 about pros and cons. Discuss a policy properly, he thinks, and you may succeed. But fool yourselves (or others) and failure is guaranteed. This is what led to many of his policies as chancellor. It's also what, in the end, led him to resign. Sunak had no principled objection to lockdown. What drove him mad was the refusal to level with the Cabinet, let alone the country, about the likely damage to society and the economy. It might have all been worth it, but no one weighed up the drawbacks against the hoped-for benefits. When Britain decided to impose sweeping sanctions on Russia over its invasion of){kind=link}
The core of his politics is a belief in being honest about trade-offs. And no subject needs it more than net zero
Rishi Sunak has just made his first big mistake as Prime Minister. Even if he regards the net zero agenda as ridiculous, he should have never ruled out going to the Cop27 summit in Egypt. He should always have been there to hand over the UK presidency, meet Joe Biden, Emmanuel Macron and various others. His inevitable decision to go made him look like he succumbed to pressure – rather than belatedly realising the diplomatic folly of staying home. So the puzzle is not why he decided to go. The puzzle is why he ever said he wouldn’t.
I have my suspicions. He doubtless had flashbacks to the Glasgow Cop26 summit when, as chancellor, he watched head-in-hands as Boris Johnson reeled off net zero pledges without even considering the cost. At the time, Sunak wondered how this climate debate could be carried out without the slightest question of trade-offs. Who would pay? How much? Was this politically deliverable? If such questions were never raised, then surely it’s not an agenda, but a charade? But as he’ll have realised, such charades are part of a PM’s job.
If I had to say which belief system drives Sunak, I wouldn’t say conservatism. Nor capitalism, or even liberalism. His beliefs overlap with all three but his “irreducible core” – as Tony Blair once put it – is something else. I’d call it trade-off-ism: a belief that politicians must be honest with people (and themselves) about pros and cons. Discuss a policy properly, he thinks, and you may succeed. But fool yourselves (or others) and failure is guaranteed.
This is what led to many of his policies as chancellor. It’s also what, in the end, led him to resign.