Ben Wallace would never normally be regarded as a promising leadership candidate. He’s the equivalent of someone like Michael Ancram: respected but dull and anonymous.
...and therefore just what is needed right now. A man who has no personal ambition for the top job, but serves if his country calls. So very different to the skin stretched over ambition we've had from Boris and Liz.
Would you take Gove?
Yes, but only because he is very pro tidal lagoons. Would the public warm to him? I doubt it very much.
I'd take Gove, or Wallace, or Sunak, or Hunt, or Tugendhat, and one or two others.
But would any of them take the job, and more important, would any of them be acceptable to the Party?
It's a right old mess, Mark. What a state when even you come across as one of its most reasonable voices!
Thanks (I think!).
If they'd listened to me they wouldn't be in this mess. A different mess admittedly, but not this one....
Love you or loathe you, Mark, nobody can dispute you have always been a sound and loyal voice for the Party for many years on this Site. Even your political opponents here must be feeling for you in what can only be described as a pretty dark hour for the Party.
Yes, it was meant as a compliment - but watch out when your opponents start being nice to you!
Braverman is working on plans to prevent the European Court of Human Rights from overruling the British government on deporting migrants to Rwanda. Ministers are resigned to the prospect of being prevented by legal challenges from implementing this policy before the next general election.
Can the ECHR actually overrule? I thought they could sternly wag their finger… where there is explicit parliamentary approval for something (don’t know if that is the case in this policy) the UK courts would find it difficult to overrule
We can ignore ECHR. It says our ban on prisoners voting is unlawful but we still don't let them vote.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
Property fund manager on R4 interviewed this morning about pulling all their UK investments explicitly said it was their judgment Truss/Kwarteng had both precipitated, and made worse than it otherwise would have been, the rise in interest rates and deterioration of market sentiment.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
And so the rebellion against the next Truss/Kwarteng flagship policy of spending cuts begins only a day after their defeat on their last flagship policy of tax cuts for the wealthy.
Never before has a PM's authority been so completely destroyed so soon after taking power.
It would have been two weeks sooner, but for Her Majesty dying.....
If it hadn’t been for the queen dying it may not have blown up in the way it did…
Why? The 45p rate still wouldn't have been voted on by Cabinet. The underlying need for massive cuts to services would still be there. The only thing different would be two weeks to have these fights before Conference. Two weeks to erase these changes and move on. But without even a bat-shit crazy Budget, what would Truss have to trumpet? She would just be a vacuum.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 3m Liz Truss doesn’t have the support in the Commons or in the Cabinet to introduce a real terms benefit cut. She needs to drop this as well. And she needs to drop it quickly.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
No, it wouldn’t, it really wouldn’t. Debt rates were going up anyway. Maybe it cost us a couple of billion in total - a lot in absolute terms but not significant as a percentage - but not much more than that
There is a bigger political problem they will not even have thought about with this.
One of the things the Tories want to claim success on is wage inflation. Having the gap between wage inflation and cost inflation front and centre of the news for a month whilst the Tories battle it out, will change perceptions for those who got a good 5-10% pay rise to start seeing it as a real terms pay cut instead.
At the same time the relaxations on lower skilled workers entry requirements will come in. One of the few areas where the Tories could try and claim success will disappear.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
So you haven’t answered my first question but let’s try a different one.
Where is Liz’s growth plan? And give that it doesn’t exist where will growth come from…
Hint it ain’t low corporation tax as. We’ve tried that for 12 years and it hasn’t generated growth just short term profiteering
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
They want to hammer the workshy lazy feckless Brits. Thats their entire plan. Poor? Hungry? Get a job. Have a job? Get a better job!!! Vote Conservative.
They can want to do that all they desire.
It ain’t going to raise enough money to cover the gap and it’s political suicide - not that that would stop this bunch of muppets - but it will ensure enough MPs rebel because the other option will be a lot of very unhappy, potentially violent, constituents
I know that. You know that. They do not apparently; Because the plan is to fuck over public spending.
Mrs Brady has already had to tell her there isn't a majority for the announced plan. Think what he will have to do when they finally admit what they are doing to policing and the NHS and Education and UC...
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
Property fund manager on R4 interviewed this morning about pulling all their UK investments explicitly said it was their judgment Truss/Kwarteng had both precipitated, and made worse than it otherwise would have been, the rise in interest rates and deterioration of market sentiment.
Spoke to a friend yesterday who had built up an excellent business in equity release. A good number of employees, very well regarded in the market. As of this week, providers are honouring offers already made, but otherwise are now withdrawing these loans or just exiting the market.
He has no idea whether his business is still viable.
“I didn’t think her leadership was in trouble,” ex-cabinet minister tells me.
“But then I spoke to younger colleagues. They say of lions in the wild that once they’ve had a taste of human flesh they keep eating humans. Well the 2019 intake has had its taste of human flesh.”
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
No, it wouldn’t, it really wouldn’t. Debt rates were going up anyway. Maybe it cost us a couple of billion in total - a lot in absolute terms but not significant as a percentage - but not much more than that
"UK government borrowing costs are on course for one of their biggest ever monthly rises — and mortgage rates are set to increase as well — following the bond market meltdown triggered by chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s fiscal policy announcement last week."
“The moves are just extraordinary,” said Vivek Paul, UK chief investment strategist for the BlackRock Investment Institute. “The market has delivered its verdict [on the government’s fiscal plans] and it’s not a good one.”
Living in a fantasy world of economics might have worked for Bozo, but Truss does not have the political friends to pull that one off.
The way the party is behaving is tantamount to a cry for help from someone hoping for an intervention from friends and family. In politics, that generally means the electorate booting you out of government and into rehab, better known as opposition.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
And so the rebellion against the next Truss/Kwarteng flagship policy of spending cuts begins only a day after their defeat on their last flagship policy of tax cuts for the wealthy.
Never before has a PM's authority been so completely destroyed so soon after taking power.
It would have been two weeks sooner, but for Her Majesty dying.....
In another pre-recorded interview - with Today - Liz Truss promises Nick Robinson nothing she says will be out of date… and then explains why the fiscal statement/OBR forecast is coming in November, which it is now not. As of last night it’s due this month. https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1577196966827634688
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
Property fund manager on R4 interviewed this morning about pulling all their UK investments explicitly said it was their judgment Truss/Kwarteng had both precipitated, and made worse than it otherwise would have been, the rise in interest rates and deterioration of market sentiment.
Spoke to a friend yesterday who had built up an excellent business in equity release. A good number of employees, very well regarded in the market. As of this week, providers are honouring offers already made, but otherwise are now withdrawing these loans or just exiting the market.
He has no idea whether his business is still viable.
How much might Sunak back un the Treasury steady things ? The current lot just aren't going to get their policies through Parliament.
The public opposition to a welfare squeeze is already growing - Penny Mordaunt is openly questioning the concept and other prominent MPs like Damian Green, Rob Halfon, Michael Gove and Esther McVey saying it's the wrong target https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1577188505402212352
A consensus figurehead like Wallace would at least allow for less incompetent ministers to be brought back into government. Half the existing cabinet are there solely for their loyalty to Truss.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
Nah, were within margin of error. Online polls gave leave a lead. Phone polls gave remain a lead. All very close and remain only jumped ahead in the polling in the very last week.
Braverman is working on plans to prevent the European Court of Human Rights from overruling the British government on deporting migrants to Rwanda. Ministers are resigned to the prospect of being prevented by legal challenges from implementing this policy before the next general election.
Can the ECHR actually overrule? I thought they could sternly wag their finger… where there is explicit parliamentary approval for something (don’t know if that is the case in this policy) the UK courts would find it difficult to overrule
We can ignore ECHR. It says our ban on prisoners voting is unlawful but we still don't let them vote.
That’s what I thought. So why can’t Braverman go ahead and implement the policy regardless?
Indeed they did. A load of people who never vote because they are poor and dispossessed came out to vote for something they were told would (a) stick it to the man and (b) give them a better life.
Are you saying these same people will vote in favour of having their UC and services cut?
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
Liz Truss is right that growth is the answer. The trouble is that so far, she has not revealed where this growth will come from. During the leadership campaign, she mentioned a ten-year plan. Perhaps she will let us in on the secret this afternoon.
Rishi, while more tied to what Truss denigrates as Treasury Orthodoxy, did have a plan: raise corporation tax and then use tax allowances to incentivise research and investment.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
Liz Truss is right that growth is the answer. The trouble is that so far, she has not revealed where this growth will come from. During the leadership campaign, she mentioned a ten-year plan. Perhaps she will let us in on the secret this afternoon.
Rishi, while more tied to what Truss denigrates as Treasury Orthodoxy, did have a plan: raise corporation tax and then use tax allowances to incentivise research and investment.
As is, Liz Truss can't even deliver a ten day plan.....
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
And so the rebellion against the next Truss/Kwarteng flagship policy of spending cuts begins only a day after their defeat on their last flagship policy of tax cuts for the wealthy.
Never before has a PM's authority been so completely destroyed so soon after taking power.
It would have been two weeks sooner, but for Her Majesty dying.....
If it hadn’t been for the queen dying it may not have blown up in the way it did…
Why? The 45p rate still wouldn't have been voted on by Cabinet. The underlying need for massive cuts to services would still be there. The only thing different would be two weeks to have these fights before Conference. Two weeks to erase these changes and move on. But without even a bat-shit crazy Budget, what would Truss have to trumpet? She would just be a vacuum.
The order things were presented would have been very different instead of
They cannot afford another confidence vote fiasco and subsequent reliance on the brain-dead Tory membership.
Retiring on health grounds or family grounds is her only reasonably graceful exit from this point, and also by far the best outcome for her party.
If Tory MPs are going to go down the forced removal route then they need to engineer a coronation. That'll require a majority to agree on a single candidate, and then the 1922 committee to change the rules to strip the fossil membership of their run-off vote.
In the discussion of who to try to lead the Tories to something less than a calamitous defeat, the obvious candidate is neither Johnson nor Sunak, it's Theresa May. Please, no laughing at the back. By definition, she has experience and is untainted by association with the adventures of her predecessors, and her period in office represents a golden age of competence and probity when contrasted with that which has followed. Besides which, her aspirations for ministerial office have already been and gone, thus the expected heavy defeat can't kill off a career that was already over.
The Tories are going to lose the next election, but you can’t go into that election saying you’re going to lose, which is what appointing May in a temporary role would amount to. You have to pretend you’re going to win. Ergo, you need a leader who wants to be their for a long time.
True, but anyone who thinks that the Conservatives have a meaningful chance of winning next time is deluded, and anyone who wants the job is crazy.
And whilst deluded crazies are ten a penny in politics, making one of them PM will make matters worse.
What's really needed is someone who knows, deep down, what the true situation is, but can convincingly pretend otherwise.
The problem is that the non-crazy elements of the Tory party have been got rid of in various purges over the last 6 years. Only the crazies are left, and they are different brands of crazy that cannot work together.
I hope the next election is an extinction event for the Conservative Party.
Betting comment: The gulf between PBers prognostications about what happens in the next GE (Tory wipeout etc) and the current odds for 'PM after next General Election' are stark to say the least. (LT is 2/1 to be PM after next GE.) That's the difference between approximately Zero % and 33% probability. Interesting.
IMHO the truth is that Zero is too low and 33% too high. No idea beyond that.
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
So you haven’t answered my first question but let’s try a different one.
Where is Liz’s growth plan? And give that it doesn’t exist where will growth come from…
Hint it ain’t low corporation tax as. We’ve tried that for 12 years and it hasn’t generated growth just short term profiteering
I replied to your separate question separately. Fundamentally just putting up taxes might defer the day of reckoning for a few years. But it doesn’t solve the problem.
I have no idea of what Liz Truss’s plan is. I didn’t vote for her and she doesn’t confide in her cabinet or me.
Indeed they did. A load of people who never vote because they are poor and dispossessed came out to vote for something they were told would (a) stick it to the man and (b) give them a better life.
Are you saying these same people will vote in favour of having their UC and services cut?
Or even vote for Brexit again given that item (a) hadn't really happened and (b) certainly hasn't?
There seems to be a consensus that growth is the right thing for the government to focus on even if very few think that Truss has any of the answers, and it is more likely she is damaging growth.
I would suggest instead the government focuses on the environment, specifically green tech and investment, and personal health and diet.
There are loads of things we can do in both areas. And in the long run (a decade or two) both will indeed lead to more sustainable growth.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
No, it wouldn’t, it really wouldn’t. Debt rates were going up anyway. Maybe it cost us a couple of billion in total - a lot in absolute terms but not significant as a percentage - but not much more than that
"UK government borrowing costs are on course for one of their biggest ever monthly rises — and mortgage rates are set to increase as well — following the bond market meltdown triggered by chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s fiscal policy announcement last week."
“The moves are just extraordinary,” said Vivek Paul, UK chief investment strategist for the BlackRock Investment Institute. “The market has delivered its verdict [on the government’s fiscal plans] and it’s not a good one.”
Living in a fantasy world of economics might have worked for Bozo, but Truss does not have the political friends to pull that one off.
Yes they went up a lot. But they have settled back. And they were going up anyway.
The “Truss penalty” is the area under the curve between what rates have been for her vs what they would have been anyway. That will close in time.
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
Nah, debt interest would have been a lot, lot cheaper without the muppets in charge.
No, it wouldn’t, it really wouldn’t. Debt rates were going up anyway. Maybe it cost us a couple of billion in total - a lot in absolute terms but not significant as a percentage - but not much more than that
"UK government borrowing costs are on course for one of their biggest ever monthly rises — and mortgage rates are set to increase as well — following the bond market meltdown triggered by chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s fiscal policy announcement last week."
“The moves are just extraordinary,” said Vivek Paul, UK chief investment strategist for the BlackRock Investment Institute. “The market has delivered its verdict [on the government’s fiscal plans] and it’s not a good one.”
Living in a fantasy world of economics might have worked for Bozo, but Truss does not have the political friends to pull that one off.
Yes they went up a lot. But they have settled back. And they were going up anyway.
The “Truss penalty” is the area under the curve between what rates have been for her vs what they would have been anyway. That will close in time.
Yes because she will be replaced soon enough. Hopefully not by another loon.
They cannot afford another confidence vote fiasco and subsequent reliance on the brain-dead Tory membership.
Retiring on health grounds or family grounds is her only reasonably graceful exit from this point, and also by far the best outcome for her party.
If Tory MPs are going to go down the forced removal route then they need to engineer a coronation. That'll require a majority to agree on a single candidate, and then the 1922 committee to change the rules to strip the fossil membership of their run-off vote.
In the discussion of who to try to lead the Tories to something less than a calamitous defeat, the obvious candidate is neither Johnson nor Sunak, it's Theresa May. Please, no laughing at the back. By definition, she has experience and is untainted by association with the adventures of her predecessors, and her period in office represents a golden age of competence and probity when contrasted with that which has followed. Besides which, her aspirations for ministerial office have already been and gone, thus the expected heavy defeat can't kill off a career that was already over.
The Tories are going to lose the next election, but you can’t go into that election saying you’re going to lose, which is what appointing May in a temporary role would amount to. You have to pretend you’re going to win. Ergo, you need a leader who wants to be their for a long time.
True, but anyone who thinks that the Conservatives have a meaningful chance of winning next time is deluded, and anyone who wants the job is crazy.
And whilst deluded crazies are ten a penny in politics, making one of them PM will make matters worse.
What's really needed is someone who knows, deep down, what the true situation is, but can convincingly pretend otherwise.
The problem is that the non-crazy elements of the Tory party have been got rid of in various purges over the last 6 years. Only the crazies are left, and they are different brands of crazy that cannot work together.
I hope the next election is an extinction event for the Conservative Party.
Betting comment: The gulf between PBers prognostications about what happens in the next GE (Tory wipeout etc) and the current odds for 'PM after next General Election' are stark to say the least. (LT is 2/1 to be PM after next GE.) That's the difference between approximately Zero % and 33% probability. Interesting.
IMHO the truth is that Zero is too low and 33% too high. No idea beyond that.
LT 2/1 PM after next election is the lay of all time.
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
And so it begins...
Except Bozo still won't allow him to retain his seat...
Liz has removed a number of foundations on which Boris's support was built and they are not rebuildable. Boris may be able to shore them up a bit but it's not going to be enough..
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
Liz Truss is right that growth is the answer. The trouble is that so far, she has not revealed where this growth will come from. During the leadership campaign, she mentioned a ten-year plan. Perhaps she will let us in on the secret this afternoon.
Rishi, while more tied to what Truss denigrates as Treasury Orthodoxy, did have a plan: raise corporation tax and then use tax allowances to incentivise research and investment.
And I think that part of Rishi’s plan was interesting. Not enough on its own, but a useful idea
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
No, but there is not enough to fill the gap without severely impacting things.
There seems to be a consensus that growth is the right thing for the government to focus on even if very few think that Truss has any of the answers, and it is more likely she is damaging growth.
I would suggest instead the government focuses on the environment, specifically green tech and investment, and personal health and diet.
There are loads of things we can do in both areas. And in the long run (a decade or two) both will indeed lead to more sustainable growth.
Environment, green tech and investment - where is the money to do that going to come from?
Remember you need to fix a £20bn budget gap and you haven't identified any savings yet you want to spend money.....
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
After 12 years of Conservative leadership, how much low-hanging fruit do you imagine is left?
That’s exactly the point.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do - How can it be delivered most efficiently - What is the cost - How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
Liz Truss is right that growth is the answer. The trouble is that so far, she has not revealed where this growth will come from. During the leadership campaign, she mentioned a ten-year plan. Perhaps she will let us in on the secret this afternoon.
Rishi, while more tied to what Truss denigrates as Treasury Orthodoxy, did have a plan: raise corporation tax and then use tax allowances to incentivise research and investment.
It seems unthinkable that a mature liberal democrat big state country (we would still be big state even if, impossibly, 10% were cut from public expenditure) like the UK can sort out productivity when there is no trust in the current plan for public finances. Even if LT is right in priorities, this cannot be right in the order of events. Ask Mrs T.
Liz Truss has cost the Conservative Party lots of support in the polls, and she is under-qualified to be PM. Is she to blame for this? No. The blame lies with the contorted logic by which so many people justified voting for her to be Conservative leader and PM, despite her being out of her depth, which was obvious all the time.
Would Ben Wallace be a stronger candidate? No, and to his credit he knows this and has not put himself forward to take over. But some people here are supporting him, so it seems that the contorted logic has not gone away. People seem to have forgotten what qualities a real politician / minister / prime minister should have. To fix the political system, politicians need to be held in higher regard and to be paid appropriately. Until then, it looks like the government will continue to flounder.
As with Labour in its two leadership elections prior to SKS, the problem is members (and MPs) who weigh ideology above (what should be the) first base issues of competence and character. Ask first who can actually make a decent (and acceptable) fist of doing the job, then, if you still have a choice, consider who is ideologically preferred.
So long as Tory members are concerned about picking a leader for their views, rather than their abilities, then they are in the same rabbit hole that lumbered Labour with Corbyn and hence the rest of us with the lying clown.
Ben Wallace would never normally be regarded as a promising leadership candidate. He’s the equivalent of someone like Michael Ancram: respected but dull and anonymous.
...and therefore just what is needed right now. A man who has no personal ambition for the top job, but serves if his country calls. So very different to the skin stretched over ambition we've had from Boris and Liz.
Would you take Gove?
Yes, but only because he is very pro tidal lagoons. Would the public warm to him? I doubt it very much.
I'd take Gove, or Wallace, or Sunak, or Hunt, or Tugendhat, and one or two others.
But would any of them take the job, and more important, would any of them be acceptable to the Party?
It's a right old mess, Mark. What a state when even you come across as one of its most reasonable voices!
FWIW, Mark has always been in my list of sane PB Tories. The surprising thing is how many of those that weren't also called Truss as a disaster, even quite early on.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
No, but there is not enough to fill the gap without severely impacting things.
Which is the point.
All governments suffer from mission creep. Someone has a pet project and 30 years later it is still going on with its budget increasing every year & no one asking if it is useful or necessary
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
And so the rebellion against the next Truss/Kwarteng flagship policy of spending cuts begins only a day after their defeat on their last flagship policy of tax cuts for the wealthy.
Never before has a PM's authority been so completely destroyed so soon after taking power.
It would have been two weeks sooner, but for Her Majesty dying.....
If it hadn’t been for the queen dying it may not have blown up in the way it did…
The one service Loopy Liz has done all of us is sparing the nation having the clown preside over the funeral and the rest.
There seems to be a consensus that growth is the right thing for the government to focus on even if very few think that Truss has any of the answers, and it is more likely she is damaging growth.
I would suggest instead the government focuses on the environment, specifically green tech and investment, and personal health and diet.
There are loads of things we can do in both areas. And in the long run (a decade or two) both will indeed lead to more sustainable growth.
Environment, green tech and investment - where is the money to do that going to come from?
Remember you need to fix a £20bn budget gap and you haven't identified any savings yet you want to spend money.....
I would not have done most of the tax cuts. I would also get pensioners paying NI, remove the triple lock and introduce wealth taxes. I would not get elected.....
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
None of that raises £20bn next year which is what is needed to cover the Corporation tax reversals...
Braverman is working on plans to prevent the European Court of Human Rights from overruling the British government on deporting migrants to Rwanda. Ministers are resigned to the prospect of being prevented by legal challenges from implementing this policy before the next general election.
Can the ECHR actually overrule? I thought they could sternly wag their finger… where there is explicit parliamentary approval for something (don’t know if that is the case in this policy) the UK courts would find it difficult to overrule
We can ignore ECHR. It says our ban on prisoners voting is unlawful but we still don't let them vote.
We discussed this some weeks ago. If I recall correctly (might be a stretch) they didn't say the ban was unlawful, just that we hadn't followed the right procedures. In effect the farago served all sides well - the Tories were outraged at the interference, the hand-wringing lefties were delighted that the ECHR 'owned' the Tories. Although the bigger losers were the prisoners, who still can't vote.
Liz Truss has cost the Conservative Party lots of support in the polls, and she is under-qualified to be PM. Is she to blame for this? No. The blame lies with the contorted logic by which so many people justified voting for her to be Conservative leader and PM, despite her being out of her depth, which was obvious all the time.
Would Ben Wallace be a stronger candidate? No, and to his credit he knows this and has not put himself forward to take over. But some people here are supporting him, so it seems that the contorted logic has not gone away. People seem to have forgotten what qualities a real politician / minister / prime minister should have. To fix the political system, politicians need to be held in higher regard and to be paid appropriately. Until then, it looks like the government will continue to flounder.
As with Labour in its two leadership elections prior to SKS, the problem is members (and MPs) who weigh ideology above (what should be the) first base issues of competence and character. Ask first who can actually make a decent (and acceptable) fist of doing the job, then, if you still have a choice, consider who is ideologically preferred.
So long as Tory members are concerned about picking a leader for their views, rather than their abilities, then they are in the same rabbit hole that lumbered Labour with Corbyn and hence the rest of us with the lying clown.
My concern with membership voting is that it's fine if you are in opposition - a lovely luxury where a party can waste a few years finding themselves.
However when in power - we elect MPs to be our representatives and the selection of the PM should be left in the hands of the MPs we elect as our representatives...
It really boils down to do does the PM have a mandate directly from the members or not. If MPs select a PM then there is clearly a mandate (we are a parliamentary democracy where power is given to elected representives). Once the final vote is passed to a different none elected group that mandate completely disappears..
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
So what job do you give Boris? 🙄
I’d keep Boris well out of it.
That said I do (sadly) subscribe to the theory set out above that if he were fighting the next Ge he would save a number of seats that Truss has no hope of saving.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
You are right on housing benefit and pensions. I don't know enough about in work benefits to say either way.
However, housing benefit reforms hits landlords and house prices hardest. Triple lock hits pensioners hardest.
These are the Tory party client votes that are sacred.
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
And so it begins...
He’s going to become the Berlusconi of Britain isn’t he? Forever coming back no matter how much he debases the office.
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
There is a perfectly decent cabinet available, especially with a couple of elevations to the Lords: Gove, Mitchell, Hat, Hunt, Greening, Grieve, Gauke, Rishi, Mordaunt, Saj, TM, Hague, Cameron, Rory....
They could at least run the country for a bit without destroying us while Labour get ready for centrist social democracy.
As funny as it may be, Boris may end up being the only option the Tories have. The Truss government is collapsing in significant part because it has no mandate. So throwing them out on that basis and replacing them with Sunak - who continues those economic policies may be ok.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
So what job do you give Boris? 🙄
I’d keep Boris well out of it.
That said I do (sadly) subscribe to the theory set out above that if he were fighting the next Ge he would save a number of seats that Truss has no hope of saving.
1) Would Bozo save seats that no-one else will save - possibly a couple but I actually doubt it... 2) down south will Bozo cost the tories seats that might otherwise be won?
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
None of that raises £20bn next year which is what is needed to cover the Corporation tax reversals...
The planned corporation tax increase wasn’t going to raise anything like that much
Edit: guardian says £47bn over 3 years offset by £25bn in investment allowances. So about £8bn
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
And so it begins...
Several people did say that Boris was giving support to Liz Truss because he knew she'd be so bad that he could make a comeback.
@paulwaugh .@trussliz tells @NickFerrariLBC it's a matter for the King whether he attends COP27, refusing to deny she talked to him about it.
Of course it’s a matter for the King
He makes his own decisions having sought the counsel of his ministers
No he doesn't, that's what Charles I had to be put right about.
George VI wanted to go to D Day.
Churchill wanted to go to D-Day. In order to restrain the Prime Minister, the King used the reducto ad absurdum of sending himself. Churchill did pop across later on.
ETA but yes, it is not for KC3 to pick his own summits.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
None of that raises £20bn next year which is what is needed to cover the Corporation tax reversals...
The planned corporation tax increase wasn’t going to raise anything like that much
Heard Liz Truss on the radio. She was amazing. Reminded me of peak Blair and Cameron. She has a clear plan. Everything is completely fine.
Indeed! AIUI she did pre-recorded interviews with Today and LBC. Last night. Embargoed til this morning. With her clearly and firmly saying that the the timings for the budget would not change...
As funny as it may be, Boris may end up being the only option the Tories have. The Truss government is collapsing in significant part because it has no mandate. So throwing them out on that basis and replacing them with Sunak - who continues those economic policies may be ok.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
He can utilise the overreaction to Truss/Kwarteng to blame all the economic problems on her (and therefore on getting rid of him) while doing his Churchill act.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
You are right on housing benefit and pensions. I don't know enough about in work benefits to say either way.
However, housing benefit reforms hits landlords and house prices hardest. Triple lock hits pensioners hardest.
These are the Tory party client votes that are sacred.
Nothing is sacred. The triple lock has only been around for a decade.Change needs to be sold
@paulwaugh .@trussliz tells @NickFerrariLBC it's a matter for the King whether he attends COP27, refusing to deny she talked to him about it.
Of course it’s a matter for the King
He makes his own decisions having sought the counsel of his ministers
No he doesn't, that's what Charles I had to be put right about.
George VI wanted to go to D Day.
Churchill wanted to go to D-Day. In order to restrain the Prime Minister, the King used the reducto ad absurdum of sending himself. Churchill did pop across later on.
ETA but yes, it is not for KC3 to pick his own summits.
Yes, but why is that a raa? The implication is, I want to go but you/the cabinet wouldn't let me.
As funny as it may be, Boris may end up being the only option the Tories have. The Truss government is collapsing in significant part because it has no mandate. So throwing them out on that basis and replacing them with Sunak - who continues those economic policies may be ok.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
You are right on housing benefit and pensions. I don't know enough about in work benefits to say either way.
However, housing benefit reforms hits landlords and house prices hardest. Triple lock hits pensioners hardest.
These are the Tory party client votes that are sacred.
Nothing is sacred. The triple lock has only been around for a decade.Change needs to be sold
Oh, is that how they plan to raise money for the tax cuts?
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
There is a perfectly decent cabinet available, especially with a couple of elevations to the Lords: Gove, Mitchell, Hat, Hunt, Greening, Grieve, Gauke, Rishi, Mordaunt, Saj, TM, Hague, Cameron, Rory....
They could at least run the country for a bit without destroying us while Labour get ready for centrist social democracy.
A number of those are impossible, but I applaud the sentiment.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
You are right on housing benefit and pensions. I don't know enough about in work benefits to say either way.
However, housing benefit reforms hits landlords and house prices hardest. Triple lock hits pensioners hardest.
These are the Tory party client votes that are sacred.
Nothing is sacred. The triple lock has only been around for a decade.Change needs to be sold
Neither of the establishment parties can tackle these things whilst their leaders are elected by members. File under not going to happen.
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
No, but there is not enough to fill the gap without severely impacting things.
Which is the point.
All governments suffer from mission creep. Someone has a pet project and 30 years later it is still going on with its budget increasing every year & no one asking if it is useful or necessary
Once the state is in something it is politically difficult to get out - even in trivial ways. 150 years ago public expenditure on health, education, social welfare and pensions was trivial.
Now any small cut to a £200bn budget on health, social welfare or pensions will lead to an unstoppable back bench revolt.
This year the government is borrowing £190 bn. All suggestions which involve cut price paper clips won't do. Abolishing the state pension would go a long way......
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
So what job do you give Boris? 🙄
I’d keep Boris well out of it.
That said I do (sadly) subscribe to the theory set out above that if he were fighting the next Ge he would save a number of seats that Truss has no hope of saving.
1) Would Bozo save seats that no-one else will save - possibly a couple but I actually doubt it... 2) down south will Bozo cost the tories seats that might otherwise be won?
Good morning ladies and gentlemen! Interesting program on Channel 5 last night; about 40 people, a significant number of whom voted Conservative last time in discussion. Only one or two were going to vote Conservative next time and nearly all seem to be in sympathy with the current wave of strikes.
Tying up with all the anecdotal evidence I have found too: Truss and Kwasi are absolute kryptonite. I have yet to speak to one person who I know voted Tory at the last election who is on record as saying they will do so next time (I do not know any die hard party members but…).
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
So what job do you give Boris? 🙄
I’d keep Boris well out of it.
That said I do (sadly) subscribe to the theory set out above that if he were fighting the next Ge he would save a number of seats that Truss has no hope of saving.
1) Would Bozo save seats that no-one else will save - possibly a couple but I actually doubt it... 2) down south will Bozo cost the tories seats that might otherwise be won?
It seems the Government / BBC are cutting down on the world service - including it's Iranian language service. Is this really a good means of saving a few quid because it's our soft power reputation disappearing here..
https://twitter.com/mikebutcher/status/1577204733277782017 Mike Butcher🇬🇧🇪🇺 @mikebutcher · 10m BBC Arabic radio to close after 84 years. 400 staff at BBC World Service will lose their jobs. Also paring down its Iranian-language service. Seems a bad move? Maybe dump a few less crucial things? MENA is on our doorstep.
Heard Liz Truss on the radio. She was amazing. Reminded me of peak Blair and Cameron. She has a clear plan. Everything is completely fine.
Why must we always judge Prime Ministers in terms of their predecessors? She is her own unprecedented, peerless self. I'm Backing Britain, with her at the helm.
As funny as it may be, Boris may end up being the only option the Tories have. The Truss government is collapsing in significant part because it has no mandate. So throwing them out on that basis and replacing them with Sunak - who continues those economic policies may be ok.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
The only way back for him would be a members' vote. Not going to happen - and I doubt he'd want to stand once the party is in opposition..
There seems to be a consensus that growth is the right thing for the government to focus on even if very few think that Truss has any of the answers, and it is more likely she is damaging growth.
I would suggest instead the government focuses on the environment, specifically green tech and investment, and personal health and diet.
There are loads of things we can do in both areas. And in the long run (a decade or two) both will indeed lead to more sustainable growth.
Environment, green tech and investment - where is the money to do that going to come from?
Remember you need to fix a £20bn budget gap and you haven't identified any savings yet you want to spend money.....
More importantly, are we as a country ready to do stuff that will lead to sustainable growth? One of the memorable things Truss said in the campaign was she didn't like adding solar to farms. Investment zones, even if they happen, won't put houses in the right places for where jobs are.
As long as the party of government is also the party of the retired-and-doing-fine-personally, we have a problem.
As funny as it may be, Boris may end up being the only option the Tories have. The Truss government is collapsing in significant part because it has no mandate. So throwing them out on that basis and replacing them with Sunak - who continues those economic policies may be ok.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
He can utilise the overreaction to Truss/Kwarteng to blame all the economic problems on her (and therefore on getting rid of him) while doing his Churchill act.
He really can't. People had stopped listening to his boosterism bullshit by the end - they aren't going to suddenly pay attention now that the situation has got a lot worse.
Anyway, he has a lot of baggage to get past - his lying to parliament investigation, his in bed with the Russians bombshell to the liaison committee on the day before he resigned etc etc
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
The Tory party has been cutting things for 12 years via austerity and then random “money saving”.
Quick question point me at some Government spending where you can see £100m of easy to make savings…
I will exclude only foreign aid because that is so obvious (and wrong) that it’s an easy get out…
That’s *exactly* the wrong way to look at it. £100m makes no difference in the scheme of things.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays) - Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock - Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
None of that raises £20bn next year which is what is needed to cover the Corporation tax reversals...
The planned corporation tax increase wasn’t going to raise anything like that much
@paulwaugh .@trussliz tells @NickFerrariLBC it's a matter for the King whether he attends COP27, refusing to deny she talked to him about it.
Of course it’s a matter for the King
He makes his own decisions having sought the counsel of his ministers
No he doesn't, that's what Charles I had to be put right about.
George VI wanted to go to D Day.
Churchill wanted to go to D-Day. In order to restrain the Prime Minister, the King used the reducto ad absurdum of sending himself. Churchill did pop across later on.
ETA but yes, it is not for KC3 to pick his own summits.
Yes, but why is that a raa? The implication is, I want to go but you/the cabinet wouldn't let me.
Because the objection was that on D-Day the Nazis were shooting back, so what happened if Churchill were killed? It was unthinkable that the King should put his life at risk, but in his case the succession is known and immediate (as we saw last month).
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
And so it begins...
He’s going to become the Berlusconi of Britain isn’t he? Forever coming back no matter how much he debases the office.
Going for Boris as PM again just returns to where we were in February. Still no answer on the doorstep to "Why the hell would I vote for a liar?"
"Because he is better than Liz Truss" is hardly a plea in mitigation.....
As funny as it may be, Boris may end up being the only option the Tories have. The Truss government is collapsing in significant part because it has no mandate. So throwing them out on that basis and replacing them with Sunak - who continues those economic policies may be ok.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
Apart from being top kek bringing Johnson back must have appeal to the tories because he's the only one that would have any popular democratic legitimacy and he can easily add 1-5% to the tory polling just by banging on about Brexit for a bit. Jizzy Lizzy doesn't give a shit about or perhaps actively dislikes Brexit.
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
And so it begins...
He’s going to become the Berlusconi of Britain isn’t he? Forever coming back no matter how much he debases the office.
Going for Boris as PM again just returns to where we were in February. Still no answer on the doorstep to "Why the hell would I vote for a liar?"
"Because he is better than Liz Truss" is hardly a plea in mitigation.....
Cabinet minister Penny Mordaunt tells me #TimesRadio benefits SHOULD rise with inflation: “I’ve always supported - whether it’s pensions, whether it’s our welfare system - keeping pace with inflation. It makes sense to do so. That’s what I voted for before.” 1/4
Supposedly they need to find £20bn of spending cuts - I just don’t see any at all.
The easiest way to fill that £20bn gap is going to be reversing their corporation tax cut - I just don’t see any other solution that works…
So everything the state spends money on is necessary and implemented in the best possible way?
No, but there is not enough to fill the gap without severely impacting things.
Which is the point.
All governments suffer from mission creep. Someone has a pet project and 30 years later it is still going on with its budget increasing every year & no one asking if it is useful or necessary
Once the state is in something it is politically difficult to get out - even in trivial ways. 150 years ago public expenditure on health, education, social welfare and pensions was trivial.
Now any small cut to a £200bn budget on health, social welfare or pensions will lead to an unstoppable back bench revolt.
This year the government is borrowing £190 bn. All suggestions which involve cut price paper clips won't do. Abolishing the state pension would go a long way......
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.” https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
And so it begins...
He’s going to become the Berlusconi of Britain isn’t he? Forever coming back no matter how much he debases the office.
Going for Boris as PM again just returns to where we were in February. Still no answer on the doorstep to "Why the hell would I vote for a liar?"
"Because he is better than Liz Truss" is hardly a plea in mitigation.....
Comments
Yes, it was meant as a compliment - but watch out when your opponents start being nice to you!
Have a good day. I'm off to walk the pups.
It’s not fruitful to try and squeeze generally. The state needs to zero base it’s budget:
- what should the state do
- How can it be delivered most efficiently
- What is the cost
- How can that be raised
Way too radical, of course. But if you believe that (a) there is a limit to the percentage of GDP the state can take in tax; (b) demographics are pushing costs up faster than we are growing; and (c) there is no easy and quick solution to our productivity challenges then “once you have eliminated the impossible, then whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth”
At least Liz Truss’s “growth” approach is a genuine attempt at 3. Its poorly executed and mid conceived, but the objective is reasonable as a way to square the circle
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1577192047710466049
Paul Waugh
@paulwaugh
.@trussliz tells @NickFerrariLBC it's a matter for the King whether he attends COP27, refusing to deny she talked to him about it.
@DPJHodges
·
3m
Liz Truss doesn’t have the support in the Commons or in the Cabinet to introduce a real terms benefit cut. She needs to drop this as well. And she needs to drop it quickly.
One of the things the Tories want to claim success on is wage inflation. Having the gap between wage inflation and cost inflation front and centre of the news for a month whilst the Tories battle it out, will change perceptions for those who got a good 5-10% pay rise to start seeing it as a real terms pay cut instead.
At the same time the relaxations on lower skilled workers entry requirements will come in. One of the few areas where the Tories could try and claim success will disappear.
Where is Liz’s growth plan? And give that it doesn’t exist where will growth come from…
Hint it ain’t low corporation tax as. We’ve tried that for 12 years and it hasn’t generated growth just short term profiteering
Mrs Brady has already had to tell her there isn't a majority for the announced plan. Think what he will have to do when they finally admit what they are doing to policing and the NHS and Education and UC...
He has no idea whether his business is still viable.
“I didn’t think her leadership was in trouble,” ex-cabinet minister tells me.
“But then I spoke to younger colleagues. They say of lions in the wild that once they’ve had a taste of human flesh they keep eating humans. Well the 2019 intake has had its taste of human flesh.”
🦁
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1577197236819148800
I did put some money on Truss out this year
"UK government borrowing costs are on course for one of their biggest ever monthly rises — and mortgage rates are set to increase as well — following the bond market meltdown triggered by chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s fiscal policy announcement last week."
“The moves are just extraordinary,” said Vivek Paul, UK chief investment strategist for the BlackRock Investment Institute. “The market has delivered its verdict [on the government’s fiscal plans] and it’s not a good one.”
Living in a fantasy world of economics might have worked for Bozo, but Truss does not have the political friends to pull that one off.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/liz-truss-walks-into-another-row
A 25% Labour lead and Truss approval ratings lower than a snakes belly suggest this isn't.
https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1577196966827634688
The current lot just aren't going to get their policies through Parliament.
The public opposition to a welfare squeeze is already growing - Penny Mordaunt is openly questioning the concept and other prominent MPs like Damian Green, Rob Halfon, Michael Gove and Esther McVey saying it's the wrong target
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1577188505402212352
A consensus figurehead like Wallace would at least allow for less incompetent ministers to be brought back into government. Half the existing cabinet are there solely for their loyalty to Truss.
I would look at:
- reforming housing benefit (and selectively building social property for short term stays)
- Linking pensions to earnings only not the triple lock
- Redesigning in work benefits so they are not abused by firms looking to underpay staff
None of it will be easy. But the impact would be large
I can fully believe the polls.
If the party constitution didn’t restrict this, I’d suggest parachuting May in with Rishi as Chancellor, on the understanding May is there to steady the ship and Rishi will be the successor fighting the next election for the Tories. As it stands there’s no mechanism to do this, so instead I think they should go for Rishi as PM but on the understanding the cabinet includes whatever big hitters they’ve got left in Parliament - the Mays, Goves, Hunts etc.
The betting markets however......
Whether Truss goes or not, Kwasi can't stay in post
Are you saying these same people will vote in favour of having their UC and services cut?
I remember this one about Boris.
Rishi, while more tied to what Truss denigrates as Treasury Orthodoxy, did have a plan: raise corporation tax and then use tax allowances to incentivise research and investment.
He makes his own decisions having sought the counsel of his ministers
Fed - 0.75% increase
BoE - 0.5% increase (market starts thing hmmm)
Budget - market goes nope
it could well have gone
Budget - yep it's cutting some taxes that may work
BoE - decent increase there
Fed - larger increase than BoE but they'll catch up next month.
Just switching the order of things around may (it may not but it may well have done) have allowed the proposals to breath and live...
That's not to say I don't disagree with you and the budget would have been a disaster whenever it was done but you never know...
IMHO the truth is that Zero is too low and 33% too high. No idea beyond that.
“It’s over. I’m finished. It’s just a question of how long we can last until we lose the election. The only option is to bring Boris back - he was elected by members and the public and is the only one that can stop Starmer getting a majority.”
https://twitter.com/MhariAurora/status/1577201473586614273
Betting Post:Football: couple of tips.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2022/10/ligue-1-and-bundesliga-thoughts-4.html
Backed Lorient to win away at Brest, 3.1, and Troyes to win away at Nantes 5.25. No Bundesliga bets this time.
I have no idea of what Liz Truss’s plan is. I didn’t vote for her and she doesn’t confide in her cabinet or me.
I would suggest instead the government focuses on the environment, specifically green tech and investment, and personal health and diet.
There are loads of things we can do in both areas. And in the long run (a decade or two) both will indeed lead to more sustainable growth.
The “Truss penalty” is the area under the curve between what rates have been for her vs what they would have been anyway. That will close in time.
Because removing them also looks weak unless there's a clear, popular alternative, which there usually isnt.
Liz has removed a number of foundations on which Boris's support was built and they are not rebuildable. Boris may be able to shore them up a bit but it's not going to be enough..
Remember you need to fix a £20bn budget gap and you haven't identified any savings yet you want to spend money.....
So long as Tory members are concerned about picking a leader for their views, rather than their abilities, then they are in the same rabbit hole that lumbered Labour with Corbyn and hence the rest of us with the lying clown.
All governments suffer from mission creep. Someone has a pet project and 30 years later it is still going on with its budget increasing every year & no one asking if it is useful or necessary
George VI wanted to go to D Day.
However when in power - we elect MPs to be our representatives and the selection of the PM should be left in the hands of the MPs we elect as our representatives...
It really boils down to do does the PM have a mandate directly from the members or not. If MPs select a PM then there is clearly a mandate (we are a parliamentary democracy where power is given to elected representives). Once the final vote is passed to a different none elected group that mandate completely disappears..
That said I do (sadly) subscribe to the theory set out above that if he were fighting the next Ge he would save a number of seats that Truss has no hope of saving.
However, housing benefit reforms hits landlords and house prices hardest. Triple lock hits pensioners hardest.
These are the Tory party client votes that are sacred.
They could at least run the country for a bit without destroying us while Labour get ready for centrist social democracy.
But if the outrage from the public continues then it may have to be Boris as the only option. Remember he starts from a position of disgrace with his own massive negative ratings - so it won't be easy. And how does he do boosterism when there is no money left following KT and the Fuckup Gang crashing the economy?
2) down south will Bozo cost the tories seats that might otherwise be won?
Edit: guardian says £47bn over 3 years offset by £25bn in investment allowances. So about £8bn
ETA but yes, it is not for KC3 to pick his own summits.
Now any small cut to a £200bn budget on health, social welfare or pensions will lead to an unstoppable back bench revolt.
This year the government is borrowing £190 bn. All suggestions which involve cut price paper clips won't do. Abolishing the state pension would go a long way......
https://twitter.com/mikebutcher/status/1577204733277782017
Mike Butcher🇬🇧🇪🇺
@mikebutcher
·
10m
BBC Arabic radio to close after 84 years. 400 staff at BBC World Service will lose their jobs. Also paring down its Iranian-language service. Seems a bad move? Maybe dump a few less crucial things? MENA is on our doorstep.
Not going to happen - and I doubt he'd want to stand once the party is in opposition..
As long as the party of government is also the party of the retired-and-doing-fine-personally, we have a problem.
Anyway, he has a lot of baggage to get past - his lying to parliament investigation, his in bed with the Russians bombshell to the liaison committee on the day before he resigned etc etc
"Because he is better than Liz Truss" is hardly a plea in mitigation.....
Again.