New Ipsos poll sees sharp decline in Sunak’s ratings – politicalbetting.com

First, unlike Sunak.

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

This is consistent across all polls now.

Sunak is going down and is becoming Gordon Brown.

Brown got a hung parliament in 2010

HYUFD said:

Even just 32% believing Sunak is a good PM is higher than the current Tory voteshare. He still outpolls his party

And so he should.

If he were entirely representative of the Party, or even the Parliamentary Party, you guys wouldn't have too much to worry about. You certainly wouldn't be facing the possibility of meltdown.

As it is....well you know how it is.

Sunak is being pulled down by two factors under his direct and immediate control. The Prime Minister should settle the strikes, where largely the public is on the side of the strikers, and get rid of ministers who have crossed the line.

Sunak has been compared to Brown on this thread. Perhaps the similarity is years as Chancellors used to pondering fine detail for months, then not appreciating the change of pace needed in Number 10. Zahawi could have been axed weeks ago, for instance. Both are also being asked to cos play the once-popular previous leader, which means they are pressed into daft stunts.

HYUFD said:

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

This is consistent across all polls now.

Sunak is going down and is becoming Gordon Brown.

Brown got a hung parliament in 2010

If you offered Sunak 258 seats now, I think he'd be advised to accept before you changed your mind. It probably puts Labour on 290-300ish and just about makes the SNP irrelevant.

YBarddCwsc said:

Anyone who had to deal with a problem like Zahawi knows that it is difficult because of allegation & counter-allegation.

I personally favour all allegations against politicians being investigated quickly, then a report (& evidence) being made public and swift action taken.

So, Sunak does seem to me to have handled this OK. Just as the Labour Party did OK over the allegations regarding Chris Matheson, ex MP for Chester. They did not suspend him until after an independent report that confirmed that the sexual harassment allegations were true.

If you sack people just because there is an allegation, then you end up with instances like Conor Burns. He was cleared of all wrongdoing after a sexual harassment story was leaked to the public, but by then he had been sacked. The alleged victim hadn’t made a complaint & AIUI there was no evidence of misconduct.

Now in Zahawi's case, tax law is complex and his affairs were (probably) in the hands of a tax advisor. So, whether he was personally culpable did need a bit of time to investigate.

Though his offence was his failure to disclose his dispute with HMRC, rather than the dispute itself.
All the enquiry did was reveal he had failed to disclose it on several more occasions.

I don't see he has any defence to that either before or after the enquiry.

Stuartinromford said:

HYUFD said:

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

This is consistent across all polls now.

Sunak is going down and is becoming Gordon Brown.

Brown got a hung parliament in 2010

If you offered Sunak 258 seats now, I think he'd be advised to accept before you changed your mind. It probably puts Labour on 290-300ish and just about makes the SNP irrelevant.

The underlying assumption behind the Sunak premiership may be false. Tories hope that he will deliver competent management and save Tory seats in the longer term. I am not sure that's what's playing out. If his mission is to minimise Tory loses, going early might be the best plan.

Sunak could take a bold but risky decision - sacking Raab, Braverman, and Richard Sharp in one move.

The charming but unassuming chap suddenly ripping off his Italian suit to reveal the Superman sign underneath.

LostPassword said:

Jonathan said:

I am getting to the point where I would not be surprised if Sunak didn't make it through the summer.

Sunak became leader to put a stop to the chaos of Liz Truss. Provided he can avoid a run on Sterling or a debt crisis, I think enough MPs will stick with him to see him through to the election.

I don't think there are enough MPs willing to risk a repeat of Liz Truss, which might result if Johnson returns as PM, or Braverman wins the next leadership contest, to give Sunak the push out.

Sunak is toast the moment a majority of his MPs think they stand a better chance of saving their seats with Boris (or A.N. Other). Looking at Tory MPs, we are one bad set of election results away from that moment.

Have we actually had the independent report into Zahawi published?

It looks from the outside, as if Sunak has chosen an arbitrary date to sack the minister, having waited so long that the damage to his own reputation has been done, while not actually waiting for the report that he himself commissioned? Worst of all worlds for the PM.

I love Forest Friends.

kinabalu said:

Chris said:

Rishi Sunak claims he 'acted pretty decisively'.

Is there no competent advice available to the prime minister of the UK about how things will sound?

I'm not too down on Sunak over this one. What I can't understand is why Zahawi didn't resign days ago. I blame him, obviously, but I'm afraid I also blame Boris Johnson. Ok of course our politics was no enclave of angels before him - we can all reach back for examples - but Johnson has taken it into the toilet. Given he still lurks with intent in the Tory Party, his appeal undimmed with many MPs and large parts of the membership, I don't see how things can improve much until they're out of office.

Well, I just can't imagine how Sunak thought Zahawi could survive, just based on what was in the papers, let alone what Sunak could/should/must have known as prime minister.

But really my point was about how feeble the "pretty decisively" sounded, in the circumstances. Even if you've been a pathetically weak ditherer, for God's sake tell people you've been an iron fist (if necessary in a velvet glove of due process)!

Sandpit said:

Have we actually had the independent report into Zahawi published?

It looks from the outside, as if Sunak has chosen an arbitrary date to sack the minister, having waited so long that the damage to his own reputation has been done, while not actually waiting for the report that he himself commissioned? Worst of all worlds for the PM.

Here it is

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1132735/Letter_from_Sir_Laurie_Magnus_to_the_Prime_Minister__29_January_2023.pdf

Difficult this one.

The Kremlin accuses Boris Johnson of lying.

Past form suggests….

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/kremlin-dismisses-boris-johnsons-claim-vladimir-putin-threatened-to-kill-him-with-missile-in-call-ahead-of-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-12798288

YBarddCwsc said:

Nigelb said:

YBarddCwsc said:

Anyone who had to deal with a problem like Zahawi knows that it is difficult because of allegation & counter-allegation.

I personally favour all allegations against politicians being investigated quickly, then a report (& evidence) being made public and swift action taken.

So, Sunak does seem to me to have handled this OK. Just as the Labour Party did OK over the allegations regarding Chris Matheson, ex MP for Chester. They did not suspend him until after an independent report that confirmed that the sexual harassment allegations were true.

If you sack people just because there is an allegation, then you end up with instances like Conor Burns. He was cleared of all wrongdoing after a sexual harassment story was leaked to the public, but by then he had been sacked. The alleged victim hadn’t made a complaint & AIUI there was no evidence of misconduct.

Now in Zahawi's case, tax law is complex and his affairs were (probably) in the hands of a tax advisor. So, whether he was personally culpable did need a bit of time to investigate.

Though his offence was his failure to disclose his dispute with HMRC, rather than the dispute itself.
All the enquiry did was reveal he had failed to disclose it on several more occasions.

I don't see he has any defence to that either before or after the enquiry.

Once upon a time, when I ran an organisation, I had to deal with a serious case of bullying.

Although it was pretty obvious to me that the alleged bully was likely guilty, it still took over 6 months.

The alleged bully's defence still actually needed to be examined.

And all the while, folks were saying: why has @YBarddCwsc not taken swift action against bullying?

Sure (and I have had a not entirely dissimilar experience).

But that simply doesn't apply to ministerial posts. There's no right to 'due process' if the PM wants to sack you - and in this case it was clear from Zahawi's own public statements, before the 'enquiry', that he'd failed to disclose a pretty clear conflict of interest.

And he wasn't sacked because of an allegation, but because of what he failed to tell the PM.

That a load of the public think he fiddled his tax doesn't help the PR side of things, but the precise detail of his dispute with HMRC really doesn't matter.

Sandpit said:

Have we actually had the independent report into Zahawi published?

It looks from the outside, as if Sunak has chosen an arbitrary date to sack the minister, having waited so long that the damage to his own reputation has been done, while not actually waiting for the report that he himself commissioned? Worst of all worlds for the PM.

My understanding was that the day of letters, yesterday, included a letter from the ethics person to Sunak that constituted the report so commissioned.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Difficult this one.

The Kremlin accuses Boris Johnson of lying.

Past form suggests….

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/kremlin-dismisses-boris-johnsons-claim-vladimir-putin-threatened-to-kill-him-with-missile-in-call-ahead-of-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-12798288

is it possible that both parties are lying? That would be my default viewpoint in such circumstances.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Difficult this one.

The Kremlin accuses Boris Johnson of lying.

Past form suggests….

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/kremlin-dismisses-boris-johnsons-claim-vladimir-putin-threatened-to-kill-him-with-missile-in-call-ahead-of-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-12798288

Hmmm

Given that the Russians seem to threaten nuclear war whenever there is a “y” in the name of the day, claiming that Putin *didn't* make a threat would be the questionable statement.

If you were a Tory MP, would you prefer to stick with Sunak or twist with Boris?

glw said:

Nigelb said:

Though his offence was his failure to disclose his dispute with HMRC, rather than the dispute itself.
All the enquiry did was reveal he had failed to disclose it on several more occasions.

I don't see he has any defence to that either before or after the enquiry.

Exactly it's the failure to disclose the dispute and penalty, which is relatively simple, that has brought him down. Not the dispute itself which is almost certainly too complicated for anyone who is not a tax expert.

I think he had seven opportunities to give the correct information.

Jonathan said:

If you were a Tory MP, would you prefer to stick with Sunak or twist with Boris?

That would depend on whether or not you want TSE actively campaigning for Labour...

Stuartinromford said:

Chris said:

kinabalu said:

Chris said:

Rishi Sunak claims he 'acted pretty decisively'.

Is there no competent advice available to the prime minister of the UK about how things will sound?

I'm not too down on Sunak over this one. What I can't understand is why Zahawi didn't resign days ago. I blame him, obviously, but I'm afraid I also blame Boris Johnson. Ok of course our politics was no enclave of angels before him - we can all reach back for examples - but Johnson has taken it into the toilet. Given he still lurks with intent in the Tory Party, his appeal undimmed with many MPs and large parts of the membership, I don't see how things can improve much until they're out of office.

Well, I just can't imagine how Sunak thought Zahawi could survive, just based on what was in the papers, let alone what Sunak could/should/must have known as prime minister.

But really my point was about how feeble the "pretty decisively" sounded, in the circumstances. Even if you've been a pathetically weak ditherer, for God's sake tell people you've been an iron fist (if necessary in a velvet glove of due process)!

"Hell yes, I'm tough enough..."

https://youtu.be/ZpZkPf7ogDc

Obviously I wouldn't recommend handling it in precisely that way.

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

HYUFD said:

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

This is consistent across all polls now.

Sunak is going down and is becoming Gordon Brown.

Brown got a hung parliament in 2010

And Labour have been out of power since.

Accept it mate, you're out.

Two big reasons that Cameron failed to get a majority in 2010 were:
-Unlike 2015, he failed to crush the Lib Dems
-He only won a single seat in Scotland

By comparison
1) Labour aren't really competing with the Lib Dems over any Tory seats they could realistically win
2) While a full recovery of their seats in Scotland is very unrealistic, Labour will do better there than Cameron/the Tories did in 2010

While I don't think Labour will win a landslide, I do think they'll manage to get a working majority (IMHO, they will do better in England & Wales than they did in 2005, though obviously won't do as well they did in Scotland).

Yet again Martha Kearney got to the nub of the issue on Today this morning.

Why has Zahawi not had the whip removed. Sunak is saying that a liar is not allowed to be in cabinet but it is perfectly acceptable to have one as a Cons MP.

"The quiet, unexpected vindication of the Euro", according to Greece's main centre-right newspaper.

https://www.ekathimerini.com/opinion/1203435/the-quiet-unexpected-vindication-of-the-euro/

CarlottaVance said:

The SNP wants 16-year-olds to be able to change gender. But its own sentencing quango says brains don’t fully mature until the age of 25. How can these both be coherent policies?

https://twitter.com/GrahamGGrant/status/1620029292284612610

SNP and coherent, well they don't exactly sit together

When asked about 16 year olds being able to purchase alcohol the first Minister, after initially seeming to accept it, backtracked and it was an emphatic no from the puritans.

CarlottaVance said:

The SNP wants 16-year-olds to be able to change gender. But its own sentencing quango says brains don’t fully mature until the age of 25. How can these both be coherent policies?

https://twitter.com/GrahamGGrant/status/1620029292284612610

Usually I am against Twitter 'zinger' comparisons, but that one is a headscratcher.

Peter_the_Punter said:

His popularity is sinking amongst the same public that thought Boris Johnson was a good idea and that Liz Truss would be a suitable replacement.

Let it sink Rishi. Just do the job as well as you can. The Election will be lost whatever you do. There's nothing to be gained from appealing to the constituency which picked the previous two PMs.

I think Tories would do well to read this post and consider why Sunak is such a darling of Labour supporters. 'Let it sink Rishi' - just stay in power being shit, and let us come in with a huge majority next election. The man is electoral and political poison.

YBarddCwsc said:

Anyone who had to deal with a problem like Zahawi knows that it is difficult because of allegation & counter-allegation.

I personally favour all allegations against politicians being investigated quickly, then a report (& evidence) being made public and swift action taken.

So, Sunak does seem to me to have handled this OK. Just as the Labour Party did OK over the allegations regarding Chris Matheson, ex MP for Chester. They did not suspend him until after an independent report that confirmed that the sexual harassment allegations were true.

If you sack people just because there is an allegation, then you end up with instances like Conor Burns. He was cleared of all wrongdoing after a sexual harassment story was leaked to the public, but by then he had been sacked. The alleged victim hadn’t made a complaint & AIUI there was no evidence of misconduct.

Now in Zahawi's case, tax law is complex and his affairs were (probably) in the hands of a tax advisor. So, whether he was personally culpable did need a bit of time to investigate.

Indeed, but Sunak has a culpability over reinstating the sacked by Truss, Braverman.

To be fair to Sunak, perhaps the biggest conflict of interest surrounding Zahawi was Johnson installing him as CoE whilst Zahawi was under investigation by HMRC. That is an unbelievable dereliction of duty from both Johnson and Zahawi. And the biggest issue for the Conservatives SHOULD be Johnson's alleged conflict of interest patronages in relation the his loan guarantees both with regard to the potential for gifted roles at the BBC and the Commonwealth Office. All these ordure lined roads lead back to Johnson.

WhisperingOracle said:

"The quiet, unexpected vindication of the Euro", according to Greece's main centre-right newspaper.

https://www.ekathimerini.com/opinion/1203435/the-quiet-unexpected-vindication-of-the-euro/

Just to add on this, the points it makes about the Euro proving its worth for smaller and medium-sized economies during the Ukrainian crisis are interesting. I don't think it would particularly work for Britain, but it seems another example of Brexit being out of step with the prevailing trends in Europe, rather than the great harbinger the Eurosceptics were hoping for.

Jonathan said:

If you were a Tory MP, would you prefer to stick with Sunak or twist with Boris?

That's a difficult one. Johnson brings on board BJO "socialists", but does he not so repulse genteel Southern England? So that is six of one, half a dozen of the other. I was hearing on LBC that there is a groundswell of swivel-eyed support for Mogg. Can that be true?

eek said:

glw said:

Nigelb said:

Though his offence was his failure to disclose his dispute with HMRC, rather than the dispute itself.
All the enquiry did was reveal he had failed to disclose it on several more occasions.

I don't see he has any defence to that either before or after the enquiry.

Exactly it's the failure to disclose the dispute and penalty, which is relatively simple, that has brought him down. Not the dispute itself which is almost certainly too complicated for anyone who is not a tax expert.

The dispute isn't that complex

Zahawi received a large amount of money that rested in an offshore account.

He hoped that because the money was resting offshore if he let it rest there long enough he wouldn't have to pay tsx on it if / when he brought the money back to the UK.

We are in the realms of Father Ted aren't we?

Sandpit said:

Have we actually had the independent report into Zahawi published?

It looks from the outside, as if Sunak has chosen an arbitrary date to sack the minister, having waited so long that the damage to his own reputation has been done, while not actually waiting for the report that he himself commissioned? Worst of all worlds for the PM.

He received the report on the 29th January and acted on it

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Interesting pre-print paper which explores possible reasons for the unexpectedly high number of transgender people in Newham & Brent:

https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/yw45p/

Mistakes in filling in the form owing to mistranslation and misunderstanding? The authors might be right but it's a bit of a reach. Is there evidence of similar anomalies around other questions in those boroughs, for instance? And why not other places with large immigrant communities?

Is there perhaps widespread under-reporting, with the head of household being less likely to report trans offspring, whereas single people completing their own forms can be more open?

I'd also like to see more exploration of this. The tone, which should not be important, but soes make me wonder, comes across as the author having a particular viewpoint, rather than just being interested in the anomaly. May be this is the explanation for the apparent anomaly or it may be that it's not.

I understand that the disquiet over the sex question may also have caused some to boycott the gender question too. It's not implausible that such a boycott would gain more traction in an area like Brighton with a larger (or at least more visible) transgender community throug word of mouth etc than in some other places. Non-response would be a key thing to consider too, I think - which may be in the pre-print, I did not read it fully.

Not quite my field, but if I was reviewing it I'd be asking for fair bit more analysis to pin this down before publication, but would be recommending publication once that was satisfied. It's interesting and potentially a very important issue - if there is confusion here, there might also be confusion on other things.

FrancisUrquhart said:

BBC impartiality at risk because journalists 'lack understanding of basic economics'

They said: “We think too many journalists lack understanding of basic economics or lack confidence in reporting it. This brings a high risk to impartiality.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/01/30/bbc-impartiality-risk-journalists-lack-understanding-basic-economics/

No shit sherlock....as we saw during COVID, analysis of numbers, too confusing....

Not to mention perspective, in pictures

TheScreamingEagles said:

Mexicanpete said:

eek said:

glw said:

Nigelb said:

Though his offence was his failure to disclose his dispute with HMRC, rather than the dispute itself.
All the enquiry did was reveal he had failed to disclose it on several more occasions.

I don't see he has any defence to that either before or after the enquiry.

Exactly it's the failure to disclose the dispute and penalty, which is relatively simple, that has brought him down. Not the dispute itself which is almost certainly too complicated for anyone who is not a tax expert.

The dispute isn't that complex

Zahawi received a large amount of money that rested in an offshore account.

He hoped that because the money was resting offshore if he let it rest there long enough he wouldn't have to pay tsx on it if / when he brought the money back to the UK.

We are in the realms of Father Ted aren't we?

Father Ted was funny this government and scandal are not.

Boris could be father Jack, I think. Still trying to work out Dougal (needs to be loveable as well as stupid) and Ted.

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

Why is Braverman still in the cabinet?

The support of 32 MPs in the first round of voting in the summer 2022 leadership election.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/July–September_2022_Conservative_Party_leadership_election

WhisperingOracle said:

Why is Braverman still in the cabinet, Horse asks ?

Because Sunak hasn't been able to do his Clark Kent act, and rip off his jacket.

Has anyone done the Sunak needs to be a braver man to ditch Braverman gag yet?

If not, bagsy.

TimS said:

Sunak is securing his place in box 3 of the pantheon of PMs. It becomes ever harder for him to shift boxes as time goes on.

Box 1: important PMs. Love them or hate them, these PMs marked a political turning point and defined an epoch. Lloyd George, Churchill, Atlee, Thatcher, Blair

Box 2. Notable but second tier: MacMillan, Wilson, Heath, possibly Brown, Cameron

Box 3: weak PMs/ victims of forces outside their control: Chamberlain, Eden, Callaghan, Major, May, Sunak

Box 4 (new category) complete plonkers: Johnson

Box 5: glitches in the matrix. Truss

I think you are generous to Cameron & Brown..... but like the idea (mainly agree)

LostPassword said:

Jonathan said:

Stuartinromford said:

HYUFD said:

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

This is consistent across all polls now.

Sunak is going down and is becoming Gordon Brown.

Brown got a hung parliament in 2010

If you offered Sunak 258 seats now, I think he'd be advised to accept before you changed your mind. It probably puts Labour on 290-300ish and just about makes the SNP irrelevant.

The underlying assumption behind the Sunak premiership may be false. Tories hope that he will deliver competent management and save Tory seats in the longer term. I am not sure that's what's playing out. If his mission is to minimise Tory loses, going early might be the best plan.

Many dozens of Tory MPs will lose their seats in an early general election. Another 12-18 months of receiving an MPs salary, and to create a new career plan, might be worth another couple of dozen lost seats. The incentives for individual MPs are not necessarily what we think they are.

That's no doubt correct, and applies in Downing Street too. Being PM must be interesting (and lucrative), not to be discarded lightly so as to lose by a smaller margin.

Is there an actual count somewhere of how many Tory MPs have decided not to stand again, vs. how many have announced they will stand? I recall that CCHQ asked them all to say by New Year, but I've not seen many more than a couple of dozen indicate one way or the other.

swing_voter said:

TimS said:

Sunak is securing his place in box 3 of the pantheon of PMs. It becomes ever harder for him to shift boxes as time goes on.

Box 1: important PMs. Love them or hate them, these PMs marked a political turning point and defined an epoch. Lloyd George, Churchill, Atlee, Thatcher, Blair

Box 2. Notable but second tier: MacMillan, Wilson, Heath, possibly Brown, Cameron

Box 3: weak PMs/ victims of forces outside their control: Chamberlain, Eden, Callaghan, Major, May, Sunak

Box 4 (new category) complete plonkers: Johnson

Box 5: glitches in the matrix. Truss

I think you are generous to Cameron & Brown..... but like the idea (mainly agree)

I think they are both borderline 2/3.

Forgot Douglas-Home. Probably another 3.

Sunak has brought back a degree of normality to the Tory party, which is not too say they are not still in an awful polling position, mired in sleaze and a discredited talent pool from which to choose.

What is does say though is that the manner of any Sunak exit would likely be pretty normal, and not done in Truss time.

This would entail a number of things including, Sunak resisting any pressure on him and declaring himself up for the fight; malcontents, perhaps Boris supporters, ramping that they have 20-30 letters in and will bring Sunak down "soon" for months on end; if they do get to 53/4 letters having to then persuade their fellow MPs that an uncertain leadership process, likely with more normal rules and multiple candidates and doubts over whether Boris will even stand, is a good idea.

Even with a solid base of Boris supporters, at each stage there is a threshold, doubt, a reading of the wider room. All those protections that kept Boris in post for so long.

And the underlying question of whether changing yet again will really, this time, advance the cause, "no" being a highly plausible answer, or simply shred further their remaining tiny tissue of credibility.

If there is an air of resignation, it is not surprising.

mwadams said:

Mexicanpete said:

Jonathan said:

If you were a Tory MP, would you prefer to stick with Sunak or twist with Boris?

That's a difficult one. Johnson brings on board BJO "socialists", but does he not so repulse genteel Southern England? So that is six of one, half a dozen of the other. I was hearing on LBC that there is a groundswell of swivel-eyed support for Mogg. Can that be true?

I thought Mogg's wizard wheeze was to become King of the Rump when they lose the election. He's probably right that it is better to be Opposition Leader than have actual responsibility for the mess he's been instrumental in creating.

I would love to see Mogg as the leader of all 10 remaining Tory MPs....

Dorset police in the news today. The Met must be breathing a sigh of relief.

Yes, it’s another rapist with a warrant card.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/01/30/serving-dorset-police-officer-charged-rape/