Red or blue wall? Rishi’s next tricky balancing act

He steadied the ranks by bringing David Cameron back into cabinet – but at the coming election, Rishi Sunak may yet find it impossible to appeal to both the old and new Tory tribes, says Andrew Grice

Rishi Sunak with his new-look cabinet – now with added David Cameron as foreign secretary (PA)

When Rishi Sunak’s pitch to be the “change candidate” was shown to focus groups, a common response was… laughter.

It was never going to work after 13 years of Tory rule. No wonder he has dropped it after only six weeks.

His new strategy was unveiled this week in a dramatic cabinet reshuffle that saw the surprise return of David Cameron – and the sacking of Suella Braverman.

Sunak returned to a much more authentic brand – competence, stability and statesmanship – while deploying Cameron’s appeal in the traditionally Tory blue wall in the South, to try to prevent the Liberal Democrats winning up to 50 seats at next year’s general election. It was a back-handed compliment to Ed Davey’s party and reflected Tory jitters about the danger of tactical voting.

But the move angered right-wing Tories, who accused Sunak of “sacrificing” the red wall in the North and Midlands that the party seized in 2019 – in many cases, their own seats. They worry that Reform UK, the successor to Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, is ticking up in the opinion polls. It could cost the Tories 20 marginal seats by taking votes away from them and allowing Labour or the Lib Dems to win them.

It was always going to be harder for Sunak in the red rather than blue zone. “Boris, Brexit and Corbyn” enabled the Tories to invade the North and Midlands; Sunak can rely on none of them and his wealth is a handicap. Many Tory supporters in the south didn’t like “Boris or Brexit”, but stuck with the party in 2019 because they didn’t like Jeremy Corbyn. They do not see Keir Starmer as such a threat.

Over to Cameron… and Jeremy Hunt. The cut in inheritance tax he will likely announce in Wednesday’s autumn statement is firmly targeted at the blue wall.

Voters there initially saw Sunak as “Cameron 2.0”, according to Luke Tryl, UK director of the More in Common think tank, but now realise Sunak is more right-wing and “not who we thought he was”. Who better to reassure them than Cameron Mark 1, whose performance is rated more highly than Sunak’s?

However, I’m told Sunak’s new approach is more nuanced than his right-wing critics think. Allies deny he has written off the 40 red wall seats seized from Labour. “It’s about stability and professionalism,” one said. “We can appeal to the red wall without p***ing off everyone else like Suella [Braverman] did.” Her culture wars were not working in the red wall – because the economy matters most there – but alienated the blue wall. That risked a repeat of Labour’s 1997 landslide.

Sunak’s hope? A blue wall fightback pushes up the Tories’ dismal 23 per cent poll rating to more than 30 per cent by early next year. Crucially, they would then turn back to the red wall, try to get some credit for lower inflation and higher wages and thus appeal to both tribes in the party’s 2019 coalition.

The new approach makes sense to More in Common’s Tryl, a former Tory special adviser. “If the bottom falls out of the [blue wall] base, there is no way back,” he told me. “They don’t want to spend the next year fighting on two fronts and falling between two stools.” Tryl likened the focus on the blue wall to “dance with the one that brought you”.

He said: “If they get to 30 or 32 per cent in the polls, it’s game on – and they could pivot back to the red wall. For the Conservatives to win the election, or even be the largest party, requires a lot to go right. I certainly think this is the best shot of avoiding a 1997-style wipeout.”

There’s only one problem: the small boats. Voters across the country want them stopped and they are the most common reason why 2019 Tory voters have deserted the party. While there is strong support in the red wall for the plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, blue-wall Tories are more likely to oppose than back it.

Sunak should beware being dragged down the route of breaking international law by opting out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Refugee Convention, as Braverman proposed on Friday. There’s a two-one majority for staying in the ECHR. More in Common found that all voter groups, including “backbone Conservatives”, are more likely to say the government should follow international law than risk breaking it.

Defying it would play badly among the liberal voters Cameron is wooing, so Sunak would fall between two stools – again.

This highlights the PM’s very difficult balancing act. It might well prove impossible to appeal to both the old and new Tory tribes. If Sunak has to choose, I think we now know he would go blue.