More humiliations are fast approaching for Truss’s government

Though entirely in the national interest and well overdue, it is painful to watch the unravelling of the mini-Budget and the government’s “plan for growth”.

Having ditched the “distraction” of abolishing the 45 per cent additional rate of income tax, we are now due another U-turn, or at least a partial one, this time on corporation tax. The cut in national insurance seems to have escaped the cull, thanks to opposition support, and Labour seems to be content to go along with the earlier-than-planned reduction in the basic rate of tax, to 19 per cent.

The energy price guarantee also looks secure. The minor reforms to stamp duty, land tax and dividend taxation may survive. On the spending side, infrastructure investment and “levelling up” projects look vulnerable – another violation of Ms Truss’s stated policy (and the 2019 manifesto). At the moment, the mini-Budget is living up to its nickname of a “hung budget”, dependent on the indulgence of Tory critics and the other political parties.

Once again, there is some dissonance in the “comms”. In London, all the talk is of the retreats and compromises being foisted on the prime minister by a restive party. On the other side of the Atlantic, at the IMF conference, the hapless chancellor only a few weeks into his job, was forced to declare that he’d still be chancellor in a month’s time. He also gave the impression that he wanted to “deliver” his mini-Budget, and insisted that he was totally focused on growth.

He didn’t sound much like a man heading for more reversals, but no politician would admit as much. Perhaps he was putting a brave face on the next humiliation, fast approaching, which he is well aware of; or maybe, behind the scenes, he is trying to stick to his guns even as the prime minister has steadily fled the battlefield. Either way, it’s not a pretty sight.

It does suggest that the chancellor and prime minister may no longer be in as harmonious a political partnership as they were when they were crisscrossing the country, telling Tory activists whatever they wanted to hear to win the leadership contest. In their very brief honeymoon period, up to the mini-Budget on 23 September, the pair almost operated as a duo, in lockstep on the radical mission to build an “aspiration nation”. It was all about “growth, growth, growth”.

Now? Not so much. The bold tax cuts in the budget weren’t just about keeping (reckless) campaign promises and honouring the traditional Tory aim of leaving people to spend more of their own money themselves. The deep tax cuts – the largest since 1972 – were the centrepiece of the growth strategy. They were about “unleashing potential”, spurring enterprise and attracting foreign investment. Now, with the tax cuts being reversed step by step, the growth strategy is evaporating in real time. The plan for growth is, in fact, shrinking.

So, logically, should Ms Truss’s chances of survival. Yet it is rightly difficult to unseat a prime minister, and, despite the clamour to replace her from her own MPs, Ms Truss has some reason to believe she can survive until the next election.

Ironically, Ms Truss’s very weakness is now a source of strength. With Labour some 20 to 30 points ahead in the opinion polls, few Tory MPs would be inclined to face the electorate in a general election. Ms Truss has said she isn’t going to call one, and it’s hard to see even the most frustrated of Tory MPs voting their own administration out of office and putting Keir Starmer into No 10 before Christmas.

A threat by Ms Truss to ask the King for a dissolution at a time when her party still enjoys a healthy majority could push her critics into a corner and trigger a constitutional crisis. Neither would be good for the Conservatives’ reputation for strong and stable government.

That leaves a dizzying array of options for Ms Truss to be deposed by a form of internal party “palace coup” – by the MPs and sidelining the membership. Yet the rules are stacked in her favour, and her many opponents are fatally divided about who she should be succeeded by, and indeed, what policy they might follow. Technically, she cannot be challenged for a year, and her party is conveniently divided and confused about what they want. Some want a return for a Boris Johnson, and that would go down well with the party in the country; but there’s no great evidence of a public clamour for his resurrection.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment, sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here

A Sunak-Mordaunt partnership is a more realistic and attractive proposition to MPs – but the membership would find it highly offensive because they sense they are soft on Brexit. This is quite strange, given that Rishi Sunak and Penny Mordaunt were Leavers in the 2016 referendum, while Ms Truss voted Remain, but there it is. Other names such as Kit Malthouse are also being canvassed. The likes of Kemi Badenoch and Sajid Javid might also be part of a solution, and a new team: the talent hasn’t entirely run out.

Yet it is all very complicated and would alienate the voluntary party. Any competitive election involving a vote by the membership would invite a run from Suella Braverman, which would complete the Ukipisation of the Conservative Party, and see hard-right, hard-Brexit fantasises tested to destruction over the next couple of years.

There seems no easy – or even difficult – way out for the Conservative Party, and so they are lumbered with Ms Truss, if not Mr Kwarteng. As with John Major in 1995-97, and Gordon Brown in 2009-10, their best chance of change for the better has passed, their fate has been sealed, and they will just have to make the best of a candidate they don’t really believe in. The next two years are really going to drag.