Wow. Apols if already discussed, just seen it. Chimes with my assertion the other day that we’re living through Project Fear. Except that this is Jeremy Warner, of the Telegraph, saying it, not some random northern simian schmuck:
’Project Fear was right all along’
Downbeat predictions by the Treasury and others on the economic consequences of leaving the EU, contemptuously dismissed at the time by Brexit campaigners as "Project Fear", have been on a long fuse, but they have turned out to be overwhelmingly correct, and if anything have underestimated both the calamitous loss of international standing and the scale of the damage that six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has imposed on the country.
…Perhaps I exaggerate, but not since the humiliation of the International Monetary Fund bailout in 1976 have we seen an unravelling quite as spectacular. This too from a Tory Government with a substantial overall majority. It is scarcely believable.
These are dark days for Tory MPs, who will be acutely aware that loss of reputation for economic competence is electoral poison for their party. As the former Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has already observed, that reputation has been comprehensively trashed by what's just occurred.
…We'll be paying the consequences in reduced standing and prosperity for years, if not decades, to come.
The big question is how much is down to Brexit and how much down to the incompetence of the Brexiteers? I actually don't think things are that complicated. There's a lot of psychobabble talked about the markets but they probably want to see two things:
1) Stop threatening a trade war with our biggest trading partner over Northern Ireland 2) Have a plan that shows percentage debt to GDP falling in the medium term
It's not that complicated. Will those measures make up for the costs of leaving the single market and customs union? Probably not and the lack of compensatory benefits to leaving bodes ill for our economic future. But I remain unconvinced by the disaster analysis.
Yes, but it's not just BREXIT -> POOR ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
It's also BREXIT -> POLITICAL INSTABILITY -> UNCERTAINTY -> CRISIS
The public were desperate to draw a line under the scandals and incompetence of the Johnson years - it was quite obvious that someone like Mordaunt was needed, assuming she could rise to the challenge.
Instead we got Truss who has doubled down on the worst of the clown, continuing the incompetence and retaining the cabinet of numpties, whilst abandoning even those bits of the clown’s agenda that were popular.
What is remarkable is how predictable, and predicted, this all was (except for poor Leondamus, obvs). Like a slow motion car crash, as Truss rose through the leadership contest, went before the members, and then rushed into number ten to trash everything.
I've read several commentators emphasising that this car crash is the Tory members' fault. They take a large part of the blame, but at least an equal part must lie at the feet of the 113 MPs who voted for Truss in the last round of MPs' voting.
What were they thinking? 1 They might have thought she was genuinely up to the job ...in which case, how could we ever trust their judgement again?
2 They might have thought she was genuinely better than Mordaunt ...in which case, how can such a group of MPs be so utterly devoid of leadership talent?
3 Some might have been Sunak supporters wanting to give Rishi an easier ride ...in which case, how could we trust such Machiavellian gamblers in the future? The risks of voting for such a candidate were ridiculously high, as we're now seeing
I can't see any other possibilities...
Traditionally a vacant PM’ship is almost always filled by the former CoE or former FS, and the MPs will have wanted someone with a track record in senior office. That was why Mordaunt would have carried some risk, against which you have to set Truss’s obvious personality flaws.
Johnson is significantly to blame for sowing the seeds of this fiasco, deliberately choosing weak deputies for fear of having competent ones.
So many of the MPs won’t have got beyond “top tier cabinet member but not Rishi”. Blaming Rishi for Johnson’s demise is ridiculous, given that everyone wanted him gone, but that is how these people seem to think. Rishi was also too sensible for the ERG crew, unwilling to buy into their warped world view.
But, as you suggest, possibly a few Rishi supporters imagined their membership wouldn’t be foolish enough to vote for Truss, and got her into the final ahead of Mordaunt? A big mistake, up there with those Labour MPs who helped put Corbyn in front of their members, never expecting they would vote for him!
Had the latter not happened, we may not have got landed with Johnson - certainly not in such a powerful position. So, really, follow the trail and it would seem that Margaret Beckett’s stupidity is to blame for everything that followed.
Labour mainstream always used to allow/facilitate a hard left candidate in their leadership elections, so blaming Beckett for Corbyn is a tad unfair (though she is partially culpable).
EdM is far more culpable because of his buy-yourself-a-vote changes to the leadership election rules.
To be honest this is now a big risk for both main parties. Recent elections in both parties have led to members making disastrous mistakes. Democracy is such a flawed system!!
Maybe the pre-1964 system of choosing Tory leaders was better... in its defence it arguably only got things seriously wrong once, in installing Alec Douglas-Home in October 1963...
Blaming Beckett for Truss made me smile, but I can see the chain!!
There's a very strong argument that, if it's a sitting PM, it should be done quickly by the MPs.
The MPs are elected, and hence accountable to the whole electorate in due course, whereas Tory members are accountable to no-one for the clusterf**k they have inflicted upon us. It's noticeable on ConHome that many of the ardent Trussites have melted away and the rest are doubling down with alt-right conspiracy/betrayal nonsense.
Most sitting PM vacancies occur late in the term (election-winning PMs will stick around, save for health or scandal), so the voters will have our say before long, and if they lose the election, they are normally done.
I agree... but there are risks in having two different processes according to whether a party is in or out of Government. What if there's a coalition (eg a National Government) and the Tories were the junior partner supplying the Deputy Prime Minister? ...or if there was an arrangement where the parties each provided a PM for 2 years, as is currently the case in Ireland?
I know these are once-in-a-blue-moon scenarios but the last thing you want is procedural ambiguity at a point where there's inevitably going to be considerable instability anyway...
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Mr Halfon is either playing a Machiavellian game or is not that bright himself.
The former, I've met him on quite a few occasions and he's definitely not an idiot.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
If she thought about this for more than a second she would have won a landslide at the next election.
The bad feeling towards Stride, the chairman of the Treasury select committee and a key figure in the Ready for Rishi campaign, resurfaced when the prime minister was appointing Jeremy Hunt as her new chancellor on Friday.
Truss and her aides had discussed bringing George Osborne back as a “break glass in case of emergency” candidate, an echo of Gordon Brown bringing Peter Mandelson into his cabinet. Sources say Truss contemplated giving Osborne the job “for about a second” before dismissing the idea.
But asked how she would have found him a parliamentary seat, she replied: “We could have created a vacancy in central Devon” — Stride’s seat since 2010.
We now why @Leon ran away to Pembrokeshire in the lockdown.
Call it champagne. That's what Spain did till it joined the EEC and had to rebrand as cava, so here's an obvious brexit dividend.
Doesn’t work like that these days, and protected designations are one of the areas covered by the Brexit agreement.
Besides which calling things that aren’t champagne “champagne” has the perverse effect of making them seem cheap rip offs because of the association with such. See Russian “champagne” or Australian (or pea pod) “burgundy”.
Wales has a good opportunity here because the ESW name is now firmly established for English fizz and won’t be shifted now but is a bit of a mouthful. Whereas Wales still has the opportunity to differentiate.
By the way a lot of the growth in new vineyards in the last couple of years is in Wales - wye valley and vale of Glamorgan, as well as the English borderlands. Not in volume but in numbers. Some good stuff being made including at the trendier / natural wine end.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
The same chance as anyone else (including the lying clown himself, as polls at the time already demonstrated), then?
The Labour lead was half what it is now under Boris
Boris was corrupt. That's the problem that most of us had with him. He was personally corrupt, and saw no problem with corruption on the part of others, like Owen Paterson. And, he was quite willing to tolerate sexual assaults by his MP's. When I was still a member of the Conservative Party, I voted for Hunt over him, precisely because I suspected that Boris' ethical failings would cause endless problems. I wish I had been proved wrong.
Truss is an unlikeable crank. Hunt is pretty dull, but he is at least fairly serious, which is what is needed right now.
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Only helps if she was going to explain why she was throwing herself onto the fire....
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
Imports from the EU have fallen, exports to the EU have grown since Brexit. I'm not sure reversing that would change the economic picture.
No, our fundamental issue is that we have an ageing population and a government too scared of its core voters to make them pay for the cost of that ageing. In or our of the EU that doesn't change.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
But, they're the big ones. Trade has not been "crushed" as Scott P claims.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Hunt is also raising tax and cutting spending, Farage remains a tax cutter
Doesn't matter. You can't borrow to cut taxes. You can't attack the poor to cut taxes - especially when you need the poor to vote for you.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
You are missing the point. Farage is the bogeyman to scare wavering Tories back into line. That is why the activists are waving him about. They know he is no danger, but they need to frighten the troops.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Hunt is also raising tax and cutting spending, Farage remains a tax cutter
Farage isn’t anything other than a loud mouth on the sidelines.
"The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed,"
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Mr Halfon is either playing a Machiavellian game or is not that bright himself.
The former, I've met him on quite a few occasions and he's definitely not an idiot.
I must say I do rather like him. Haven't checked to see if he has done anything idiotic, but if he has I am not aware of it and he always comes over as very sensible to me.
The public were desperate to draw a line under the scandals and incompetence of the Johnson years - it was quite obvious that someone like Mordaunt was needed, assuming she could rise to the challenge.
Instead we got Truss who has doubled down on the worst of the clown, continuing the incompetence and retaining the cabinet of numpties, whilst abandoning even those bits of the clown’s agenda that were popular.
What is remarkable is how predictable, and predicted, this all was (except for poor Leondamus, obvs). Like a slow motion car crash, as Truss rose through the leadership contest, went before the members, and then rushed into number ten to trash everything.
I've read several commentators emphasising that this car crash is the Tory members' fault. They take a large part of the blame, but at least an equal part must lie at the feet of the 113 MPs who voted for Truss in the last round of MPs' voting.
What were they thinking? 1 They might have thought she was genuinely up to the job ...in which case, how could we ever trust their judgement again?
2 They might have thought she was genuinely better than Mordaunt ...in which case, how can such a group of MPs be so utterly devoid of leadership talent?
3 Some might have been Sunak supporters wanting to give Rishi an easier ride ...in which case, how could we trust such Machiavellian gamblers in the future? The risks of voting for such a candidate were ridiculously high, as we're now seeing
I can't see any other possibilities...
The behaviour of the MPs, both before and after the election, has been terrible.
If they couldn’t work with Liz Truss, they shouldn’t have nominated her in the first place. Trashing your own leader, repeatedly and in public, within weeks of them being elected, is really not acceptable behaviour for MPs - doubly so for all those former minsters mouthing off to the broadsheets again today, who should really know better.
This isn’t a Corbyn situation, where a couple of dozen errant extremists in the Parliamentary party wanted to ‘widen the debate’, this was the result of a choice of two candidates from those nominated.
Sadly, some of us predicted this during the campaign, with the increasingly hyperbolic language used against Truss by the Sunak supporters, as the campaign progressed.
You could have saved yourself some typing, and just put "Liz Truss is innocent!" and allowed the rest of us to laugh.
To be fair there is a reasonable argument that MPs failed absolutely. If they knew - as they should have done - that she was useless and they couldn’t work with her then they should never have nominated her
A nice comparison with US UFO-believers who doubled down on their nutty beliefs when their expected spaceship didn't turn up!
Each of those predictions was flatly disputed by those who voted against this historic error, but we were told we simply didn’t believe fervently enough, or that we were talking Britain down.
All the contenders now busying themselves for a run at the top job are true believers: people who defended breaches of the rule of law and other acts of Brexit-inspired vandalism. In many ways this reveals the truth that Brexit itself, however tarnished, is now the sacred shibboleth of the party — not economic competence, not Thatcherism, not even Burkean traditionalism. Everything is expendable in defence of the central dogma.
That is why we need not a change of leader but of government. This is not merely in the interests of the nation but of the Tory party itself. Festinger found the only reliable way for people to break free from the bonds of a cult was to take a break; preferably to go on a long holiday.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
The great thing about this board for those observing the Tory party from the outside is the running arguments between Big G, Barty, and HYUFD. The One Nation, Libertarian and Traditionalist tendencies encapsulated in one glorious ongoing Blue on Blue catfight.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
Imports from the EU have fallen, exports to the EU have grown since Brexit. I'm not sure reversing that would change the economic picture.
No, our fundamental issue is that we have an ageing population and a government too scared of its core voters to make them pay for the cost of that ageing. In or our of the EU that doesn't change.
Current figures for exports to the EU are inflated by the lack of German LNG terminals, so the gas comes to the UK on a ship and then flows in a pipe to the continent. This is not indicative of a broader healthy UK->EU trade relationship.
Wow. Apols if already discussed, just seen it. Chimes with my assertion the other day that we’re living through Project Fear. Except that this is Jeremy Warner, of the Telegraph, saying it, not some random northern simian schmuck:
’Project Fear was right all along’
Downbeat predictions by the Treasury and others on the economic consequences of leaving the EU, contemptuously dismissed at the time by Brexit campaigners as "Project Fear", have been on a long fuse, but they have turned out to be overwhelmingly correct, and if anything have underestimated both the calamitous loss of international standing and the scale of the damage that six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has imposed on the country.
…Perhaps I exaggerate, but not since the humiliation of the International Monetary Fund bailout in 1976 have we seen an unravelling quite as spectacular. This too from a Tory Government with a substantial overall majority. It is scarcely believable.
These are dark days for Tory MPs, who will be acutely aware that loss of reputation for economic competence is electoral poison for their party. As the former Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has already observed, that reputation has been comprehensively trashed by what's just occurred.
…We'll be paying the consequences in reduced standing and prosperity for years, if not decades, to come.
The big question is how much is down to Brexit and how much down to the incompetence of the Brexiteers? I actually don't think things are that complicated. There's a lot of psychobabble talked about the markets but they probably want to see two things:
1) Stop threatening a trade war with our biggest trading partner over Northern Ireland 2) Have a plan that shows percentage debt to GDP falling in the medium term
It's not that complicated. Will those measures make up for the costs of leaving the single market and customs union? Probably not and the lack of compensatory benefits to leaving bodes ill for our economic future. But I remain unconvinced by the disaster analysis.
Yes, but it's not just BREXIT -> POOR ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
It's also BREXIT -> POLITICAL INSTABILITY -> UNCERTAINTY -> CRISIS
and BREXIT -> REDUCED STANDING IN THE WORLD
BREXIT -> MORE POLITICS OF FANTASY AND LIES
BREXIT -> WE DONT NEED THE REST OF THE WORLD, and
BREXIT -> PM BORIS -> POLITICAL SCANDAL
Brexit + the FPTP system has brought us to this.
Imagine Brexit and a proportional voting system. Different leaders and almost certainly a closer relationship involving customs Union at the least, as well as no Boris.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Hunt is also raising tax and cutting spending, Farage remains a tax cutter
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
It is difficult imagining Truss going into the next election as leader. Much easier to imagine Hunt. His route looks difficult but possibly not as difficult for Tory MPs as watching their futures disapearing down the toilet every time she opens her mouth.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
Nope. See Liberals/Alliance before they learnt to target. You need a ground game to create targets unless you are already there.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
The public were desperate to draw a line under the scandals and incompetence of the Johnson years - it was quite obvious that someone like Mordaunt was needed, assuming she could rise to the challenge.
Instead we got Truss who has doubled down on the worst of the clown, continuing the incompetence and retaining the cabinet of numpties, whilst abandoning even those bits of the clown’s agenda that were popular.
What is remarkable is how predictable, and predicted, this all was (except for poor Leondamus, obvs). Like a slow motion car crash, as Truss rose through the leadership contest, went before the members, and then rushed into number ten to trash everything.
I've read several commentators emphasising that this car crash is the Tory members' fault. They take a large part of the blame, but at least an equal part must lie at the feet of the 113 MPs who voted for Truss in the last round of MPs' voting.
What were they thinking? 1 They might have thought she was genuinely up to the job ...in which case, how could we ever trust their judgement again?
2 They might have thought she was genuinely better than Mordaunt ...in which case, how can such a group of MPs be so utterly devoid of leadership talent?
3 Some might have been Sunak supporters wanting to give Rishi an easier ride ...in which case, how could we trust such Machiavellian gamblers in the future? The risks of voting for such a candidate were ridiculously high, as we're now seeing
I can't see any other possibilities...
The behaviour of the MPs, both before and after the election, has been terrible.
If they couldn’t work with Liz Truss, they shouldn’t have nominated her in the first place. Trashing your own leader, repeatedly and in public, within weeks of them being elected, is really not acceptable behaviour for MPs - doubly so for all those former minsters mouthing off to the broadsheets again today, who should really know better.
This isn’t a Corbyn situation, where a couple of dozen errant extremists in the Parliamentary party wanted to ‘widen the debate’, this was the result of a choice of two candidates from those nominated.
Sadly, some of us predicted this during the campaign, with the increasingly hyperbolic language used against Truss by the Sunak supporters, as the campaign progressed.
You could have saved yourself some typing, and just put "Liz Truss is innocent!" and allowed the rest of us to laugh.
To be fair there is a reasonable argument that MPs failed absolutely. If they knew - as they should have done - that she was useless and they couldn’t work with her then they should never have nominated her
A minority of MPs failed. Most of them voted for someone else.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
But, they're the big ones. Trade has not been "crushed" as Scott P claims.
Yes, recebt EU numbers confirmed the ONS numbers. EU imports from the UK are up, EU exports to the UK are down. In services EU imports from the UK are up hugely and EU exports to the UK are down.
Brexit has seen the balance of payments gap close quite substantially with the EU. It's been replaced with a bigger balance of payments deficit with the rest of the world following high oil and commodity prices.
We now why @Leon ran away to Pembrokeshire in the lockdown.
Call it champagne. That's what Spain did till it joined the EEC and had to rebrand as cava, so here's an obvious brexit dividend.
Doesn’t work like that these days, and protected designations are one of the areas covered by the Brexit agreement.
Besides which calling things that aren’t champagne “champagne” has the perverse effect of making them seem cheap rip offs because of the association with such. See Russian “champagne” or Australian (or pea pod) “burgundy”.
Wales has a good opportunity here because the ESW name is now firmly established for English fizz and won’t be shifted now but is a bit of a mouthful. Whereas Wales still has the opportunity to differentiate.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
The great thing about this board for those observing the Tory party from the outside is the running arguments between Big G, Barty, and HYUFD. The One Nation, Libertarian and Traditionalist tendencies encapsulated in one glorious ongoing Blue on Blue catfight.
With a number of Cameroon reformists and wets - Tory remainers and those who hated Boris - now on the sidelines as ex-Tories but still offering up advice.
There's a very strong argument that, if it's a sitting PM, it should be done quickly by the MPs.
The MPs are elected, and hence accountable to the whole electorate in due course, whereas Tory members are accountable to no-one for the clusterf**k they have inflicted upon us. It's noticeable on ConHome that many of the ardent Trussites have melted away and the rest are doubling down with alt-right conspiracy/betrayal nonsense.
Most sitting PM vacancies occur late in the term (election-winning PMs will stick around, save for health or scandal), so the voters will have our say before long, and if they lose the election, they are normally done.
William Hague regrets the rule change he made to let members have the final say, and is in favour of changing it back. I think it highly likely the Tory party will change the rules after the next election.
I've only just got round to reading the exchange of letters between Truss and Kwarteng following the latter's sacking. Absolutely incredible. I'm happy to provide a brief summary:
Truss: Kwasi, you were a brilliant Chancellor, with fantastic policies suggested by me - just the right medicine. You really are the bee's knees. And, you're my best mate ever.
Kwarteng: Why the fuck did you sack me then?
This exchange of letters was quite unbelievable. Kwarteng got asked to resign and agreed to do it, but there was no explanation of how this came about, given that they both agree that what they were doing was the right thing to do. So the message is that the leadership are so incompetent and clueless, they cannot even construct the appearance of being in control of events. The impression is that Truss is acting impulsively and irresponsibly, and no one around her is stepping in to manage the situation. This is probably what is spooking the markets as much as anything else, because she still notionally has a lot of power as PM. So it may be that Hunt helps calm the situation, but it doesn't get resolved until Truss is out of No.10. Fortunately for us, she doesn't have any power base she can really rely on at this point. She may have deluded herself in to thinking she is doing a 'Trump' with this impulsive behaviour and the (now failed) mini-budget; but Trump did at least have some supporters and credibility.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Whenever things get really bad, HY starts wittering about the second coming of Farage; he just reads across from his nutty religious beliefs into nutty political ones.
I can still remember when he was tipping Farage as next PM, during the May years.
We now why @Leon ran away to Pembrokeshire in the lockdown.
Call it champagne. That's what Spain did till it joined the EEC and had to rebrand as cava, so here's an obvious brexit dividend.
Doesn’t work like that these days, and protected designations are one of the areas covered by the Brexit agreement.
Besides which calling things that aren’t champagne “champagne” has the perverse effect of making them seem cheap rip offs because of the association with such. See Russian “champagne” or Australian (or pea pod) “burgundy”.
Wales has a good opportunity here because the ESW name is now firmly established for English fizz and won’t be shifted now but is a bit of a mouthful. Whereas Wales still has the opportunity to differentiate.
Babi ffug?
Something romantic and historical: how about Glyndwr?
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Mr Halfon is either playing a Machiavellian game or is not that bright himself.
The former, I've met him on quite a few occasions and he's definitely not an idiot.
I must say I do rather like him. Haven't checked to see if he has done anything idiotic, but if he has I am not aware of it and he always comes over as very sensible to me.
You don't have to check too hard; the very idea of Liz Truss holding a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people surely qualifies as idiotic.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Hunt is also raising tax and cutting spending, Farage remains a tax cutter
Goodness me just stop. With this kind of nonsense your'e degrading an otherwise serious site and totally embarrassing yourself.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Mr Halfon is either playing a Machiavellian game or is not that bright himself.
The former, I've met him on quite a few occasions and he's definitely not an idiot.
I must say I do rather like him. Haven't checked to see if he has done anything idiotic, but if he has I am not aware of it and he always comes over as very sensible to me.
Perhaps he was just indulging a penchant for satire.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Hunt is also raising tax and cutting spending, Farage remains a tax cutter
Hunt is taking action to stabilise the economy against head winds caused by utter incompetence led by a tax cutting agenda
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
In that scenario, the Labour Party would win election (presumably with a stonking great majority), the SNP would do what the SNP does and get 50 odd seats, the LDs would presumably get a bunch of seats (because tactical voting), and then the right wing vote would split between Reform and the Conservatives, with Reform doing well enough to become the official opposition.
With all due respect, that seems unlikely.
Let's assume (for the purpose of argument) that the Labour Party get 42% and the LDs 14%, and that their votes are somewhat efficient.
That leaves (say) 34% for the Conservatives plus Reform.
Unless the split was extremely (i.e. 90:10) in Reform's favour, it wouldn't end up the offical opposition. More likely, it would just result in more LD and Lab seats.
IanB2. I agree that “if Truss/ Hunt surprise dramatically on the upside, the less nailed in punters will think is a Labour win”. But such a development would favour my bet. Truss would be less likely to go, which is essential for my bet delivering. So that helps. And yes, Starmer would be less sure to become PM after the next General Election. But he would still be odds on to do so , in my view. My bet is primarily a bet in Truss surviving until the next General Election.
MPs know now what a dreadful performer she is (as they should have known before). And how policy-impulsive she can be.
Do you think they have forgotten 2017 already?
The one bit of your logic that works is that, if the Tories allow her to lead the campaign, Starmer will win.
Which is why backing Starmer to be next PM at 7.6 is a better bet than backing Truss to lead the Tories at the next GE at 4.3 approx.
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Halfon is a pretty clever politician - not entirely sure in that clip how serious he was being....
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Mr Halfon is either playing a Machiavellian game or is not that bright himself.
He is a very thoughtful mp with a great affinity with his constituents
The public were desperate to draw a line under the scandals and incompetence of the Johnson years - it was quite obvious that someone like Mordaunt was needed, assuming she could rise to the challenge.
Instead we got Truss who has doubled down on the worst of the clown, continuing the incompetence and retaining the cabinet of numpties, whilst abandoning even those bits of the clown’s agenda that were popular.
What is remarkable is how predictable, and predicted, this all was (except for poor Leondamus, obvs). Like a slow motion car crash, as Truss rose through the leadership contest, went before the members, and then rushed into number ten to trash everything.
There was one hustings in particular where she was genuinely impressive, and that made some believe (or hope) that she had hidden depths as a politician, but that was clearly a flash in the pan.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Not how FPTP works. And they will still have to pass the SNP and LDs to become LOTO. If Tories are on 10% the LDs are going to pick up loads.
We now why @Leon ran away to Pembrokeshire in the lockdown.
Call it champagne. That's what Spain did till it joined the EEC and had to rebrand as cava, so here's an obvious brexit dividend.
Doesn’t work like that these days, and protected designations are one of the areas covered by the Brexit agreement.
Besides which calling things that aren’t champagne “champagne” has the perverse effect of making them seem cheap rip offs because of the association with such. See Russian “champagne” or Australian (or pea pod) “burgundy”.
Wales has a good opportunity here because the ESW name is now firmly established for English fizz and won’t be shifted now but is a bit of a mouthful. Whereas Wales still has the opportunity to differentiate.
Don't see the need for an overarching country brand (France of course does not have one, non champagne has to get by as cremant or mousseux). Colour, varieties, methode trad are the key points.
Liverpool 2005 was a fantastic comeback but Truss's position is more akin to being 10-0 down at half time.
I remember watching that game with two Liverpool supporting friends at the Dogstar in Brixton. I told them at half time, absolutely seriously, “I can see you coming back from this”. I left before the penalties saying “told you so, you’ll win now”. It was the only time I’ve got anything about football right ever. I backed Utd to beat City the other week FFS.
On that basis I confidently predict Truss will still be PM and be getting regular poll leads by the end of 2022.
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
Yes, that's well argued and you are right that 7.6 is great value.
It can certainly happen but a lot depends on Truss herself. She would have to accept that she is effectively powerless and that Hunt is de facto PM but it could be done. She would need to act a bit like a constitutional Monarch, being present but not interfering. If she and her supporters could accept that, stability of sorts would return and I think we would see some reduction in the Labour lead in the polls.
They would still lose the next GE but could well retain 200 or so seats. Right now, that looks quite a decent outcome.
Mr. Royale, as an uncontested successor, it could be Hunt. But there's no chance if it goes to the members.
Start at the other end - if there's a vacancy, neither the Tories nor the country can afford a contest lasting months. We'd be lucky to get 50 cents for a £ by the end of it.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Quite O/T, but for my dissertation, I've just been reading up about the treatment meted out by Spanish guerillas on the afranchesados (pro-French Spaniards). It's one of those things that I wish I had not read.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Let’s just clarify how hypothetical your post is.
Hunt is not the leader of the Conservative Party. OK, there’s a reasonable chance he will be soon. Let’s call that a 25% chance.
Farage is not the leader of any party. He has come back before, of course, but I don’t think we can call this more than a 33% chance.
Next Farage needs to get to 25% in the vote vs Hunt on 10%. Farage is offering the same as Truss, who is struggling to get 25% with all the advantages of incumbency and an established political party. This has a 5% chance at best.
So, at best, there’s a 1 in 240 chance that we’re even in this scenario. So… Why are we even talking about this nonsense?
Wow. Apols if already discussed, just seen it. Chimes with my assertion the other day that we’re living through Project Fear. Except that this is Jeremy Warner, of the Telegraph, saying it, not some random northern simian schmuck:
’Project Fear was right all along’
Downbeat predictions by the Treasury and others on the economic consequences of leaving the EU, contemptuously dismissed at the time by Brexit campaigners as "Project Fear", have been on a long fuse, but they have turned out to be overwhelmingly correct, and if anything have underestimated both the calamitous loss of international standing and the scale of the damage that six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has imposed on the country.
…Perhaps I exaggerate, but not since the humiliation of the International Monetary Fund bailout in 1976 have we seen an unravelling quite as spectacular. This too from a Tory Government with a substantial overall majority. It is scarcely believable.
These are dark days for Tory MPs, who will be acutely aware that loss of reputation for economic competence is electoral poison for their party. As the former Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has already observed, that reputation has been comprehensively trashed by what's just occurred.
…We'll be paying the consequences in reduced standing and prosperity for years, if not decades, to come.
The big question is how much is down to Brexit and how much down to the incompetence of the Brexiteers? I actually don't think things are that complicated. There's a lot of psychobabble talked about the markets but they probably want to see two things:
1) Stop threatening a trade war with our biggest trading partner over Northern Ireland 2) Have a plan that shows percentage debt to GDP falling in the medium term
It's not that complicated. Will those measures make up for the costs of leaving the single market and customs union? Probably not and the lack of compensatory benefits to leaving bodes ill for our economic future. But I remain unconvinced by the disaster analysis.
Yes, but it's not just BREXIT -> POOR ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE
It's also BREXIT -> POLITICAL INSTABILITY -> UNCERTAINTY -> CRISIS
and BREXIT -> REDUCED STANDING IN THE WORLD
BREXIT -> MORE POLITICS OF FANTASY AND LIES
BREXIT -> WE DONT NEED THE REST OF THE WORLD, and
BREXIT -> PM BORIS -> POLITICAL SCANDAL
Evidence for “reduced standing in the world”. Preferably without shouting.
All strikes me as a sledgehammer to crack a nut, or in this case multiple nutters. There are already laws in place. The Police just need to use them instead of acting as enablers.
We now why @Leon ran away to Pembrokeshire in the lockdown.
Call it champagne. That's what Spain did till it joined the EEC and had to rebrand as cava, so here's an obvious brexit dividend.
Doesn’t work like that these days, and protected designations are one of the areas covered by the Brexit agreement.
Besides which calling things that aren’t champagne “champagne” has the perverse effect of making them seem cheap rip offs because of the association with such. See Russian “champagne” or Australian (or pea pod) “burgundy”.
Wales has a good opportunity here because the ESW name is now firmly established for English fizz and won’t be shifted now but is a bit of a mouthful. Whereas Wales still has the opportunity to differentiate.
Babi ffug?
Something romantic and historical: how about Glyndwr?
Doesn't work. I am afraid there is something very faintly comic about Welsh wine, it's not something to make a positive point of. Tintern Parva are sensible to sound English and Latin.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
But, they're the big ones. Trade has not been "crushed" as Scott P claims.
Yes, recebt EU numbers confirmed the ONS numbers. EU imports from the UK are up, EU exports to the UK are down. In services EU imports from the UK are up hugely and EU exports to the UK are down.
Brexit has seen the balance of payments gap close quite substantially with the EU. It's been replaced with a bigger balance of payments deficit with the rest of the world following high oil and commodity prices.
It's fascinating how, for so many people, the travails of Truss are all about Brexit all over again.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
We've always obsessed too much about the EU: discussion of our relationship with it manages to stifle any discussion of the UK's real issues.
A nice comparison with US UFO-believers who doubled down on their nutty beliefs when their expected spaceship didn't turn up!
Each of those predictions was flatly disputed by those who voted against this historic error, but we were told we simply didn’t believe fervently enough, or that we were talking Britain down.
All the contenders now busying themselves for a run at the top job are true believers: people who defended breaches of the rule of law and other acts of Brexit-inspired vandalism. In many ways this reveals the truth that Brexit itself, however tarnished, is now the sacred shibboleth of the party — not economic competence, not Thatcherism, not even Burkean traditionalism. Everything is expendable in defence of the central dogma.
That is why we need not a change of leader but of government. This is not merely in the interests of the nation but of the Tory party itself. Festinger found the only reliable way for people to break free from the bonds of a cult was to take a break; preferably to go on a long holiday.
Joining a millennial space cult is very much like having a baby.
Mr. Royale, as an uncontested successor, it could be Hunt. But there's no chance if it goes to the members.
Start at the other end - if there's a vacancy, neither the Tories nor the country can afford a contest lasting months. We'd be lucky to get 50 cents for a £ by the end of it.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Yes the 1922 committee should add a rule that leadership candidates must have at least 40% of MPs vote for them in a final round to make a members ballot.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
Leave voters: 1. A significant number have died 2. Ideologues who had been howling at the moon forever and will always do so 3. Shire Tories looking at the past 4. Red wall working class voters expecting that their prospects improve
Brexit is NOT the electoral issue it was. You seem to be suggesting that red wall Lab to Con voters will now vote REFUK so that services and investment in their area can be cut to the bone.
Liz Truss Fireside chat. I picture the scene; a leather armchair, oak panelling, Truss siting and smiling with wide eyes with Hunt curled up sleeping by her feet as the British economy burns in the fireplace next to her.
All strikes me as a sledgehammer to crack a nut, or in this case multiple nutters. There are already laws in place. The Police just need to use them instead of acting as enablers.
AIUI one of the biggest issues is that sentencing for criminal damage is based on the cost of the damage. The cost of repairing the frame of Sunflowers, or cleaning up the milk at Waitrose, is actually minimal and unlikely to cross the custody threshold.
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
Yes, that's well argued and you are right that 7.6 is great value.
It can certainly happen but a lot depends on Truss herself. She would have to accept that she is effectively powerless and that Hunt is de facto PM but it could be done. She would need to act a bit like a constitutional Monarch, being present but not interfering. If she and her supporters could accept that, stability of sorts would return and I think we would see some reduction in the Labour lead in the polls.
They would still lose the next GE but could well retain 200 or so seats. Right now, that looks quite a decent outcome.
I expect some recovery during a GE campaign (even Major got 30% in 1997) because Labour's platform and team will come into focus in a way they're currently not.
Mr. Royale, as an uncontested successor, it could be Hunt. But there's no chance if it goes to the members.
Start at the other end - if there's a vacancy, neither the Tories nor the country can afford a contest lasting months. We'd be lucky to get 50 cents for a £ by the end of it.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Yes the 1922 committee should add a rule that leadership candidates must have at least 40% of MPs vote for them in a final round to make a members ballot.
Under that rule, there wouldn’t have been anyone on the final ballot! Or would you make the MPs have an additional ballot with just the last two candidates? I suspect Truss would’ve managed 40%.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
The great thing about this board for those observing the Tory party from the outside is the running arguments between Big G, Barty, and HYUFD. The One Nation, Libertarian and Traditionalist tendencies encapsulated in one glorious ongoing Blue on Blue catfight.
I’d prefer the term “backwoodsman” to “traditionalist” for HYUFD. His type have never* represented the majority of the party
(*except in the period between the corn laws and the recombination with the Peelites. A period that saw 30+ years of unbroken Whig government)
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
Roy Jenkins and David Steel (who had excellent ground games) say hello.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Those of us that like Hunt, or merely prefer grown-ups in charge, need to be reminded of this regularly.
The public were desperate to draw a line under the scandals and incompetence of the Johnson years - it was quite obvious that someone like Mordaunt was needed, assuming she could rise to the challenge.
Instead we got Truss who has doubled down on the worst of the clown, continuing the incompetence and retaining the cabinet of numpties, whilst abandoning even those bits of the clown’s agenda that were popular.
What is remarkable is how predictable, and predicted, this all was (except for poor Leondamus, obvs). Like a slow motion car crash, as Truss rose through the leadership contest, went before the members, and then rushed into number ten to trash everything.
I've read several commentators emphasising that this car crash is the Tory members' fault. They take a large part of the blame, but at least an equal part must lie at the feet of the 113 MPs who voted for Truss in the last round of MPs' voting.
What were they thinking? 1 They might have thought she was genuinely up to the job ...in which case, how could we ever trust their judgement again?
2 They might have thought she was genuinely better than Mordaunt ...in which case, how can such a group of MPs be so utterly devoid of leadership talent?
3 Some might have been Sunak supporters wanting to give Rishi an easier ride ...in which case, how could we trust such Machiavellian gamblers in the future? The risks of voting for such a candidate were ridiculously high, as we're now seeing
I can't see any other possibilities...
The behaviour of the MPs, both before and after the election, has been terrible.
If they couldn’t work with Liz Truss, they shouldn’t have nominated her in the first place. Trashing your own leader, repeatedly and in public, within weeks of them being elected, is really not acceptable behaviour for MPs - doubly so for all those former minsters mouthing off to the broadsheets again today, who should really know better.
This isn’t a Corbyn situation, where a couple of dozen errant extremists in the Parliamentary party wanted to ‘widen the debate’, this was the result of a choice of two candidates from those nominated.
Sadly, some of us predicted this during the campaign, with the increasingly hyperbolic language used against Truss by the Sunak supporters, as the campaign progressed.
You could have saved yourself some typing, and just put "Liz Truss is innocent!" and allowed the rest of us to laugh.
To be fair there is a reasonable argument that MPs failed absolutely. If they knew - as they should have done - that she was useless and they couldn’t work with her then they should never have nominated her
A minority of MPs failed. Most of them voted for someone else.
That’s fair.
I wonder how great an overlap there is between
a) people who voted for truss b) members of truss’s government c) MPs who had zero chance of preferment under any other PM
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Halfon is a pretty clever politician - not entirely sure in that clip how serious he was being....
I think he's right in that the country could do with a bit of reassurance, and by raising the possibility of Truss providing that reassurance he's implicitly making the point that, despite Hunt's arrival as Chancellor, it's still necessary to replace her.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Garage - and Brexit - is a busted flush. Yes there are still some utterly obsessed people out there, but most of the country has moved on, a chunk of Brexit voters have died and a chunk of the red wall have noticed that the opposite of what they believed they would get would happen.
So let's play your scenario. The return of Farage. Leading which party - is he even a REFUK member still? Let's further assume that he is. It's a party with no reach. With no agenda (I imagine the "reform" they want has just been torpedoed by Truss). And a "none of that matters" approach to everything that matters to voters instead focusing on migrants and woke.
Nope. Farage is not a threat.
Hunt is also raising tax and cutting spending, Farage remains a tax cutter
He's never cut a tax in his life. He doesn't need to, because he's never been in a position to do so.
He's a tax cutter the same way I'm an olympic gymnast. He can talk about it.
What you mean is he will call for tax cuts. And yes, that's usually popular - but as we've seen even Tories can realise it's a bad idea
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
Sure, we would have all those handicaps, but not the additional one of trade barriers with our nearest and biggest trade partner.
Imports from the EU have fallen, exports to the EU have grown since Brexit. I'm not sure reversing that would change the economic picture.
No, our fundamental issue is that we have an ageing population and a government too scared of its core voters to make them pay for the cost of that ageing. In or our of the EU that doesn't change.
The export figure is distorted by the gas and oil exports due to the war. Take that out and both import/export trade have been hit post-Brexit.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
The great thing about this board for those observing the Tory party from the outside is the running arguments between Big G, Barty, and HYUFD. The One Nation, Libertarian and Traditionalist tendencies encapsulated in one glorious ongoing Blue on Blue catfight.
I haven't heard from Barty much recently, is he still holding a candle for MsLiz?
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
With debt interest at its current levels, and anaemic growth, there probably isn't much of a choice.
Hunt's strategy is presumably to ease off once the economic headwinds/inflation/interest rates moderate.
Whilst I accept there are few choices, you have to accept that this is the political death of the Tory party. The disaster of the last few weeks will take the blame for why they are now having to bring back austerity, not Covid, not the legacy of the last decade.
"Things are a mess, we have to take tough decisions, I'm cutting services you need as your pay gets squeezed and your bills soar." The "mess" which prompted this being Truss.
If the party leaves the person responsible for the mess in office, its absolute death. Or remove her now, blame the mess on Truss, try and fix things and home something turns up to turn the polls.
Another addition to the list of ideas which are not going to help.
The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed..
Mr Halfon is either playing a Machiavellian game or is not that bright himself.
The former, I've met him on quite a few occasions and he's definitely not an idiot.
Even non idiots can have idiotic ideas from time to time.
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Within the EU our economic difficulties would be exactly the same as outside the EU.
We would still have a trade deficit, still have a growth rate that is half what it was from 1950-1999, still be coping with the fallout from Covid and Ukraine.
And, politically, Conservative MPs would still be behaving like Conservative MP's.
We've always obsessed too much about the EU: discussion of our relationship with it manages to stifle any discussion of the UK's real issues.
Agreed. While I’m of the opinion that Brexit is an economic negative, you’re probably right that considerably more damage has been done by the overriding belief that either EU membership or Brexit is the answer to the country’s problems.
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
Yes, that's well argued and you are right that 7.6 is great value.
It can certainly happen but a lot depends on Truss herself. She would have to accept that she is effectively powerless and that Hunt is de facto PM but it could be done. She would need to act a bit like a constitutional Monarch, being present but not interfering. If she and her supporters could accept that, stability of sorts would return and I think we would see some reduction in the Labour lead in the polls.
They would still lose the next GE but could well retain 200 or so seats. Right now, that looks quite a decent outcome.
Thanks PtP. I am not arguing that I expect Truss to survive, only that I think it's very possible that she does so because of a) the inherent difficulties in replacing her and b) the fact that her attempt at a reset/second chance at her Premiership might yet succeed. If it does than we get Starmer as next PM.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
With debt interest at its current levels, and anaemic growth, there probably isn't much of a choice.
Hunt's strategy is presumably to ease off once the economic headwinds/inflation/interest rates moderate.
One alternative is something like a temporary 5p increase to income tax, call it the Truss tax, to be reduced in stages once we've reached certain thresholds in reduction in debt interest payments.
Mr. Royale, as an uncontested successor, it could be Hunt. But there's no chance if it goes to the members.
Start at the other end - if there's a vacancy, neither the Tories nor the country can afford a contest lasting months. We'd be lucky to get 50 cents for a £ by the end of it.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Yes the 1922 committee should add a rule that leadership candidates must have at least 40% of MPs vote for them in a final round to make a members ballot.
Under that rule, there wouldn’t have been anyone on the final ballot! Or would you make the MPs have an additional ballot with just the last two candidates? I suspect Truss would’ve managed 40%.
I think it's a good idea, since neither ended up clearly ahead and everyone is guessing what her backers would prefer. Once the contest started most of them went to Truss but it might be they did that as it was clear she was going to win.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
With debt interest at its current levels, and anaemic growth, there probably isn't much of a choice.
Hunt's strategy is presumably to ease off once the economic headwinds/inflation/interest rates moderate.
Whilst I accept there are few choices, you have to accept that this is the political death of the Tory party. The disaster of the last few weeks will take the blame for why they are now having to bring back austerity, not Covid, not the legacy of the last decade.
"Things are a mess, we have to take tough decisions, I'm cutting services you need as your pay gets squeezed and your bills soar." The "mess" which prompted this being Truss.
If the party leaves the person responsible for the mess in office, its absolute death. Or remove her now, blame the mess on Truss, try and fix things and home something turns up to turn the polls.
I don't think you really have the best interests of the tory party in mind when giving them this advice. There's no saying that the mess of truss staying exceeds the mess of ditching a PM after 6 weeks plus the mess entailed by selecting a replacement - or indeed either of those things individually.
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
Yes, that's well argued and you are right that 7.6 is great value.
It can certainly happen but a lot depends on Truss herself. She would have to accept that she is effectively powerless and that Hunt is de facto PM but it could be done. She would need to act a bit like a constitutional Monarch, being present but not interfering. If she and her supporters could accept that, stability of sorts would return and I think we would see some reduction in the Labour lead in the polls.
They would still lose the next GE but could well retain 200 or so seats. Right now, that looks quite a decent outcome.
I expect some recovery during a GE campaign (even Major got 30% in 1997) because Labour's platform and team will come into focus in a way they're currently not.
It's almost inevitable. The leads we are seeing at the moment are unsustainable. If the Blue Team can get it down to 10% or so - by no means impossible in the kind of scenario outlined above - you get about 200/220 Tory seats and a small but workable Labour majority.
Anyway you have better and happier things to think about, no? You're the one with the new baby, yes?
A spokesman from BMW is quoted in the Times this morning saying it will be brought back to the UK when a purpose-built electric-only production line is ready.
Could be just words, of course, but BMW claim the move is not permanent.
Meanwhile, MINI cabriolet production is being moved from the Netherlands to Cowley.
Yeah... when BMW binned off Solihull and Longbridge they promised 100% of Mini production would always be at Cowley.
I reckon they'll sell Cowley to Great Wall. The IC engine plant at Hams Hall is doomed no matter who owns it.
I was surprised at the claim that BMW don’t have an electric platform small enough for the mini, so have to use Great Wall’s. Presumably they would want to share a future mini electic platform with the 1 series?
BMW 1 series length 4319mm Mini 3 door 3865mm
In a small car 450mm or 18 inches is a significant difference so the small mini is a very unique project if you want a standard base to work from (and extend to longer cars)
The reality is that the BMW 1 series isn’t a VW Up size it’s a Golf
And of course it’s not permanent as in 2030 or so all European cars will be electric only at which point if Oxford is going to be used it will be building electric cars
Really weird timing by BMW. Who on earth thinks it a good idea to invest substantially in Chinese production now, with the US becoming ever more hostile and increasingly pulling out? We are heading towards trading wars and large scale trading blocs. The idea that things are going to move easily from China to western markets over the next 10-20 years borders on naive.
This investment is coming nearly 20 years too late but it is still very disappointing it was not made here.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Let’s just clarify how hypothetical your post is.
Hunt is not the leader of the Conservative Party. OK, there’s a reasonable chance he will be soon. Let’s call that a 25% chance.
Farage is not the leader of any party. He has come back before, of course, but I don’t think we can call this more than a 33% chance.
Next Farage needs to get to 25% in the vote vs Hunt on 10%. Farage is offering the same as Truss, who is struggling to get 25% with all the advantages of incumbency and an established political party. This has a 5% chance at best.
So, at best, there’s a 1 in 240 chance that we’re even in this scenario. So… Why are we even talking about this nonsense?
Comments
It's also BREXIT -> POLITICAL INSTABILITY -> UNCERTAINTY -> CRISIS
and BREXIT -> REDUCED STANDING IN THE WORLD
BREXIT -> MORE POLITICS OF FANTASY AND LIES
BREXIT -> WE DONT NEED THE REST OF THE WORLD, and
BREXIT -> PM BORIS -> POLITICAL SCANDAL
I know these are once-in-a-blue-moon scenarios but the last thing you want is procedural ambiguity at a point where there's inevitably going to be considerable instability anyway...
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
(I note Kwarteng's letter to Truss has his name below his signature.)
Wales - wye valley and vale of Glamorgan, as well as the English borderlands. Not in volume but in numbers. Some good stuff being made including at the trendier / natural wine end.
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
Truss is an unlikeable crank. Hunt is pretty dull, but he is at least fairly serious, which is what is needed right now.
No, our fundamental issue is that we have an ageing population and a government too scared of its core voters to make them pay for the cost of that ageing. In or our of the EU that doesn't change.
"The influential Tory MP, Robert Halfon, said that the prime minister needs to hold a ‘fireside chat’ with the British people, who he said are frightened and dismayed,"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/oct/16/liz-truss-tax-conservatives-tories-jeremy-hunt-kwasi-kwarteng-chancellor-latest-updates (8:41 BST)
Edit: I see @Nigelb beat me too it.
Each of those predictions was flatly disputed by those who voted against this historic error, but we were told we simply didn’t believe fervently enough, or that we were talking Britain down.
All the contenders now busying themselves for a run at the top job are true believers: people who defended breaches of the rule of law and other acts of Brexit-inspired vandalism. In many ways this reveals the truth that Brexit itself, however tarnished, is now the sacred shibboleth of the party — not economic competence, not Thatcherism, not even Burkean traditionalism. Everything is expendable in defence of the central dogma.
That is why we need not a change of leader but of government. This is not merely in the interests of the nation but of the Tory party itself. Festinger found the only reliable way for people to break free from the bonds of a cult was to take a break; preferably to go on a long holiday.
Imagine Brexit and a proportional voting system. Different leaders and almost certainly a closer relationship involving customs Union at the least, as well as no Boris.
You can get Hunt at the same odds as Starmer.
Brexit has seen the balance of payments gap close quite substantially with the EU. It's been replaced with a bigger balance of payments deficit with the rest of the world following high oil and commodity prices.
https://twitter.com/brianneDMR/status/1581419960043085824?t=GsXx4cGr3KwHi5FcqGUbUA&s=19
That.... That's unexpected.
Did not have "Dems within 3 in Iowa from The Gold Standard" on my 2022 bongo card @Pulpstar
I can still remember when he was tipping Farage as next PM, during the May years.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
You really are not very good at politics are you
With all due respect, that seems unlikely.
Let's assume (for the purpose of argument) that the Labour Party get 42% and the LDs 14%, and that their votes are somewhat efficient.
That leaves (say) 34% for the Conservatives plus Reform.
Unless the split was extremely (i.e. 90:10) in Reform's favour, it wouldn't end up the offical opposition. More likely, it would just result in more LD and Lab seats.
On that basis I confidently predict Truss will still be PM and be getting regular poll leads by the end of 2022.
It can certainly happen but a lot depends on Truss herself. She would have to accept that she is effectively powerless and that Hunt is de facto PM but it could be done. She would need to act a bit like a constitutional Monarch, being present but not interfering. If she and her supporters could accept that, stability of sorts would return and I think we would see some reduction in the Labour lead in the polls.
They would still lose the next GE but could well retain 200 or so seats. Right now, that looks quite a decent outcome.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Hunt is not the leader of the Conservative Party. OK, there’s a reasonable chance he will be soon. Let’s call that a 25% chance.
Farage is not the leader of any party. He has come back before, of course, but I don’t think we can call this more than a 33% chance.
Next Farage needs to get to 25% in the vote vs Hunt on 10%. Farage is offering the same as Truss, who is struggling to get 25% with all the advantages of incumbency and an established political party. This has a 5% chance at best.
So, at best, there’s a 1 in 240 chance that we’re even in this scenario. So… Why are we even talking about this nonsense?
So that isn't sorting it out then is it.
https://news.sky.com/story/home-secretary-unveils-major-crackdown-to-stop-climate-protesters-holding-the-public-to-ransom-12721772
All strikes me as a sledgehammer to crack a nut, or in this case multiple nutters. There are already laws in place. The Police just need to use them instead of acting as enablers.
Doesn't work. I am afraid there is something very faintly comic about Welsh wine, it's not something to make a positive point of. Tintern Parva are sensible to sound English and Latin.
1. A significant number have died
2. Ideologues who had been howling at the moon forever and will always do so
3. Shire Tories looking at the past
4. Red wall working class voters expecting that their prospects improve
Brexit is NOT the electoral issue it was. You seem to be suggesting that red wall Lab to Con voters will now vote REFUK so that services and investment in their area can be cut to the bone.
This is ludicrous.
Its official. Full-on austerity.
(*except in the period between the corn laws and the recombination with the Peelites. A period that saw 30+ years of unbroken Whig government)
Hunt's strategy is presumably to ease off once the economic headwinds/inflation/interest rates moderate.
You are having a good war.
I wonder how great an overlap there is between
a) people who voted for truss
b) members of truss’s government
c) MPs who had zero chance of preferment under any other PM
He's a tax cutter the same way I'm an olympic gymnast. He can talk about it.
What you mean is he will call for tax cuts. And yes, that's usually popular - but as we've seen even Tories can realise it's a bad idea
"Things are a mess, we have to take tough decisions, I'm cutting services you need as your pay gets squeezed and your bills soar." The "mess" which prompted this being Truss.
If the party leaves the person responsible for the mess in office, its absolute death. Or remove her now, blame the mess on Truss, try and fix things and home something turns up to turn the polls.
He’s like an infection that keeps coming back. Political herpes.
While I’m of the opinion that Brexit is an economic negative, you’re probably right that considerably more damage has been done by the overriding belief that either EU membership or Brexit is the answer to the country’s problems.
Anyway you have better and happier things to think about, no? You're the one with the new baby, yes?
Owzitgoing?
It’s unlikely that tax rises sufficient to close the complete gap are possible
Productivity enhancements, while critical, take time
The markets are grumpy
What is your solution?
This investment is coming nearly 20 years too late but it is still very disappointing it was not made here.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.