Transcript: Britain’s China conundrum

This is an audio transcript of the Political Fix podcast episode: ‘Britain’s China conundrum’

Lucy Fisher
The UK’s China conundrum: how to balance security with trade.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Welcome to Political Fix, your essential insider guide to Westminster from the Financial Times with me, Lucy Fisher. Coming up, we’ll examine the details of the government’s plans to tighten the rules on Chinese activity in the UK. And while Rishi Sunak has made it to the end of the parliamentary term, we’ll dissect the big challenges looming for the Tories. With me here in the FT studio are Political Fix regulars Miranda Green. Hi, Miranda.

Miranda Green
Hello, Lucy.

Lucy Fisher
Robert Shrimsley. Hi, Robert.

Robert Shrimsley
Hi, Lucy.

Lucy Fisher
And George Parker. Hi, George.

George Parker
Hi, Lucy.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Lucy Fisher
So we’ll mark the government’s report card as it gets to the Easter break shortly. But first, the big story of the week, the allegations that China has launched two major malicious cybercampaigns against the UK. Firstly, an attack on the UK’s Electoral Commission database and secondly, an attack, hacking or attempting to hack at UK parliamentarians. George, just how big a deal is this public attribution made by Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, on Monday?

George Parker
Quite a big deal, but not that big a deal. I think we should put this in context, of course, that everyone spies on everyone else. And it’s not very long ago, I remember back in 2021 when the Americans, with Danish help, were spying on the German chancellor Angela Merkel. So let’s put this in context. And in the end, this was a sort of fairly low-grade attack on the Electoral Commission — hacking a document which, as journalists will remember, is in the public domain and something of a tool that we use as journalists and targeting some MPs who’ve been hawkish on China. So it’s serious, but this kind of thing goes on. And you got the impression with this announcement by Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister, this was something that they were forced to bring forward slightly because of the fact that the Americans were doing something similar on the same day. I think they needed to show that their Tory hawks on their own benches, that they were serious about dealing with this.

Lucy Fisher
And Miranda, Dowden unveiled sanctions against two Chinese officials and one Chinese entity, a front company linked to China’s ministry of state security. Now the hawks, the likes of former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, said that this fell far short of the kind of robust answer needed to show China that this kind of behaviour is unacceptable. Do you think the government should have gone further, or is it just realistic that, you know, they have to try and balance the trade links — obviously, fifth-biggest trading partner with the UK?

Miranda Green
It’s kind of an impossible question, isn’t it, which is I think why Rishi Sunak’s own words sound a little bit too much like commentary on the problem and a little bit too little, like somebody who knows what course of action to take. I mean, I was very struck by him saying that this was an epoch-defining issue, how to deal with China’s rise. And that sounds to me a bit like somebody, you know, launching an academic paper on the China problem, not a prime minister who knows exactly what his strategy is.

So I think you’re absolutely right to draw attention to the fact that we are already really dependent on China. I mean, you’re talking about really intricate supply chain issues. You’re talking about green technology, you know, EVs for electric vehicles, white goods. Apparently, we’re completely dependent on imports that there’s no way to unwind our trade dependence on our links with China in the modern world and in terms of the future industries that we’re hoping will lead to economic growth in the UK.

So that gives them this enormous political problem when there are security issues at stake. So, you know, I can’t see them ending being stuck between the hawks and the doves on this. I mean, David Cameron, now the foreign secretary, during his premiership we were incredibly friendly as a nation towards China. He and George Osborne wanted to forge greater links. So the Tory party’s kind of split on it, and the government has to try and steer a course through the middle and it’s almost impossible.

Lucy Fisher
And Robert, I mean, the hawks on the Tory benches want to see more sanctions. They point to the US going much further in targeting very senior officials in Xinjiang, where there’s allegations of human rights abuses against the Uyghurs. They also point to the US being strong in terms of sanctions levied against officials in Hong Kong where the UK’s actually not issued any, even though of course, we have our historic links to the place. The hawks also focus on the semantics, as Miranda brought out. You know, Rishi Sunak uses this very careful terminology that China is an epoch-defining challenge. He’ll go as far as saying it is a threat in terms of the UK’s economic security. But the hawks want to see him upgrade the language to say it’s an outright threat. Is this discussion worth having or is it just semantics?

Robert Shrimsley
Well, I think it’s the problem. I mean, it’s not semantics. It does matter, particularly matters in terms of our security thinking. But I think the issue is what you have is, as Miranda said, you know, we’ve gone from a period of really big open-door policy towards China under David Cameron and George Osborne to this current search for sort of Goldilocks position. It’s neither too close nor too far. You know, we want as many economic links as we can have without any problems. But as again, as Miranda was saying, you know, you get into supply chain issues very quickly and the line between, you know, legitimate supply chain and security concerns is a very blurred one.

I was very struck when Rishi Sunak was at the liaison committee earlier this week. He was being questioned by Liam Byrne, the Labour chair of the business committee, and he was sent in. Well, OK. If you’re saying it’s a problem, what are you gonna do about the Chinese equipment that’s still in cellular masts? And OK, what are you gonna do about banning TikTok in Britain or Hikvision, which is these security cameras in government departments? You’ve banned them on government premises. Should we be banning them elsewhere? What are you going to do about the merger of Hutchinson and Vodafone? It’s a Hong Kong company merging with Vodafone. You know, where do you draw the line?

And I think the problem for the government’s position is we recognise there’s an issue. The British government knows it’s got to be more adroit and more alert to this, but the problem’s just gonna keep coming one after another and the government’s gonna find itself — any government, not just this government — is gonna find itself on a treadmill where it is pushed ever further towards the more hawkish position and a more hardline position when it is trying not to. And unlike America, Britain is not such an enormous economic power that it has clout towards China in the way it makes its decisions. So I think it’s a very, very difficult position and we’re gonna be pulled towards more hawkishness.

Lucy Fisher
And I think you’re right. You know, every week, month that pass, we see new decisions come into the public spotlight. At the moment, it’s China’s EVE, which is looking at investing in a new gigafactory in the West Midlands that now the hawks are saying should be blocked.

Robert Shrimsley
I mean, there was a very funny, I think, the Matt cartoon I saw of someone saying I’ve got part of my Chinese electric vehicle down the street cause I don’t want them to know where I live. (Laughter) You could just see how this is ratcheting up, even in humour.

Lucy Fisher
Well, of course they know where we live now, given they’ve got access to our addresses and names on the Electoral Commission database. George, one area where the government has signalled its going to go further is with this introduction of the foreign influence registration scheme (Firs). It’s a UK version of the Foreign Agents Registration Act in the US. Just explain to us what it is exactly and what the government might do regarding China.

George Parker
Well, this all flows from the National Security Act, which was passed in 2023 and seen as a big shake up of the recent security legislation. And it creates this thing, as you mentioned, called the foreign influence registration scheme, where if you are working for a Chinese entity or the entity of a foreign state listed by ministers — and it should be said that China hasn’t been listed yet, but the suggestion is it might well be soon — that you would then have to register with the authorities, that people know where you are and what you’re doing, and so on. In the enhanced tier, there are two tiers, in the enhanced tier the net is drawn pretty widely.

And there’s a concern, I think, in business groups and others that this would be very unwieldy. And how do you know whether you’re actually supposed to register or not? Would you have to register if you’re working for any Chinese entity, which in this case, of course, mean any Chinese company, ‘cause they’re all owned by the Chinese state, or if you were a contractor, for example, for a Chinese company operating in the UK? And so that’s a debate going on inside government — whether they go to that enhanced tier, whether they need to avoid unintended consequences, how do they define this. And that’s quite a big technical piece of work, because what the British government doesn’t want to do, and going back to what Miranda and Robert were saying, is to be an outlier in being more robust on China than our allies.

The government’s policy on China is summarised by three words: engage, protect, and align. Now, alignment is talking about aligning with our allies and how we deal with China so we’re not an outlier. And there’s a sort of mirror image of the golden age which used to enrage our allies. And I remember going over with George Osborne to China in 2015. I was the only journalist on the trip. It was the height of the golden age. We went to Xinjiang, we went to the Shanghai Stock Exchange. It was open, all access. Amber Rudd, the energy secretary, was there saying, come and invest in our nuclear power stations. What really annoyed our allies about that was we weren’t aligning with them. We were trying to gain a competitive advantage by being out there as China’s biggest and best partner in the west. What we don’t want to do now is the mirror image of that and become the most robust hawkish, country in the west. So that’s the balance that they’re trying to strike.

Lucy Fisher
Miranda, would Labour do anything differently on China?

Miranda Green
Oh, what a good question, because of course, all the problems we’ve talked about strategically would afflict an incoming administration as well. David Lammy, who’s the shadow foreign secretary, has talked about having a full review of all UK-China relations almost as soon as Labour take over should they win the election, which again sort of raises what Robert said, which is if you have that review, is this a clever way of parking the problem and not taking a decision on, you know, the tiers and on what restrictions you place on British companies involved with Chinese companies, or is it actually lining up a whole bunch of headaches down the line when the review reports? Would you then have to make decisions about what you think’s a security risk and what isn’t?

I mean, obviously we don’t totally know that David Lammy will be the foreign secretary should Labour win, which I think is quite important in this context. But at the moment they’re just really enjoying pointing out what they call the inconsistencies in the government position, as George has outlined, this kind of veering across the road. And obviously you’ve got, you know, the Home Office as well wanting to be more hawkish because of security concerns. You’ve got Kemi Badenoch, you know, sounding the warning bell, saying don’t damage trade interests. And at the moment for Labour it’s another issue on which they can enjoy the government’s discomfiture. But I mean, I don’t know what your interpretation is, Lucy, because you’re very close to the story of what does the government mean by a careful crackdown? Because that’s a very strange phrase, no?

Lucy Fisher
A very strange phrase. And I think it speaks to a sense of confusion at the heart of the strategy. But it is just so difficult for the reasons we’ve been discussing, balancing national security with the trade impact. And I’m interested that, you know, we’ve seen so much churn in terms of ministers moving departments. Departmentally, the orthodoxies that you might expect are in play. The Home Office very keen to press ahead with, you know, prioritising security; the Department for Business and Trade on the other hand and the Foreign Office much more concerned about, you know, aggravating China. But you’ve had some characters move between those departments. And I think in particular, James Cleverly, previously foreign secretary, now having jumped over to the Home Office, having to recalibrate his views, depending on the kind of information he’s seeing, the advice he’s gaining from officials.

Robert Shrimsley
One thing I was interested to see is when we do get this review, if we get a Labour government, one of the big defence and foreign policy shifts that the Conservatives came up with was the notion of the Indo-Pacific tilt and being much more active as a player, holding back China and using our military and defence alliances partly to push our commercial interests and being involved in the Pacific. Obviously, post Ukraine, a lot of attention, particularly on the Labour side, has gone back towards defence of Europe. And I’m interested if you think that we’ll see a shift away from the Pacific tilt that the Conservatives were pushing for.

Lucy Fisher
I think it’s a really good question. I think in one sense, yes, you know, John Healey and David Lammy have really emphasised the importance of the UK, you know, leading the protection of our own backyard in Europe in the wake of the Ukraine invasion, and also that making more sense in the context of a US that’s, you know, less inclined to keep pouring money and military hardware into Ukraine. The UK needs to focus on that and free up America to be a bit more focused on the threat from China as they see it.

I think, however, you have to balance that with the reassurance piece that the likes of Healey and Lammy have very much been doing with the Australians, the New Zealanders who are very concerned about Labour potentially pivoting away. While there are many critics, including on the Conservative benches, who say well, it’s all just sloganeering, the Indo-Pacific tilt, we barely have enough, you know, ships or crews to keep our presence in much nearer theatres. In actual fact, sending a gunship, you know, once a year, quite infrequently to these areas actually means a lot to our allies in Australia and New Zealand. So they are very keen to see that kept up. And Labour’s indicated they’ll do that.

Robert Shrimsley
And there’s the defence of Japan, I suppose.

Lucy Fisher
Of course, of course. And that’s very much a deepening alliance. And actually, I was interested this week that Japan and South Korea were two Indo-Pacific nations that came out with messages of solidarity to the UK.

George Parker
And just very quickly on the Labour approach to China economically. You know, you hear of Rachel Reeves and she mentioned this in her Mais lecture of talking about “securonomics”, which is about securing supply chains, not being reliant on countries like China for essential materials and economic supplies. But the other part of that is the economics bit of securonomics. And that’s what I don’t think you’ll see a massive shift in emphasis, really, because already the government has its own strategies in trying to protect supply chains from being overdependent on countries like China. I don’t think there’ll be a massive shift.

Miranda Green
There is a key interesting electoral issue about the Hongkongers in the UK because of course they, you know, have a vote in the general election and they are concentrated in some particular constituencies that are Labour targets so it’s gonna be quite interesting what the messaging is to that particular group of voters.

Lucy Fisher
And just a final question to you, Robert. I mean, I speak to many Conservative MPs who slightly roll their eyes at the hawks. They say, well, they’re the usual suspects. And one cabinet minister said to me this week, well, Iain Duncan Smith won’t be happy until we cut links from China in every aspect of life. And that’s completely unrealistic. But just to put the other side of it, you know, I was struck by Duncan Smith talking this week about how he has been impersonated by a “wolf warrior” Chinese agent who made up a fake email address, messaged many of his contacts, legislators in other countries, claiming to be him and recanting his criticism of China. Also this week, we’ve seen the three-year anniversary of a wave of UK parliamentarians being sanctioned by China. This is alarming, isn’t it?

Robert Shrimsley
It is. Actually, I don’t agree with this argument it’s just the usual suspects, because actually, the people who are hawkish on China go across the political spectrum of the Conservative party. Tom Tugendhat, security minister, was very, very big in this caucus, or whatever one would wish to call it. So I think this is a broader spectrum of the Conservative party and the society. And although, you know, one can make jokes about Iain Duncan Smith being impersonated, actually, it’s very serious. And I do think . . . We don’t exactly know what the Chinese intent is either in going off the electoral register or some of the attempted hacks of parliament, but we know it’s not benign. And I think it is something that’s worth worrying about. And it makes the point that actually, this isn’t going to go away so Britain is gonna have to be much more careful in how it protects itself.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Lucy Fisher
Well, Rishi Sunak has made it to the end of this parliamentary term but not without the loss of two ministers. George, James Heappey, the armed forces minister, and Rob Halfon, the skills minister, have stepped down from government this week. How big a blow is that to Rishi Sunak?

George Parker
I think it’s a blow in the sense it represents a broader trend of MPs, prominent MPs not just stepping down as MPs but now stepping back from the government as well in anticipation of a future life in the private sector. Of course, the clock starts ticking on when they can take up private sector jobs when they stop being MPs and of course, that they start the clock ticking now; that’s advantageous to them.

But, you know, the serious point is that James Heappey and Rob Halford were two of the more respected government ministers, and it was touching, actually, I think we were talking about earlier, weren’t we, that John Healey, the shadow defence secretary, in the House of Commons this week said that there’d been a whole load of other people in different jobs for only one armed forces minister and James Heappey was an Army veteran who served in Afghanistan, highly respected in the armed forces. He’s a loss. Robert Halfon also widely respected across the education field, another loss to the government. Two sort of moderate voices and serious voices in the Conservative party.

So I think it’s worrying in that respect because it just adds to the sense of a government that’s gradually losing altitude. Also, you know, you have to reflect on the fact that did those two people think they were gonna hold their seats at the election? James Heappey represents Wells in Somerset, which was previously a Lib Dem seat. It would be a Lib Dem target this time around. Rob Halfon’s got a majority of about 14,000 over Labour. You know, in the danger zone for sure. So it reflects a general drift in the government, doesn’t it?

Lucy Fisher
I think you’re right, Miranda. I mean, Harlow, Rob Halfon’s seat, is typically regarded as a real bellwether. And Halfon himself was this pioneer of blue-collar Conservatism; spoke to, you know, parts of the electorate that the Tory party doesn’t always very successfully manage to connect with.

Miranda Green
Yeah, very interesting individual and I think will be a genuine loss to the House of Commons when he goes.

Lucy Fisher
And as George says, it does add to the sense of decay in this administration, doesn’t it, that, you know, as the opposition parties say, this is a government that’s running out of steam. These ministers could have been in place potentially for many more months if they thought that they really had policies they wanted to see through.

Miranda Green
Well, this is really interesting, isn’t it? Why would you not, if you were the government, try and achieve a few things in this last few months that you may have left? And I think there is a sort of weird atmosphere of a slight zombie parliament now. And you have MPs from all parties complaining, you know, it’s not just opposition MPs saying, come on, let’s just have this general election and let us have our chance in power. There are also a lot of Tory MPs who really want them to get on with it now. So having two well-respected ministers stand down. And there are a lot of MPs thinking about their future life, what’s their next job going to be when and if they lose those seats. So yeah, there’s a kind of atmosphere of decay. The legislative programme is so light. You know, normally when an election is called you have this bit called “wash-up” when the legislation that’s kind of left over gets dealt with and only certain bills will make it. So there’s a bit of a competition to get your pet project through in the last days of a government. I mean, you wonder whether there’ll be much competition at all or even a need for wash-up, because there’s so little going on and the MPs are all gossiping about that in all parties.

George Parker
And Lucy will be too modest to mention but she wrote a defining piece on the zombie parliament, which you can easily look up online.

Lucy Fisher
Thanks, George.

Miranda Green
Oh, knocking off in the afternoon really early because there’s so little to do. That’s right.

Lucy Fisher
And Robert, another MP announced they were stepping down this week. Scott Benton, he lost the Tory whip last April after he was caught in a rather shocking journalistic sting in which he appeared to offer to lobby ministers, table parliamentary questions in return for payment from gambling industry investors. Rishi Sunak’s facing another tricky by-election on May the 2nd.

Robert Shrimsley
Yeah, I mean at least he’s put it on May the 2nd so it would possibly get lost in the other, all the good news from the local elections. It all adds to this whole general sense of fin de siècle. And the other point I’d make, by the way, on people like Rob Halfon and James Heappey, I mean, you have a natural tendency — 14 years in government, people come to the end and they look at the situation, am I gonna make it to cabinet or am I gonna spend five years working in opposition but for no great joy?

But what I think is happening is a real issue that you’re seeing a hollowing out of the talent and the experience of the government as well in this process, so that actually, whatever shape the Conservative party is in after the election, a lot of wise heads are going to be on a lot of people with practical experience of government. We saw the hollowing out of the Conservative party post-Brexit. Now this is another, you know, more attritional one. And I just think it makes you concerned slightly for where the Conservative party will be post-election, especially if it’s lost and it has to start rebuilding. And the whole point is just generally that everybody’s looking at the parliament, they’re looking at the by-elections, they’re looking at the local elections and just saying, you know, I don’t think the next parliament gonna be all that much fun.

George Parker
There was one thing on the by-election on in Blackpool on May the 2nd, which I think is interesting is that across the country one might expect Reform UK is obviously breathing down the Conservative party’s neck in the opinion polls. Probably won’t do all that well in local elections just because their resources are spread too thin. They don’t have a councillor base, they don’t have a whole load of activists. But they will put all their effort into the parliamentary by-election in Blackpool South. So you could have otherwise had a narrative the Conservatives would have said, well, look, Reform UK aren’t doing very well across the country. But Reform UK will try to focus everyone’s attention on a seat in Blackpool South, where they could do quite well.

Robert Shrimsley
I did think it was extraordinarily interesting that Reform UK openly admitted, or at least Ben Habib, the deputy, was saying they’re not contesting local elections. I did think that was a very interesting moment because actually, you have to contest local elections. We’re going to be . . . Gonna make it as a party, you need to build up your activist and councillor base. And of course, they haven’t got the breadth of the main parties, but a party that’s really serious about becoming a player in the long-term British political landscape needs to build up in local government. And so even if they just focus on a handful of places where they might be quite strong — places like Derby or whatever — I think it’s a mistake and quite telling that they think they can repeat the Brexit party trick from the European elections and do this without an activist base.

Miranda Green
Do you not think that’s just completely because they’re not in the same game as the other parties? I mean, are they interested in running some towns? Probably not. They see themselves as a disrupter wanting to change the course of history in terms of the Conservative party, don’t they? So actually building up a local base is not the game they’re in.

Robert Shrimsley
But a key part of becoming a disrupt— well, obviously, you know, there’s debate as to what Reform want. Are they simply there to try and play the old shakedown routine they’ve been playing for years. They’re trying to force the Conservative party on to their agenda. Or do they actually want to be something more? But the truth is, in our parliamentary political system, the key facets you have to have in the eyes of the voters is can you win? You know, one of the reasons why the Lib Dems don’t do well in lots of places is because people think they can’t win. But one of the reasons why they are still a force in others is because people are look, well, they can win here. If Reform don’t establish a track record of being able to win a base anywhere, then they will not get that sense of momentum that allows them to become challengers.

Miranda Green
Yeah, but winning a local elections and then running local councils is actually about administering billions of pounds worth of important services. I am unconvinced that Reform UK are actually interested in . . . 

Robert Shrimsley
Are you implying they’re not serious, Miranda?

Miranda Green
I am. I am, and I’m also implying that they aren’t actually interested in taking responsibility in that way because they are all about the strategy of the right.

Robert Shrimsley
But I mean, when you just go to a Reform meeting — you know, I went to one of their spring conferences — a lot of these people are ex-councillors. So they do have people of experience in local government but they are in their admittedly limited activist base. I think it’s an interesting and telling decision.

Lucy Fisher
I agree with you, Robert. I think Reform would want to. They just lack the kind of local association networks, executives, the real geographic spread in order to field enough candidates. They also lack the money to put, you know, real campaigns together and leaflets.

Robert Shrimsley
Well, they could target a few places.

Lucy Fisher
They could target a few places. I think they’re trying to avoid the embarrassment of last year, when they only gained six councillors net, and that was really seen to damage them. But again, I don’t think you can necessarily wish away the importance of local elections in, as you say, building up your base of activists for the general election as well.

And on that note, George, we’ve seen some really interesting analysis this week from Rallings and Thrasher, these electoral gurus, who say that the Conservatives could lose up to 500 councillors — half of all those facing election on May the 2nd. They point out that this is the round that was last contested in 2021, when Boris Johnson enjoyed a real vaccine bounce in the middle of the pandemic. It sounds like they could be heading for an absolute massacre in electoral terms.

George Parker
I mean, it looks pretty bleak for them. The national vote share, I think, in these elections, when these seats and mayoralties were last contested, the Conservatives I think got 40 per cent was the projected national vote share. If you look at their opinion poll rating at the moment, it’s 20 per cent. I think Labour polled around 30 per cent national share in 2021. You don’t need to have the genius to see which way that’s going to be going.

These elections being contested are generally in places where the Conservatives don’t do very well in normal circumstances anyway. Boris Johnson, who had reach into those places, has gone and been replaced by Rishi Sunak, whose own approval ratings are going through the floor at the moment. So it does look likely to be a terrible night for the Tories on May the 2nd.

Lucy Fisher
Miranda, they do have a bit of a break now over Easter, 20-odd days off, the MPs, those hard-working legislators. We’ve heard a lot about what Labour’s planning to do regarding its manifesto, how it’s going to whittle down that chunky national policy forum document. Less said about the Conservatives, but they are starting to hold these policy committees with MPs starting to think about the choices they need to make.

What do you think about what we’ve heard so far? Of course, the chancellor confirmed the pensions triple lock will remain over the weekend. But one of the big questions they’re contending with is whether to make a vow in the manifesto to leave the ECHR, the European Convention on Human Rights.

Miranda Green
It’s a really good question. I mean, the Tory party strategy over the last few months, I think we could probably all agree, has been one way and then back the other way. You know, are they going for some sort of core vote on the right? Are they trying to reach out to the centre? Are they trying to present a platform that’s responsible economic management after the Truss-Kwarteng disaster, you know, or are they seeking to offer bold electoral bribes in the form of future dramatic tax cuts?

So how they kind of, you know, coalesce those different strands into something that looks like a coherent programme for another term in government is quite a task, I would say, for whoever is actually wielding the pen. And I suppose it’s also gonna be a question of whether they do what they did last time and put a couple of people who are good thinkers and writers in charge of building that programme so that it comes across as coherent. Because obviously last time they had Rob Colville and Rachel Wolf in charge of the project. Robert Colville, a think-tank chief on the right; Rachel Wolf, a kind of policy thinker who now works at Public First, the policy direction consultancy.

And who you have actually, you know, doing the editorial work on a manifesto does really matter, so it’s gonna be interesting to watch how that emerges.

Robert Shrimsley
Everything Miranda says is right. I think the ECHR is a really interesting question because although I don’t think you’re gonna win an election on committing to leave the European Convention of Human Rights, I do think the Conservative party is being pulled inexorably towards that position.

And one of the things I think will be worth watching out for is if the local elections go as badly as we all seem to think they’re going to go, you’re going to get a new wave of panic rippling through the party, because it’s one of those funny things; even if you expect it when it actually happens, it feels so much worse. And I think it is quite conceivable that Rishi Sunak is going to feel he needs to throw something to his party to shore up his position.

Now there are all kinds of very good technical reasons why just committing to leave the ECHR is problematic, including the impact on Northern Ireland and on the trade agreement with the European Union. But I just think that when Rishi Sunak comes back from May the 2nd, if it hasn’t gone a lot better than we expect, there is gonna be this wave of panic, there is gonna be this need to try and quell the party. And I wonder if things like that are gonna start coming back into play.

George Parker
And you do meet ministers and Tory strategists who think this would be a very bad idea to start talking about the ECHR? For a start, you know, this whole talk about being a foreign court, you know — accused of breaking international laws, a court that we helped set up after the second world war — that plays extraordinarily badly across moderate Tory votes and seats in the South.

Also, there’s something Isaac Levido, the Tory election strategist, goes on about all the time: if we go into the next election giving the impression that Brexit isn’t done, voters will think what on earth are you talking about? Now the ECHR we know has nothing to do with the EU, but has the word European in its title. And if the Tories go into the next election still banging on about Europe and foreigners being in charge, I think the voters are gonna turn on them.

Robert Shrimsley
I completely agree, but I’m talking about internal party discipline. I do think every week that the Conservatives are not managing to make the debate about the economy is a week they’ve lost.

George Parker
Yes, I agree.

Lucy Fisher
Robert, the final word to you, because I know the publication of Dame Sara Khan’s review into social cohesion and resilience caught your eye this week and you’ve written your column on it. What did you make of it?

Robert Shrimsley
I thought it was a really interesting report, and the result of quite a lot of work that she has put into it. There were lots of bits to it, but the bit that I was struck by was the way she made a link between the attacks on free speech and the maintenance of social cohesion.

The point she’s making is you have this thing which she calls freedom-restricting harassment, where people feel they are no longer able to say what they think on a range of issues, where debate is quelled by online pylons or mobs visiting your home or whatever, or, you know, that you might lose your job. And she said this is a major problem for the cohesion of society, because if people don’t think they can say what they think anymore, you know, apart from the most extreme positions, then this is actually very damaging. And it allows malign players from extremists on either side to dominate the debate and pull society apart.

And she’s made a very strong argument for a number of things, including the principle that all the leaders of politics and civic society need to stand up and show a bit more fortitude, siding with those who are harassed and saying we believe in free speech and we’re going to defend it. I thought it was a very interesting report. It’ll be interesting to see how the government acts on it.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Lucy Fisher
Well, we’ve just got time left for the Political Fix stock picks. Miranda, who are you buying or selling?

Miranda Green
Well, I think, back in the mists of time, that I bought Susan Hall, the Conservative candidate for the London mayoralty, as a kind of hedge. And even though it’s always nice to have a hedge, I’m gonna sell her this week, because the Conservative party campaign in London has gone full tonto, putting out adverts implying that London is some sort of, you know, crime-infested horror . . . 

George Parker
Dystopian vision.

Miranda Green
Totally dystopian vision. And actually they did a terrible video, which it turned out they were using footage from the New York transport system or something.

George Parker
Sadiq Khan has seized power.

Miranda Green
Sadiq Khan seized? Sadiq Khan won the election. He didn’t seize power. Anyway. So I’m selling Susan Hall as a matter of principle this week.

Lucy Fisher
OK, but can we agree you’ve made a loss?

Miranda Green
Oh, yeah. No, I’m really out of pocket. (Laughter)

Lucy Fisher
George.

George Parker
I’m gonna go for someone listeners may or may not be familiar with — it’s Jonathan Gullis, who’s the MP for Stoke-on-Trent North. He is toast at the next election in that seat. There’s no way he’s gonna win it. But he’s done a couple of interesting things this week. The first thing was after Rishi Sunak went to the 1922 backbench committee, he came out and did a briefing to all the assembled journalists, rallying people to the cause. We’ve gotta fight, get behind Rishi. Absolutely loyal. A couple of days later he was made vice-chairman of the Conservative party.

Now, you have to ask yourself, what’s going on here? Someone who’s facing unemployment within a few months, I wonder whether he might be found a safer seat to fight the next elections. Only wild speculation on my part. Otherwise, I can’t understand what he’s up to.

Miranda Green
What, a last-minute chicken run?

George Parker
Why not?

Miranda Green
Whoa!

Lucy Fisher
One to watch.

Miranda Green
Lucy, what about you?

Lucy Fisher
I’m going to buy Penny Mordaunt just for the ultimate sass factor this week. The Telegraph reported on her making all these visits on the rubber chicken circuit to a local Tory association, saying that she was on manoeuvres. And the Telegraph said she had visited 40 as part of this nascent secretive leadership campaign. She wrote to them to correct the number as 70 that she’s visited, although of course insists this is all in the service of helping the party win the next election.

Miranda Green
Sensational, isn’t it? Go big or go home. (Laughter)

Robert Shrimsley
Absolutely.

Lucy Fisher
Robert, who are you buying this time?

Robert Shrimsley
Well, I mean harking back to something we mentioned earlier. I couldn’t decide whether to buy or sell, but I’d just like to buy high-level headhunters. Because there are lots of Conservative ex-ministers out there looking to be placed in work. Now, it is possible they’ve flooded the market and the headhunters are going to struggle to place them, but they’ve got a lot of ex-ministers on their list who they can offer up to businesses as useful members of their boards or executive committees. So, headhunters.

Lucy Fisher
Well, there we go. Robert Shrimsley, Miranda Green, George Parker, thanks for joining.

Miranda Green
Thank you.

Robert Shrimsley
Thanks, Lucy.

George Parker
Pleasure.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Lucy Fisher
That’s it for this episode of the FT’s Political Fix. I’ve put links to subjects discussed in the episode in the show notes. Do check them out. They’re articles we’ve made free for Political Fix listeners. There’s also a link there to Stephen Bush’s award-winning Inside Politics newsletter. You get 30 days free. And don’t forget to subscribe to the show. Plus, do leave a review or a star rating if you have time. It really helps us spread the word.

Political Fix was presented by me, Lucy Fisher, and produced by Audrey Tinline with help from Leah Quinn. Manuela Saragosa is the executive producer. Original music and sound engineering by Breen Turner. Cheryl Brumley is the FT’s global head of audio. We’ll meet again here next week.

[MUSIC PLAYING]