Pandemic and Putin have made it hard for ministers to do more than respond to crisis

Tories could find excuses. In each case, the by-election was held in difficult circumstances. Voters, who do not appreciate unnecessary by-elections, are inclined to treat them as referendums on the question: “Does the government deserve a kick in the pants?” (“Pants” is putting it politely.) So it is not surprising that there was a large anti-government swing. This does not mean that it would be replicated in a general election.

Equally, as Tories are quick to point out, this was much more than just a crossing of the floor from their party to Labour. You could argue that the real winner was – in Laura Kuessenberg’s term – the “sofa vote”. A lot of people just couldn’t be bothered. Even so, it is impossible to disagree with John Curtice’s conclusion. The Tories have an electoral mountain to climb. 

There is a simple reason for this. Vast numbers of people are fed up. They will run through a long shopping list of complaints, often finishing with “and another thing.”

One might define them as the “and another thing” vote.

Some of this is unfair. Between them, Covid and Putin cost the country at least £600 billion. That had inevitable consequences: inflation and increased taxes. But there has been a virulent outbreak of 20:20 hindsight. These days, it is hard to find anyone who admits that they were wholly in favour of lockdown. That is not what it felt like at the time. According to the polls, the British public seemed to have a dismaying enthusiasm for lockdown and tighter controls. Keir Starmer followed the polls, as he usually does. 

Moreover, in the early days of the epidemic, when Boris nearly died, there was barely suppressed panic in much of Whitehall and Westminster. Some experts thought that we might be facing an outbreak on the scale of Spanish flu. Mass death would overwhelm the health service and with it the economy, not to mention society. This was partly because of the Italians. 

If their crisis had started in Palermo or Naples, Northern Europeans would have found it easier to stay calm. “What d’you expect: the mafia will have stolen the drugs and the beds.'” But when the plague hit Bergamo, it was a different matter. In real terms, Bergamo is in Northern Europe. So when its hospitals were plunged into chaos, our officials were gravely worried. ‘What happens when this reaches Bootle or Birkenhead?’

It may not have been necessary to impose such a severe lockdown, or to furlough a large proportion of the economy. But it is easy to understand the government’s reasoning. Alas for the Government, a lot of the voters are not in an understanding mood. Indeed, they are ready to blame the entire political system. From the sub-postmasters to wokery in defence recruiting to the small boats, to the large boats that cannot go on station, there is a constant growling: “why is it that nothing works?”. Nor should we forget the Downing Street parties. Though they may have been trivial events, they reinforced an impression of insouciance and hypocrisy: one rule for us, a different rule for them – and why weren’t they concentrating at their desks, not BYOB-ing about in the No.10 garden?

Although there is a great deal of “a plague on both your houses” in all this, the Tories are bound to cop most of the blame. They are in office. As things stand, “time for a change” may not be repeated with much enthusiasm. Nor has it seemed easy to challenge.

Yet that is what the PM must do. He has got to say, as he did in Manchester, that he sees the need for change and will respond to it. Yes, his party has been in government, but pandemic and Putin between them made it hard for ministers to do more than respond to crisis. Now that the worst is over, there is scope for creativity. He should insist that he and his colleagues cannot wait.

In a similar vein, he might say something along the following lines. “It must be acknowledged that even before the recent crises, there was a widespread feeling that the public services were often failing to serve the public. There are plenty of able, conscientious, dedicated public servants but there have also been failures of ethos and leadership. We will undertake the long process of reform necessary to put that right.”

A short process is also needed. We must assume that Jeremy Hunt is preparing tax cuts. The danger is that he will be caught between two fires. Some of his own backbenchers will express disappointment that his cuts don’t go far enough, while Labour will say that, after trashing the economy and allowing the tax burden to rise, he is now coming out with some pathetic bribes which the country cannot afford and which will further undermine the public services.

In response, Hunt should get his retaliation in first. He ought to explain why the economy has been suffering – just like every other major European economy – and what we have done to put it right. As a result, we can now afford some judicious tax cuts, and under sensible stewardship there will be more to follow.

Apropos public expenditure, it is not quite too late for Hunt and Sunak to set out the facts. The government is spending around £1.2 trillion, which is around 45 percent of national income and around £17,000 for every person in this country. With all that expenditure, we ought to be able to afford enough hospitals, doctors, nurses, schools et al – perhaps even the odd warship that works.  The key is efficiency: galvanising the public realm so that it begins to work and to serve the public.

It is late in the electoral cycle for such a rhetorical initiative. But as a previous Tory leader once said, there is no alternative. If Rishi fights, he might lose. If he fails to fight, defeat is inevitable. 

Assuming he does fight, it should be easier to lead. Despite the grumblers and pessimists, there are still plenty of Tory MPs who would be ready to respond to leadership. That would also be a more enjoyable business than waiting for the end.

We also know that Sir Stumbler is the anti-inspirational candidate. His Deputy, Angela Rayner, would like to fill that gap. She is determined to make it easier for trade union leaders to call strikes. I think that she may possibly be misreading the public’s wishes. Are there really that many voters who think that the country needs more strikes?

As Rishi Sunak showed us last Monday on GB News, he enjoys campaigning and is good at it. A lot of viewers were surprised, so there is an obvious lesson. More surprises, please: more campaigning. It may all come to nothing. But at least the Tories’ opponents would know that they have been in a fight. 

Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life