“Wanted — Conservative leaders with the courage of their convictions.” Such a notice would be a fitting festoon for the Conservative Central Headquarters in London. And since we’re posting ads, here’s one to hang outside Number 10 Downing Street: “To Let.”

For Friday’s sacking of the chancellor of the exchequer, Kwasi Kwarteng, almost certainly tolls ill for the premiership of Liz Truss. Up to this point, even the most skeptical of Conservative supporters (of whom I number myself) could have cut her some slack. 

What was at stake, after all, was nothing less than the economic and social well-being of the United Kingdom. The prime minister, though, flinched. First, a fortnight ago, with the reversal on lowering the marginal rate of tax to 40 percent from 45 percent on incomes of £150,000 — a level, mind you, maintained through Tony Blair’s “New Labor.”

The Prime Minister next cashiers Mr. Kwarteng, ostensibly on “messaging” failure. Optics-wise, it would have been preferable, though unwarranted, for him to have resigned. But it was otherwise. “You have asked me to stand aside as your Chancellor,” he wrote Ms. Truss this morning. “I have accepted.”

At the Friday afternoon press conference, the Premier noted she had “met the former chancellor” and “was incredibly sorry to lose him,” since he is “a great friend” who “shares my vision to set this country on the path to growth.”

Then why sack him? If Mr. Kwarteng falls foul of the common good, then by extension, so does the Prime Minister. Was it that, as Ms. Truss said, “parts of our mini-budget went further and faster than markets were expecting”?

Consider the Prime Minister’s opening comments. “We will do whatever is necessary to ensure debt is falling as a share of the economy,” she said, and “control the size of the state.” Next came a howler — “our public sector will become more efficient” —  and a curious statement on spending, which “will grow less rapidly than previously planned.”

Since the broad outlines of a “tax-cuts-promote-economic-growth” agenda remain, then Mr. Kwarteng may be guilty of nothing more than over-eagerness in delivery. Nevertheless, he was dismissed. Nothing better exemplifies Disraeli’s criticism that a “Conservative Government is an organized hypocrisy.”

It was a refusal to accept the latest Government u-turn that turned Kwarteng out of office. Corporate tax rates would rise to 25 percent, after all . . . the “slow growth” policy of Ms. Truss’s leadership challenger, Rishi Sunak — whom she had castigated during the campaign for introducing the highest tax burden in 70 years.

Then, Ms. Truss argued that raising corporation taxes would hinder growth; now, she claims government revenues of “£18 billion per year.” The question only supply-siders have the sense (and nerve) to ask is, “What would revenues have been at the current 19 percent?”

On this corporate tax about-face, YouGov polling shows 60 versus 15 percent of all voters in favor. For Conservative voters, the result is 57 percent versus 22 percent, respectively. Someone should poll small business owners who subsist on the margin, who now face a 6 percent tax rise, and many of whom will face bankruptcy.

The inconsistency between the message that lower taxes lead to economic growth, and actual tax increases — let alone the admission of “slower” spending increases — runs counter to Conservative principle, and betrays the Brexit promise of “maximal liberty and minimal government.”

Speaking of Brexit, the new Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt — the fourth in as many months — championed remaining in the European Union. He was also one of those Conservative authoritarians calling for covid lockdown.

Mr. Hunt initially stood as a candidate to replace Boris Johnson, but with anemic support he cast in with Mr. Sunak. His appointment as chancellor stokes rumors that an incremental Sunak coup is in motion.

On Saturday, Mr. Hunt told the BBC it “was wrong to cut the top rate of tax for the very highest earners.” His remarks “suggested that he may reverse much of Conservative Prime Minister Liz Truss’ tax-cutting plans,” the AP reported.

Adding grist to the mill, London’s Sun reminds Britons that the new Chancellor “rightly believes corporation tax should be far lower than 19 per cent. His first act, on the PM’s new orders? To raise it to 25.” More Disraelian “conservative” hypocrisy.

With that in mind, Chancellor Hunt is set to present the Government’s medium term fiscal plan to the House of Commons on October 31 — Halloween. Boo, we say. One wonders if, at the end of the month, the Truss Ministry will still be standing.

Does Ms. Truss have a ghost of a chance? With British politics in daily flux, anything can happen. YouGov finds that 59 percent of Britons want the Prime Minister to resign; 46 percent of Tory members agree.

A former Conservative chancellor under Theresa May, Philip Hammond (no friend of the Brexit agenda), opines openly that if Ms. Truss steps down, her replacement will have no alternative but to call an early general election.

Such would certainly call “Curtains!” on the Conservative Government. Polling consistently shows, depending on the pill, Labor leading by between 28 and 34 percentage points.

In one respect, whether the UK Government is led by Conservatives or Labor, the difference would likely be more in degree than in kind. Simply think about the socio-economic burden under which the country groans.

Controversy over climate, energy, wokism, government itself — all this, under the “Tories.” One shudders to think of how the trajectory could worsen.

Only the elites have benefited, economically and socially: whether they be the bureaucracy, crony industries and non-governmental organizations, or the celebrity “media” culture.

As for the British people, their suffering, your diarist fears, has just begun.

BrexitDiarist@gmail.com