After George Osborne's terrible record as Chancellor, any candidate he backs for Tory leadership is tainted

He said he'd do one thing after Brexit and he did another, after failing to meet his own aims which were unrealistic in the first place. Osborne's record is simply shambolic

George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer (PA)

A factor that will carry significant weight in the Tory leadership ballot centres on who Osborne backs for leadership. In our current economic climate, a Chancellor who is able to successfully negotiate with EU finance ministers, as well as implement credible fiscal plans, is essential.

But a candidate backed by Osborne will be associated with his inability to demonstrate economic and fiscal foresight.

Osborne’s latest plans to slash corporation tax to less than 15 per cent in an effort to attract business investment in a post-Brexit Britain reflects an attitude that is rushed, hasty and has huge potential for negative consequences. The attitude that Britain should “get on with it” rings true to a certain extent – but certainly not in making moves that would anger EU finance ministers, alienate voters and re-categorise Britain as the tax haven of Europe.

The Chancellor decided to abandon the target that had been his top goal and driving force behind austerity measures in past budgets after Brexit – and we must not forget that some argued the target lacked credibility even before the referendum. Deputy director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Carl Emmerson, commented that Osborne only had a “slightly better than 50/50 chance” of hitting the 2020 target regardless. He always knew it was a gamble.

Any potential Prime Minister backed by a Chancellor who creates targets criticised for their credibility even before major political, economic and fiscal upheaval is unlikely to garner the support of the general public. This is the public who bore the burden of austerity cuts, all seemingly for nothing.

Indeed, any individual supported by Osborne in this leadership ballot will be marred by the endorsement of a man who had threatened to make £30bn of tax rises or spending cuts in a post-Brexit emergency budget, then decided to adopt a more cautious attitude and await official forecasts. They will be associated with techniques that are drastic, arguably aimed at scare-mongering the public into adopting political standpoints, and reflective as opposed to pro-active – if Osborne is fond of them as a leader, then it is likely that it is because they use tactics favoured by the Chancellor.

As such, this candidate will immediately lack fiscal credibility; their campaign will indicate, by negative association, that they lack the steady economic and fiscal foresight to steer a post-Brexit Britain through a near-likely recession. Additionally, they will be seen as in agreement with a Chancellor who implements plans that primarily benefit the elite.

It’s now time to guide Britain through one of its most turbulent periods in history – and a Prime Minister who follows Osborne’s shaky lead is the last thing our country needs.