Isabel Hardman

It’s easy to laugh at Liz Truss bringing out a book, much harder to ask whether there are points she makes that Westminster can actually learn from. The former prime minister obviously has a self-awareness problem which leads her to blame her failures on anyone and everyone who happened to be around at the time. That makes it much easier to dismiss the whole thing. But there are arguments – particularly within the final chapter – that we haven’t just heard from Truss, or indeed just from Conservatives. Even previous Labour leaders have complained about the resistance from the civil service to reforms.

Rishi Sunak wants this weekend’s attempt by Iran to attack Israel to mark a de-escalation in the region. He told MPs this afternoon that he would be speaking to Benjamin Netanyahu later today and that he would be discussing how to prevent further escalation, saying: ‘All sides must show restraint.’ This was not a surprise, given Lord Cameron’s language this morning about the need for Israel to ‘take the win’.  Instead, what was more striking was that MPs did not, as had been suggested by some, spend that much time in this statement complaining about British involvement in foiling the attack. Sunak suggested once again that this was an extension of the RAF’s campaign against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

Angela Rayner has this evening announced that she would quit if convicted of breaking electoral law, saying: ‘If I committed a criminal offence, I would of course do the right thing and step down. The British public deserves politicians who know the rules apply to them.’ This line follows the announcement earlier today that Greater Manchester Police were investigating whether she gave false information about her home address on official documents. Rayner insisted once again that she was ‘completely confident I’ve followed the rules at all times’.

Normally when a select committee hearing or interview is described as ‘wide-ranging’, it’s because a lot was said, but none of it of much note. Today’s Liaison Committee session with Rishi Sunak was wide-ranging, but in an unusually newsy way. The Prime Minister was grilled by select committee chairs on immigration, Rwanda, Gaza, defence spending, China, online harms, pensions and local government. Almost all the topics yielded a line of note – though admittedly some of the lines were notable for what Sunak did not say.

What difference is the revelation that China was behind two cyber attacks – on the Electoral Commission and UK parliamentarians – really going to make when it comes to the government’s approach to Beijing? Oliver Dowden told MPs today that the two attacks ‘demonstrate a clear and persistent pattern of behaviour that signal hostile intent from China.’ But he came in for criticism for the scale of the government response – just two individuals and one entity associated with the attack have been sanctioned, and there is a promise to continue to ‘call out’ this activity in the strongest terms. The Chinese ambassador is also being summoned to respond to the announcement.

Rishi Sunak will have been grateful to have got through Prime Minister’s Questions today with little criticism – at least from his own side. The session opened with a loyal planted question on the inflation figures, which allowed Sunak to tell the Commons that ‘our plan is working’ and underline that this was the steepest fall since the 1980s.  Once that was over, the session then descended into a pretty run-of-the-mill grudge match between Sunak and Keir Starmer, with the latter listing things that weren’t working and asking why the Prime Minister wasn’t calling an election. Sunak’s responses contained some minor developments in his attacks on Starmer for defending Hizb ut-Tahrir.

Rachel Reeves has given her much-anticipated speech about what she’d do as the first female chancellor in history. As briefed, her Mais lecture was a look at Labour’s ‘securonomics’ economic policy, with promises to beef up the Treasury, as well as analysis of Nigel Lawson’s 1984 Mais lecture, and an insistence that ‘I don’t want to make this a party political speech any more than you want me to’. Both Reeves and the Conservatives are dodging questions Some of the most striking lines were the ones where she reflected on Labour’s own record in government, telling the audience that ‘the analysis on which [New Labour’s policies were] built was too narrow’ and that ‘stability was a necessary, but not a sufficient condition to generate private sector investment.