Best Of

Morning all

The thing about populism is it always has to be on the right side of opinion - to be popular.

Farage's sole misstep in the 2024 GE was when he advocated a view on the Ukraine which was well out of step with public opinion at the time and he suffered for it.

Simply running to where the focus groups tell you public opinion is on any subject will leave a party completely tied up in an incomprehensible platform of contradictory policies which will make Government either impossible or so riddled with compromises and broken promises as to be entirely discredited.

The other side of this is where a populist leadership tries to offer a more conciliatory or moderate line they are then in danger of losing support because their voter base is often more extreme - immigration being the classic example. Yet the populist leader will, if they have any sense, know that the more they chase their own supporters to the extreme, the more they will repel others.

The art of politics is or should be about arguing a case to the electorate and convincing them it's the right thing to do even when many of the voters will lose out as a result. That's not easy.

There is for example a case to be made for immigration but no one is making it.

Various comments tonight about how 1% annual tax on house values would let you abolish council tax, SDLT, and IHT at a stroke.

At the same time it's a policy where the average home owner will pay the same or less in tax as the current council tax bill, with almost all the incidence falling on rich people in the SE.

Tax simplification. Two fairly unpopular taxes gone, a third one effectively restructured to be considerably more progressive. No loss of tax revenue.

So - why hasn't one of the parties picked it up and run with it? OK it will make a small number of rich voters very angry, but for Reform and these days the Tories, it probably doesn't matter all that much electorally - a policy with 10 winners to every loser and with the losers geographically concentrated in places you don't win anyway, why care? They will all be ABCs in the SE who vote Lib-Dem anyway.

It can (and should) also discourage second ownership of homes, and also wealthy foreigners owning homes in the UK they barely use.

The value of UK residential property is 9 trillion. Only about 3.5% of this changes hands every year, so to replace stamp duty alone would just require a 0.12% annual charge. But if you made it 1% for homes occupied less than 180 days a year, and 2.5% for those occupied less than 90 days, then you could make the annual charge to replace stamp duty just 0.05% per year, which is nothing.

If we wanted to replace Council Tax (which is no bad thing), you would probably need a number more like 0.75% (residents), 1.5% (less than 180 days), 3% (less than 90 days). That would be positive for the majority of voters, would increase labour mobility, increase housing availability (and probably building too), and a large chunk of the receipts would be paid for by people who don't even live in the UK full time.

As you say, it's insane that none of the major parties have proposed it.

Kemi's speech - bloody brilliant.

I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.

I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.

I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.

You OK hun?

Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?

The other half is the problem. So she says:

[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.

On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.

A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.

Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.

Her "fully costed savings" that offset mostly uncosted tax cuts

Starmer and Reeves have done far more damage to our economy with their job destroying budgets and enormous new black hole entirely made in nos 10 and 11

No they haven't.
Give them time and they may.
But it's a colossal leap of magical thinking to imagine they've undone 14 years in 14 months.

Kemi's speech - bloody brilliant.

I just watched it. Was certainly well-delivered and she seemed entirely at ease: a good sign as temperament is incredibly important in a role like that.

I keep going backwards and forwards with Kemi. She has become leader too early, perhaps fatally so, like Hague. And yet, the talent is there, and maybe a sprinkling of stardust. But the ogre of May 2026 lies in wait. I wish her luck as she could well be a good thing.

I thought the speech utterly incoherent. Actually worse than Liz Truss. The difference of course was that Truss was Prime Minister and important, while Badenoch fortunately is irrelevant.

You OK hun?

Not really politically speaking but Badenoch's dismal Conference speech has nothing to do with that. Half her speech was platitudes and insults against the other parties - mainly Labour even though Labour isn't at all the driver for the Conservatives' 16% standing in the polls. But fair enough, if a party leader can't serve platitudes and insult the other parties in a conference speech, when can they?

The other half is the problem. So she says:

[Young people] feel they are living somewhere where things never get any better. Britain is stagnating, while the world around us moves on. We are competing with restless and ambitious countries around the world. We are competing with a billion people in India striving to become middle class. We are competing with economic success stories like Poland. 15 years ago, Polish workers came here to find opportunity. Now, Poland is growing twice as fast as we are. While Britain was redefining what a woman is, China was building five nuclear reactors.

On whose watch did this happen and why? Does she think that happened entirely in the last 14 months? Actually from the rest of the speech it appears she does. But not the slightest hint of the "bold ideas", "positive vision for this country" and "plan to deliver it" in her speech.

A public sector which already every year, demands more and more and more of our money, yet services don’t get better, they get worse.

Why does she think this is? (I have a good idea and interestingly I don't think it's mainly the previous government's fault). Her solution for collapsing public services is to spend less money on them.

Her "fully costed savings" that offset uncosted tax cuts

All the Lou Grade ITC dramas, most notably the colour episodes of the Saint, the Avengers (I still have a thing for Linda Thorson) the Champions, the Protectors, Department S, Man In a Suitcase, the Zoo Gang, the Prisoner, the Baron and the Persuaders etc were all very well written and performed. Even if a street in London looked exactly the same as a Street in Monte Carlo. The only series that didn't really work was the Adventurer because Gene Barry couldn't work with any actor who was taller than him, and apparently he was short!

The Verity Lambert, Thames productions like the Sweeney and Minder all stand up to scrutiny too.

Verity Lambert wasn’t involved in The Sweeney

Some of those ITC series had some belting themes too.

Me and my two buddies used to drive around in my old Triumph Acclaim like we were Regan, Carter and Daniel’s fr9 the sweeney.

Happy days. I remember my mate came out of Shirley police station. Rolled over the bonnet for effect . He’d been called in to make peace with a whovian twat he’d upset. And we drove off up the M42 to the wood for some chips

Ace days

It’s a great series.

Here’s a really eye catching policy - that any of the major right wing parties could introduce

Add an extra hour to the day. Take three minutes off each of the other hours (no one will notice) then combine all that into a new hour

And here’s the right wing libertarian angle. Allow people to spend their new hour when they like. ie if you really enjoy early morning you could add your extra Leon-hour between six and seven. An extra hour to get things done while all the world snoozes!

Night owls could prolong the sultry mood at 1am. A Leon-hour of the night

And if you’re simply knackered just get an extra Leon-hour of sleep

This is what British politics needs. Not tax tweaks. Proper changes

Agree with this.

They also need to add an extra month in the summer, which could easily be created from days taken from months at drearier times of year (it's madness that January has 31 days, for example).

It's be a double whammy - a whole extra month of summer, and less winter grot to wade through.

Ethiopia already has 13 months, so they are way ahead of us.

They are also are only a month into 2018, so have yet to experience Covid.

...

The question is whether Jenrick is “racist” is not illuminating. Yet, whether something or someone is “racist” consumes a massive amount of media attention and focus in 2025.

No, what is relevant is that Jenrick’s comments - taken out of context or not - were offensive.

God only knows how I’d feel if I was a brown migrant or perhaps even just brown, in the UK today. I would not be feeling very welcome, and I would also be feeling that the next Tory leader is stoking racial enmity for partisan advantage.

Jenrick should apologize, but he hasn’t and he won’t.
He’s beyond the pale.

There is a trend on the right to stop apologising - see also Truss's refusal to disassociate herself from Tommy Robinson. Liz Truss isn't a supporter of Tommy Robinson, but she refused to give any ground on it because she did not want to continue what she sees as the left being given the right to pronounce on what is right and decent, and what, as you say, is 'beyond the pale'.

If someone wants the right to pronounce on what is 'right and decent', I might suggest they start by not associating herself with criminal neo-Nazi thugs.

Truss is not setting herself up as the pronouncer of what is right and decent - she is refusing to submit to what is effectively a left-wing derived rulebook of modern manners.

Don't be a nitwit. You don't need to be left-wing to criticise Tommy Robinson.

She is making the same mistake as Enoch Powell who refused to give any ground to his critics even when the criticism was justified. The latest episode of The Rest is History is very good on this and how his utter refusal to show or express any empathy for those harmed by his words, even in the face of clear evidence of such harm, damned him even more. He didn't simply make criticisms. He deliberately used inflammatory language and then tried to claim the consequences of his choice of words had nothing to do with him.

This is irresponsible dangerous politics. It is as bad as those marchers shouting Arab slogans from the 8th century about killing Jews and then pretending this has nothing to do with creating a climate of fear.

Tory politicians should not be behaving like this.