Heroes: The Inexorable Rise of the Right 

 

‘Try to cry out in the heat of the moment 

Possessed by a fury that burns from inside’ 

 
As readers will know a common theme through my articles is the rise of right-wing politicians, which I regard as one of the consequences of the GFC. Readers will also recollect that in my very first column I predicted that Brexit would cause ruptures within the Tory’s as the right became mover vocal and influential. 

However, before I get dark and depressing, a moment of light relief linked to investment.  

Tony Blair’s son Euan company, Multiverse, made a pre-tax loss of £14.2m last year on revenues of £27m. The business has been loss making since inception in 2016. 

Despite this, the company was awarded the coveted tech ‘unicorn’ status (1) when it was valued at £1.4bn in fundraising driven by US venture capital firms in June 2022. 
 
See: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicorn_(finance) 
 
Now, I am the first to admit that I know little about investment, but a business that consistently losses money, and that is valued at more than 50x sales, seems to be based on hope more than anything else.  

Still, good luck to the lad! 

Returning to this weeks theme, the uneasy alliance that is the Tory party continues to wobble as the right flex their muscles. Senior Tories warned Rishi Sunak that he is enjoying the ‘calm before the storm‘, with MPs plotting to tackle him over immigration and plans to secure ‘Brexit freedoms’. 

Whilst the two issues come as no surprise both are controversial. The former will bring the government into confrontation with the House of Lords, the latter with the European court of human rights. 

A former cabinet minister was quoted saying; ‘Sunak’s got to take risks, but it is not in his nature and he has a risk-averse chancellor. You get to May and a bad election result, then get the 2019 ‘red wall’ intake seriously concerned about their seats. That’s when it’s all going to kick off. It really is the calm before the storm at the moment.’ 

Without doubt many Tories are looking over their shoulder and are seeing the spectre of Reform UK looming large. 
 

‘That’s when it’s all going to kick off. It really is the calm before the storm at the moment’

 
David Jones, a former Brexit minister, warned Sunak that his authority ‘rests upon it being completed successfully’. He added that ‘the future of the Conservative party‘ was at stake. 

‘I was proud in 2019 to stand on a manifesto of getting Brexit done and delivering on its opportunities, founded on the support of many thousands of working-class voters who had been wounded by Labour’s historic betrayal on Brexit. We must deliver on it.’ 

I find Jones’s comment that ‘the future of the Conservative party‘ is at stake, especially interesting, as I predicted prior to the Brexit referendum that the outcome had the potential to see the party splinter. 

In addition, news that the former Conservative treasurer Peter Cruddas, a key ally of Boris Johnson, is set to launch a Momentum-style grassroots campaign, called Conservative Democratic Organisation (‘CDO’) to overhaul party democracy, further proves my point. CDO aims to give members full say over candidate selections ‘with minimum interference by CCHQ [Conservative campaign headquarters]’, including the power to deselect MPs. 

Priti Patel, the former home secretary and close ally of Johnson, is an early stage high-profile supporter of the proposals, said: ‘Our grassroots are the heart and soul of our party. They are our greatest assets and advocates and they should never be taken for granted. 

‘Party members are committed to our values of freedom, enterprise and opportunity and we need to empower them to have more say over our policies and candidates. That will make us stronger, more successful in government, and boost our membership numbers.’ 

Cruddas and other senior backers of CDO tried unsuccessfully in the summer to put Johnson on the ballot paper for the Tory leadership contest, a move which attracted grassroots support. 

In the announcement of the group’s formation on the Conservative Post website, it said ‘many of us are fed up with having left-wing candidates and a left-wing agenda imposed on us from above – we are in the Conservative party, not Labour, for a reason‘. 

Part of the reason behind the proposal is the removal of Liz Truss as PM after she was backed by members, and then replaced by Rishi Sunak without a members’ vote. 

The group proposes reducing the role of CCHQ to grading candidates on their ability and core beliefs. ‘The centralising and controlling direction of Central Office would be ended; which has led to many MPs being selected who are not genuine Conservatives, do not have the necessary skills or commitment, and have insufficient loyalty to the party.’  

‘This has manifested itself in the appalling behaviour of some current Conservative MPs, and previous ones who were stripped of the whip, and who are the root cause of political instability at present.’ 

Whilst this seems aimed at bringing Johnson back as leader, it should be remembered that, whilst the parliamentary party selected Sunak, it was Liz Truss, the runner-up, who won the contest thanks to party members. Can we afford anymore of their blind stupidity? 

In the face of this right-wing belligerence what can Drippy Rishi offer?  

In terms of dealing with the ongoing strikes he is playing the hardman, further tightening anti-strike legislation, and hastening our descent into a police state. 
 

‘he is playing the hardman, further tightening anti-strike legislation, and hastening our descent into a police state’

 
The right to strike is fundamental to worker rights. However, under the provisions of a new law, trade unions in sectors such as health, education, rail and fire would be required to keep ‘a minimum service level‘ running during a strike – effectively voiding the right of workers to withdraw their labour. Workers disobeying this could be sacked effectively compelling them to work. 

Workers who want to strike would be forbidden from doing so, meaning that trade unions would be required to ask them to cross their colleagues’ picket lines. 

The new legislation could also threaten trade unions with bankruptcy. When workers walk off the job during industrial action, they are potentially in breach of contract, and trade unions have been the cause of that breach. But if ballots are conducted according to the law, they can’t be sued for losses incurred due to strike action. 

If the new legislation is passed, trade unions would be made liable for losses incurred by strikes that didn’t maintain a minimum service, which could push the union into bankruptcy. 

Politically it helps Sunak keep the right onside, and shows his loyalty to Thatcherism.  In addition, there is the possibility that the unions will overreact and that Labour will be drawn in and damaged by association with an upsurge of militancy, with a resultant upswing in Tory popularity with the electorate. 

It is hard to see beyond provocation and distraction. Should the bill pass through parliament it is likely to be tested in the courts before key provisions can take effect,  as was the case with offshoring immigrants to Rwanda.  
 

‘This is yet more proof that the government favours confrontation over solutions’

 
This is yet more proof that the government favours confrontation over solutions. The bill does nothing to solve the strikes, but that isn’t the intent behind it. 

In addition, the imprecise drafting and sweeping terms contained within it could provide ministers with the opportunity to rule all industrial relations by decree rather than limiting their powers to are currently regarded as essential services.  

What the government will not, or cannot acknowledge is that the current disputes are caused by their actions which have caused real-terms wages to fall over the last 14-years. TUC research shows that nurses have lost the equivalent of £3,000 a year on average, while midwives and ambulance drivers have lost £4,000. 

Deliberate government policy has created an economy that makes strikes necessary. Record numbers are seeking help from Trussell Trust food banks and the majority of those in poverty are in working households. 

It doesn’t have to be this way. If workers are really essential, as this legislation implies, then pay them properly. 

This lack of financial incentives for workers might explain our poor productivity. The highly productive decades of the 1950s-60s benefitted from three key factors: ideas, investment and the struggle against inequality. The economy was driven by new products becoming available to the masses through policies that encouraged full employment, collective bargaining and rising wages. Today, whilst we still have plenty of ideas, government policy has caused business to be frightened to invest, and their policies have fuelled the fires of inequality. Until this changes the economy will continue to register low-growth. 
 

‘If workers are really essential, as this legislation implies, then pay them properly’

 
Aside from taking us further towards being a police state, Sunak gave a speech last week outlining his aims. Ironically, so did the Labour leader.   

Both speeches had much in common; cliches about the energy of the hard-working British people Both tried to sound hopeful, because voters prefer to optimism to pessimism. They both championed the usual soundbites; ‘new internationally competitive growth clusters in high-value industries’. Both stressed ‘innovation‘, perhaps because it makes them sound tomorrow solution. 

Both majored on ‘change‘, which suggest that Sunak understand that  this is necessary if Britain is to  be made better.  
 

‘new internationally competitive growth clusters in high-value industries’

 
Starmer had more ambitious plans, including green energy goals, and redistributing power away from Westminster. 

Sunak clearly misses where we are with his ‘big idea‘ was that all teenagers should study maths until they are 18. This, other than being tokensim, puts more pressure on under-funded public services as we don’t have sufficient teachers to fulfil this. 

Both spoke of ‘tough’ choices, yet managed to avoid the elephant in the room; Brexit. Each mentioned it only in passing and neither confronted its crippling effect on our prosperity. The simple reality is that until Brexit is either reversed or restructured no amount of ideas will change anything! 

Sunak’s plan consisted of the obvious, growing the economy, managing inflation, with no mention of anything amounting to a political programme. Perhaps this can be explained but the fact is that his party is fragmented that it cannot agree on anything. Rebel MPs have pressured him into dropping reform of the planning system, despite the manifesto commitment to build 300,000 new houses a year, or the perennial pledge to deal with social care.  

In truth extra maths is all he can offer without risking the fractious, restive coalition that keeps him in office. 

Brexit is no different. Whilst he knows that a compromise deal over the NI protocol is required if we are to improve UK-EU relation, the hard-right European Research Group will oppose anything that looks like compromise. The same applies to the attempt to scrap and replace 4,000 laws by the end of 2023 that might contain an element of EU law. 
 

‘I expect Johnson to return as Tory leader’

 
In contrast the right have no interest in dealing with our failing social care system, or in resolving the ongoing strikes that are crippling the country. 

Sunak is fighting a losing battle with his right-wing, they rule the roost and can make or break a leader. With the spectre of Farage and Reform UK looming large this will only get worse.  

The Tories are vulnerable to Reform in a number of seats, and I could foresee that extending to the ‘red wall’. Johnson’s 2019 success was built-on Farage standing candidates down, which, it appears won’t be the case going forward. I expect Johnson to return as Tory leader, but wouldn’t be surprised to find Reform holding the balance of power after the next election. 

Brexit aside, we know Farage admired Truss’s failed budget. We can expect more of the same, summarised as shrinking the state and low taxes. 

A small state allows business and entrepreneurs to do as they wish, and low taxes mean they will contribute less. De facto, the rich will flourish and the poor will remain just that, only the gap will widen. Any dissenters will be pilloried as ‘doing the country down’. 

This is government to the exclusion of the many. 

Ask yourself this. What does the government do for you?    

‘Our vision touched the sky 

Immortalists with points to prove’ 

 
 
Some familiar, and familiarly depressing themes from Philip this week; possibly one of the most dispiriting things was the ‘opportunity’ to see Sunak and Starmer’s visions of the future back to back and realise that’s all we’ve got. Hobson’s Choice.

He may only be keeping Boris’ seat warm, but Sunak seems to become more and more irritating and insignificant with every speech he sings; does he actually read them beforehand? Does he actually undertand them? Is he actually just ‘Briefcase Wanker’ Will from the Inbetweeners?

Talking of wankers, Harry Hewitt’s book is out, and apparently selling like hot cakes at Kandahar’s Waterboarded and Stoned Literary Emporium.

I suspect his advance will soon pale into insignificance next to his personal protection budget, and fully expect Vol 4 to conclude that his recollection of killing 25 ‘bad-guys’ was in fact a dream he had after having beaned himself on a dog bowl. 

Meantime, Boris is holed up in Carole Bamford’s £20m London gaff and true to form is reporting it as a £10k a month ‘bung’, when comparable places cost £30k. Maybe his mere presence devalued it – and he did say he was going to lay down in front of the bulldozers to prevent Heathrow expansion, just before he sodded off to avoid the vote.

Then, despite Grant Shapps/Fox/Green/Stockheath’s attempt to airbrush him away, Boris was back at HQ looking for all the world like the love child of Ann Widdecombe and Thor the wanking walrus – seemingly untroubled that the £32,000 an hour he charges to trot out some reheated old flim-flam, is about the same a nurse can expect to bring up a family on for a year. FMOB.

What was Philip thinking?:

Writing this piece and looking out of the window reminded me of my comments in the very first article, when I talked about growing up in mid-70s London and everything was grey. Weather aside, it feels like we have come full circle. Whilst much has changed for the better, there is an overwhelming feeling of a country that has lost its way.

The Tory party, such as it is, seems to care about nothing other than its own survival. Everything it says and does is geared to that. The new reform group, CDO, is just an exercise in keeping them in government and pushing us further to the right.

Nothing positive is being done, everything they propose is aimed at confrontation and fuelling them the “them and us” that proved their supporters with victims to satiate their blood lust.

It is the politics of exclusion, there is no togetherness. When Johnson exhorted the “blitz spirit” during Covid it, for a short-while, united us, and made us appreciate those that risked their lives to provide the day-to-day services required.

Today that is all gone, many of those who risked their lives are now forced to strike in order to earn a living wage. All the government is prepared to offer are new rules that bring us closer to living in a one-party police state.

Sunak had a choice. They could have tried to resolve the existing disputes in a practical way, instead they have proposed a showboating bill that offers nothing except a bottomless pit of potential conflicts for thousands of workplaces. It tells us a lot about the government that it seems to prefer the latter to the former.

The Tory’s will show their true colours should the parliamentary enquiry into Johnson find against him. In truth, the committee has no real teeth. If Tory MPs vote to reject it, he could get off. Whilst I am not a betting man I suspect they will rally behind him.

Another example of how far right they have travelled is Andrew Bridgen, the libertarian and Brexiter. This week he lost the Tory whip after he compared the Covid vaccine programme to the holocaust. He would be dangerous to the Tory’s as an independent, one I could easily see joining Reform UK. 

I foresee the right predominating in the future. Johnson is still the Tory’s first choice, while he won’t have the advantage of Reform not opposing him, they are cut from the same cloth. Reform could poll well in the so-called “red wall”, and I can see them holding the balance of power in a hung parliament.

I decided to avoid the “Harry saga”, too much angst, and pointless tittle-tattle. Similar applies to our attempt to enter the space race when we can’t even get the trains to run”

Sober thoughts require sober tunes. This week I have revisited Joy Division’s second album, “Closer”; we open with the “Eternal”, and close with” A Means to an End.” Enjoy.

@coldwarsteve
 

 

Philip Gilbert is a city-based corporate financier, and former investment banker.

Philip is a great believer in meritocracy, and in the belief that if you want something enough you can make it happen. These beliefs were formed in his formative years, of the late 1970s and 80s

Click on the link to see all Brexit Bulletins: