The role of Prime Minister is hardly seen as easy; a never-ceasing bombardment of probing by journalists having to be juggled with managing and executing the decisions of a government, with every single move being made under the scrutiny of the entire world. Since the days of Sir Robert Walpole in 1721, seen by many as the ‘first’ prime minister, there have been 57 different PMs. None of them, however, have lasted as brief a time as number 56, Liz Truss.
Truss was not an unusual candidate for PM; she, like many other PMs before her, had gone to Oxford, studying PPE, and had not raised any major red flags while she was an MP. After defeating Rishi Sunak in the September conservative party election, she took the helm of Prime Minister on September 5. Granted, her situation was far from ideal; she was taking on this role at a time when Queen Elizabeth II had just passed away. Immediately after this, however, the first of Truss’s bold moves took shape; the infamous ‘mini-budget’, which included scrapping high taxes and providing energy support packages for those in need. This was a huge U-turn from what the previous 3 PMs had emphasised; spending within your budget, being prudent with your money. Her first act was looking like her first major mistake; the value of the pound was sent into a downwards spiral, and organisations from all over the world were quick to critique it. To compound matters, it emerged that the Office of Budget Responsibility, which must evaluate any major financial plans, had not been able to review the ‘mini budget’ due to it not being classed as a full budget. To many in the UK, it appeared that Truss and Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng had been able to rush their plan through on a mere technicality. Whether this was a deliberate undermining of power, or an innocent mistake, was unknown, but Kwasi Kwarteng’s statement that there had been no time for a full review sowed doubt and mistrust into the minds of many. This cannot be mistaken as anyone other than Truss’s and Kwarteng’s fault. The plan may have had good intentions, but what was shown was a severe lack in awareness and a disregard for procedure, neither of which is seen attributes of a good Prime Minister.
The repercussions of the mini budget had still not been fully felt. Truss was embarrassed again on October 14, when she sacked Kwasi Kwarteng. This alone again put out a show of distrust, as Kwarteng had been openly backed by Truss in the decisions he had made up to this point. Jeremy Hunt, who had supported Rishi Sunak when Truss was elected, was now Chancellor. The fact that Truss thought a strong ally of her opponent was the best candidate speaks volumes about the support she had, and also the strength of that support. There was more to come. Hunt then proceeded to undermine Truss by reversing all of her economic plans, and Truss was forced to agree. Truss’s promises of bold financial plans, which were a pivotal part in her success at the election, had been quashed. The resignation of Suella Braverman, which contained strong criticisms of Truss’s rule, indicated Truss’s cabinet and support, like dominoes, were starting to collapse, one by one.
It was this, along with a few poor media interviews, which presented Truss as a woman clutching at straws with no idea of what to do, that caused her to resign after just 49 days in charge, only 24 hours after her fighting speech, the headline of which was ‘I am a fighter’. One can only hope that future PMs will not make the same mistakes Truss did.
Written by KK Sunil, Year 9
References :