A new Rishi Sunak is being launched at Tory conference and one I saw first hand being interviewed by Laura Kuenssberg in Manchester this morning. This version is more feisty, ignores attempted interruptions and is, in general, spoiling for a fight. The Prime Minister is trying to ditch his timeshare-salesman image and is seeking to become a slayer of dragons but without (so far) any actual dragons. He’s not doing much, but his enemies react so wildly as to exaggerate what he’s actually doing.
I was critical of Sunak’s five pledges and still regard them as nonsense. But in this week’s Spectator our leading article is far more positive because we have been arguing, for years, for a sense-check to be applied to HS2 and net zero.
Today’s Sunday Telegraph is just as supportive. Sunak has broken the omertà: that you must never mention the cost or drawbacks of net zero. Or HS2. He has opened a discussion on whether either of these projects will deliver benefits proportional to their costs. But if he starts applying this test to the other Tory pet projects, how many would survive? That’s what concerns his critics: it’s the philosophy, not the reforms. Because the reforms, in and of themselves, are small beer.
Sunak is aligning with the EU on a 2035 petrol-car sales ban rather than the old, demonstrably unworkable 2030 target. He agrees with the Infrastructure Commission that HS2 in its current form has blown its budget so much as to be undoable and needs tweaked. He didn’t kill HS2. The project, in its original form, died when the budget moved from the £15.6 billion George Osborne promised at the 2008 Tory conference in Birmingham and closer to £100 billion now. For years, most cabinet members have seen this as a disaster – yet few dared say so out loud.
Sunak has been helped by green lobbyists who act as if he’s just been caught in the Sycamore Gap with with a chainsaw
It’s worth considering what nonsense that 2008 Osbornian idea actually was. The pledge was to start HS2 in 2015 and have it finished in 2027 – to Manchester and Leeds. All billed as a green alternative to domestic flights. Some £20 billion has been spent on HS2 now, but not an inch of track has been laid. As Osborne knew, he’d be long gone by the time the real bill came in. The Spectator ran a 2012 cover saying the project had died, given that the real costs were clearer and an economic rationale was no longer possible. But we were wrong. HS2 has staggered on, undead, ever since. Sunak is simply trying to point out the obvious.
None of this is radical. But Sunak has been helped mightily by green lobbyists, corporates and Tory donors who act as if he’s just been caught with a chainsaw in the Sycamore Gap. He invites his opponents to explain why certain families should spend £5,000 to £20,000 on green upgrades that would make a negligible difference to the net zero target. Or why they think the overall agenda is affected in any way. They cannot because the net zero debate has so far been conducted in a hysterical fashion: either you go along with all of it, or you’re a denier. Most voters are stuck in the middle: with Sunak.
Sunak was opposing HS2 and net zero (and lockdown) while chancellor. He lost the argument and didn’t return to it, telling himself that Boris Johnson had the personal mandate. You can argue that Sunak should have quit before he actually did, given the widening chasm between his view and the PM’s. But his newly chosen campaign themes – moderating net zero, championing motorists, emphasising cost-benefit analyses – are his longstanding bugbears. Attempts to portray this as cyclical and poll-driven will fail.
He’s moving not to the right but to the centre. Uxbridge showed that people resent having their intelligence insulted by Sadiq Khan pretending that there’s an air quality emergency in London. When environmentalism becomes a tax-raising racket, with untruths dressed up as science, people notice. An Opinium poll puts the Tories just 10 points behind today, half the normal deficit. A freak poll, no doubt. But, as conference starts, a helpful freak.
Much more needs to be done. As we say in the leading article, the Triple Lock is, like HS2, an Osbornian bad idea that needs to go. But Sunak thinks it’s needed to bribe elderly voters so it will stay. He should also draw a dividing line on welfare reform given that Liz Kendall, the shadow secretary of state for Work and Pensions, may well emerge as a less formidable opponent than Jonathan Ashworth was. We have heard almost nothing from Kendall, so it’s hard to tell how effective she’ll be. But welfare reform is a topic that makes Labour feel queasy and it’s possible that the Tories have it to themselves.
For the first time in quite a few months, I can see a way through for Sunak – but he does not have much time to lose. His verbal positioning needs to be followed up by bigger, more significant reforms. It’s unlikely that Keir Starmer will follow. If Sunak can be mocked as ChatGBT with a wristband, Starmer is the spinning colour wheel of death: very slow to respond, and even when he does, not doing much. Starmer needs the benediction of the lobbyists and the NGOs who Sunak is now defining himself against.
Sunak has come quite far posing as a radical by saying deeply ordinary things. At a time of hysteria, of course, stating the obvious can be a revolutionary act. For the first time since entering No. 10, he seems to have something to say. As a result, he’ll actually have an audience this week in Manchester. We’ll soon see whether he has much new to say.
Comments