The invisible prime minister with the dullness dividend: Why Sunak’s keeping a low profile
He’s done it! It was a low bar to jump over but at least Rishi Sunak has lasted longer as prime minister than Liz Truss.
The nation can be reassured that there will not be a fourth prime minister this year, or even a general election before Christmas, as Boris Johnson subjected the country to in 2019.
This week Sunak passed the new shortest record set by Truss by serving in Number 10 for more than 44 days without resigning.
After the political turmoil brought on by two “disrupter” prime ministers, the public seems pleased by the period of calm which the diligent Sunak has brought with him. In opinion polls he is personally much more popular than his party and about on a par with the leader of the opposition, although Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour is way ahead of the Conservatives.
The people who seem least content, least respectful, and least inclined to give the new prime minister a break are on his own side. He is finding it next to impossible to please the country and the Conservatives at the same time.
Faced with these difficulties Sunak has opted to keep a low profile. Beyond a list of unmissable prime ministerial engagements at home and abroad, he has scarcely been seen in public or on social media. Tory voices have joined his opponents attacking him as an “invisible prime minister”.
Sunak’s ‘dullness dividend’
The circumstances in which he came to power meant that Sunak had no chance of a honeymoon period: a bold 100 days in which he could “hit the ground running” and “come up with fresh ideas”.
Liz Truss had just tried that and crashed the economy.
Sunak and Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor who had already been chosen for him, faced an immediate crisis and a repair job to restore confidence. On the financial front Sunak has achieved what was asked of him.
There has been a “dullness dividend”. Britain’s economic standing is now no worse than it was before the shock of the Truss/Kwarteng mini-budget, interest rate rises are similar to those in equivalent economies, and normal service has resumed on debt markets.
Sunak has kept his head down, moving surreptitiously, because many of his measures – such as putting up taxes and trying to maintain public spending – are “unTory”, according to critics on his own side.
But then Conservative activists never wanted him as leader – after all they rejected him this summer in favour of Truss when they had the chance to vote for him.
Sunak’s paid a price for becoming PM
Sunak was once the rising star of the party. Back then he hired experts to run a slick personal publicity campaign, including videos and postings of his activities as chancellor branded with his signature.
This self-promotion backfired as his relationship with the then prime minister Johnson soured and as their policy differences widened.
Earlier this year “Rishi” was tarnished by being fined along with Johnson for breaking COVID party rules. Around the same time his public image as a future UK prime minister was shattered when the media were pointed towards his wife’s non-dom tax status and his own possession of a US green card.
Tory MPs installed Sunak as party leader and prime minister because the wider public, rather than Tory activists, saw no credible alternative if a general election was to be avoided.
The MPs knew that they had to prevent another ballot of the party membership which would probably have re-imposed the disgraced Johnson on the nation.
Sunak also had to pay a price to get to the top. He was effectively blackmailed into giving key jobs in the cabinet to people who would otherwise have thrown their weight behind another membership ballot, which was the last thing the national interest needed and which he might have lost.
Suella Braverman and Gavin Williamson, who had both previously been sacked from government for misconduct, were the most prominent of these compromise appointments.
They have got in the way of Sunak delivering his promise that “the government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability”.
Williamson has already had to resign for bullying, Braverman is under investigation for similar offences, as is Dominic Raab, whose previous track record barely justified his reappointment as deputy prime minister.
Meanwhile Sunak was unable to find a place in government for his closest ally at Westminster, and former boss, Sajid Javid, who announced this week that he is standing down as an MP.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Labour Leader Keir Starmer opens up PMQs with a question about housing targets, accusing the Prime Minister of breaking promises.
Beware the Tory man-eating tigers
Sunak has had to strike similar compromises with the broader range of Conservatives in parliament.
Tory MPs have tasted blood so often in ousting four PMs – Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss – that they are the political equivalent of man-eating tigers, unable to stop.
Some of them are already predicting that next spring’s local election results will be so bad that they will have a chance then to get rid of “Rishi” and perhaps replace him with “Boris”. Many have already abandoned hope that the Conservatives can win the next general election and are thinking only of their own skins.
For more than a dozen MPs so far that means not standing for re-election. Quitter Matt Hancock epitomized the prevalent mood of self-interest this week when he lectured the prime minister that he was going because “the Conservative Party must now reconnect with the public we serve.”
Others are trying to bend the government to policies which will go down well with voters in their constituencies even if they are not necessarily in the national interest.
Sunak has little appetite to fight ideological battles
In spite of the notional Conservative majority in the Commons, Sunak’s programme is constantly vulnerable to rebellion and potential defeat.
Shire Tories don’t want house building in their back yard, so this week Sunak U-turned on house building.
Landowners and the construction industry like on-shore wind farms so Sunak U-turned to favour them.
Campaigners in the North East want the jobs generated by a new coal mine in Cumbria, so the government has given it the green light, overruling its own environmental advisors.
Sunak has little appetite to fight ideological battles with his own side in parliament, continuing instead to concentrate on practical problems, away from parliamentary scrutiny where possible.
Business managers have dropped the Schools Bill, pleading pressure of parliamentary time, even though the House is actually sitting for fewer hours than usual, and often goes home at teatime on Wednesday.
Raab’s plans for a British Bill of Rights are set to be shelved, in favour of practical measures on strikes and small boat migrants.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Un-named Video
The avoidance of hard hats
Chancellors of the Exchequer concentrate on one big thing, surfacing rarely to go public. Gordon Brown was shocked how constant the demands on him were when he became prime minister.
Former Chancellor Sunak is also finding out the hard way – as was shown by his initial decision, quickly reversed, not to attend the COP 27 meeting in Egypt. Since then he has only been out and about when he can’t avoid it, at the G20, Remembrance Day, and the Lord Mayor’s banquet.
Stung by missteps of his predecessors and his former self, Sunak has let it be known that he will not be donning hard hats and high vis jackets for what have become standard photo opportunities.
He will be hoping that trying to do the right thing, slowly and cautiously, will have political dividends over time, rather than being merely its own reward. As yet there is little sign that his low profile is paying off for the Conservatives.
Sunak’s absence of PR bluster has upset Tory cheerleaders who have come to expect the swagger of a Cameron, Johnson or Truss. But then, in the long run, such overconfident celebrity behaviour did neither them nor the UK much good.
Donald Trump has said Volodymyr Zelenskyy will have to approve a proposed peace plan to end the war in Ukraine.
The controversial 28-point proposal – which would hand swathes of land to Russia and limit the size of Kyiv’s military – closely resembles the Kremlin’s demands.
Mr Zelenskyy has warned he has reservations about the plan, telling Ukrainians in a solemn speech: “Now is one of the most difficult days in our history.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Russia-Ukraine peace proposal explained
But Russian President Vladimir Putin has cautiously welcomed the US proposals – and said they “could form the basis for a final peace settlement”.
Speaking to reporters at the White House, Mr Trump appeared to dismiss Mr Zelenskyy’s concerns: “He’ll have to like it… at some point, he’s going to have to accept something.”
The US president went on to reference their now-infamous Oval Office meeting back in February, where he told Ukraine‘s leader “you don’t have the cards”.
Kyiv has been given until Thursday to accept the peace plan – but this deadline could be extended to finalise the terms.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
We face losing major partner or dignity, says Zelenskyy
‘I am highly sceptical it will achieve peace’
Mr Trump has received pushback from members of his own party, with a prominent Republican warning the plan “has real problems”.
Senator Roger Wicker, who chairs the Senate Committee on Armed Services, expressed doubt that the White House proposals would achieve peace.
“Ukraine should not be forced to give up its lands to one of the world’s most flagrant war criminals in Vladimir Putin,” he warned.
Tim Ash from the Chatham House think tank added: “Russia gets everything it wants and Ukraine gets not very much.
“If Zelenskyy accepts this, I anticipate huge political, social and economic instability in Ukraine.”
Analysis: We could all pay if Europe doesn’t step up
The Trump peace plan is nothing of the sort. It takes Russian demands and presents them as peace proposals, in what is effectively a surrender ultimatum for Ukraine.
If accepted, it would reward armed aggression. The principle that even de facto borders cannot be changed by force – sacrosanct since World War Two for very good reasons – will have been trampled on at the behest of the leader of the free world.
According to Reuters, European nations including the UK, France and Germany are now working on a counterproposal with Kyiv.
EU leaders, who were not consulted about the plan, will hold a meeting on the sidelines of the G20 summit in South Africa on Saturday.
Sir Keir Starmer, who spoke to Mr Zelenskyy by phone on Friday, has warned “Russia pretends to be serious about peace, but their actions never live up to their words”.
Ahead of the talks, the prime minister said: “Ukraine has been ready to negotiate for months, while Russia has stalled and continued its murderous rampage. That is why we must all work together, with both the US and Ukraine, to secure a just and lasting peace once and for all. We will continue to coordinate closely with Washington and Kyiv to achieve that.
“However, we cannot simply wait for peace, we must strain every sinew to secure it. We must cut off Putin’s finance flows by ending our reliance on Russian gas. It won’t be easy, but it’s the right thing to do.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Inside the Ukraine peace plan
The EU’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said: “We all want this war to end, but how it ends matters. Russia has no legal right whatsoever to any concessions from the country it invaded. This is a very dangerous moment for us all.”
Read more from Sky News:
Starmer refuses to rule out manifesto-breaking tax rises
BBC board member resigns – and criticises ‘governance issues’
‘Ukraine may be facing an extremely difficult decision’
During his address, Mr Zelenskyy said he would not betray Ukraine’s national interest – but warned dilemmas lie ahead.
He added: “Either a loss of dignity or the risk of losing a key partner. Either accepting a complicated list of 28 demands or enduring an extremely harsh winter, the harshest yet, with all the risks that follow.
“A life without freedom, without dignity, without justice. And all while being asked to trust someone who has already attacked us twice.”
Pics: Reuters
Washington has reportedly threatened to cut off intelligence sharing and weapons supplies if Kyiv refuses to accept the deal.
The US-backed proposal would require Ukraine to withdraw from territory it still controls in eastern provinces that Russia claims to have annexed – with Russia giving up smaller amounts of land it holds in other regions.
Ukraine would also be permanently barred from joining NATO, and its armed forces would be capped at 600,000 troops.
Sanctions against Russia would also be gradually lifted, with Moscow invited back into the G8 and frozen assets pooled into an investment fund.
World
Ukraine and Europe cannot reject Trump’s plan – they will play for time and hope he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin
“Terrible”, “weird”, “peculiar” and “baffling” – some of the adjectives being levelled by observers at the Donald Trump administration’s peace plan for Ukraine.
The 28-point proposal was cooked up between Trump negotiator Steve Witkoff and Kremlin official Kirill Dmitriev without European and Ukrainian involvement.
It effectively dresses up Russian demands as a peace proposal. Demands first made by Russia at the high watermark of its invasion in 2022, before defeats forced it to retreat from much of Ukraine.
Ukraine war latest: Kyiv receives US peace plan
(l-r) Kirill Dmitriev and special envoy Steve Witkoff in St Petersburg in April 2025. Pic: Kremlin Pool Photo/AP
Its proposals are non-starters for Ukrainians.
It would hand over the rest of Donbas, territory they have spent almost four years and lost tens of thousands of men defending.
Analysts estimate at the current rate of advance, it would take Russia four more years to take the land it is proposing simply to give them instead.
It proposes more than halving the size of the Ukrainian military and depriving them of some of their most effective long-range weapons.
And it would bar any foreign forces acting as peacekeepers in Ukraine after any peace deal is done.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is Moscow back in Washington’s good books?
The plan comes at an excruciating time for the Ukrainians.
They are being pounded with devastating drone attacks, killing dozens in the last few nights alone.
They are on the verge of losing a key stronghold city, Pokrovsk.
And Volodymyr Zelenskyy is embroiled in the gravest political crisis since the war began, with key officials facing damaging corruption allegations.
Read more from Sky News:
Witkoff’s ‘secret’ plan to end war
Navy could react to laser incident
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Ukrainian support for peace plan ‘very much in doubt’
The suspicion is Mr Witkoff and Mr Dmitriev conspired together to choose this moment to put even more pressure on the Ukrainian president.
Perversely, though, it may help him.
There has been universal condemnation and outrage in Kyiv at the Witkoff-Dmitriev plan. Rivals have little choice but to rally around the wartime Ukrainian leader as he faces such unreasonable demands.
The genesis of this plan is unclear.
Was it born from Donald Trump’s overinflated belief in his peacemaking abilities? His overrated Gaza ceasefire plan attracted lavish praise from world leaders, but now seems mired in deepening difficulty.
The fear is Mr Trump’s team are finding ways to allow him to walk away from this conflict altogether, blaming Ukrainian intransigence for the failure of his diplomacy.
Mr Trump has already ended financial support for Ukraine, acting as an arms dealer instead, selling weapons to Europe to pass on to the invaded democracy.
If he were to take away military intelligence support too, Ukraine would be blind to the kind of attacks that in recent days have killed scores of civilians.
Europe and Ukraine cannot reject the plan entirely and risk alienating Mr Trump.
They will play for time and hope against all the evidence he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin and put pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the war, rather than force Ukraine to surrender instead.
The Eurovision Song Contest is changing its voting system, following allegations of “interference” by Israel’s government this year.
Israeli singer Yuval Raphael received the largest number of votes from the public in the contest in May, ultimately finishing as runner-up after the jury votes were counted.
But a number of broadcasters raised concerns about Israel’s result.
After the final, Irish broadcaster RTE requested a breakdown in voting numbers from contest organiser the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), while Spain’s public broadcaster, Radio Television Espanola (RTVE), called for a “complete review” of the voting system to avoid “external interference”.
In September, Dutch public broadcaster AVROTROS said it could no longer justify Israel‘s participation in the contest, due to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
It went on to say there had been “proven interference by the Israeli government during the last edition of the Song Contest, with the event being used as a political instrument”. The statement did not elaborate on the means of “interference”.
Sky News has contacted the Israeli government for comment.
In early December, the EBU will hold its winter general assembly, with members due to consider the changes, and if not satisfied, vote on Israel’s participation.
Key changes to next year’s competition include:
• Clearer rules around promotion of artists and their songs
• Cap on audience voting halved
• The return of professional juries to semi-finals
• Enhanced security safeguards
Read more: Could Eurovision boycotts over Israel lead to a competition crisis?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Will Eurovision boycott Israel?
Sanctions threat
The EBU said the tightening of rules around promotion was to “discourage disproportionate promotion campaigns… particularly when undertaken or supported by third parties, including governments or governmental agencies”.
It said that “any attempts to unduly influence the results will lead to sanctions”.
Contest director Martin Green said “no broadcaster or artist may now directly engage with or support campaigns by third parties – including governments or their agencies – that could distort the vote”.
He said the reduction in the number of votes that can be made online, or via SMS or phone call, from 20 to 10 was “designed to encourage more balanced participation”.
He said that “although the number of votes previously allowed did not unduly influence the results of previous contests, there were concerns expressed by participating broadcasters and fans alike”.
Professional juries in semi-finals – and younger jurors
It was also announced that professional juries in the semi-finals would be restored for the first time since 2022, with an expansion to the range of professions from which jurors can be chosen.
The EBU said this will give roughly 50-50 percentage weight between audience and jury votes.
At least two jurors aged 18-25 will be present in every jury, to reflect the appeal of the contest with younger audiences.
Also mentioned were enhanced technical safeguards designed to “protect the contest from suspicious or coordinated voting activity” and strengthen security systems that “monitor, detect and prevent fraudulent patterns”.
Politics making itself heard over Europop lyrics
Mr Green said that the neutrality and integrity of the competition is of “paramount importance” to the EBU, its members, and audiences, adding that the event “should remain a neutral space and must not be instrumentalised”.
Israel’s 2024 representative, Eden Golan. Pic: AP
A vocally apolitical event, world events have dominated Eurovision in recent years.
Russia was banned from the competition in 2022 following its invasion of Ukraine.
Israel has competed in Eurovision for more than 50 years and won four times, but there have been ongoing calls to block their participation over the conduct of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government in the Hamas-Israel war.
Israel denies targeting civilians in Gaza and has said it is being unfairly demonised abroad.
In September, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Iceland, and Slovenia threatened to withdraw their participation in Eurovision unless Israel is excluded from the competition.
There were also demonstrations against Israel’s inclusion in Basel, Switzerland, when the 2025 competition took place.
‘Step in right direction’
Responding to the changes, Iceland’s official broadcaster RUV told Sky News they were “a step in the right direction”, and they would be discussing them with their “sister stations in the Nordic countries” ahead of the EBU meeting in December.
Ireland’s official broadcaster RTE told Sky News: “Clearly, events in the Middle East are unfolding day by day. As previously confirmed by the EBU, the issue of participation in the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest has been included on the agenda of the EBU Executive Board’s ordinary Winter General Assembly.”
Sky News has also contacted the official broadcaster for the Netherlands (AVROTROS), Spain (RTVE), Slovenia (RTVSLO), and Israel (Kan) for comment.
The chief executive of Kan, Golan Yochpaz, has previously said the event should not become political and that there is “no reason” why Israel should not be part of it.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Pic: Reuters
Netanyahu praised Israeli entrant
Earlier this year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Israel’s 2025 Eurovision entrant Yuval Raphael she had brought the country “a lot of honour” after she finished in second place, adding “you’re the real winner. Statistically, it’s true… You entered the hearts of a huge portion of the public in Europe.”
The year before he told entrant Eden Golan: “I saw that you received almost the highest number of votes from the public and this is the most important thing, not from the judges but from the public, and you held Israel’s head up high in Europe.”
In October, a ceasefire deal was put in place, aimed at bringing an end to the two-year war in the Middle East.
The war began when Hamas stormed into Israel on October 7 2023, killing around 1,200 people and taking 251 hostage.
Israel invaded Gaza in retaliation, with airstrikes and ground assaults devastating much of the territory and killing more than 67,000, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.
Its figures do not differentiate between civilians and combatants, but it says around half of those killed were women and children.
The world’s largest live music event, next year’s contest will be held in Vienna, Austria, in May and will celebrate 70 years of Eurovision.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024