Rishi Sunak: big challenges ahead

Ideology and pragmatism

Sir, – Your editorial asserts that due to the recent change of prime minister the UK Conservative government’s mandate has “run out”, and that “there should be a general election” (“The Irish Times view on Rishi Sunak as British prime minister: big challenges ahead”, October 25th).

This is quite a contrast with your newspaper’s position during a previous change of prime minister.

When Boris Johnson ascended to the office in 2019 his government lacked a majority in the Commons. He sought to dissolve parliament and call an election, but was initially blocked from doing so by the Labour Party which (correctly) feared a large Tory victory. At the time, your newspaper said that Labour “would be remiss not to use that power to [their] advantage”, and dismissed the prospect of an election as “Johnson’s latest wheeze” (Editorial, October 26th, 2019).

If a government without a majority didn’t need to call an election, then why should that same government now do so while it has a solid majority of 80 seats? Are we to take it then that an election is an unnecessary “wheeze” when the Conservatives are leading in the polls, but that it’s a “democratic imperative” to call one now that Labour might win?

READ MORE

A change of prime minister mid-parliament is nothing new in the UK. There were 17 such changes between 1900 and 2019, and on 14 of those occasions no election was called.

Article 28 of the Irish Constitution makes it clear that a Taoiseach may resign and be replaced without the need for a general election, something which will happen for a sixth time this December when Leo Varadkar returns to the office.

In 1937, the drafters of these provisions deliberately drew on the long-standing British constitutional practice which recognises that in a parliamentary democracy electoral mandates are not vested in one office-holder but in all elected members of that parliament, and that therefore an election is not necessary solely by virtue of the resignation of a prime minister. – Yours, etc,

BARRY WALSH,

Clontarf,

Dublin 3.

A chara, – Journalists should think very carefully before levelling accusations of racism. Anne Harris (“Boris is box office and he is not going away”, Opinion & Analysis, October 25th) gives the reasons for Liz Truss’s victory over Rishi Sunak in the vote among Tory members as being “a toxic hangover from the days of empire” and “Racism in short”.

The only evidence she provides to support this serious allegation is a quote from comedy character Basil Fawlty that it is “bleedin’ obvious”.

This is all the more bizarre given that she goes on to mention the real reason that Mr Sunak was unpopular was that he was perceived to have shafted Mr Johnson while Ms Truss remained loyal. Given that, Mr Sunak performed far better than expected.

Like them or loathe them, the Conservatives indisputably have a better record in appointing women and people from ethnic minorities to senior government positions than any other party in the UK or indeed here. – Is mise,

DAVE SLATER,

Kilkea,

Co Kildare.

Sir, – Can we assume that the British media and in particular the BBC will give the same level of coverage and the same level of relentless and obsessive discussion to the transfer of power in Ireland between Micheál Martin and Leo Varadkar as Irish media outlets are giving to the transfer of power in the British Tory party?

If they do not then we can only assume that the deferential colonial mindset and the national inferiority complex are still alive and well in the media here. – Yours, etc,

CIARAN McCULLAGH,

Bishopstown,

Cork.

Sir, – It is a worrying sign for Britain’s future social harmony that although Rishi Sunak admitted Liz Truss made “mistakes”, the new British prime minister felt moved to pay tribute to his predecessor’s “restlessness to create change”.

Due to Ms Truss’s recklessness, as opposed to restlessness, mortgage payments for millions of people will significantly increase.

In truth, for the sake of equality and closing the UK’s massive income gap, the British government needs to tax the rich. For instance, according to Britain’s Wealth Tax Commission a one-off wealth tax on millionaire couples paid at 1 per cent a year for five years would raise £260 billion.

The Tories are ideologically opposed to asking the rich to pay their fair share.

Sadly, Keir Starmer’s Labour is also reluctant to tax the rich, but due to fear of rocking the electoral boat. – Yours, etc,

JOE McCARTHY,

Arbour Hill,

Dublin 7.

Sir, – In Rishi Sunak’s first speech as British prime minister, he said: “This government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level.”

Integrity in government is incompatible with any action that unilaterally abandons signed international agreements. The fact that he would even refer to these qualities in his speech shows how he accepts they have been missing for a long time in British government actions.

Whether Mr Sunak means what he said will be tested very soon with the Northern Ireland Protocol. – Yours, etc,

T GERARD BENNETT,

Bunbrosna,

Co Westmeath.