The spectacle of political TV debates is always a hard watch; I never enjoy politicians vying with each other on TV. They are, however, vitally important as they are one of the few occasions politicians step out of the Westminster bubble and are put before the public in all their vulnerability. The focus is so pointed that a good or bad showing can make or break a politician. In this blog, I give my verdict on the two recent leadership debates and the five Conservative candidates who would be Prime Minister.
I went into the debates thinking that Rishi Sunak would simply be unable to connect with ‘red wallers’ and ‘blue collar’ conservatives, with his privileged upbringing, billionaire wife, and polished private school delivery. Sunak, however, was the only one who looked and sounded like a potential Prime Minister. He had presence, got his message across well, and had the confidence to put himself about.
Sunak’s weaknesses are that he has raised the tax burden to the highest it has been in 70 years and his family’s vast wealth. He handled attacks in these areas adroitly: in countering his position on taxation, Sunak set out how he was willing to do what is necessary to ensure the NHS has the funding it needs post-Covid, even if it was politically inconvenient. He made no bones about his father in-law’s wealth saying that it is an inspiring story of a self-made man who created a business empire, and that it should be seen as an example of what can be achieved through hard work.
In response to Kristian Guru Murthy’s politically charged attack on energy bills Sunak robustly countered saying that Murthy shouldn’t ‘mis-worry’ people with help on its way, including £1,200 targeted assistance to those most in need. The Conservatives are terrible at communicating all the good things that they do and Sunak’s steely counter-attack here was one of the few moments when the candidates were on the front foot.
The experience and achievements of Liz Truss is such that she is the only viable alternative to Sunak in the race to become Prime Minister. Truss stuck to her story on being able to deliver from day one and gravitated back time and again to her achievements in office which includes the completing in quick time of a dozen trade deals and standing up to Putin’s aggression in Ukraine.
The economics of Truss was probably the soundest of the five. Economic growth in the UK is set to be the slowest in the 7 most-advanced world economies and in response she is seeking to cut taxes to stimulate the economy and treat the Covid debt like a war debt by paying it back over a longer period of time which, by definition, is fiscal conservatism. Stagflation (inflation + low growth) is upon us and with the cost of living crisis weakening people’s spending power and a recession looming, an economic strategy seeking to harness growth cannot but be attractive.
This was the key dividing line in the debate: inflation vs economic growth. Rishi Sunak held his line that he wouldn’t enact inflationary economic policy, whilst Liz Truss (as did Penny Mordaunt, admittedly) promoted an economic growth strategy through reversing the rise in National Insurance contributions and tax cuts.
I am just not sure Truss has the strength of personality to be Prime Minister. Truss came across as robotic at times and, although superficial, oratory delivery is important in politics. With politics just being noise to many, when one has the attention of the public it is vital one can communicate and come across well. Thinking ahead to the General Election to come, I don’t see Truss having the warmth and personality to shine under the scrutiny of an election campaign.
Truss clearly believes that she has the knowledge and experience to be Prime Minister and she can certainly back it up, and perhaps rather than a polished politician what we need right now is someone who is best able to do the job, with appearances being a secondary consideration.
Which leaves the other three. Opinion polls after the two debates showed how the general public liked Tom Tugenhadt and thought he would make a good Prime Minister. I have no idea what debate these people were watching as I thought Tugenhadt was hopeless. Tugenhadt’s strength is foreign policy and his answer in the Channel 4 debate in relation to net-zero commitments, in fairness, was very good, saying how it is all well and good reducing carbon emissions in the UK but if they are exported abroad it makes no difference. But his answers in relation to issues facing the UK were vacuous and rambling. He even said the phrase ‘incredibly incredible’ which sums up how even when speaking he was barely saying anything.
Kemi Badernoch’s retort to Tugenhadt’s criticism of the Boris administration was an example of her refreshingly no nonsense approach, declaiming his criticism as easy for someone to say who had no responsibility or difficult decisions to make. This was seen again when ITV’s Julie Etchingham insisted that Brexit wasn’t done which Kemi flatly dismissed saying that Brexit is done and we need to move on. Quite.
At these debates, though, Kemi lacked stage presence and was too polite, even at times putting her hand up to speak. A more confident speaker wouldn’t have waited for the opportunity. When she did find her stride Kemi was very persuasive and succinctly conveyed that there are no easy answers to the issues of the day, with all decisions resulting in trade offs.
Penny Mordaunt was the most disappointing of the five. The bookies' favourite going into the debates, Penny was controlled throughout in an attempt to come across as a serious politician. Her ‘team’ approach to governing may be laudable after the more presidential style premiership of Boris, but it made her seem lightweight. This is not the time for monetary policy decisions she claimed, they should wait for the autumn budget with buy-in from cabinet ministers. As sensible as this sounds, the leadership contest is happening right now and Penny will need to show she has the substance necessary for the top job.
Conservative MPs are voting again this week to narrow candidates down to two. Kemi and Liz Truss are vying for the same ‘right’ wing of the parliamentary party and who they eventually fall behind will be fascinating. Eventually this wing of the party will coalesce around one of them and that should see them through to the final two against Sunak. My view is that they should fall behind Truss. What she lacks in delivery she makes up for in experience. Kemi is for the future.
I am looking for substance and credibility in my next Prime Minister and it is clear that only Sunak and Truss come anywhere close to it. In the ITV debate the candidates had the opportunity to ask each other questions. Truss chose to ask Sunak about China. This exchange summed up the pair to me: Truss asked a grown up question about a serious threat to national security that extends beyond domestic travails and Sunak gave a rounded answer that shows he has the mental bandwidth and intellect to navigate the Country’s interests on the international stage.
Comentários