Not fines, but inflation is a resigning matter — for sunak | thearticle

The only countries where the police normally remove heads of government from office are police states. In a mature democracy such as the United Kingdom, we change prime ministers by voting

them out of office in a general election. Exceptionally they resign in mid-term, either for reasons of ill-health (Churchill, Macmillan and Wilson are examples) or because they have lost the

confidence of their party (Thatcher and May, among others). Neither of these conditions applies in the case of Boris Johnson. The British constitution does not require a prime minister to

resign because they have received a fixed penalty notice. Whether he was wise to drag this sorry saga out for several months is another matter. What was originally just a Labour Party

debating point became “Partygate” because Downing Street pushed back, insisting that no rules had been broken. Boris Johnson is doubtless sincere when, in the personal apology he issued last

night, he said that it had not occurred to him that by taking a ten minute break in between a punishing schedule of meetings to celebrate his birthday with his wife and colleagues, he was

breaking the law. If he had explained this and apologised in the first place, he could have saved himself and everyone else involved a lot of bother. With the exception of those who have

never supported Boris Johnson, the Conservative Party and the country are now ready to put Partygate behind them. By the next election it will have become part of the narrative of the

pandemic and people will take it into account when casting their votes. The only person who seems to have seriously considered quitting at this point is the Chancellor. For him to have

offered his resignation merely because he received a fine would have been absurd. It would also have been damaging and disloyal. Yet there is a much more serious reason why Rishi Sunak might

have been right to consider his position. Inflation last month hit 7 per cent, a whole point higher than the Bank of England expected. The rate is predicted to rise to 8.5 per cent this

month. If so, it will have doubled in just six months and neither the Governor of the Bank, Andrew Bailey, nor anyone else knows at what level it will peak. To say that inflation is out of

control is therefore hardly an exaggeration. The primary responsibility for maintaining price stability rests with the Bank of England. That it misjudged the connections between the money

supply and the economy during the pandemic is now becoming apparent. Quantitative easing may have been the right response to the 2008 financial crisis but it was the wrong one this time. The

Bank overreacted to a brief phase of deflation early on in the pandemic and, even when the danger of runaway inflation was apparent, continued in effect to to print money. Long after the

house was on fire, our central bankers poured fuel on the flames. Why, though, was the Bank inclined to be so cavalier with the money supply? The responsibility for that lies at the door of

the Treasury. Rishi Sunak built his reputation as a Chancellor on a massive Keynesian stimulus,  using public spending and soft government loans to keep the economy afloat during the

precipitous but brief recession caused by the pandemic. Financed by the Bank’s purchase of government debt, Sunak succeeded in masking the impact of Covid, but the policy overshot the mark

and carried on for too long. Neither the Governor nor the Chancellor took seriously the warnings of impending inflation that have resounded for the past 18 months or more, not least from

Brian Griffiths here, here, here and here. To ignore the advice of such a distinguished economist as Lord Griffiths, who headed the Downing Street policy unit under Margaret Thatcher and

thus had first-hand knowledge of the last period of high inflation, was a grave dereliction of duty. For this reason alone, both Andrew Bailey and Rishi Sunak deserve to lose their jobs. The

Governor has manifestly failed in his statutory duty to prevent inflation rising above 2 per cent for more than brief periods. Few expect inflation to return to that level this year or even

next. Despite the much-vaunted “independence” of the Bank, however, the custodianship of the currency is the first task of sound government. It cannot be entirely delegated to unelected

officials, either at the Bank or the Treasury. The buck stops with the Chancellor. He, more than anyone else, is culpable for the “cost of living crisis”. Most people do not care how rich

Sunak and his wife may be, nor about her non-dom tax status. Nor do they care about his fixed penalty notice. What they do care about is that their bills have become unaffordable. Millions

of people are being reduced to destitution. Inflation is a terrible scourge of society which sets people against one another. In its own way, it is even more destructive than the pandemic.

Rishi Sunak must know by now that he should have told the Bank to take away the punch bowl at least a year before it did. The party that mattered was not the one at Number 10 for which he

and Boris Johnson have now been fined. It was his debt-fuelled bonanza that debauched the currency. His promise in the Spring Statement of an income tax cut just before the next election

merely looked cynical. It added insult to injury. He may carry on for a while in office, but Rishi no longer looks dishy to the great British public. A Chancellor who loses control of

inflation is doomed. If Sunak has not gone by the next Cabinet reshuffle, the Prime Minister should sack him. A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to

covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a

donation._