariffs - and sends bold message to Americans

Canada’s prime minister Justin Trudeau has labelled new tariffs imposed by US president Donald Trump as a “dumb thing to do”.

It was confirmed overnight that tariffs on goods coming into the US from Mexico, Canada and China had come into effect.

Mr Trump’s expansion of tariffs to cover the top three trading partners of the United States has been met with promises of retaliation and a retreat in stock market values globally.

Mr Trudeau, speaking in a press conference on Tuesday, said his government would file a legal challenge against the US at the World Trade Organisation, and that Canada was considering its options.

“Today the United States has launched a trade war against Canada, its closest partner and ally, its closest friend,” he said.

“They have chosen to sabotage their agenda. There is absolutely no justification or need for these tariffs today.”

He also described the tariffs as a “dumb thing to do” and that it undermined his understanding of an agreement he made with Mr Trump over fentanyl production.

Mr Trudeau also warned it would impact American workplaces and add to inflation in the US.

Addressing the American public, he said: “We don’t want this… but your government has chosen to do this to you.”

The new tariffs will be felt heavily by all exporters in those countries, but also by US companies which rely on supplies from them.

Mexico and Canada face tariffs of 25%, with 10% for Canadian energy. Tariffs on Chinese imports have doubled, raising them from 10% to 20%.

Canada announced it would retaliate immediately, imposing 25% tariffs on US imports worth C$30bn (£16.3bn).

It added that the tariffs would be extended in 21 days to cover more US goods entering the country without a climbdown.

Mr Trump responded by saying that he would match any Canadian tariffs immediately through higher duties.

At a news conference, outgoing prime minister Justin Trudeau described the tariffs as “dumb” and said Canadian companies would be given government support that would even extend to protections against takeover interest caused by the trade war.

Mexico threatened both reciprocal tariffs along with non-tariff measures.

China also vowed to retaliate and reiterated its stance that the Trump administration was trying to “shift the blame” and
“bully” Beijing over fentanyl flows.

Stock markets were down sharply across the world on Tuesday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the broader S&P 500 on course for big falls for a second day.

The Nasdaq later entered positive territory.

Share prices for carmakers were among the worst performers generally.

Companies including General Motors, VW and Mercedes saw sharp falls as each has factories in Mexico which sell into the US.

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

European stock markets had achieved record levels on Monday on the back of higher defence spending pledges.

But the German DAX closed more than 3.5% off. Its leading faller was Continental, the car parts manufacturer best known for its tyres, which saw an 11% decline.

The CAC in Paris was down by almost 2% while the FTSE 100 closed 1.3% lower as fears of an expanded trade spat overcame global growth hopes.

The implications were playing out more widely.

Oil costs were down by 1.5%, with Brent crude trading at six-month low of $70 a barrel.

Cryptocurrencies were hit too amid the flight from risk. Bitcoin was trading at $83,170 – far below the $100k+ witnessed when Mr Trump took office.

There was also evidence that investors saw the tariffs as an own goal because the US dollar – usually a safe haven in times of market woes – came under pressure.

The pound was trading at its highest level versus the dollar since mid-December at just shy of $1.28.

The main threat to the US is that higher import costs, caused by tariffs, push up inflation as those costs are passed on.

Consumers in the US could see price hikes within days, one expert said.

Gustavo Flores-Macias, a public policy professor at Cornell University, New York, said “the automobile sector, in particular, is likely to see considerable negative consequences”.

This is due to supply chains that “crisscross the three countries in the manufacturing process” and ” because of the expected increase in the price of vehicles, which can dampen demand,” he added.

The Trump administration is gearing up to bring in other tariffs in the coming weeks.

On 2 April, reciprocal tariffs will take effect on all countries that impose duties on US products.

He is also considering 25% tariffs on goods from the EU “very soon” after claiming the bloc was created to “screw the United States”.

World

Zelenskyy is ‘untrustworthy crook and punk’, says ex-Trump aide

Published

2 hours ago

March 5, 2025

admin

Zelenskyy is 'untrustworthy crook and punk', says ex-Trump aide

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been called a “crook” and a “punk” by a former top aide to Donald Trump.

Steve Bannon also told Sky’s Ali Fortescue he thinks the US president should pull out of a planned minerals deal with Ukraine.

In a wide-ranging interview on the Politics Hub, the ex-chief strategist said Mr Trump’s efforts to improve relations with Russia is a “brilliant” move.

Mr Bannon said the UK and Europe need to “wake up” and realise they do not have to be worried about Russia invading the rest of Europe, as they do not have the army to do it.

“The rapprochement of the United States with Russia breaks the control of the Chinese Community Party… it’s a brilliant stroke.”

Follow latest: Zelenskyy’s olive branch to Trump

He added the EU “will come along with it” and insisted Mr Trump is “going out of his way to be a peacemaker”.

But he was clear about whether the leader should agree to sign a deal with Ukraine‘s president for rare minerals, which was supposed to happen on Friday until the pair had a heated row in the Oval Office.

“Absolutely not. He [Zelenskyy] had his shot. Zelenskyy is untrustworthy. He’s a crook and a punk. And he showed what a punk he was in the Oval Office the other day,” said Mr Bannon.

He suggested the row was prompted by Mr Zelenskyy trying to get security guarantees from the US, something the American public would not accept.

👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈

Minerals deal a ‘gift’ to Ukraine

“They told him, time and time and time again, do not bring up security guarantees. A security guarantee means… American troops and that will never happen,” said Mr Bannon.

He also said the deal was unnecessary and only a “very general framework” anyway, which risked tying the US to the “future reconstruction of the country”.

“We don’t need a rare earth deal. The United States doesn’t need rare earths from Ukraine. That was a total gift to him and the Ukrainian people.”

However, sources have told the Reuters news agency that Mr Trump is planning to announce the US and Ukraine’s minerals agreement during his address to Congress on Tuesday.

Mr Trump has paused military aid to Kyiv in the most dramatic step yet in his pivot towards closer ties with Russia.

‘Let EU underwrite Ukraine security’

Mr Bannon also took aim at European nations, saying defence spending was insufficient: “Let them [the EU] step up and let them underwrite the security of Ukraine.”

In particular he described the UK’s commitment to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence as “nothing”. He also criticised Britain’s combat capabilities saying the economy “can’t afford it”, adding the “bond market already turfed out Liz Truss“.

He said the “reality” is that much of NATO did not spend enough on defence, has “faked” for decades its capability to take on Russia, and the military alliance would struggle to put up “two combat divisions”.

Mr Bannon also accused “much of the British establishment” of being in business with the Chinese Communist Party.

In terms of UK politics, he says he is “a Nigel Farage guy and believes in Reform“.

Mr Farage is close to the US president but has had to be slightly more reserved in his praise of him of late – knowing British public opinion is very much behind Mr Zelenskyy and Ukraine.

World

Zelenskyy says Ukraine ‘ready to come to negotiating table’ – after US pauses military aid

Published

2 hours ago

March 5, 2025

admin

Zelenskyy says Ukraine 'ready to come to negotiating table' - after US pauses military aid

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said Ukraine is “ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible” in the search for a “lasting” peace with Russia.

The Ukrainian president made the statement on social media hours after Donald Trump’s White House announced it was pausing US military aid to Kyiv.

He also said he was “ready to sign” a deal giving the US access to minerals in Ukraine – which has been a sticking point between the countries in the last week, with Kyiv seeking security guarantees in return.

It comes after vice president JD Vance said a potential European peacekeeping force in Ukraine would be “20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years” – sparking anger from a number of UK politicians.

Ukraine war latest: White House meeting ‘regrettable’, says Zelenskyy

The Ukrainian president stopped short of saying sorry in the statement, but outlined how the first stages of a possible peace deal might work.

He also reiterated how grateful he was for American support for Ukraine, after Mr Vance criticised him, claiming he had not shown enough gratitude during his explosive White House visit.

Mr Zelenskyy added: “Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the way it was supposed to be.

“It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is time to make things right.

“We would like future cooperation and communication to be constructive.”

Trump ‘focused on peace’ – but attacks Zelenskyy again

Earlier, a White House official, speaking anonymously, said: “President [Trump] has been clear that he is focused on peace.

“We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well. We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”

There was no indication about the possible length of the pause, and there’s been no comment so far from Ukraine.

It comes after the astonishing clash between the two leaders – as well as Mr Vance – in the Oval Office on Friday.

Mr Trump‘s berating of Mr Zelenskyy was condemned by many and has led to a show of support from European leaders as they try to formulate their own way forward.

The US president attacked the Ukrainian leader again on Monday, telling reporters he should be “more appreciative”.

Writing on Truth Social, Mr Trump also said Mr Zelenskyy had made “the worst statement that could have been made” after he commented that peace was still “very, very far away”.

“America will not put up with it for much longer!” he posted.

“It is what I was saying, this guy doesn’t want there to be peace as long as he has America’s backing,” the president added.

Mr Zelenskyy then posted on X that Ukraine was “working together with America and our European partners and very much hope on US support on the path to peace”.

“Peace is needed as soon as possible,” he said.

‘Music to the ears of Putin’

By David Blevins, US correspondent

President Trump’s decision to pause military aid to Ukraine marks a significant shift in US foreign policy, one previously considered unthinkable.

This blow to Ukraine’s defences in the face of Russian aggression will be music to the ears of President Putin. US military aid has kept Ukraine in this David and Goliath battle for three years.

It has funded what military analysts simplify as “the big stuff” of battle – artillery, anti-tank weapons, rockets and armoured vehicles. Trump’s decision to push pause disregards efforts by Keir Starmer and other European leaders to devise a peace plan.

Those already questioning Europe’s reliance on the US for defence will conclude they have been given the answer.

But the decision sets President Trump up for a potential confrontation with Republicans, who had approved the funding, in Congress.

White House sources say he wants President Zelenskyy to go on TV and apologise for the jaw-dropping showdown last Friday. But the Ukrainian president feels he has no apology to make for expressing his doubt about Russia’s commitment to peace.

Earlier, Trump side-stepped a question about a Kremlin diplomat claiming the US administration and Moscow were now aligned on foreign policy.

This weakening of Ukraine’s defence capability moves that question front and centre as he prepares to address Congress on Tuesday.

Despite the diplomatic crisis, Mr Trump has said a deal is still possible.

An agreement giving the US access to Ukraine’s rare earth metals was meant to have been signed by the two presidents on Friday.

It was billed as an important step in a future peace deal – and part payback for aid already received.

However, the dramatic falling out has thrown that into jeopardy.

Mr Zelenskyy wants the metals deal to include guarantees on halting Russia should it break the terms of any peace agreement.

Zelenskyy showed ‘lack of respect’

Mr Vance suggested on Monday that the metals pact was the best way to secure a lasting end to the war.

“If you want real security guarantees, if you want to actually ensure that Vladimir Putin does not invade Ukraine again, the very best security guarantee is to give Americans economic upside in the future of Ukraine,” Mr Vance told Fox News.

“That is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years,” he added.

Mr Vance said Mr Zelenskyy had shown a “lack of respect” and “a certain sense of entitlement” in Friday’s trip to Washington.

He repeated that the door was still open if he altered his approach, but told Fox News he “still isn’t there”.

European and world leaders – who met Mr Zelenskyy at the weekend – have discussed a potential “coalition of the willing” to deploy peacekeepers and deter further Russian aggression.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said Britain was prepared to put “boots on the ground and planes in the air” under the plan – but it’s unclear who else might participate.

He told MPs on Monday that Britain must “lead from the front” on supporting Ukraine and the “security of our continent, the security of our country”.

However, the prime minister believes any international deployment of troops must have a US “backstop” deterrent to be taken seriously by Russia.

America has given around €64bn (£53bn) of military aid to Ukraine, compared with €62bn (£51.3bn) from European nations (including Britain).

The overall US total is €114bn (£94bn) and the European one €132bn (£109bn). This includes humanitarian aid and other financial assistance to keep the country running.

Following the weekend summit, the UK also pledged £1.6bn in finance for Ukraine to buy another 5,000 air defence missiles.