Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
For Britain’s PM, Chaos Has Consequences
For Britain’s PM, Chaos Has Consequences
Mar 28, 2026 2:38 AM

After a mere 45 days, Liz Truss is out as prime minister. Given the contradictions in Conservative Party policies, no one should be surprised.

Read More…

Boris Johnson, though deeply flawed, was the glue that held the British Conservative Party together. His electoral reach, charisma, mitment to deliver Brexit put together a huge majority of 80 seats over all other bined in the 650-seat House of Commons.

But that glue came unstuck owing to Boris’ character flaws, and now, in the resulting chaos, the Conservative Party itself e apart at the seams, squandering the largest parliamentary majority in recent times. Cabinet ministers fell like stones, Members of Parliament demanded the reversal of the vote of the membership, the prime minister herself changed policy on issues by the day, by the hour.

Unable to mand her party or deliver on her electoral mandate, Liz Truss resigned on October 20, after just 45 days in office, the shortest premiership in British history.

The consequences, however, are profound. The coalition that Boris Johnson built had three major elements. First, there were the Thatcherite low-tax, small-state conservatives. Second, there were socially conservative, anti-immigration Brexit voters, who in certain parts of the country had traditionally voted Labour but flocked to the Boris Johnson banner. There is some overlap, but it is, as we will see, by no means universal. Both these groups were minorities; together, however, they formed a majority, albeit an unstable one. The third group consisted of those Conservatives who just wanted to win and recognized Boris Johnson’s electoral appeal. Many big-government big spenders were hidden within this last group. What is even more bizarre is that Boris himself appeared to belong to neither of those first two groups at all, just the third one—he wanted to win and, despite some innate instincts for liberty, too often saw government as the answer rather than part of the problem.

Both of the two main parts of the coalition that is the Conservative Party have been blown out of the water and consigned to the trash can for the foreseeable future. They have been replaced by economic globalists and advocates of big government. This is the disastrous consequence of electing the inept and failing to argue, and win, the case. The party elected the least-disliked candidate in Liz Truss from a motley collection. The membership made clear, at least in polling, that they wanted Kemi Badenoch, bined those first two groups of party constituents. The Members of Parliament, however, wanted Rishi Sunak, the chancellor (equivalent to treasury secretary), who was more of an economic globalist. Both ended up with their second choice—the MPs explicitly, the members because they were not even offered their preferred option. And there were serious doubts about the basic capability of the successful candidate.

Liz Truss represented, at least in part, that first group: low tax, small state, but not the second, the socially conservative and anti-immigration voters. What is more, she proved a poor advocate even of the first group.

Let’s deal first with that second group. According to the BBC, nearly 34,000 illegal immigrants have crossed the English Channel from France so far in 2022. Every one of them goes onto the state welfare budget. Suella Braverman, appointed home (interior) secretary by Liz Truss, resigned on October 19 after a blazing row with the prime minister, who wished, for economic reasons, to further relax restrictions on immigration. That second group of voters, who delivered so many new districts for the Conservatives, won’t be doing so a second time.

Surely, though, we could at least place some hope in the low-tax, small-state agenda? The so-called mini-budget, a little over two weeks after Liz Truss took up office, contained some seriously hopeful agenda items. These included canceling a proposed rise in corporate tax; reversing a previously imposed tax rise on both employees and employers; reducing from next April the standard rate of e tax from 20% to 19%; abolishing the highest rate e tax band (45%) altogether; removing the cap on bonus payments in the banking sector; and supply-side reforms such as building even more low-tax investment zones, reducing regulation on entrepreneurs, and planning zone freedoms (intended to reduce regulations to make it easier to build new houses). Phew! Great stuff. Polling showed that, apart from bankers’ bonuses and the 45% rate abolition, the measures all had public support.

Why, then, did they fail so spectacularly and in a way that exposed Prime Minister Truss as so weak, effectively forcing her resignation?

Janet Daly, an American-born, sensible, petent columnist for the Daily Telegraph, wrote that nobody “is being truthful about the depth and breadth of this crisis which mon to all the Western nations who have been perpetrating an economic lie since 2008.” In other words, we have e addicted to cheap money and big government, and the two are connected. This was one of the consequences of both the economic crisis of 2008 onward and the COVID catastrophe. Governments bailed out business with cheap (low-interest) money. And since money is made “cheap” for a reason, more can (and will) always be borrowed. It’s a vicious circle of spending and debt that bursts when interest rates return to more normal levels. With COVID, the government will restrict liberty and, once again, bail out business from the fallout. The principal consequence is that a high-tax, high-spend government paradigm is now baked in for the foreseeable future,irrespective of which party runs the government.

A program of reform needs planning and careful execution. Even more important, however, is to make the case and win the argument. We simply cannot assume that people understand the basic principles that make a moral case for a low-tax, small-state economy. In this instance, the pro-growth argument was not even attempted, simply announced. The markets were ready for part of the agenda but not the speed and, also, not the inherent contradiction at the heart of the program. Economic growth! preached the prime minister. Lower taxes, encourage investment, economic freedom! Oh, and continued government spending at the highest levels in living memory. It is that contradiction of low tax but high spend and high borrowing that sank the budget proposals. The PM was too weak and the Conservative Party too addicted to cheap money for the plan to work.

The media bayed and the markets tanked. The pound dropped, worried, of course, by debt, and interest rates on government bonds rose sharply, exposing also a number of fallacies in the market itself—overreliance on bonds and opportunities to short the currency to make a profit. In the wake of this chaos, the chancellor resigned, and his successor (who gained so few votes even among Members of Parliament in the leadership election that he was eliminated in the first round) reversed nearly everything. Markets, of course, are fickle and should be careful what they wish for. Low tax wedded to low debt has been abandoned. A Labour government is unlikely to operate with lower levels of government debt. The market should, perhaps, have been more cautious in its response.

Needless to say, the media loved it. They helped bring Boris down (with assistance from the man himself), and they hate anything related to Brexit and populism and, indeed, anything remotely conservative. Another opportunity to bring down a government. They now have succeeded. Every day, the plained about “unfunded tax cuts.” There is no such thing; there is only unfunded government expenditures, the solution to which is either to borrow more (so our children pay), to tax more, or to spend less. Alas, this last option was never on offer from Liz Truss. You see the contradictions. Never once did the media cry out that the British tax burden is the highest for 70 years and that government expenditure was at unsustainable levels.

The current debacle had thus ended in the only way that was ever possible. The e will be, undoubtedly, that one of the losers is installed. The coalition of the Conservative Party is broken. Since the Second World War, there have been approximately 29 years of Labour governments, and 42 years of Conservative government. We are probably headed for a leftist government. Oh well, one leftist government under the Labour banner replacing another leftist government under the Conservative banner. The biggest loss is that intellectual vision for small-state conservatism. We will need to return to the drawing board and make the basic moral arguments again. As no small aside, Scripture reminds us that government should be limited in its reach (Deut 17:14-20).

What happens now? As we understand it, within a week there will be a leadership election. Will the membership be asked their views? Apparently so, but the bar for nominations will be set so high among MPs (most likely 100 nominations to stand, last time it was 20) that there will likely be a maximum of three candidates even in the first round. Perhaps there will be online membership voting or, even more likely, there will remain but one candidate standing, so the membership will not be asked at all. There is talk of Boris returning, but surely that has to be unrealistic, and certainly not wise. Lord, help us.

A final point. I genuinely feel sorry for Liz Truss. One potential candidate at the time of the Conservative leadership election declined to stand because of the impact on his family. Politics is brutal; I would say too brutal. It is almost impossible to make the intellectual arguments necessary for specific policies because you are immediately classified as either partisans or traitors. Liz Truss has two teenage daughters. Pray for her and her family at this difficult time. Our leaders need our prayers always; indeed, as Christians we are enjoined by Scripture not only to submit to our leaders (Rom 13: 1-7; Pet 2:13-25) but also to pray for them, irrespective of whether we voted for them or agree with them (1 Tim 2:1-2). Government is a godly institution for our good and well-being. Pray for those in government, pray for those called to serve. Pray that the Lord will raise up new and godly leaders. Pray for our nation-states.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Report: Largest North Korean prison camp has expanded
Do Google Earth satellite images point to more grim news from inside North Korea? According to an article from United Press International (UPI), Curtis Melvin of the U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University noticed a substantial difference in satellite images of a North Korean prison camp from 2013 to some taken last month: [A]erial snapshots from Oct. 15 indicated considerable changes have been made to Camp No. 16. Melvin said the new changes included dams, hydroelectric power plants, apartments for...
Why Don’t Christian Victims of Islamic State Qualify As Victims of Genocide?
The Obama administration is moving to designate the Islamic State’s persecution of the Yazidi in Iraq an act of “genocide.” For the past few years the Yazidi, a tiny religious minority in the Kurdish region of the country, have been forced to flee the killings, rapes, and enslavement by Islamic State (the terrorist group formerly known as ISIS). There is no doubt that what is happening to the Yazidi should be considered genocide. But what about the Christians who are...
Will the Earth Ever Have Too Many People?
At the beginning of human history, God gave mankind a mandate to “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth” (Genesis 1:28). Sometime later—around the 19th-century—people started wondering, “Is the earth close to being filled with humans?” In 1798, Thomas Malthus predicted that if current birth rates persisted, many in Great Britain would starve to death. Instead, the birth rate was matched by increased agricultural yields, allowing more people to be fed with fewer land resources. Despite Malthus’s failed...
Video: Bradley J. Birzer on Russell Kirk – American Conservative
On November 5th, 2015, the Acton Institute was pleased to host Dr. Bradley J. Birzer for a lunch lecture and book launch celebration for the release of his latest book, Russell Kirk: American Conservative. Russell Kirk has long been known as perhaps the most important founding father of the American Conservative movement in the second half of the 20th century. In the early 1950s, America was emerging from two decades of the Great Depression and the New Deal and facing...
Registration for Acton University 2016 is now open
Acton University 2015 Attendees We are now 211 days from the opening day of Acton University 2016! University.Acton.org is updated, full of brand new information, and ready to go for next year’s conference, held at The De Vos Place in downtown Grand Rapids, Michigan on June 14-17, 2016. Registration will be open from today until May 20, 2016 at Midnight EST. That sounds like a lot of time, but don’t delay! We are offering two price points this year: $500...
How Access to Cars Helps the Poor
One of the most important socio-economic factors in America is social mobility, the ability of an individual or family to improve (or lower) their economic status. And one of the major factors in increasing social mobility is to simply increase mobility. For example, if you have to walk to work, you are limited to jobs within a few miles of your home. But if you can drive to work, the number of job opportunities available to you may increase considerably....
Jayabalan: Pope Francis should affirm support for Israel, Jews in talks with Iran
Hassan RouhaniIranian President Hassan Rouhani postponed his much-anticipated four-day European visit after the attacks in Paris over the weekend. According to a Voice of America report, the Iranian leader described the Islamist terror attacks, which have pushed the death toll to 132 and wounded more than 300 in Paris, as “crimes against humanity.” Rouhani had planned to visit Italy, the Vatican and France “in a trip aimed at boosting business and diplomatic ties after years of crippling international sanctions because...
How Property Rights Saved the Pilgrims
This week school children across the country will be hearing the tale of the Pilgrims and the first Thanksgiving. You probably heard a similar story when you were in a kid that went something like this: The Pilgrims sailed over to America from Plymouth, England on the Mayflower. During their first winter in the new country many of them starved because they were unable to produce enough food. In the spring, though, a Native America tribe taught the Pilgrims how...
Is this the end of Europe?
Writing for Public Discourse, Samuel Gregg has some rather negative predictions about the European Union in a new piece titled, “The end of Europe.” Gregg begins by quoting France’s leader during World War II, General Charles de Gaulle. In his Mémoires d’Espoir, de Gaulle saw Europe as having “a spiritual and cultural heritage.” He wrote that “the same Christian origins and the same way of life, linked to one another since time immemorial by countless ties of thought, art, science,...
Bourgeois Equality: The Modern World Can’t Be Explained By Material Causes
Economist Deirdre McCloskey is set to release the long-anticipated conclusion of theBourgeois Era trilogysometime next spring. The book, Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World, will build on her thesis that our newfoundprosperity is not primarily due tosystems, tools, or materials, but the ideas and rhetoric behind them. “The Great Enrichment, in short, came out of a novel, pro-bourgeois, and anti-statist rhetoric that enriched the world,” she writes, in a lengthy teaser for National Review. “It...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved