Western countries achieved quite successful results at the G7 meeting. They once again clarified their position towards Russia and pushed for a larger military aid operation. However, for British Prime Minister Sunak, the G7 summit was not perfect. During the meeting, Sunak faced a succession of questions from three reporters, all related to "cabinet scandals." These questions made him angry, and even erupted into emotional anger at the venue.
At the last press conference before the end of the meeting, Sunak was confronted by a surprise questioning from a BBC reporter. The journalist bluntly asked whether Sunak still had confidence in his Home Secretary and whether he was considering an independent investigation. The question was unexpected, caught Sunak off guard, and it was hard to hide his dissatisfaction. In response, he did not explicitly answer the reporter's question, but instead asked if there were no questions related to the summit to ask.
Subsequently, two other journalists also went on to ask questions about the Home Secretary scandal, which drove Sunak into a difficult situation. In the face of a series of presses, Sunak only repeatedly said that he knew nothing about the Home Secretary scandal, insisting that he would only answer questions related to the summit. The answer sparked resentment among journalists and the media, who saw Sunak's behavior in Japan as an "angry" attitude.
Why do journalists ask these questions? The incident stemmed from the Home Secretary being involved in a speeding scandal. At the time, the Home Secretary did not accept the police, but used his network to try to evade punishment. This behavior sparked a public outcry and discontent. The purpose of the reporter's question was to seek Sunak to clarify the actions of the Home Secretary concerned. Sunak, however, chose to avoid mentioning it, claiming that he was focused on summit matters and could not comment on the matter.
Sunak's choice was not untargeted. He was well aware that if he was involved in the Home Secretary scandal, it could trigger even greater public anger. The experience of former Prime Minister Boris Johnson is impressive, as he tried to shelter a party whip but was eventually forced to resign, giving way to public anger. In the face of this previous experience, Sunak did not dare to act rashly.
However, Sunak's choice did not quench public discontent, and British people's dissatisfaction with his government has gradually heated in recent years. Climate policy, the national health service, the social welfare system, racial discrimination, and the education system have sparked protests. People expressed their dissatisfaction through demonstrations, petitions, economic boycotts, etc., which even turned into some violence and property damage.
However, these protests have also forced the government to respond to the problem, forcing the government to pay more attention to public opinion and uphold the foundations of democracy. In the midst of the ongoing wave of protests, Sunak wisely avoided issues involving a cabinet scandal, knowing that if he angered the population, the consequences would be dire. Britain's internal problems were becoming increasingly acute, and Sunak did not dare to risk exacerbating it.
In short, despite some success at the G7 summit, Sunak's evasive approach to the Home Secretary scandal has sparked resentment among journalists and the public. In the context of the current escalating popular protests, Sunak's choice may be wise, as he faces serious political challenges. The discontent of British society and the sharp confrontation of internal problems have put great pressure on the stability of the government and the development of democracy.