Some of the ministerial departures seem to be Nadhim Zahawi’s bet over the past week. Some of the flare-ups could be resolved but, in accepting a penalty for not paying taxes, the former Tory leader showed behavior that would not pass the sniff test with voters.
Rishi Sunak’s defenders will argue that he has acted decisively but correctly in removing party seats. After ordering an inquiry earlier in the week, the prime minister fired Zahawi within hours of receiving the report. Allies argue that Sunak moved too quickly while respecting due process. It plays to the image as a detail person, taking all the data before action.
The argument was that the case was very clear when it came, but Sunak waited until action was unavoidable. Stories about Zahawi’s tax affairs were common currency in Westminster before his appointment. Those who report the truth are threatened with letters of libel. Sunak kept voting for him and defended him in the Commons, only moving when action was unavoidable. It strengthened Labour’s attack that the prime minister was “weak”.
Critics may also note that, despite having promised to restore integrity to the government, Sunak has experienced such cases in a short period of time. Gavin Williamson was returned to the cabinet and then forced to resign. Suella Braverman was reappointed as home secretary within days of her resignation over security breaches as Sunak needed support to succeed the leader. Dominic Raab, the deputy prime minister, is facing an investigation into multiple allegations of bullying. For someone who is supposed to be faithful to his standards in public life, Sunak seems very unfortunate. But he also created his own bad luck. There is only one way the Zahawi affair will end. Sunak’s desire to make a fresh start is likely to be met with faster and more decisive action.
And for all the focus on questions, investigations and processes because of the fact that Sunak is hiding behind the investigation. Ministers serve at the pleasure of the prime minister. They can throw out whoever they like without “due process” if they feel it’s politically problematic in any way. Ethics investigations are only a shield that allows the leader to delay a decision or tell the parliamentarians themselves that there is no choice. Supposedly a safeguard against wrongdoing, the investigation is also a means of media and party management.
In one sense, the Zahawi affair will now disappear. Individual “sleaze” stories resonate less with the public than one might imagine because voters tend to see such behavior as common across all parties. But they are debilitating. Such storms make it more difficult for Sunak to shift the political narrative to an area that is more favorable to him. Marshalling all the details is usually wise, but sometimes leaders demand gut instinct. That the main issue may not matter, but in the midst of a crisis in the cost of living and public services, it only adds fuel to the opposition’s argument that this is a tired and self-serving government that has been in office for too long.
It all makes it harder for Sunak to rid himself of the wrongdoing and lax standards of the Boris Johnson era. Many of these problems are the effluent of the previous administration, but they are washing up on his watch. Importantly, it reinforces the overall attack that the Tories do not consider the rules to apply.
Sunak is the party’s biggest asset at this time. A reputation as quietly competent is the Tories’ best shot at holding onto power. If the voters conclude that they are just a continuation of the previous chaos then the opportunity recedes. A more political leader will be more ruthless in protecting his reputation.
robert.shrimsley@ft.com