Truss Tried to Reassure Britons With Media Blitz.
Her Woes Multiplied.
In a round of interviews, the prime minister showed
little sympathy for the pain that high interest rates could inflict on mortgage
holders, critics said.
Prime Minister Liz Truss’s Conservative Party now
trails the opposition Labour Party by 33 percentage points in polling.
Mark
Landler
By Mark
Landler
Sept. 30,
2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/30/world/europe/truss-bbc-interviews-tax-cuts.html
LONDON —
For Prime Minister Liz Truss, it was a chance to steady the waters after days
of turmoil in the financial markets over her new fiscal plan: eight rapid-fire
interviews with local BBC radio stations from Leeds to Nottingham.
By the time
Ms. Truss signed off from the last one on Thursday morning, her political woes
had multiplied, leaving her new government in a state of disarray almost
without precedent in recent British politics.
She was,
critics said, robotic in defending a tax-cut plan that had been eviscerated by
the markets, and showed little sympathy for the pain that high interest rates
could inflict on mortgage holders. One host described her as a “reverse Robin
Hood.” A listener on another station asked, “Are you ashamed of what you’ve
done?”
Barely three
weeks into her job, Ms. Truss has suffered a dizzying loss of public support.
Her Conservative Party now trails the opposition Labour Party by 33 percentage
points, according to a new poll by the market research firm YouGov. That is the
largest Labour lead since Tony Blair’s early days as prime minister in 1998,
and the kind of gap that usually results in a landslide election defeat.
Her
plunging poll numbers have badly damaged Ms. Truss’s standing in her party,
which is gathering on Sunday in Birmingham for what promises to be an anxious
annual conference. Some speak openly of the party ousting her before the next
election, though the mechanics for doing that remain complicated.
“This is by
far the biggest and swiftest hit to a party’s opinion poll rating that British
politics has ever seen,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary
University of London. “For Tory MPs, this is like realizing on your wedding
night that you’ve made a truly terrible mistake.”
Matthew
Goodwin, a politics professor at Kent University and an expert on the Tory
Party, said, “I can’t think in my lifetime of any British prime minister who
has mismanaged her first few weeks in office like Liz Truss.”
What makes
Ms. Truss’s predicament so difficult is that none of the escape hatches are
appealing. Reversing some of her tax cuts — particularly the one for the top
income bracket of people earning more than 150,000 pounds, or about $164,000, a
year — would mollify the markets and probably some voters.
But it
would be a heavy psychological blow for a leader who ran her campaign, and has
built her government, on the conviction that tax cuts and supply-side policies
will reignite growth. Giving that up, Professor Bale said, would vitiate the
ideological rationale of her government and potentially turn her into a
lame-duck leader until the next election, which she will have to call by early
2025.
Sticking to
her guns, which has been Ms. Truss’s response so far, leaves open the chance
that Britain’s economy will pick up by the time she faces voters. But the
stubborn threat of inflation all but guarantees that the Bank of England,
Britain’s central bank, will keep raising interest rates. That will hurt people
who need to refinance home mortgages and likely throw the broader economy into
a recession.
When she
was asked by BBC Radio Stoke about her fiscal plan’s impact on the housing
market, Ms. Truss paused before saying, “Interest rates are a matter for the
independent Bank of England.” She added that “interest rates have been rising
around the world” and blamed much of the crisis on Russia’s war in Ukraine.
For the
last few days, the bank has actually helped Ms. Truss by intervening in the
market to buy British government bonds. That brought down interest rates and
strengthened the pound, which had tumbled to its lowest level against the
dollar since 1985. On Friday, the pound traded up to $1.11.
But the
intervention, which was driven by fears of the damage done to British pension
funds by the turbulent market, has put the Bank of England in an awkward
position, economists said. It runs counter to the bank’s monetary policy of
raising interest rates to cool inflationary pressures.
“The bank
has had to reverse course on its objectives practically overnight,” said Eswar
Prasad, a professor of economics at Cornell University. “It looks like the bank
is being forced to clean up the adverse consequences of the U.K. Treasury’s
actions.”
“This could
have some longer-term implications for the bank’s independence, credibility,
and effectiveness,” Professor Prasad continued. “That really hampers it in its
ability to fulfill its objectives.”
Once the
Bank of England completes its bond-buying program on Oct. 14, economists said
they expected it to revert to its tighter monetary policy, which would suggest
another increase in interest rates at its November meeting. The only government
action that could forestall, or even moderate a sharp spike in rates,
economists said, would be if the government reversed one of more of its tax
cuts.
“Absent
that U-turn, the bank is going to have to raise interest rates a lot,” said
Adam S. Posen, who served on the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee.
He said the bank needed to curb both the inflation from an expansionary fiscal
budget and the additional inflation caused by a devalued pound.
Beyond the
tug-of-war between fiscal and monetary policy, critics say Ms. Truss faces a
more elemental problem: her chancellor of the Exchequer, Kwasi Kwarteng, has
lost the faith of the markets in his economic stewardship.
That is
partly because when Mr. Kwarteng announced the tax cuts last week, he did not
submit the package to the scrutiny that a government budget normally receives.
That fed fears that the tax cuts were “unfunded,” meaning that they would not
be matched with cuts in spending and so would require massive borrowing.
On Friday,
Mr. Kwarteng and Ms. Truss met at Downing Street with officials from the
government’s forecasting agency, the Office of Budget Responsibility — a move
designed to signal they now welcomed the scrutiny. The office will submit its
projections for the cost of the fiscal program and its effect on Britain’s
growth on Oct. 7, but the government will not publish the numbers until Nov.
23.
For Ms.
Truss, the political fallout from her program’s botched rollout has been
profound. Political analysts point out that she won the support of only a third
of Conservative Party lawmakers in the first stage of the leadership contest.
Now, the collapsing polls have left the lawmakers angry, fearful, and divided.
Unless the
trends are reversed, many of the party’s members in Parliament will be swept
out of their seats in the next election, particularly in the “red wall”
districts of the Midlands and the North, where Ms. Truss’s predecessor, Boris
Johnson, lured traditional Labour voters to switch to the Tories with his
promise to “Get Brexit done.”
That
realignment of British politics is in jeopardy. Professor Goodwin, of the
University of Kent, said these voters did not want Ms. Truss’s low-tax,
neoliberal economic policies. Adding to the alienation, he said, she was
determined to relax immigration laws, another core issue for working-class
voters.
“We’re
seeing the complete implosion of the Conservative vote,” Professor Goodwin
said. “They’re losing middle-class voters who are alienated by Brexit, and
working-class voters who are alienated by their economic policy.”
For all the
hand-wringing, it is not immediately clear what the Tories can do about it.
Three months after evicting Mr. Johnson from Downing Street, few people want to
go through with another protracted, divisive leadership contest.
Professor
Bale said another option would be for the party to settle on a consensus
alternative to Ms. Truss and then pressure her to step down, so the new leader
could be crowned without any delay. The problem with this scenario, he said, is
a lack of obvious candidates to step into the role of the party’s savior.
Mark
Landler is the London bureau chief. In 27 years at The Times, he has been
bureau chief in Hong Kong and Frankfurt, White House correspondent, diplomatic
correspondent, European economic correspondent, and a business reporter in New
York. @MarkLandler
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário