Tory leadership: The case for and against another ‘disrupter’ prime minister I Adam Boulton
It could be all over on Monday or the Conservatives may be about to mesmerise the nation with another round of vicious infighting.
The Conservative Party rules can’t be changed. They are that Conservative MPs draw up a shortlist of two candidates from their number.
The 180,000 paid-up and unelected party members then choose between them. Less than half of those eligible to vote actually voted for Liz Truss last time but they still overruled the MPs’ preference and saddled the nation with a prime minister who lasted less than 50 days.
Three names emerge in Tory leadership contest – politics latest
Sir Graham Brady and the executive of the 1922 Committee of backbenchers have done what they can to try to stop it happening again by changing the way MPs draw up the shortlist. It is possible that the MPs will present the membership with a fait accompli early next week.
After the bumpy ride for the country and their party under Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, senior Tory backbenchers have done what they can to ensure an orderly transition to an orthodox candidate: most likely Rishi Sunak or Penny Mordaunt, who were the runners-up in the last contest which, amazingly, elected Ms Truss less than two months ago.
As things stand, however, there is a chance that these best laid plans could go awry, resulting in Britain ending up with another “disrupter” prime minister drawn from an unrepresentative band of populist libertarians.
How will Tories pick the new PM?
Rishi Sunak lost to Liz Truss in the last Tory leadership contest
The ’22 have set the threshold for nominations high. To enter the contest, a candidate will need to gather written backing from 100 fellow Tory MPs over this weekend. That is five times higher than the 20 required last time and has the desired effect of limiting the field to a maximum of three candidates since there are only 357 Conservatives in the Commons.
Nominations will close at 2pm on Monday. MPs will then vote, with the results declared at 6pm. Theoretically, that may not be necessary. It is possible that only one candidate – Rishi Sunak, the runaway favourite – will get enough nominations. He would then win by a walkover, similiar to the way Gordon Brown took over the premiership from Tony Blair.
Nominating someone is more potent than just voting for them. Remember the charity nominations Margaret Beckett and other “morons”, her words not mine, gave Jeremy Corbyn so he could run. This time MPs might decide that Mr Sunak is going to win anyway, so for a quiet life and possibly currying favour with the new boss they could give him a key to No 10.
But in the final round this summer, Mr Sunak led with 137 votes, to 113 for Ms Truss and 105 for Penny Mordaunt. Ms Mordaunt wants to run again and is scrabbling for her base to nominate her. In polls this summer she was more popular with Tory voters than Mr Sunak. She would prefer a straight fight with Mr Sunak, whether that comes about because only she and he are nominated or because they beat a possible third candidate in an initial vote.
If there are two candidates left for the membership to choose from, there will be an online ballot of the membership next week, with the result declared on Friday. Before that, the ’22 have already said that there will be “an indicative vote” between them first by MPs. The purpose of this is to send a powerful and unambiguous message to the membership about whom MPs want as leader. In choosing Ms Truss last time they went against the MPs’ first preference of Sunak.
If Mr Sunak and Ms Mordaunt are the final two, they could still take the decision out of the membership’s hands by agreeing that one who has least backing from MPs withdraw in favour of the one with most, allowing him or her to become prime minister. They would also both commit in advance to serve in the same cabinet and to keep Jeremy Hunt as chancellor .
Read more:
Resignations, reversals and rebellion – the 44 days of Liz Truss’s premiership
It’s hard to see how new PM will stop the rot – Beth Rigby analysis
Will Johnson derail the smooth transition?
Such a smooth transition would be derailed if there is a third candidate with 100 nominations.
All eyes are on Boris Johnson, who is said, like Donald Trump, to want a comeback. If, and it is a big if, he gets on to the starting grid, there could be a stampede of MPs who might decide he looks like a vote winner and put him into the second round against either Ms Mordaunt or Mr Sunak.
His chances of victory and re-election by the membership would be very high. He is popular and he is the only candidate who can claim a personal mandate, having led the party to victory in the 2019 general election.
But, but, but.
Tory MPs and cabinet ministers turfed out Mr Johnson this summer for serial dishonesty and sending others out to lie on his behalf. Jacob Rees-Mogg, Nadine Dorries and a few diehards may be calling on him to return but he has never been loved by the rank and file of the parliamentary party, who control the nominations. Nor does he fit snuggly with the libertarian, UKIP-style entryists of the European Research Group, who are now fighting a rear-guard action to preserve their influence in the party.
There are obvious efforts by Johnson supporters in parliament and the media to talk him up this weekend. But his shooting star support from some MPs could easily plateau short of 100 nominations. If so, having drawn attention to himself yet again, Mr Johnson would most likely return to his less demanding, more lucrative exertions on the US lecture circuit.
Could an unlikely outsider emerge?
If it is not Mr Johnson, someone else could emerge as the third challenger.
Suella Braverman fancies her chances and her sacking as Ms Truss’s home secretary positions her to rally the right. Kemi Badenoch also has high ambitions.
Fortunately for Ms Mordaunt or Mr Sunak, Jeremy Hunt and Ben Wallace have both ruled themselves out of the race. It is unlikely anyone else would be able to muster 100 nominating signatures.
Shell-shocked Tory MPs do not want to take the risk of taking a punt on another incoherent or incompetent leader. They want a well-known figure with a proven track record to steady the ship.
In the ultimate reckoning, this is likely to count against Ms Mordaunt. At 49, she is older than Mr Sunak, 42, and has been in parliament five years longer, since 2010. But she has served barely two years as a cabinet minister.
Mr Sunak by contrast has three years in cabinet under his belt, two of them as the chancellor who piloted the economy through COVID.
MPs have the future of the nation in their hands. One option would be to open the door to the return of the discredited individual they kicked out a few months ago. Or they could shut him out for good and opt for a technocrat.
World
‘At least 59 killed’ in Gaza after Israeli military opens fire near aid centre and carries out strikes
At least 59 Palestinians have reportedly been killed after the Israeli military opened fire near an aid centre in Gaza and carried out strikes across the territory.
The Red Cross, which operates a field hospital in Rafah, said 25 people were “declared dead upon arrival” and “six more died after admittance” following gunfire near an aid distribution centre in the southern Gazan city.
The humanitarian organisation added that it also received 132 patients “suffering from weapon-related injuries” after the incident.
The Red Cross said: “The overwhelming majority of these patients sustained gunshot wounds, and all responsive individuals reported they were attempting to access food distribution sites.”
The organisation said the number of deaths marks the hospital’s “largest influx of fatalities” since it began operations in May last year.
The IDF has said it fired “warning shots” near the aid distribution site but it was “not aware of injured individuals” as a result.
It said in a statement: “Earlier today, several suspects were identified approaching IDF troops operating in the Rafah area, posing a threat to the troops, hundreds of metres from the aid distribution site.
“IDF troops operated in order to prevent the suspects from approaching them and fired warning shots.”
Palestinians mourn a loved one following the incident near the aid centre. Pic: Reuters
Mother’s despair over shooting
Somia Alshaar told Sky News her 17-year-old son Nasir was shot dead while visiting the aid centre after she told him not to go.
She said: “He went to get us tahini so we could eat.
“He went to get flour. He told me ‘mama, we don’t have tahini. Today I’ll bring you flour. Even if it kills me, I will get you flour’.
“He left the house and didn’t return. They told me at the hospital: your son…’Oh God, oh Lord’.”
Asked where her son was shot, she replied: “In the chest. Yes, in the chest.”
Somia Alshaar, pictured with her daughter, says her son was shot dead. Pic: Reuters
‘A policy of mass murder’
Hassan Omran, a paramedic with Gaza’s ministry of health, told Sky News after the incident that humanitarian aid centres in Gaza are now “centres of mass death”.
Speaking in Khan Younis, he said: “Today, there were more than 150 injuries and more than 20 martyrs at the aid distribution centres… the Israeli occupation deliberately kills and commits genocide. The Israeli occupation is carrying out a policy of mass murder.
“They call people to come get their daily food, and then, when citizens arrive at these centres, they are killed in cold blood.
“All the victims have gunshot wounds to the head and chest, meaning the enemy is committing these crimes deliberately.”
Israel has rejected genocide accusations and denies targeting civilians.
Two boys mourn their brother at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis. Pic: Reuters
‘Lies being peddled’
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), the controversial US and Israeli-backed group which operates the distribution centre near Rafah, said: “Hamas is claiming there was violence at our aid distribution sites today. False.
“Once again, there were no incidents at or in the immediate vicinity of our sites.
“But that’s not stopping some from spreading the lies being peddled by ‘officials’ at the Hamas-controlled Nasser Hospital.”
The Red Cross said its field hospital in Rafah has recorded more than 250 fatalities and treated more than 3,400 “weapon-wounded patients” since new food distribution sites were set up in Gaza on 27 May.
Read more:
‘At least 798 killed’ at Gaza aid points
’10 children killed’ waiting for Gaza health clinic to open
Israel says permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’
Palestinians inspect the wreckage after an Israeli airstrike in Deir al Balah. Pic: AP
It comes after four children and two women were among at least 13 people who died in Deir al Balah, in central Gaza, after Israeli strikes pounded the area starting late on Friday, officials in Al Aqsa Martyrs hospital in the territory said.
Fifteen others died in Israeli airstrikes in Khan Younis, in southern Gaza, according to Nasser Hospital.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has not responded to a request for comment on the reported deaths.
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Israeli has been carrying out attacks in Gaza since Hamas-led militants killed some 1,200 people and took 251 hostages on 7 October 2023.
Hamas still holds 50 hostages, with fewer than half of them believed to be alive, after most of the rest were released in ceasefire agreements or other deals.
Israel’s offensive in Gaza has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, more than half of them women and children, according to Gaza’s health ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count.
US President Donald Trump has said he is closing in on another ceasefire agreement that would see more hostages released and potentially wind down the war.
But after two days of talks this week with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, there were no signs of a breakthrough.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The latest fatalities in Gaza comes as a 20-year-old Palestinian-American man was beaten to death by settlers in the Israeli-occupied West Bank on Friday, the Palestinian Health ministry said.
Sayafollah Musallet, also known as Saif, was killed during a confrontation between Palestinians and settlers in Sinjil, north of Ramallah, the ministry said.
A second man, Hussein Al-Shalabi, 23, died after being shot in the chest.
Mr Musallet’s family, from Tampa Florida, has called on the US State Department to lead an “immediate investigation”.
A State Department spokesperson said it was aware of the incident but it had no further comment “out of respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones” of the reported victim.
The Israeli military said the confrontation broke out after Palestinians threw rocks at Israelis, lightly injuring them.
As investigators continue to piece together the full picture, early findings of the Air India crash are pointing towards a critical area of concern — the aircraft’s fuel control switches.
The flight, bound for London Gatwick, crashed just moments after taking off from Ahmedabad airport on 12 June, killing all but one of the 242 people on board the plane and at least 19 on the ground.
According to the preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), the two engine fuel control switches on the plane were moved from the “RUN” to “CUTOFF” position.
These switches control fuel flow to the engines and should only be used when the aircraft is on ground, first to start the engines before a flight and later to shut them down at the gate.
They are designed so they’re unlikely to be changed accidentally, pointing to possible human error on the Air India flight.
The findings include the final conversation between the pilots and show there was confusion in the cockpit as well.
When one pilot asked the other why he cut off the fuel, he responded to say he did not do so.
The Air India plane before the crash. Pic: Takagi
Moments later, a Mayday call was made from the cockpit, but the plane could not regain power quickly enough and plummeted to the ground.
Captain Amit Singh, founder of Safety Matters Foundation, an organisation dedicated to aviation safety, told Sky News: “This exchange indicates that the engine shutdowns were uncommanded.
“However, the report does not identify the cause – whether it was crew error, mechanical malfunction, or electronic failure.”
Previous warning of ‘possible fuel switch issue’
“The Boeing 787 uses spring-loaded locking mechanisms on its fuel control switches to prevent accidental movement,” Mr Singh explained.
But a previous bulletin from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) “warned that these switches might be installed with the locking feature disengaged,” he said.
This could “make them susceptible to unintended movement due to vibration, contact, or quadrant flex”, he added.
The plane’s tail lodged in a building. Pic: Reuters
Speaking to Sky News, aviation expert Terry Tozner said: “The take-off was normal, the aircraft rotated at the correct speed left the ground and almost immediately, the cut-off switches were selected to off, one then two.
“But nobody has said with any clarity whether or not the latch mechanisms worked okay on this particular aircraft. So we can only assume that they were in normal working order.”
In India, there has been a backlash over the findings, with some saying the report points to pilot error without much information and almost dismisses the possibility of a mechanical or electric failure.
Indian government responds
India’s civil aviation minister Kinjarapu Ram Mohan Naidu has been quick to respond, saying: “We care for the welfare and the wellbeing of pilots so let’s not jump to any conclusions at this stage, let us wait for the final report.
“I believe we have the most wonderful workforce of pilots and crew in the whole world.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
India plane crash survivor carries brother’s coffin
Both pilots were experienced, with around 19,000 flying hours between them, including more than 9,000 on Boeing 787s.
The report says the aircraft maintenance checks were on schedule and that there are no signs of fuel contamination or a bird strike.
So far, no safety recommendations have been issued to Boeing or General Electric, the engine manufacturers.
Concern over destroyed flight recorder
Mr Singh said “the survivability of the flight recorders also raises concern”.
The plane’s rear flight recorder, designed to withstand impact forces of 3,400 Gs and temperatures of 1,100C for 60 minutes, “was damaged beyond recovery”.
Read more:
Everything you need to know about the crash
Air India’s lone survivor is nothing short of miracle
“The Ram Air Turbine (RAT), which deploys automatically when both engines fail and power drops below a threshold, was observed as deployed in CCTV footage when the aircraft was approximately 60ft above ground level,” Mr Singh said.
“This suggests that the dual engine failure likely occurred before the official timestamp of 08:08:42 UTC, implying a possible discrepancy.”
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi visiting the crash site. Pic: X/AP
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Mr Singh said it was also “of particular note” that the plane’s emergency locator transmitter (ELT) did not send any signal after the crash.
“Was the ELT damaged, unarmed, mis-wired, or malfunctioning?” he said.
The report has generated more questions than answers on topics including human error, power source failures and mechanical or electrical malfunction.
The final report is expected to take a year. Meanwhile, families grapple with the unimaginable loss of loved ones in one of the worst disasters in India’s aviation history.
Donald Trump has announced he will impose a 30% tariff on imports from the European Union from 1 August.
The tariffs could make everything from French cheese and Italian leather goods to German electronics and Spanish pharmaceuticals more expensive in the US.
Mr Trump has also imposed a 30% tariff on goods from Mexico, according to a post from his Truth Social account.
Announcing the moves in separate letters on the account, the president said the US trade deficit was a national security threat.
In his letter to the EU, he wrote: “We have had years to discuss our trading relationship with The European Union, and we have concluded we must move away from these long-term, large, and persistent, trade Deficits, engendered by your tariff, and non-Tariff, policies, and trade barriers.
“Our relationship has been, unfortunately, far from reciprocal.”
In his letter to Mexico, Mr Trump said he did not think the country had done enough to stop the US from turning into a “narco-trafficking playground”.
The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said today that the EU could adopt “proportionate countermeasures” if the US proceeds with imposing the 30% tariff.
Ms von der Leyen, who heads the EU’s executive arm, said in a statement that the bloc remained ready “to continue working towards an agreement by Aug 1”.
“Few economies in the world match the European Union’s level of openness and adherence to fair trading practices,” she continued.
“We will take all necessary steps to safeguard EU interests, including the adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required.”
Ms von der Leyen has also said imposing tariffs on EU exports would “disrupt essential transatlantic supply chains”.
Meanwhile, Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said on the X social media platform that Mr Trump’s announcement was “very concerning and not the way forward”.
He added: “The European Commission can count on our full support. As the EU we must remain united and resolute in pursuing an outcome with the United States that is mutually beneficial.”
Mexico’s economy ministry said a bilateral working group aims to reach an alternative to the 30% US tariffs before they are due to take effect.
The country was informed by the US that it would receive a letter about the tariffs, the ministry’s statement said, adding that Mexico was negotiating.
Read more US news:
Trump plans to hit Canada with 35% tariff
More than 160 missing after Texas floods
Robot performs realistic surgery
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
How ‘liberation day’ unfolded
Trump’s tariff threats and delays
On his so-called “liberation day” in April, Mr Trump unleashed “reciprocal tariffs” on many of America’s trade partners.
The US president said he was targeting countries with which America has a trade imbalance.
However, since then he’s backed down in a spiralling tit-for-tat tariff face-off with China, and struck a deal with the UK.
The US imposed a 20% tariff on imported goods from the EU in April but it was later paused and the bloc has since been paying a baseline tariff of 10% on goods it exports to the US.
In May, while the US and EU where holding trade negotiations, Mr Trump threated to impose a 50% tariff on the bloc as talks didn’t progress as he would have liked.
However, he later announced he was delaying the imposition of that tariff while negotiations over a trade deal took place.
As of earlier this week, the EU’s executive commission, which handles trade issues for the bloc’s 27-member nations, said its leaders were still hoping to strike a trade deal with the Trump administration.
Without one, the EU said it was prepared to retaliate with tariffs on hundreds of American products, ranging from beef and auto parts to beer and Boeing airplanes.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike