Hancock on Kuenssberg saying that the PM must stay on. And in doing so is setting out in detail why they are going to remove her in the next few days.
The "we must have stability, she will lead, she's listened, she's changed tack" argument is laughable. Every single day that she stays in office the worst this will get.
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.
Perfectly plausible, although this morning's papers indicate more of a 'cats in the sack' fight going on. If true, it beggars belief but then....
Fingers crossed for Villa today. Is Gerrard the right man for them? Not sure.
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.
Several hundred of my posts summarised in a single sentence.
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.
It's a second order effect.
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
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%.
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.
The best example of the way the EU is merely symbolic for many pro-Europeans is the way they will argue that we should copy the major EU countries because everything is better there while the UK is stuck in the past, but then act as if the biggest domestic threat is to the NHS. Somehow at this point the idea of learning from or European neighbours becomes too painful.
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 won't bore everyone again with my fantastic 2022 predictions from January 1st... suffice to say 'fantastic' is the right descriptor.
Mr Hunt has the look of a mad axeman on some of today's front pages.
From the sounds of it that is not entirely inaccurate.
For the Cons to start to recover they first have to hit the bottom. Is there sense in leaving Truss/Hunt to announce some or most of the pain before stepping in with the coup de grace? Obviously not - but might some Con MPs be thinking that way?
Hancock on Kuenssberg saying that the PM must stay on. And in doing so is setting out in detail why they are going to remove her in the next few days.
The "we must have stability, she will lead, she's listened, she's changed tack" argument is laughable. Every single day that she stays in office the worst this will get.
Yep. If you listen to what the senior politicians are saying they’re damning in their faint praise. Hunt was too. The ground is being prepared for her exit, I guess it’s just when that happens.
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.
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?
Owzitgoing?
Well, thanks. I post in-between feeds and toddler tantrums!
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.
Just Leon's bad luck that this was the only one he saw, then?
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.
Let me flip your initial point around - does leaving Truss in position represent the best interests of the Tory party? Everything she says makes it worse, everything she did and wanted to do has been a disaster.
So her plan was wrong. Her communicating style is wrong. The country have reacted massively badly to both and their opinion of this is getting worse. So how does leaving her in office to keep digging help the Tory party?
Removing her will be an absolute cluster fuck. Politically untenable hence all the calls for a general election. And yet it remains their best case scenario. That is how bad Truss is.
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.
Tory MP Robert Halfon not holding back... He tells @SophyRidgeSky that over last few weeks govt has "looked like libertarian jihadists" & treated country like "laboratory mice" for economic experiments. "This is not where the country is." https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1581552042346131456
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.
It's a second order effect.
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
FFS that's a bit rich! We had 40 years of Eurosceptics banging on about Europe rather than talking about fixing our problems. The net result was that they just added another problem to the list.
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.
Nah. They should just scrap the members ballot completely and have the MPs decide.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
When are government departments not being asked to make efficiency savings? It is business as usual
All the time. Government is extremely inefficient, however, part of the issue is decades of underinvestment in capital in favour of shovelling more money to the NHS and pensioners. I expect this will result in a continuation of that pattern. Other departments will face capital investment cuts (because these don't affect day to day running) and the money will be shovelled towards the NHS and pensioners. In 5 years time we'll continue to wonder why nothing in the country works properly.
Hancock on Kuenssberg saying that the PM must stay on. And in doing so is setting out in detail why they are going to remove her in the next few days.
The "we must have stability, she will lead, she's listened, she's changed tack" argument is laughable. Every single day that she stays in office the worst this will get.
What parts of the government policy (in so far as this can be gleaned) is not Sunak's platform?
I think we are still getting the changes in NI. Other than that, I am a bit stuck.
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%.
Additional ballot, I don't think she would have.
She would’ve needed 30 of Penny’s supporters. 25 of Mordaunt’s public supporters subsequently backed Truss versus 14 who went for Sunak. That suggests to me that Truss would’ve gotten at least a third of Mordaunt’s MP vote.
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.
Let me flip your initial point around - does leaving Truss in position represent the best interests of the Tory party? Everything she says makes it worse, everything she did and wanted to do has been a disaster.
So her plan was wrong. Her communicating style is wrong. The country have reacted massively badly to both and their opinion of this is getting worse. So how does leaving her in office to keep digging help the Tory party?
Removing her will be an absolute cluster fuck. Politically untenable hence all the calls for a general election. And yet it remains their best case scenario. That is how bad Truss is.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
You have a big deficit that you need a plan to close
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?
I was making a political point. If there was a General Election tomorrow and Labour win a landslide the mess will still remain and the maths the same. What would change would be a sense of fairness and a sense of competence (in that even if Labour get some things wrong it will be less wrong than Johnson and Truss).
We will have to do this in one form or another. My point is that the Tories have been fingered by the public as being responsible for the mess, and they will continue to be blamed for the consequences for a long time to come.
Remember Liam Byrne's stupid "there's no money left" note? It wasn't factually true, yet it hung round Labour's neck for a decade. The Truss mess will hang round the Tory neck for at least as long, policy options and maths and facts be damned - this is politics.
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.
The best example of the way the EU is merely symbolic for many pro-Europeans is the way they will argue that we should copy the major EU countries because everything is better there while the UK is stuck in the past, but then act as if the biggest domestic threat is to the NHS. Somehow at this point the idea of learning from or European neighbours becomes too painful.
Some of our European neighbours have systems very like the NHS, as in Italy. Others are less similar, but still closer than the abomination of the US.
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?
Owzitgoing?
Well, thanks. I post in-between feeds and toddler tantrums!
We know that, but how's the new baby affected things?
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.
Nah. They should just scrap the members ballot completely and have the MPs decide.
Whilst in Government, especially.
In opposition I don't mind the membership having a say, as if they win at the subsequent election, the new MPs would be part of the membership anyway.
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.
Perfectly plausible, although this morning's papers indicate more of a 'cats in the sack' fight going on. If true, it beggars belief but then....
Fingers crossed for Villa today. Is Gerrard the right man for them? Not sure.
Let's not go there. Unlike the White Queen in "Alice Through The Looking Glass", I generally restrict myself to believing just one imposssible think before breakfast.
How are the contributions to Ukraine being funded? If they are coming out of the defence budget 3% will not be enough. As it is a hell of a lot of kit is going to need replaced.
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.
It also fails to understand that these demonstrators want to be arrested. Part of the plan is to swamp the system with arrests, to take police away from the demonstration and enable the second wave.
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.
It's a second order effect.
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
FFS that's a bit rich! We had 40 years of Eurosceptics banging on about Europe rather than talking about fixing our problems. The net result was that they just added another problem to the list.
It wasn't 40 years. The modern Eurosceptic movement only goes back to Maastricht and the introduction of the single currency. The question of our relationship with the Euro was never truly resolved until Brexit.
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.
The faintly comic thing I think just reflects the stage in public awareness. English wine was more than faintly comic for decades, indeed it still is in some European countries. Now it’s widely respected. Welsh wine remains a novelty so faintly comic, but once volume increases that will pass. As with Essex which is now a highly respected wine region.
Country designations are important at the early stages. We simply don’t have the volume for smaller scale PDOs at the moment. They will come as output gets up to European levels. Just like other new world regions: from Californian to Napa to Los Carneros etc. Hopefully one day there will be a vale of Glamorgan PDO.
That would be massively symbolic, and might help to win public support for the more painful changes required to close the deficit. It would also prevent Labour pledging to make that increase and spend it ten times over during the election campaign.
So I can see the advantages, but I think he'd want something like that, which wasn't that.
Hunt says no return to 2010 style austerity, and I believe him - that cleared out a lot of the dead wood, so this time the 2022 style actions will be much more damaging than that was.
Sri Lanka are 88/8 chasing 164 against Namibia in the first match of the T20 world cup.
There's a player in this match called La Cock....
I'm such a child.
Definitely a name to be in a question on 'The Chase'. Incidentally the only thing I know about baseball is that there's a retired player called Rusty Kuntz. Oh, and this is probably the best sports headline ever: http://m.espn.com/soccer/story?storyId=337901&src=desktop
On Truss/Sunak: one reason why I thought Truss would not be as awful as she has truly ended up being was that Osborne appeared to rate her, and that she had started as an Osborne acolyte. To this can be added that Sunak's campaign was very poor; initially it gave off the idea of being slick and entitled (that every single columnist supporting him semed to have been a guest at his wedding did not help in these perceptions), then, when campaigning before the members, he resorted to rather unserious and desperate 'Tory populist' whistles such as complaining about 'wokeness'. Up against Truss, it took some doing to come across as the sillier one.
How could he have won? He probably ought to have had a big 'retail offer' when it came to the membership stage. However, the mere fact of being Chancellor made it extremely difficult in present circumstances, linking him to every unpopular decision of the government in which he served - while a Foreign Secretary can freelance and be somewhat removed from domestic policy. Polling even among the general public did not at the time show decisive confidence in Sunak - and I think that really would have made a difference. Sunak's mistake was perhaps not to do what Osborne did in 2016 - stand aside. The members were left with a rather poor choice.
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.
Climate change is real.
Indeed. They might even get round to reopening some of those Roman vineyards from the Welsh borders. Actually to be fair, the vineyard at the Roman city of Wroxeter in Shropshire has been open for decades.
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.
It's a second order effect.
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
FFS that's a bit rich! We had 40 years of Eurosceptics banging on about Europe rather than talking about fixing our problems. The net result was that they just added another problem to the list.
It wasn't 40 years. The modern Eurosceptic movement only goes back to Maastricht and the introduction of the single currency. The question of our relationship with the Euro was never truly resolved until Brexit.
40 years ago it was Lexit. That was why leaving the EEC was part of Foots manifesto.
I hope he will raise tax allowances from £12,750 and £50,270 in lieu of the 1p off standard rate tax
However, he has indicated he will raise taxes and is seeking fairness for the less well off so by far the best solution is to revisit the energy policy and stop it going to the better off
Indeed I think @MoonRabbit has been at the front of this argument
Also expect some form of windfall tax
The consequences of the 31st October statement will, whatever it contains, make Truss's position 100% untenable and she should recognise this and resign before she is made to
A lot of nonsense being talked about Hunt being defacto PM whilst Truss is in a straightjacket.
Take corporation tax, Truss wanted 19p, Hunt 15p and we end up with 25p.
The reality is they are both in the same straightjacket, constrained by the market and very divided Tory MPs, the only difference is Hunt is more aware and accepting of the constraints than Truss.
Yes , but they could a) change the rules or b) force her to quit. I think B is more likely. I don't think she will be able to handle the pressure - no one could. We are rapidly approaching the point where - whenever she emerges in public - she is just met with howls of scorn, laughter and derision.
Edit - there are lots of stories that are simply devastating for her. Like the one from Kwarteng yesterday that she forced him in to the 45p tax cut etc. And then she sacked him for the consequences of the policy. Without giving any explanation why. The disasters are happening faster than we are able to process or assess them.
I think she's more resilient than you think. In an abstract sort of way she notes the noise and compromises as necessary, but doesn't really take it personally.
One factor is the "Things can only get better" syndrome from a disastrous place. I'm surprised we've not already seen any polls since Hunt became Chancellor, but when we do I bet they'll show a narrowing of the gap, with Labour's lead down from 25ish to the high teens. Wavering Tory MPs seem likely to feel that process should be given a bit more time to run.
The crucial moment is the 31st, when Truss and Hunt unveil the splendid new strategy. If it's welcomed by the markets and only attacked by Labour and the unions, the Tories will run with it for a while, and then we'll be into Christmas and she'll be safe till the May elections at least.
From the Labour viewpoint, I'm not sure what I'd prefer, really. A new leader now to take all the blame for the issues to come? Truss hanging on grimly? Dunno. But betting against change is a good strategy more often than not.
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.
It also fails to understand that these demonstrators want to be arrested. Part of the plan is to swamp the system with arrests, to take police away from the demonstration and enable the second wave.
They certainly want to be arrested but I've always put it down to narcissism, so the remedy is ignore as far as possible whilst quietly locking them up.
A lot of nonsense being talked about Hunt being defacto PM whilst Truss is in a straightjacket.
Take corporation tax, Truss wanted 19p, Hunt 15p and we end up with 25p.
The reality is they are both in the same straightjacket, constrained by the market and very divided Tory MPs, the only difference is Hunt is more aware and accepting of the constraints than Truss.
He's not in charge. He has been given a somewhat free range on the economy in order to restore market confidence, and that's powerful, but it is not being de facto PM.
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?
Mr Hunt has the look of a mad axeman on some of today's front pages.
From the sounds of it that is not entirely inaccurate.
For the Cons to start to recover they first have to hit the bottom. Is there sense in leaving Truss/Hunt to announce some or most of the pain before stepping in with the coup de grace? Obviously not - but might some Con MPs be thinking that way?
Don't waste a bad leader?
Possibly some are.
That's the dream scenario for the Tories - get Truss to whack up taxes and end the triple lock, etc. - then a new leader can come in and they can try the "we're a new government", 'blame everything on the last lot' trick 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.
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.
It's a second order effect.
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
FFS that's a bit rich! We had 40 years of Eurosceptics banging on about Europe rather than talking about fixing our problems. The net result was that they just added another problem to the list.
It wasn't 40 years. The modern Eurosceptic movement only goes back to Maastricht and the introduction of the single currency. The question of our relationship with the Euro was never truly resolved until Brexit.
40 years ago it was Lexit. That was why leaving the EEC was part of Foots manifesto.
That is true, but for them it was more of an incidental issue rather than an existential question that they would "bang on about". At the time it was their opponents like Thatcher who used it as a stick to beat them with by playing up the risks.
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.
It also fails to understand that these demonstrators want to be arrested. Part of the plan is to swamp the system with arrests, to take police away from the demonstration and enable the second wave.
The country is so run down demonstrators can't even swamp courts effectively any more as there is a 4 year wait for trial.......
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.
It's a second order effect.
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
FFS that's a bit rich! We had 40 years of Eurosceptics banging on about Europe rather than talking about fixing our problems. The net result was that they just added another problem to the list.
So why repeat the experience with decades of arguing over joining the EU, instead of addressing the larger problems we face?
Due to hysteresis, joining the EU isn't going to fix any of the damage that leaving it caused.
And once we'd joined the EU what would happen then? We'd have decades of argument from people wanting us to leave again!
I hate that we left, but we just need to give it a rest for a bit, concentrate on more important things and see where we (and the EU) are in a generation or so. My ideal scenario then it's that the UK is in better shape and we could join talks about Union with the EU from a position of confidence, rather than as a supplicant. We might have a chance of arguing for the EU to make changes to win our membership in that case.
That would be massively symbolic, and might help to win public support for the more painful changes required to close the deficit. It would also prevent Labour pledging to make that increase and spend it ten times over during the election campaign.
So I can see the advantages, but I think he'd want something like that, which wasn't that.
Probably could get away with something like that by ending the personal allowance taper, and reintroducing the 45% rate at a lower threshold, perhaps even £100k. It would make for a more rational structure, but the headline figure is what would be noticed.
I hope he will raise tax allowances from £12,750 and £50,270 in lieu of the 1p off standard rate tax
However, he has indicated he will raise taxes and is seeking fairness for the less well off so by far the best solution is to revisit the energy policy and stop it going to the better off
Indeed I think @MoonRabbit has been at the front of this argument
Also expect some form of windfall tax
The consequences of the 31st October statement will, whatever it contains, make Truss's position 100% untenable and she should recognise this and resign before she is made to
He has 2 years and might already be in the mindset that they are going to lose no matter what. He could be more radical (by which I mean shifting the tax burden more without spooking the markets) and do some of the stuff we have talked about on here for a long time - ditch the triple lock, extend NI into unearned income and those continuing to work past retirement age.
I am not saying he will. He probably still has some sort of vain hope the Tories might pull this back. But if it was me I would like to think I would be a realist and also realise this could be a golden opportunity to do some real good.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
When are government departments not being asked to make efficiency savings? It is business as usual
All the time. Government is extremely inefficient, however, part of the issue is decades of underinvestment in capital in favour of shovelling more money to the NHS and pensioners. I expect this will result in a continuation of that pattern. Other departments will face capital investment cuts (because these don't affect day to day running) and the money will be shovelled towards the NHS and pensioners. In 5 years time we'll continue to wonder why nothing in the country works properly.
“Efficiency savings” are nothing of the sort in this context, as you point out. Unless they mean reducing the real terms wages of nurses and teachers etc - which we’ve been doing for several years already.
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.
The best example of the way the EU is merely symbolic for many pro-Europeans is the way they will argue that we should copy the major EU countries because everything is better there while the UK is stuck in the past, but then act as if the biggest domestic threat is to the NHS. Somehow at this point the idea of learning from or European neighbours becomes too painful.
There are a range of political views within the pro-European cause as there were fir Brexit.
The “Brexit is a ruse to destroy the NHS, despoil the environment and enable tax avoidance” is from the lefty / monbiot remain flank.
“Brexit is economic self harm imposed by retired golf club bores out of touch with the real world of business” is the centrist dad remain battalion.
Finally, “Brexit shows Britain is a nation of awful racists who by the way practised murder and eugenics with their lax lockdown policies” is the FBPE / blue heart paramilitary wing.
I am in the centrist dad battalion most of whom had accepted things in 2019 and got on with life but find the occasional “told you so” irresistible.
A lot of nonsense being talked about Hunt being defacto PM whilst Truss is in a straightjacket.
Take corporation tax, Truss wanted 19p, Hunt 15p and we end up with 25p.
The reality is they are both in the same straightjacket, constrained by the market and very divided Tory MPs, the only difference is Hunt is more aware and accepting of the constraints than Truss.
He's not in charge. He has been given a somewhat free range on the economy in order to restore market confidence, and that's powerful, but it is not being de facto PM.
It is not free range. He believes in cutting corporation tax, just like Truss. The only acceptable choice to the markets was to keep it at 25p (raising it further would not have flown politically either). Implementing the only possible choice is not being in charge or having somewhat free range. He is also in office not power and a mere cypher for markets and Tory MPs.
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.
It’s fascinating how, for so many people, the travails of Truss must be strictly compartmentalised and separated from recent history, instead of being acknowledged as simply the latest symptom of the long, slow decline of the Conservatives into a small-minded, petty nationalist cult.
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
I am not sure you have this right HY.
Left leaning Centrists like me are not frightened by the hugely impressive Hunt, some would even be prepared to vote for him against an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer. Hunt is economically and to a degree socially incompatible with us, but not full on scary, these are the voters you need.
Farage, Braverman and Badenoch on the other hand frighten the bejeezuz out of us, and they appeal to a tiny proportion of the population. The fact that this tiny percentage are already Conservative Party members makes your argument even weaker. Going full on Trump GOP is not a winning strategy.
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.
It also fails to understand that these demonstrators want to be arrested. Part of the plan is to swamp the system with arrests, to take police away from the demonstration and enable the second wave.
The country is so run down demonstrators can't even swamp courts effectively any more as there is a 4 year wait for trial.......
The point is to swamp the police system, the courts are secondary, and do seem to be unwilling to convict in many cases, notably the Bristol statue iconoclasts.
I note the two who threw the can of soup have pleaded not guilty. The point is to force a jury trial for more publicity.
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.
Let me flip your initial point around - does leaving Truss in position represent the best interests of the Tory party? Everything she says makes it worse, everything she did and wanted to do has been a disaster.
So her plan was wrong. Her communicating style is wrong. The country have reacted massively badly to both and their opinion of this is getting worse. So how does leaving her in office to keep digging help the Tory party?
Removing her will be an absolute cluster fuck. Politically untenable hence all the calls for a general election. And yet it remains their best case scenario. That is how bad Truss is.
I hope he will raise tax allowances from £12,750 and £50,270 in lieu of the 1p off standard rate tax
However, he has indicated he will raise taxes and is seeking fairness for the less well off so by far the best solution is to revisit the energy policy and stop it going to the better off
Indeed I think @MoonRabbit has been at the front of this argument
Also expect some form of windfall tax
The consequences of the 31st October statement will, whatever it contains, make Truss's position 100% untenable and she should recognise this and resign before she is made to
It is possible that Hunt will extend NI to post state pension age earnings (not pensions). 50% additional rate is unlikely as is increase to thresholds. Delay of 19% income tax rate very likely. Energy scheme time period could be cut back to March 2024 and wouldn't have much impact on individuals as it simply takes out Spring/Summer 2024 when it is warmer and lighter.
They interviewed a man in Kwasi's constituency who thought Kwasi had been badly treated. He first voted for Eden in 1955 so he must be well in his eighties. A councillor and party member, he's always voted Tory, will vote Tory if Truss is still leader or whoever is leader. So, at the moment, he's one who can decide who the PM should be.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
When are government departments not being asked to make efficiency savings? It is business as usual
All the time. Government is extremely inefficient, however, part of the issue is decades of underinvestment in capital in favour of shovelling more money to the NHS and pensioners. I expect this will result in a continuation of that pattern. Other departments will face capital investment cuts (because these don't affect day to day running) and the money will be shovelled towards the NHS and pensioners. In 5 years time we'll continue to wonder why nothing in the country works properly.
“Efficiency savings” are nothing of the sort in this context, as you point out. Unless they mean reducing the real terms wages of nurses and teachers etc - which we’ve been doing for several years already.
The biggest efficiency savings that can be made on government spending over the next 2 years, by far, come from energy efficiency. Both in public sector buildings and also private and business use where the government are subbing the rates.
Hopefully the advertising campaign to encourage this makes a very swift return.
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.
Fake like all the other Brexit sunny uplands crap. Why can teh brexiteer losers not just accept they made a complete arse of it and were totally and completely hoodwinked or just plain thick.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
When are government departments not being asked to make efficiency savings? It is business as usual
All the time. Government is extremely inefficient, however, part of the issue is decades of underinvestment in capital in favour of shovelling more money to the NHS and pensioners. I expect this will result in a continuation of that pattern. Other departments will face capital investment cuts (because these don't affect day to day running) and the money will be shovelled towards the NHS and pensioners. In 5 years time we'll continue to wonder why nothing in the country works properly.
In my experience efficiency savings in the public sector, when it is already on its knees, don't normally work. They tend to plunge the organisations in to chaos.
To give you a personal example, I got employed by a public sector body at the height of 'austerity'. They then went through a process of efficiency savings. I was asked to reapply for my job and accept new terms and conditions which, amongst other things, would impose significant new commuting costs. The job was paying £32k. When this came on the scene I applied for a different job with a different public sector organisation and got it, increasing my pay to £38k, rising to £50k after one year. Then the first organisation asked me to come back on an interim basis to do the same job I was doing before, because the whole thing was in chaos and all the staff had left, and they were offering me £75k to do it. I declined. This is all completely normal in the public sector now. It has been held together by smart and highly skilled people who sacrifice their lives to dysfunctional organisations, but they are walking away.
As a demonstration of how and why Whitehall is pretty much useless in any kind of a crisis it would be hard to beat. And Matt Hancock doesn't exactly come out of it well either.
Edit, apologies, this is actually from last week but it is still interesting.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
When are government departments not being asked to make efficiency savings? It is business as usual
All the time. Government is extremely inefficient, however, part of the issue is decades of underinvestment in capital in favour of shovelling more money to the NHS and pensioners. I expect this will result in a continuation of that pattern. Other departments will face capital investment cuts (because these don't affect day to day running) and the money will be shovelled towards the NHS and pensioners. In 5 years time we'll continue to wonder why nothing in the country works properly.
“Efficiency savings” are nothing of the sort in this context, as you point out. Unless they mean reducing the real terms wages of nurses and teachers etc - which we’ve been doing for several years already.
I note this little chart on one aspect of NHS efficiency:
Staff shortages are a major cause of inefficiency, and we have many. An efficient football team needs 11 players (plus substitutions) on the pitch, and the right skill mix. Fielding 10 saves money but isn't efficient.
My outside view is that there are currently four types of Tories
1. True Blue tribalists that will support anyone and anything who they think can beat Labour (by far the biggest group) 2. Corporate Conservatives, that are rooted in big business and care about sound money. 3. One Nation, who care about social cohesion 4. Ergonauts, who priorities include tax cuts and radical reform.
Cameron combined (2) and (3) and success brought (1) into his tent. May was anchored in (3) and didn’t last long. Boris Johnson was anchored firmly in (1) and drew from the others whenever it suits him, but weakened (3) with Brexit Truss was rooted in (4) , but had (1) along for the ride until last week.
Not sure where they go next. (4), (2) hate each other. (3) is weak. (1) are looking for anyone half competent.
I hope he will raise tax allowances from £12,750 and £50,270 in lieu of the 1p off standard rate tax
However, he has indicated he will raise taxes and is seeking fairness for the less well off so by far the best solution is to revisit the energy policy and stop it going to the better off
Indeed I think @MoonRabbit has been at the front of this argument
Also expect some form of windfall tax
The consequences of the 31st October statement will, whatever it contains, make Truss's position 100% untenable and she should recognise this and resign before she is made to
It is possible that Hunt will extend NI to post state pension age earnings (not pensions). 50% additional rate is unlikely as is increase to thresholds. Delay of 19% income tax rate very likely. Energy scheme time period could be cut back to March 2024 and wouldn't have much impact on individuals as it simply takes out Spring/Summer 2024 when it is warmer and lighter.
No idea why they did the energy scheme for 2 years. We probably will need it for 2 years but there must be something like a 20-30% chance that we don't, and we could re-assess the cost and benefits after this winter before deciding on the best plan for next winter.
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.
It is a crap idea from a clown who has no clue of real life. Only a total moron would suggest such a stupid thing given we all know she can hardly speak her name. Only conclusion can be that he hates her so much he wants to humiliate her even more or he is thick as mince.
There are a range of political views within the pro-European cause as there were fir Brexit.
The “Brexit is a ruse to destroy the NHS, despoil the environment and enable tax avoidance” is from the lefty / monbiot remain flank.
“Brexit is economic self harm imposed by retired golf club bores out of touch with the real world of business” is the centrist dad remain battalion.
Finally, “Brexit shows Britain is a nation of awful racists who by the way practised murder and eugenics with their lax lockdown policies” is the FBPE / blue heart paramilitary wing.
I am in the centrist dad battalion most of whom had accepted things in 2019 and got on with life but find the occasional “told you so” irresistible.
90% of what most Remainers want from the EU, the stuff they like, is deliverable by joining the EFTA. I see little evidence that the EU is heading in a direction the UK would be comfortable with in the long term. If they wanted to settle the Brexit issue for 50 years either join EFTA or mirror it. If Remainers make their goal rejoining the EU they can look forward to 50 years of failing.
Frankly we could probably get 50%+ of what they want with something less than EFTA that a competent government could sneak past the electorate, and then we could concentrate of actually important issues, like energy and defence, rather than listening to moaning about stuff that barely 1% of the population really gives a monkey's about, like Horizon.
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.
Let me flip your initial point around - does leaving Truss in position represent the best interests of the Tory party? Everything she says makes it worse, everything she did and wanted to do has been a disaster.
So her plan was wrong. Her communicating style is wrong. The country have reacted massively badly to both and their opinion of this is getting worse. So how does leaving her in office to keep digging help the Tory party?
Removing her will be an absolute cluster fuck. Politically untenable hence all the calls for a general election. And yet it remains their best case scenario. That is how bad Truss is.
To summarise,
You: the force is unstoppable
Me: the object is immovable
BOTH are true. So what happens now?
We wait. Preferably watching from a safe distance.
I hope he will raise tax allowances from £12,750 and £50,270 in lieu of the 1p off standard rate tax
However, he has indicated he will raise taxes and is seeking fairness for the less well off so by far the best solution is to revisit the energy policy and stop it going to the better off
Indeed I think @MoonRabbit has been at the front of this argument
Also expect some form of windfall tax
The consequences of the 31st October statement will, whatever it contains, make Truss's position 100% untenable and she should recognise this and resign before she is made to
It is possible that Hunt will extend NI to post state pension age earnings (not pensions). 50% additional rate is unlikely as is increase to thresholds. Delay of 19% income tax rate very likely. Energy scheme time period could be cut back to March 2024 and wouldn't have much impact on individuals as it simply takes out Spring/Summer 2024 when it is warmer and lighter.
No idea why they did the energy scheme for 2 years. We probably will need it for 2 years but there must be something like a 20-30% chance that we don't, and we could re-assess the cost and benefits after this winter before deciding on the best plan for next winter.
It will be reassessed in the spring. I would bet against it being in the same form this time next year - whether or not we’ve had an election in the meantime.
As a demonstration of how and why Whitehall is pretty much useless in any kind of a crisis it would be hard to beat. And Matt Hancock doesn't exactly come out of it well either.
Edit, apologies, this is actually from last week but it is still interesting.
Read that article, then re-visit all those claims that this was one of the clown's biggest achievements.
Bits of this have come out before - and it is already clear that the UK's vaccine success was down to some determined and clever people keeping it all as far away from government as possible.
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.
Because many of them are in areas that the public sees. Delays at airports.... a hospitality industry collapsing..... staff shortages in several public sensitive industries .....red tape .....an absence of nice looking and slim European girls in our cities ......being seen as a cultural backwater. Not everything is £ S D.
There are a range of political views within the pro-European cause as there were fir Brexit.
The “Brexit is a ruse to destroy the NHS, despoil the environment and enable tax avoidance” is from the lefty / monbiot remain flank.
“Brexit is economic self harm imposed by retired golf club bores out of touch with the real world of business” is the centrist dad remain battalion.
Finally, “Brexit shows Britain is a nation of awful racists who by the way practised murder and eugenics with their lax lockdown policies” is the FBPE / blue heart paramilitary wing.
I am in the centrist dad battalion most of whom had accepted things in 2019 and got on with life but find the occasional “told you so” irresistible.
90% of what most Remainers want from the EU, the stuff they like, is deliverable by joining the EFTA. I see little evidence that the EU is heading in a direction the UK would be comfortable with in the long term. If they wanted to settle the Brexit issue for 50 years either join EFTA or mirror it. If Remainers make their goal rejoining the EU they can look forward to 50 years of failing.
Frankly we could probably get 50%+ of what they want with something less than EFTA that a competent government could sneak past the electorate, and then we could concentrate of actually important issues, like energy and defence, rather than listening to moaning about stuff that barely 1% of the population really gives a monkey's about, like Horizon.
Something along those lines is probably what a majority of the public could have accepted ever since the Brexit vote. Had it been offered. It’s a massive failure of government that we’re still arguing about it.
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.
It is a crap idea from a clown who has no clue of real life. Only a total moron would suggest such a stupid thing given we all know she can hardly speak her name. Only conclusion can be that he hates her so much he wants to humiliate her even more or he is thick as mince.
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
an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer.
The rest of your post was pretty good but I don't really know how anyone can allow a thought like this to wander through their neocortex let alone release it into the public domain.
Starmer has done a remarkable job in turning Labour from totally unelectable to the Government in waiting. Weak and ineffective you say? You tell that to the Corbynistas who are fuming on twitter or to the opinion pollsters who now have his Labour Party with 30% + leads.
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.
Much depends on whether Truss can move out of the 'rabbit in the headlights' phase. If she continues, it is as PM in name only. But I have a suspicion she is actually temperamentally incapable of performing such a role. How can you, when no-one takes you seriously? Her performance in the press conference was abysmal.
The Tories have a big problem - a leader who is utterly unsuitable for the job she won but no means of removing her sanely and quickly due to the rules of appointment which make a coronation of a suitable replacement impossible
And that’s ignoring the “bedding down” rule that gives a new leader 1 year before complaints can be processed
Yes , but they could a) change the rules or b) force her to quit. I think B is more likely. I don't think she will be able to handle the pressure - no one could. We are rapidly approaching the point where - whenever she emerges in public - she is just met with howls of scorn, laughter and derision.
Edit - there are lots of stories that are simply devastating for her. Like the one from Kwarteng yesterday that she forced him in to the 45p tax cut etc. And then she sacked him for the consequences of the policy. Without giving any explanation why. The disasters are happening faster than we are able to process or assess them.
So you force Truss to quit How do you stop the Tory membership voting for another candidate offering similar policies at the subsequent leadership election.
Because the Tory party has another fractions that a single party uniting candidate doesn’t exist
To replace Truss you need to ensure her replacement is appointed unopposed and it’s that more than anything else which is keeping Truss in place
The Tories are paralysed and stuck with Truss until they figure out a way to bypass the barking mad membership.
John Major's "bastards" have now got too strong a foothold in parliament and the membership is right behind them - they would elect Farage if that was an option.
I can't see a unity candidate emerging - it only takes 20 MPs to dissent and it goes to the members.
Hunt interview - ALL government departments "being asked for efficiency savings".
Its official. Full-on austerity.
When are government departments not being asked to make efficiency savings? It is business as usual
All the time. Government is extremely inefficient, however, part of the issue is decades of underinvestment in capital in favour of shovelling more money to the NHS and pensioners. I expect this will result in a continuation of that pattern. Other departments will face capital investment cuts (because these don't affect day to day running) and the money will be shovelled towards the NHS and pensioners. In 5 years time we'll continue to wonder why nothing in the country works properly.
Yes , but they could a) change the rules or b) force her to quit. I think B is more likely. I don't think she will be able to handle the pressure - no one could. We are rapidly approaching the point where - whenever she emerges in public - she is just met with howls of scorn, laughter and derision.
Edit - there are lots of stories that are simply devastating for her. Like the one from Kwarteng yesterday that she forced him in to the 45p tax cut etc. And then she sacked him for the consequences of the policy. Without giving any explanation why. The disasters are happening faster than we are able to process or assess them.
I think she's more resilient than you think. In an abstract sort of way she notes the noise and compromises as necessary, but doesn't really take it personally.
One factor is the "Things can only get better" syndrome from a disastrous place. I'm surprised we've not already seen any polls since Hunt became Chancellor, but when we do I bet they'll show a narrowing of the gap, with Labour's lead down from 25ish to the high teens. Wavering Tory MPs seem likely to feel that process should be given a bit more time to run.
The crucial moment is the 31st, when Truss and Hunt unveil the splendid new strategy. If it's welcomed by the markets and only attacked by Labour and the unions, the Tories will run with it for a while, and then we'll be into Christmas and she'll be safe till the May elections at least.
From the Labour viewpoint, I'm not sure what I'd prefer, really. A new leader now to take all the blame for the issues to come? Truss hanging on grimly? Dunno. But betting against change is a good strategy more often than not.
I don't think the correct word is 'resilience'. I think it is 'delusion'. She could carry on for a while in a deluded state, robotically answering the wrong questions and being completely unconvincing; but I have a feeling that people just won't accept it given the rapid rise in living costs etc. The scorn and ridicule she is getting at the moment is beyond anything I have ever known. But we will see.
This all does ultimately require the Conservative Party to 'do something' and I am not confident this will happen in the very short term. I wouldn't bet on anything, it is too chaotic.
As NickP alluded to polls in the next 2 weeks will be interesting.
I’d expect the nadir of opinion was probably reached last Friday, after which we either see a levelling off or a slight bounce back as the undecideds (who were always going to come back home) feel able to say Conservative on the survey again.
Time for Labour and the Lib Dems to start a concerted counter attack after watching the Tory party “culminate” and run out of ammunition, before they can dig a new stronger defensive line.
Comments
The "we must have stability, she will lead, she's listened, she's changed tack" argument is laughable. Every single day that she stays in office the worst this will get.
Fingers crossed for Villa today. Is Gerrard the right man for them? Not sure.
Satisfied: 51%
Dissatisfied: 40%
Don't Know: 8%
Liz Truss = -70
Satisfied: 8%
Dissatisfied: 78%
Don't Know: 14%
YG, Scotland
The fact that now it's Europhiles who are banging on about Europe is maddening. When are we going to talk about fixing our problems of lack of investment, skills shortages, the deficits, etc?
On herpes....
I won't bore everyone again with my fantastic 2022 predictions from January 1st... suffice to say 'fantastic' is the right descriptor.
From the sounds of it that is not entirely inaccurate.
For the Cons to start to recover they first have to hit the bottom. Is there sense in leaving Truss/Hunt to announce some or most of the pain before stepping in with the coup de grace? Obviously not - but might some Con MPs be thinking that way?
Speaking of which..
So her plan was wrong. Her communicating style is wrong. The country have reacted massively badly to both and their opinion of this is getting worse. So how does leaving her in office to keep digging help the Tory party?
Removing her will be an absolute cluster fuck. Politically untenable hence all the calls for a general election. And yet it remains their best case scenario. That is how bad Truss is.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1581560270081896449
https://twitter.com/schneider_EF/status/1581563470956224512
He tells @SophyRidgeSky that over last few weeks govt has "looked like libertarian jihadists" & treated country like "laboratory mice" for economic experiments.
"This is not where the country is."
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1581552042346131456
I think we are still getting the changes in NI. Other than that, I am a bit stuck.
You: the force is unstoppable
Me: the object is immovable
We will have to do this in one form or another. My point is that the Tories have been fingered by the public as being responsible for the mess, and they will continue to be blamed for the consequences for a long time to come.
Remember Liam Byrne's stupid "there's no money left" note? It wasn't factually true, yet it hung round Labour's neck for a decade. The Truss mess will hang round the Tory neck for at least as long, policy options and maths and facts be damned - this is politics.
In opposition I don't mind the membership having a say, as if they win at the subsequent election, the new MPs would be part of the membership anyway.
Country designations are important at the early stages. We simply don’t have the volume for smaller scale PDOs at the moment. They will come as output gets up to European levels. Just like other new world regions: from Californian to Napa to Los Carneros etc. Hopefully one day there will be a vale of Glamorgan PDO.
So I can see the advantages, but I think he'd want something like that, which wasn't that.
Incidentally the only thing I know about baseball is that there's a retired player called Rusty Kuntz. Oh, and this is probably the best sports headline ever: http://m.espn.com/soccer/story?storyId=337901&src=desktop
On Truss/Sunak: one reason why I thought Truss would not be as awful as she has truly ended up being was that Osborne appeared to rate her, and that she had started as an Osborne acolyte. To this can be added that Sunak's campaign was very poor; initially it gave off the idea of being slick and entitled (that every single columnist supporting him semed to have been a guest at his wedding did not help in these perceptions), then, when campaigning before the members, he resorted to rather unserious and desperate 'Tory populist' whistles such as complaining about 'wokeness'. Up against Truss, it took some doing to come across as the sillier one.
How could he have won? He probably ought to have had a big 'retail offer' when it came to the membership stage. However, the mere fact of being Chancellor made it extremely difficult in present circumstances, linking him to every unpopular decision of the government in which he served - while a Foreign Secretary can freelance and be somewhat removed from domestic policy. Polling even among the general public did not at the time show decisive confidence in Sunak - and I think that really would have made a difference. Sunak's mistake was perhaps not to do what Osborne did in 2016 - stand aside. The members were left with a rather poor choice.
However, he has indicated he will raise taxes and is seeking fairness for the less well off so by far the best solution is to revisit the energy policy and stop it going to the better off
Indeed I think @MoonRabbit has been at the front of this argument
Also expect some form of windfall tax
The consequences of the 31st October statement will, whatever it contains, make Truss's position 100% untenable and she should recognise this and resign before she is made to
Take corporation tax, Truss wanted 19p, Hunt 15p and we end up with 25p.
The reality is they are both in the same straightjacket, constrained by the market and very divided Tory MPs, the only difference is Hunt is more aware and accepting of the constraints than Truss.
One factor is the "Things can only get better" syndrome from a disastrous place. I'm surprised we've not already seen any polls since Hunt became Chancellor, but when we do I bet they'll show a narrowing of the gap, with Labour's lead down from 25ish to the high teens. Wavering Tory MPs seem likely to feel that process should be given a bit more time to run.
The crucial moment is the 31st, when Truss and Hunt unveil the splendid new strategy. If it's welcomed by the markets and only attacked by Labour and the unions, the Tories will run with it for a while, and then we'll be into Christmas and she'll be safe till the May elections at least.
From the Labour viewpoint, I'm not sure what I'd prefer, really. A new leader now to take all the blame for the issues to come? Truss hanging on grimly? Dunno. But betting against change is a good strategy more often than not.
Possibly some are.
That's the dream scenario for the Tories - get Truss to whack up taxes and end the triple lock, etc. - then a new leader can come in and they can try the "we're a new government", 'blame everything on the last lot' trick again
Due to hysteresis, joining the EU isn't going to fix any of the damage that leaving it caused.
And once we'd joined the EU what would happen then? We'd have decades of argument from people wanting us to leave again!
I hate that we left, but we just need to give it a rest for a bit, concentrate on more important things and see where we (and the EU) are in a generation or so. My ideal scenario then it's that the UK is in better shape and we could join talks about Union with the EU from a position of confidence, rather than as a supplicant. We might have a chance of arguing for the EU to make changes to win our membership in that case.
I am not saying he will. He probably still has some sort of vain hope the Tories might pull this back. But if it was me I would like to think I would be a realist and also realise this could be a golden opportunity to do some real good.
Unless they mean reducing the real terms wages of nurses and teachers etc - which we’ve been doing for several years already.
The “Brexit is a ruse to destroy the NHS, despoil the environment and enable tax avoidance” is from the lefty / monbiot remain flank.
“Brexit is economic self harm imposed by retired golf club bores out of touch with the real world of business” is the centrist dad remain battalion.
Finally, “Brexit shows Britain is a nation of awful racists who by the way practised murder and eugenics with their lax lockdown policies” is the FBPE / blue heart paramilitary wing.
I am in the centrist dad battalion most of whom had accepted things in 2019 and got on with life but find the occasional “told you so” irresistible.
Left leaning Centrists like me are not frightened by the hugely impressive Hunt, some would even be prepared to vote for him against an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer. Hunt is economically and to a degree socially incompatible with us, but not full on scary, these are the voters you need.
Farage, Braverman and Badenoch on the other hand frighten the bejeezuz out of us, and they appeal to a tiny proportion of the population. The fact that this tiny percentage are already Conservative Party members makes your argument even weaker. Going full on Trump GOP is not a winning strategy.
I note the two who threw the can of soup have pleaded not guilty. The point is to force a jury trial for more publicity.
So, at the moment, he's one who can decide who the PM should be.
Hopefully the advertising campaign to encourage this makes a very swift return.
To give you a personal example, I got employed by a public sector body at the height of 'austerity'. They then went through a process of efficiency savings. I was asked to reapply for my job and accept new terms and conditions which, amongst other things, would impose significant new commuting costs. The job was paying £32k. When this came on the scene I applied for a different job with a different public sector organisation and got it, increasing my pay to £38k, rising to £50k after one year. Then the first organisation asked me to come back on an interim basis to do the same job I was doing before, because the whole thing was in chaos and all the staff had left, and they were offering me £75k to do it. I declined. This is all completely normal in the public sector now. It has been held together by smart and highly skilled people who sacrifice their lives to dysfunctional organisations, but they are walking away.
As a demonstration of how and why Whitehall is pretty much useless in any kind of a crisis it would be hard to beat. And Matt Hancock doesn't exactly come out of it well either.
Edit, apologies, this is actually from last week but it is still interesting.
Staff shortages are a major cause of inefficiency, and we have many. An efficient football team needs 11 players (plus substitutions) on the pitch, and the right skill mix. Fielding 10 saves money but isn't efficient.
1. True Blue tribalists that will support anyone and anything who they think can beat Labour (by far the biggest group)
2. Corporate Conservatives, that are rooted in big business and care about sound money.
3. One Nation, who care about social cohesion
4. Ergonauts, who priorities include tax cuts and radical reform.
Cameron combined (2) and (3) and success brought (1) into his tent.
May was anchored in (3) and didn’t last long.
Boris Johnson was anchored firmly in (1) and drew from the others whenever it suits him, but weakened (3) with Brexit
Truss was rooted in (4) , but had (1) along for the ride until last week.
Not sure where they go next. (4), (2) hate each other. (3) is weak. (1) are looking for anyone half competent.
Frankly we could probably get 50%+ of what they want with something less than EFTA that a competent government could sneak past the electorate, and then we could concentrate of actually important issues, like energy and defence, rather than listening to moaning about stuff that barely 1% of the population really gives a monkey's about, like Horizon.
I would bet against it being in the same form this time next year - whether or not we’ve had an election in the meantime.
Bits of this have come out before - and it is already clear that the UK's vaccine success was down to some determined and clever people keeping it all as far away from government as possible.
It’s a massive failure of government that we’re still arguing about it.
Starmer has done a remarkable job in turning Labour from totally unelectable to the Government in waiting. Weak and ineffective you say? You tell that to the Corbynistas who are fuming on twitter or to the opinion pollsters who now have his Labour Party with 30% + leads.
The 19% corporation tax under Sunak was retained by SME's while the higher rate of 25% applied to all other businesses
Is this still the case or has the lower rate for SME's also been raised to 25% ?
John Major's "bastards" have now got too strong a foothold in parliament and the membership is right behind them - they would elect Farage if that was an option.
I can't see a unity candidate emerging - it only takes 20 MPs to dissent and it goes to the members.
This all does ultimately require the Conservative Party to 'do something' and I am not confident this will happen in the very short term. I wouldn't bet on anything, it is too chaotic.
A mini budget based on Government borrowing c. £85 billion in order to fund, erm, tax cuts for the rich.
Margaret Thatcher would be turning in her grave.
I’d expect the nadir of opinion was probably reached last Friday, after which we either see a levelling off or a slight bounce back as the undecideds (who were always going to come back home) feel able to say Conservative on the survey again.
Time for Labour and the Lib Dems to start a concerted counter attack after watching the Tory party “culminate” and run out of ammunition, before they can dig a new stronger defensive line.