Best Of

Against my better inclinations I watched QT for a bit last night, more in hope than expectations of Sultana putting up a decent show, unfortunately hopes and expectations were dashed. She’s not a supple or subtle thinker and reverts to slogans at the drop of a hat. Strangely there’s not much difference between what Sultana and Polanski are saying, but it shows you need something extra to front a party, or a movement as Zarah would no doubt say.

Seen some of it as well. Thought she was very ranty whenever she spoke. Looked a sympathetic audience for her views too

I've seen a few clips now from QT. Have to say Ken C may be getting on a bit but he still speaks great sense and with authority.

Where are today's politicians with such talent and ability for the frontline?

Certainly not in today's Treasury.

I thought the same too, KC spoke sense on migration. He's 85 now, a good few Tory politicians would do well to heed his words.

The way the Treasury have handled this upcoming budget is astonishing, I put some of it down to a poor standard of advisors - too many fresh out of uni with PPE degrees and no experience outside politics under their belt

The dearth of talent is deep and affects all political offices from local government upwards. The ability of a lot of our local councillors is not a patch on what it was 20 years ago, that is despite less people putting themselves forward (I'm aware I sound very old saying this!)

Haven't special advisers normally been relatively recently outside of uni? Say what you like about Starmer and Reeves they both had experience outside politics, Reeves isn't known as 'Rachel from Complaints' for nothing

They should just be called advisers. Recent history has shown there is nothing special about them.

Not sure, I think they're very special.

A serious point, before I descend into Cats Does Countdown and cheap Spanish wine-

Starmer and Johnson both look set to be broken by their choices of Chief of Staff. Jeeves and Wooster rewritten by Harold Pinter. Possibly also TMay and Nick Timothy.

At what point does this become a systemic problem, and what's the answer?

Anyone at a very senior level is to a very large extent reliant on the capability of the people they appoint to delegate doing things to. The issue here is that power in the British government has become so concentrated on the Prime Minister that a single point of failure has been created, and they can only hope not to fail completely if they have a very capable assistant, as Chief of Staff.

The solution is to somehow achieve the impossible and distribute power more widely - across the Cabinet, to local or regional government, to the people doing the work.

Against my better inclinations I watched QT for a bit last night, more in hope than expectations of Sultana putting up a decent show, unfortunately hopes and expectations were dashed. She’s not a supple or subtle thinker and reverts to slogans at the drop of a hat. Strangely there’s not much difference between what Sultana and Polanski are saying, but it shows you need something extra to front a party, or a movement as Zarah would no doubt say.

Seen some of it as well. Thought she was very ranty whenever she spoke. Looked a sympathetic audience for her views too

I've seen a few clips now from QT. Have to say Ken C may be getting on a bit but he still speaks great sense and with authority.

Where are today's politicians with such talent and ability for the frontline?

Certainly not in today's Treasury.

Reports are that the black hole is £10bn less than forecast so no need to raise income tax rates.

But how will today's interest rate rise affect the numbers? Surely it will widen the black hole again.

And we are still 12 days from Budget so can the numbers still move - ie has OBR done final numbers or is there a further final revision still to come?

If there is a further revision, surely there could be trouble.

All economic statistics are rubbish. It is absurd that the budget and future direction of this great nation are held hostage to forecasters who may as well be plucking numbers from thin air, so wildly do their guesses fluctuate.

This is why Reeves is wrong to faff and tinker. She needs to restore meaningful headroom so that the markets no longer get fits of the vapours every time someone briefs something in the financial press.

Well that's a bad start to the day. The 50 year taboo on increasing the basic rate of income tax is IMO perverse and damaging. When I heard it was finally going to be broken I was cock-a-hoop. I even got a bottle in for the big day - a nice Chilean red that is at its best after two weeks in the larder. Now we find it's not happening and the news is somehow worse for hopes having been raised. If they weren't up for it they should never have hinted it was coming. All it's done is left enthusiasts like me deflated. Lessons learnt anyway. I'm giving up on this one. A hike is never ever going to happen. The 50 years will become 150. Clearly the way to view it is not as a fiscal variable to be adjusted in accordance with financial circumstances but as a numerical constant embedded in the laws of nature. Pi = 3.14159, C = 186,000 mps, the basic rate of income tax in the UK = 20p.