Seeking social care in
a hostile environment
Trevor Phillips
Page 24
be? While drawing such conclusions
might be unfair, drawn they will be.
The other, connected, objection to
having an uber-rich politician at the
helm is that their wealth would
always be a fly in the ointment of
national unity. There would fester
the poisonous sense that we are
living in an us-and-them plutocracy.
When George Osborne insisted that
“we’re all in it together” groans
resounded, but his wealth is piddlingcompared with the chancellor’s. If
Sunak were prime minister his
money would become a beating stick
for Her Majesty’s Most Loyal
Opposition. The public has frothed
at pictures of Sunak filling a Kia and
fumbling at a card reader; every
action, policy, statement and
appointment would be taken as
evidence that he is out of touch.
I don’t think that the British public
would be allergic to a plain old
millionaire prime minister. Someone
in the 1 per cent or even the 0.1 per
cent would be fine, but by my
calculations Sunak’s family fortune
puts him in at least the 0.001 per
cent, and this is probably too far
from the people he would lead.
Perhaps anti-rich feeling is the last
acceptable prejudice. Maybe it is
wrong and unfair, but Britain won’t
wear a multi-multimillionaire.Sunak is too wealthy to be prime minister
The chancellor will, perhaps unfairly, always be overshadowed by the mountains of cash sitting in his family’s vault
HM TREASURY
looking at £600,000 properties as
“struggling”? Though I admired my
colleagues, I wondered whether their
well-off friends with £600,000
one-beds in Notting Hill had skewed
their judgment on what constituted
“struggling”. Indeed, in 2019 more
households with an annual income
over £80,000 received Help to Buy
loans than households earning less
than £30,000, giving credence to the
argument that policymakers’ rarefied
backgrounds might make for poor or
misdirected policy.
Similar criticisms have been
levelled at Sunak. Did he make the
decision to withdraw the £20-a-week
uplift for universal credit because in
his world that is tip money? Did the
spring statement lack more measures
to help the very poorest because the
chancellor finds it impossible to
imagine how desperate they mustThe public has frothed at Sunak filling
a Kia and fumbling with card paymentBunga-bunga Berlusconi was hardly
reticent about his wealth, like his
brother in gold-plated opulence
Donald Trump. While the 45th
president might have been the first
billionaire to lead the US, there were
many very rich ones before him.
Perhaps the American dream seems
so achievable that Americans don’t
resent billionaires because they’re
fairly confident that one day they
will join the club.
We British are not so relaxed, at
least judging from the comments I’ve
read online: “I just hope he can still
afford to heat his pool... ” “I’m sure
his father-in-law will stick 50p in the
meter for him if he gets cold in his
Gucci flip flops.” “Life will be tough,
says multimillionaire... ” “How
about your wife giving away some of
her billions, Sunak?” These came not
from Morning Star online but from
readers of The Times. The fierceness
suggests that Sunak’s wealth would
poison his premiership from the
start. It has become his defining
feature, just as buffoonery is
Johnson’s, dullness was Major’s and
fierceness was Thatcher’s. The
British electorate was tolerant of
these things but I don’t believe they
would be with extreme wealth.
Is this just plain old envy? Partly,
but there are also two reasonable
objections to having a very rich
person running the country. The first
is that their detachment from “real
life” will lead to poor policy. There
may be something in this. While
working in David Cameron’s No 10 I
attended meetings about Help to
Buy, which offered struggling first-
time buyers government-backed
mortgages. Being a first-time buyer I
was all for it, but my jaw dropped on
hearing the maximum house price
allowed: £600,000. To me, with half
that budget, this was crazy money.
How could anyone describe thoseI
t is the question that fills
politicians with cold horror:
“How much is a pint of milk?”
Many have fallen foul of the old
grocery grilling. The former
minister Jim Paice stumbled before
saying he’d have to ask Mrs Paice.
David Cameron got the price of
bread wrong before admitting that
he made his own in a — gaffe alert!
–— bread-maker. Rishi Sunak was
ambushed recently with a tin of
beans; he was off by 40p. The most
refreshing response came from Boris
Johnson when he was mayor of
London: “I know the price of
champagne, how about that?”
A fair riposte to all those pious
interviewers who would not have a
clue what their own organic Jersey
milk costs, yet who act as though not
knowing makes you Marie
Antoinette. In attempting to avoid
their righteous scorn, most
politicians play along with the notion
that after leaving their ballroom-
sized office on Whitehall they pop to
Tesco Metro with a bag of coppers to
see if there’s any bread on special.
The “out of touch” accusation has
always irritated me because it is
often beside the point, and the point
is political talent. When it comes to
those who run our country I am
pro-elite: pro-elite thinkers from all
backgrounds who, by dint of their
elite brains, forge elite careers with
elite incomes before considering
politics. If they have been successful
enough to make a lot of money and
elevate their lives above humdrum
grocery shopping, isn’t that evidence
of their suitability for high office?
Yet events in recent weeks have
led me to a rather contradictory
realisation. As a conservative and
celebrator of success it pains me to
say so, but for top-rank politicians in
Britain there is such a thing as being
too rich. Specifically, Sunak is too
wealthy to be prime minister.
I remain a fan of the chancellor,
even after his derided spring
statement. He seems an intelligent,
decent man who is also, let’s be
frank, among the best in a not-
particularly-inspiring bunch. But I
have come to realise that what
talents Sunak has will, perhaps
unfairly, always be overshadowed by
the mountains of cash in his family’s
vault. The chancellor amassed
millions in his previous career as a
hedgie and his wife is the daughter of
one of the world’s richest men. She
has a 0.91 per cent stake (worth an
estimated £690 million) in the ITcompany Infosys, which until last
week continued to operate in Russia.
When asked about this, Sunak was
uncharacteristically prickly: “It’s very
upsetting and wrong for people to try
and come at my wife.. .” I wonder
whether his tetchiness sprang from
the realisation that in this country at
least, great wealth is not compatible
with great political ambitions.
The rule does not necessarily
apply in other nations. Before
President Zelensky there was Petro
Poroshenko, the “chocolate king”
who made a billion dollars in
confectionery. Andrej Babis, the
Czech prime minister, is a billionaire.A rarefied background
can make for poor or
misdirected policy
Vast riches will be a
f ly in the ointment
of national unity
Comment
Clare
Fo ge sred box
For the best analysis
and commentary on
the political landscape
thetimes.co.uk/redbox@clarefoges
the times | Monday April 4 2022 23