Fighting for her political survival after the collapse of her economic agenda, Prime Minister Liz Truss of Britain suffered another heavy blow on Wednesday after she was forced to fire one of her most senior cabinet ministers, the second major ouster in a six-week-old government that has tumbled into chaos.
Hours after Ms. Truss rejected demands to resign herself — “I’m a fighter and not a quitter,” she declared — the prime minister dismissed the home secretary, Suella Braverman, over a security breach involving a government document that Ms. Braverman had sent to a lawmaker in Parliament through her personal email.
Last Friday, Ms. Truss fired her chancellor of the Exchequer, Kwasi Kwarteng, who was the architect of the sweeping tax cuts that rattled financial markets and sent the British pound into a tailspin. The government’s subsequent reversal of those measures has left Ms. Truss’s grip on power in doubt — an impression deepened by Ms. Braverman’s blunt criticism of the government on her way out.
Appearing at a stormy session of prime minister’s questions in Parliament, Ms. Truss repeated her apology for the disastrous fiscal program. But she insisted that she could continue to govern despite all the turmoil.
“I had to take the decision because of the economic situation to adjust our policies,” Ms. Truss said, her obvious understatement drawing catcalls from opposition lawmakers and pained expressions from members of her own Conservative Party.
It was a brutal ordeal for Ms. Truss in only her third appearance for such questioning as prime minister. While political analysts said that the session had not produced the kind of knockout blow that would make Ms. Truss’s ouster imminent, the emergence of the news about Ms. Braverman only a few hours later exposed bitter rifts in the cabinet and a prime minister largely at the mercy of events.
Ms. Braverman, a hard-liner who was hostile to moves to allow more immigrants into Britain to help boost the economy, acknowledged she was guilty of a technical breach of security rules. But in her letter of resignation to Ms. Truss, she said she had “concerns about the direction of this government,” accusing it of breaking pledges to voters and, in particular, of failing to curb immigration.
“I have made a mistake; I accept responsibility; I resign,” Ms. Braverman added in a reference some saw as an implicit rebuke to Ms. Truss, who has refused to quit despite her admission of a bigger error.
Ms. Braverman was replaced by Grant Shapps, a more centrist figure, whose appointment underscored the shift in the political balance of the cabinet away from the hard-liners who supported Ms. Truss in the leadership contest she recently won and the rising influence of the new chancellor, Jeremy Hunt.
Both men supported the former chancellor, Rishi Sunak, when he ran, unsuccessfully, against Ms. Truss, warning that her economic agenda was a fairy tale. And Mr. Shapps’s support for Mr. Sunak was the reason he was not offered a cabinet job by Ms. Truss when she came to power.
Under tough questioning by opposition lawmakers, Ms. Truss managed to reveal yet another reversal in the government’s policy. On Tuesday, senior officials had signaled that Downing Street might no longer honor an election guarantee to increase state pension payments to keep up with both average earnings growth and the inflation rate, which is now at 10.1 percent.
But when Ms. Truss was asked about the pledge by the parliamentary leader of the Scottish National Party, Ian Blackford, she said she was “completely committed” to it. That appeared to put her at odds with Mr. Hunt, who has warned about the need for painful spending cuts.
A Downing Street spokesman said afterward that the prime minister and chancellor had conferred on the policy on Wednesday morning before she spoke. And Mr. Hunt sat behind Ms. Truss, nodding at her statements.
Still, with the confusion over policy and Ms. Braverman’s sudden ouster, the question of who is actually running the government hung over British politics. On Monday, when Mr. Hunt appeared in the House of Commons to confirm the reversal of her economic program, she sat silently behind him.
The leader of the opposition Labour Party, Keir Starmer, pressed Ms. Truss to explain why her statements should be treated with any credibility, given the reversal of her policies and the appointment of Mr. Hunt, who, at a minimum, has taken control of the economic levers of government.
Referring to the tax cuts, as well as Mr. Kwarteng, Mr. Starmer said, “They’re all gone, so why is she still here?”
Ms. Truss tried to turn the tables by accusing Mr. Starmer of backing “militant” unions: Railway workers are scheduled to strike again next month. But that counterpunch failed to land on a day dominated by uncertainty over how the prime minister could rebuild her standing.
“I have acted in the national interest to make sure we have financial stability,” Ms. Truss said, repeating, “I’m a fighter, not a quitter.” That line was made famous by the Labour politician Peter Mandelson, though, as Ms. Truss’s critics pointed out, he resigned twice from the cabinet in his career.
Adding to the sense of crisis, one of Ms. Truss’s key aides, Jason Stein, was suspended on Wednesday, pending an ethics investigation following a briefing by an unnamed Downing Street source against a senior Conservative lawmaker.
Her own lawmakers were openly speculating about how long Ms. Truss could remain in office. One of them, Steve Double, told the BBC that she had until the end of next week to convince her colleagues that she should stay.
Perhaps the biggest factor in her favor is that there is no sign yet of consensus on a successor, and some lawmakers are hesitant about rushing into another leadership contest so soon after the last one produced an outcome that most Conservative lawmakers now seem to regret.
One argument circulating among Tories is that they should wait until after Oct. 31, the date on which Mr. Hunt is scheduled to present a new plan likely to involve big cuts to government spending programs.
Britain’s financial fortunes have been so worsened by Ms. Truss’s brief period in power, the argument goes, that it makes political sense to allow her to take the blame for the painful consequences before replacing her.
Some lawmakers, however, believe that the longer Ms. Truss remains in power, the greater the damage will be to their already tarnished brand. The small group of Conservative lawmakers publicly calling for her to quit grew when William Wragg joined them, saying he was “personally ashamed” of the events around the tax-cutting announcement.
At the heart of the machinations is Graham Brady, the affable chairman of a powerful committee of Conservative backbench members of Parliament, who would preside over the election of a new party leader if there is one.
Few want a repetition of the contest Ms. Truss won after being chosen by party members from a shortlist of two selected by Conservative lawmakers. Members of Parliament want to be more in the driver’s seat if Ms. Truss is forced out, and Mr. Brady’s committee could change the rules to try to sideline activists.
As Ms. Truss was fighting for her job, her ministers were grappling with two brewing international crises: fears of a Russian escalation in the war in Ukraine, and a diplomatic clash with China over the violence that erupted during a demonstration outside the Chinese Consulate in Manchester on Sunday.
Britain’s defense minister, Ben Wallace, traveled to Washington unexpectedly on Tuesday to meet with Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III in the wake of Russia’s ferocious artillery attacks on Ukraine. Mr. Wallace’s deputy, James Heappey, said the reason for the talks was “beyond belief really,” suggesting they had discussed threats by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to use a nuclear weapon.
For the opposition, though, it was enough to seize on the political convulsions.
“This Tory government is falling apart at the seams,” said Yvette Cooper, who speaks for Labour on home affairs. “To appoint and then sack both your home secretary and chancellor within six weeks is utter chaos.”
No comments:
Post a Comment