No more than 49 days.
This is how long Liz Truss' brief stint in Downing Street lasted, before her resignation on October 20 following the onset of the economic crisis triggered by her budget reform project.
Not enough to put it in the record books, but still enough to harbor serious regrets.
If she has been discreet since then, fleeing in particular the controversy aroused by the colossal amount (115,000 pounds) of compensation that these six weeks at the head of the country will have brought her, Liz Truss came out of her silence on Saturday evening by giving herself up, in the columns of the
Telegraph
, to a first political confession - of a particular kind, since it lists above all the sins of others.
In this long forum, the former Prime Minister certainly recognizes that she was not "
irreproachable
".
But she quickly gets to grips with the underlying reasons which, she says, have impeded her budget reforms, under the sign of major tax cuts – in particular her emblematic measure to abolish the highest income tax bracket.
This plan, which eliminated significant resources for the State (several tens of billions of pounds) had worried the IMF and provoked a procession of criticism, well beyond the United Kingdom, in particular on the deleterious effect of such a project in terms of inequalities or budgetary control.
The policy of Liz Truss then panicked the financial markets, causing a rise in borrowing rates and a historic fall in the course of the pound sterling.
Read alsoResignation of Liz Truss: in the United Kingdom, the endless crisis
But Liz Truss does not budge: this policy was the right one, it only came up against the “
left-leaning conformism of the British economic elites
”.
Although the political storm that led to her downfall "
shattered
" her on a personal level, the former Prime Minister continues to believe that "
in the medium term
", her ideas would have supported the return of growth and made it possible to reduce UK debt.
Her brief stint at the head of government has, however, in her words, designated her as a "
scapegoat
" for the general poor performance of the British economy in recent years.
Thus, she believes that she was the object of a rebellion, at all levels of the State and even within her party.
“
I thought, when I arrived in Downing Street, that my mandate would be accepted, respected.
How wrong I was!
Of course, I had anticipated the system's resistance to my reforms, but I had clearly underestimated
it,” she writes.
The fault in particular with a lack of economic culture among its fellow citizens: “
Sincerely, I wanted to go against the current of the dominant thought.
Most of the media and public opinion have become estranged from the fundamentals of fiscal and fiscal policy, and the country has become leftist
,” she adds.
And to conclude:
I was given no chance to carry out my policy, due to resistance from the establishment, and a complete lack of support from my political party
”.
She also regrets having “
underestimated the reluctance of conservative parliamentarians to set up a less regulated and less taxed economy
”.
By way of consolation, however, she confides that since her departure from Downing Street she has received many letters showing her support, in particular from people who confide in her to share her diagnosis on “
the economic lethargy of the country
”.
/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/prisa/RLVRE36BJ333YNEQ2LG6XMIQSY.jpg)
