Breaking News on (one of) Boris Johnson's role models -
NTY - Berlusconi, caught on tape gushing over Putin, heightens anxiety about Italy
ROME — Silvio Berlusconi, the former Italian prime minister, campaigned to be the protector of democratic, pro-European values in a new right-wing coalition that is expected to take power in days after winning elections last month.
But even before a government can be sworn in, the 86-year-old billionaire media mogul has proved himself to be less of a stable, moderating force, than the source of renewed anxiety after the leak of surreptitiously recorded remarks revealed that he blamed Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for forcing President Vladimir Putin of Russia to invade Ukraine.
The remarks, complete with talk about a “sweet letter” and vodka from Putin, raise concerns that the new right-wing government, led by Giorgia Meloni, herself a solid supporter of Ukraine, is wobblier than expected and could, if it ever actually comes together with another Putin-admiring partner, potentially lead Italy to undercut Europe’s united front against Russia.
“I reconnected a little bit with President Putin,” Berlusconi could be heard saying on the audio published on the website of La Presse on Tuesday, in which he addresses a meeting of loyal Forza Italia party members, and some apparently not-so-loyal leakers. In the audio, he added that Putin had sent him 20 bottles of vodka “and a very kind letter” for his 86th birthday last month. Berlusconi said he responded by sending bottles of Lambrusco wine and “an equally sweet letter.”
Berlusconi has not disputed the authenticity of the remarks. On Wednesday, a European Commission spokeswoman said it was investigating whether the vodka shipment constituted a violation of European sanctions against Russia.
Blimey if I'd had known that'd move the markets in I'd have bought at 11 - still looks dead in the water to me though.
This entire market is a mugs game to attempt to trade at the moment.
No one has any info, everything is emotional. It is a choppy sea of uncertainty.
I traded off Boris at 5.1 profitably as it seemed to me it would be inevitable he’d come in. But I’m staying out for now - the market is an uniformed mess, as you say.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Would HMK not more or less have to give the official winner a chance to form a government, though?
Not if Truss advises him that the winner can't command a majority, I don't think.
Truss to Home. Just keep her away from the silver.
Agree. She needs to be sent to a rest home ASAP.
TBH I feel rather sorry for her; schemed and planned all these years to get to the job and when she gets it everything turns to ashes. Her fault of course but I still feel sorry for her.
You're far too nice, OKC. I'm not. I think of the many, many families terrified out of their wits about their mortgages. Which reminds me. I'd better send a donation to the local foodbank in good time before the holidays.
Thanks. Both for the comment and for the reminder. Eldest grandson was round here doing his sums the other day; his mortgage needs to be renegotiated in a few months time and his wife is pregnant. He can manage, but there will have to be some cutbacks. Of course their bsocialising is likely to be cut back significantly when the baby arrives anyway, although that in itself will mean further expense!
Fascinating. There are rumours on Twitter that Putin has tried to push the nuclear button and been rebuffed. I wonder if this is of a piece with that. His generals and ministers have no desire for all out war
🙏
If you've watched any of those Russian TV segments you can see the looks of panic when the nuttiest panellists talk about nukes and/or engaging NATO. They know they've f***ed up. They don't want nukes. They want some way out.
Of course, their way out is to get rid of Putin and to then get out of Ukraine.
I am getting that sense. I hope I’m not just wishcasting. It so easy to do
But PB-ers know I have been one of the more bearish and gloomy of commenters on the war, and yet today I feel a tiny shred of optimism that Russia has peered into the doomsday brink and said Nah
Who knows
My guess right this minute at 09.18 in Moab Utah, is that Russia thinks it can demolish Ukrainian morale with bombs and missiles, hold the line in the south and east through the winter, wait for the west to lose interest, then achieve an OK peace - on Russian terms - in 2023
"Putin has tried to push the nuclear button"
As the most likely use of nuke by far would be a battlefield tactical device then push the button needs to be preceded by some kind of mobilisation so the weapons are moved to the theatre of the battle. DoD intel has detected no such movements as far as we know. He can't just press a button for a tactical device via his suitcase or whatever.
It’s called a “figure of speech”. No one literally believes he is sitting there in the Kremlin with a big wooden box containing a large red Bakelite button marked NUKLEAR BOMB!!
The thinking is: he has pressed to escalate the war to a nuclear test/tactic already and he has met too much resistance from his elite generals and oligarch comrades
This might explain why the rumours now are that Russia will blow up a dam. Non nuclear. Non WMD. But still shows that Russia is big and tough and might even be militarily useful: flooding south Ukraine and slowing any Ukrainian advance
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
There was, he had his negotiations, then we had a referendum. We rejected what he'd negotiated.
If there'd been proposed a confirmatory referendum had we voted Leave then Leave would have won even more votes in 2016, which is why it wasn't done that way.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
The problem there is the incentive that would given the EU to agree the worst possible deal.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
Nah, that would have invited even more obstructionism from the losers. The big mistake was not settling the EEA question either before the referendum or on the ballot paper.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
David Cameron = Stanley Baldwin without the mid-career cheering, but with the end-of-the-day brickbats.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Very unlikely. I have known a few Tory MPs. Defection is not something they do. If you think about it, most of them spend a large part of their time socialising with other Tories (as Labour MPs do with Labour folk). Defecting would turn their whole lives upside down. It is why it rarely happens.
I agree that the defection thing is overblown. I think a dozen is about right.
Less than two months ago, the greatest ministerial mass resignation in British history took place, nearly all of them publishing letters declaring Johnson unfit to be PM.
They were right: he is unfit to be PM. They should stand by that opinion.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Would HMK not more or less have to give the official winner a chance to form a government, though?
Not if Truss advises him that the winner can't command a majority, I don't think.
With her grasp of numbers and political counting you may as well just toss a coin as take her view on important matters.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
The problem there is the incentive that would given the EU to agree the worst possible deal.
And an even bigger leave vote leading to a no deal crash out.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
Nah, that would have invited even more obstructionism from the losers. The big mistake was not settling the EEA question either before the referendum or on the ballot paper.
On the subject of Boris, I think he has a higher floor than Truss (or Morduant), and I would be surprised to see the Conservatives poll less than 30% in the General with him in charge.
But I also think he is - to some extent - damaged goods. And his return will coincide with rising energy bills for millions of households.
So: floor of 30% in the GE, ceiling of 40%. Will do better in the North than the South.
In October 2021 the Tories polled as high as 41%.
In the month before Johnson was forced to resign the highest the Tories polled was 35%.
It's striking given how much the polls have moved since then that he lost relatively little support despite the crises he created.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Would HMK not more or less have to give the official winner a chance to form a government, though?
Not if Truss advises him that the winner can't command a majority, I don't think.
Wouldn't that mean that (purely hypothetically) a deranged party leader who had been ousted by his/her own party could force an election even though the party was united behind a successor?
Is PM4PM doomed to come third in declared support? I guess depends if she’s held some back to get momentum over the weekend. And whether The Oaf is going to make it to 100 or not.
I would be so happy if it was a Rishi/Penny showdown with Big Dog in 3rd
On the subject of Boris, I think he has a higher floor than Truss (or Morduant), and I would be surprised to see the Conservatives poll less than 30% in the General with him in charge.
But I also think he is - to some extent - damaged goods. And his return will coincide with rising energy bills for millions of households.
So: floor of 30% in the GE, ceiling of 40%. Will do better in the North than the South.
I suspect both floor and ceiling may be a bit lower than that; 25% and 35% maybe, and it's the Mids he'll probably do best in. But I don't think he's going to save them, as oddly popular as he is. He will struggle to reach out, and the party he leads is now a byword for incompetence and chaos.
Fairly or not, the tories will be blamed by a lot of people who are finding themselves hundreds of pounds a month worse off because of their mortgage payments (let alone energy, food etc.). The memory of the current turmoil may fade, but millions will have monthly reminders of this governments economic ineptitude for years to come.
If the Tories let Boris back in it shows a tolerance for corruption and a disregard for the rule of law.
It’s that simple.
If you care about the country’s institutions, you cannot in conscience welcome a Boris return.
Whether you think that is better for Tory or indeed Labour prospects, or not.
There is no chance. It's a classic teaser campaign know to advertisers everywhere. It's designed to get people talking as they wait for the reveal. A Johnson comeback would destroy them as a serious Party for ever and their MPs know this. He's doing it to be talked about and to massage his ego. Even if they were foolish enough to give him enough votes I'm sure he wouldn't accept the job
How is it possible that the Tory MPs can have no confidence in Boris a few months ago and then suddenly re-elect him leader? It is madness.
Not to mention there is a parliamentary enquiry over his behaviour which could force him out yet again. Plus the polling show the public prefer both Sunak and Mordaunt over Boris.
What is wrong with these Boris-ultra lunatics?!
People are in love with him. He is a seducer. Love makes people do strange things.
All the Tories on my family WhatsApp want Boris back. Even the ones that wanted him gone in July (and were quite angry about it)
The non Tories are quiet
Will the British people feel the same way? I honestly don’t know. The Trussterfuck was such an earthquake it is difficult to predict the aftershocks
It's beyond rational explanation. For a certain kind of English Tory, the attachment to Johnson goes way beyond any kind of normal political affiliation. It's love, and love makes people do crazy, self-destructive things. The rest of us can only look on aghast, and hope that one day this nightmare will end.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Very unlikely. I have known a few Tory MPs. Defection is not something they do. If you think about it, most of them spend a large part of their time socialising with other Tories (as Labour MPs do with Labour folk). Defecting would turn their whole lives upside down. It is why it rarely happens.
I agree that the defection thing is overblown. I think a dozen is about right.
Not many to Labour, none to the LDs, but a couple of handfuls could go Indy.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Would HMK not more or less have to give the official winner a chance to form a government, though?
Not if Truss advises him that the winner can't command a majority, I don't think.
Wouldn't that mean that (purely hypothetically) a deranged party leader who had been ousted by his/her own party could force an election even though the party was united behind a successor?
No, because if the party is united behind a successor and has a majority, then the successor can command a majority in the House and the outgoing party leader would have to advise HMK accordingly.
Less than two months ago, the greatest ministerial mass resignation in British history took place, nearly all of them publishing letters declaring Johnson unfit to be PM.
They were right: he is unfit to be PM. They should stand by that opinion.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Very unlikely. I have known a few Tory MPs. Defection is not something they do. If you think about it, most of them spend a large part of their time socialising with other Tories (as Labour MPs do with Labour folk). Defecting would turn their whole lives upside down. It is why it rarely happens.
I agree that the defection thing is overblown. I think a dozen is about right.
Defections aren't likely.
What's almost inevitable, whoever wins, is that the supposed majority will vanish as there's so much rancour and willingness to rebel.
Over 40 MPs willing to keep holding rhe whip, but to march through opposition lobbies on all but confidence matters, no matter who wins on Friday.
On the subject of Boris, I think he has a higher floor than Truss (or Morduant), and I would be surprised to see the Conservatives poll less than 30% in the General with him in charge.
But I also think he is - to some extent - damaged goods. And his return will coincide with rising energy bills for millions of households.
So: floor of 30% in the GE, ceiling of 40%. Will do better in the North than the South.
In October 2021 the Tories polled as high as 41%.
In the month before Johnson was forced to resign the highest the Tories polled was 35%.
It's striking given how much the polls have moved since then that he lost relatively little support despite the crises he created.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
No it was holding a referendum because it wasn't an issue that should be decided that way because people don't know what the outcome would be, and hence we've spent six years struggling to make sense of what it should mean, and will probably spend decades in a constant state of argument over it. If he thought leaving was a good idea and/or popular he should've put it in an election manifesto and explained the consequences, how it should work and so on so people could make an informed choice. If he thought it was a terrible idea (as it seems he did) he shouldn't have promised that and made the argument that we were better off in. Instead, the problem was he took the coward's option of spending most of his time EU-bashing because it was politically convenient and helped with party management, while knowing full well that he thought the benefits outweighed costs, and ran on a referendum promise as a cop out that allowed him to face both ways by flaunting his Euroscepticism while hoping voters would save him from its consequences.
Truss to Home. Just keep her away from the silver.
Don't be ridiculous. She is unemployable except as a backbencher.
Hopefully she'll be given a project of some sort as a consolation prize. What she's been through is unfair.
I can see her serving in a future cabinet. Not right now but in a few months when someone does something particularly stupid and needs replaced sharpish. Personally, I would have no problem with that.
It’s genuinely hard to think of which capacity, though. Perhaps BEIS under Rishi; they are not actually a million miles away (ie they are both wrong) on “supply side reform.”
We do need supply side reform. Truss was right that we need more growth. She just underestimated (by a significant margin) how much room we still have for manoeuvre. Of course, I am talking about real supply side reform, not rebadging every EU regulation for the sake of it.
We desperately need it, but I’m afraid neither Sunak nor Truss have the foggiest idea of what it entails.
Not sure I agree with that. Rishi had ideas about encouraging investment using tax incentives. He could and should have gone further but it was a start. Truss accepted that increased interest rates were necessary because our ultra low rates were discouraging saving and investment and encouraging excess consumption. She was right about that. Both have shown some willingness to contemplate an increase in immigration to boost production, this seems to have been the core of the dispute with Braverman, for example.
It certainly is an important and a neglected area of economic policy.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
There's an interesting irony here. Europe was meant to be the issue that destroyed the Tories. However the immediate political impact (of Brexit) was the opposite. It destroyed Labour and delivered the Tories a new electoral coalition and a landslide GE win. But now as the deeper effects seep through it would appear - as happens quite often in life - that the first answer was correct. It's destroying the Tories.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Very unlikely. I have known a few Tory MPs. Defection is not something they do. If you think about it, most of them spend a large part of their time socialising with other Tories (as Labour MPs do with Labour folk). Defecting would turn their whole lives upside down. It is why it rarely happens.
I agree that the defection thing is overblown. I think a dozen is about right.
Defections aren't likely.
What's almost inevitable, whoever wins, is that the supposed majority will vanish as there's so much rancour and willingness to rebel.
Over 40 MPs willing to keep holding rhe whip, but to march through opposition lobbies on all but confidence matters, no matter who wins on Friday.
Not in the sense of crossing the floor, but resigning whip for independence is possible.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
That wouldn't have altered his fundamental strategic error of thinking that he could use a plebiscite to marginalise the kipper tendency.
Perhaps what he should have done instead is not had a preliminary renegotiation at all but simply held the referendum on the basis of seeking a mandate to negotiate a new relationship with the EU. Then he would have been free to campaign against the status quo and wouldn't have ended up on the wrong side.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Er, he could be doing the job he's fucking paid to do??
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Very unlikely. I have known a few Tory MPs. Defection is not something they do. If you think about it, most of them spend a large part of their time socialising with other Tories (as Labour MPs do with Labour folk). Defecting would turn their whole lives upside down. It is why it rarely happens.
I agree that the defection thing is overblown. I think a dozen is about right.
Defections aren't likely.
What's almost inevitable, whoever wins, is that the supposed majority will vanish as there's so much rancour and willingness to rebel.
Over 40 MPs willing to keep holding rhe whip, but to march through opposition lobbies on all but confidence matters, no matter who wins on Friday.
Not in the sense of crossing the floor, but resigning whip for independence is possible.
I include that in my estimate. Say 6 “independents”, 4 defections to LD, 2 defections to Labour.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Representing his constituents in Parliament at a time of crisis? 🤔
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Would HMK not more or less have to give the official winner a chance to form a government, though?
Not if Truss advises him that the winner can't command a majority, I don't think.
Wouldn't that mean that (purely hypothetically) a deranged party leader who had been ousted by his/her own party could force an election even though the party was united behind a successor?
No, because if the party is united behind a successor and has a majority, then the successor can command a majority in the House and the outgoing party leader would have to advise HMK accordingly.
Did you not read the word "deranged", and grasp the point I was making?
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Hmm. This is what I’m pondering right now.
(Thanks for the header, by the way, Richard, interesting as ever)
Less than two months ago, the greatest ministerial mass resignation in British history took place, nearly all of them publishing letters declaring Johnson unfit to be PM.
They were right: he is unfit to be PM. They should stand by that opinion.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Very unlikely. I have known a few Tory MPs. Defection is not something they do. If you think about it, most of them spend a large part of their time socialising with other Tories (as Labour MPs do with Labour folk). Defecting would turn their whole lives upside down. It is why it rarely happens.
I agree that the defection thing is overblown. I think a dozen is about right.
Defections aren't likely.
What's almost inevitable, whoever wins, is that the supposed majority will vanish as there's so much rancour and willingness to rebel.
Over 40 MPs willing to keep holding rhe whip, but to march through opposition lobbies on all but confidence matters, no matter who wins on Friday.
Not in the sense of crossing the floor, but resigning whip for independence is possible.
I include that in my estimate. Say 6 “independents”, 4 defections to LD, 2 defections to Labour.
Who are the 4 to LD defections? Can't see it myself.
VERY pleased to announce that air quality in Seattle this morning is among best in the world, with AQI = 15 (good).
Similar story for Portland, Vancouver and most of the rest of the Pacific North West. With bad air pushed back to Spokane, WA in the east, and Eugene, OR down south.
PLUS we are forecast to get later today the FIRST significant rainfall since May! Already sprinkling in Seattle, with more to come. Which will help put out raging forest fires, replenish our snow pack up in the Cascades, and possibly prevent a drought next year that would have severe impact on agriculture in Eastern WA, including over 2/3 of US apple crop and other major sources of fruit, vegetables and grain.
Truss to Home. Just keep her away from the silver.
Don't be ridiculous. She is unemployable except as a backbencher.
Hopefully she'll be given a project of some sort as a consolation prize. What she's been through is unfair.
I can see her serving in a future cabinet. Not right now but in a few months when someone does something particularly stupid and needs replaced sharpish. Personally, I would have no problem with that.
It’s genuinely hard to think of which capacity, though. Perhaps BEIS under Rishi; they are not actually a million miles away (ie they are both wrong) on “supply side reform.”
We do need supply side reform. Truss was right that we need more growth. She just underestimated (by a significant margin) how much room we still have for manoeuvre. Of course, I am talking about real supply side reform, not rebadging every EU regulation for the sake of it.
We desperately need it, but I’m afraid neither Sunak nor Truss have the foggiest idea of what it entails.
Not sure I agree with that. Rishi had ideas about encouraging investment using tax incentives. He could and should have gone further but it was a start. Truss accepted that increased interest rates were necessary because our ultra low rates were discouraging saving and investment and encouraging excess consumption. She was right about that. Both have shown some willingness to contemplate an increase in immigration to boost production, this seems to have been the core of the dispute with Braverman, for example.
It certainly is an important and a neglected area of economic policy.
Rishi has very few ideas. He is undoubtedly an attentive student of the Treasury, but imaginative or heterodox he is not, and the Treasury is a castle of quite tired groupthink.
Truss was right about “interest rates” in the abstract (not that this is a supply side reform). She just failed to note that we’re already climbing. Her notions of actual supply side reform amount to “move fast and break things”.
What should happen to underpin Hunt's ongoing attempts to maintain the UK financial system stability is for all 3 candidates (or 2 if Mordant doesn't make it) to have a meeting with Hunt, get the outline or even the detail of what he is planning and state publicly that whoever wins will maintain Hunt's proposals at least until there has been time to assess their effectiveness or otherwise. I know this would be an extraordinary thing to do but these are extraordinary times and for the next few months stability and reassurance to the markets seems to me to be the key.
Any candidate who is not able to make that pledge for the good of the country probably shouldn't be let near No.10
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
I would quite like PM4PM but I just worry she's a bit too... nice the nest of snakes and vipers that is the Tory Party!
I wouldn't read too much into it - but it does sound as though nukes aren't quite as imminent as @Leon keeps assuring us.
FWIW, the reality is that Putin's best hope is to prolong the war as long as he can and hope for Europe getting fatigue and Trump coming back.
And we shouldn't be flying our elint planes quite so close to Russian airspace.
I think that Fiona Hill made a good point, that in any 'peace' deal, the ability of Ukraine to defend itself with Western support should not be compromised. Because Russia won't stop. It may perversely be in our interest to prolong the war, whilst Russia is struggling - if a lot of mobilised soldiers die because of the incompetence of the Russian Army, then it may have some effect on Russians and their willingness to do these types of wars in the future.
I don't think it's in our interest to prolong the war; it's in our interest for it to finish as soon as possible with a defeat for the invasion. And I don't think there will be a deal until at least one of Russia and Ukraine realises they can't win. As it's existential for Ukraine, that side is unlikely to be them.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Representing his constituents in Parliament at a time of crisis? 🤔
Like BJ gives a blind fiddler's final farewell feck for all three.
The Lib Dems must be so disappointed that their national poll ratings have benefitted so little from this.
Still, even taken at face value, these figures would amount to huge swings in their target seats.
The problem is that on these swings, Lib Dems start to lose to Labour in LibDem/Labour marginals. There aren't many of them but Daisy Cooper loses her St Albans seat for instance.
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
No it was holding a referendum because it wasn't an issue that should be decided that way because people don't know what the outcome would be, and hence we've spent six years struggling to make sense of what it should mean, and will probably spend decades in a constant state of argument over it. If he thought leaving was a good idea and/or popular he should've put it in an election manifesto and explained the consequences, how it should work and so on so people could make an informed choice. If he thought it was a terrible idea (as it seems he did) he shouldn't have promised that and made the argument that we were better off in. Instead, the problem was he took the coward's option of spending most of his time EU-bashing because it was politically convenient and helped with party management, while knowing full well that he thought the benefits outweighed costs, and ran on a referendum promise as a cop out that allowed him to face both ways by flaunting his Euroscepticism while hoping voters would save him from its consequences.
No, that doesn't work - the membership question was always going to have to be resolved by referendum, mixing it in with a general election wouldn't have flown.
The problems come entirely from him so strongly taking one side and then losing. If he had either put EEA on the ballot paper as a subsidiary question (Q2: If Q1 = Leave, then EEA = Yes/No?) or allowed the government to put forward a position on what Leave meant, then the vast majority of problems that arose wouldn't have done.
But he didn't want to settle the issue fairly, he just wanted to win.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Er, he could be doing the job he's fucking paid to do??
I wouldn't read too much into it - but it does sound as though nukes aren't quite as imminent as @Leon keeps assuring us.
FWIW, the reality is that Putin's best hope is to prolong the war as long as he can and hope for Europe getting fatigue and Trump coming back.
And we shouldn't be flying our elint planes quite so close to Russian airspace.
I think that Fiona Hill made a good point, that in any 'peace' deal, the ability of Ukraine to defend itself with Western support should not be compromised. Because Russia won't stop. It may perversely be in our interest to prolong the war, whilst Russia is struggling - if a lot of mobilised soldiers die because of the incompetence of the Russian Army, then it may have some effect on Russians and their willingness to do these types of wars in the future.
I don't think it's in our interest to prolong the war; it's in our interest for it to finish as soon as possible with a defeat for the invasion. And I don't think there will be a deal until at least one of Russia and Ukraine realises they can't win. As it's existential for Ukraine, that side is unlikely to be them.
The war is not finishing anytime soon. See the thread posted earlier; Putin thinks if he plays it long enough he is in with a chance.
And, given a possible return from Trump, he is not necessarily wrong.
Truss to Home. Just keep her away from the silver.
Don't be ridiculous. She is unemployable except as a backbencher.
Hopefully she'll be given a project of some sort as a consolation prize. What she's been through is unfair.
I can see her serving in a future cabinet. Not right now but in a few months when someone does something particularly stupid and needs replaced sharpish. Personally, I would have no problem with that.
It’s genuinely hard to think of which capacity, though. Perhaps BEIS under Rishi; they are not actually a million miles away (ie they are both wrong) on “supply side reform.”
We do need supply side reform. Truss was right that we need more growth. She just underestimated (by a significant margin) how much room we still have for manoeuvre. Of course, I am talking about real supply side reform, not rebadging every EU regulation for the sake of it.
We desperately need it, but I’m afraid neither Sunak nor Truss have the foggiest idea of what it entails.
Not sure I agree with that. Rishi had ideas about encouraging investment using tax incentives. He could and should have gone further but it was a start. Truss accepted that increased interest rates were necessary because our ultra low rates were discouraging saving and investment and encouraging excess consumption. She was right about that. Both have shown some willingness to contemplate an increase in immigration to boost production, this seems to have been the core of the dispute with Braverman, for example.
It certainly is an important and a neglected area of economic policy.
Rishi has very few ideas. He is undoubtedly an attentive student of the Treasury, but imaginative or heterodox he is not, and the Treasury is a castle of quite tired groupthink.
Truss was right about “interest rates” in the abstract (not that this is a supply side reform). She just failed to note that we’re already climbing. Her notions of actual supply side reform amount to “move fast and break things”.
But Rishi will not be in the Treasury, he will be in number 10. It will be up to Hunt to take this forward and he may well do so. He was a very successful businessman before politics. And supply side economics is really focused on increasing investment and output. Interest rates are an important tool in encouraging that.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Er, he could be doing the job he's fucking paid to do??
Dave must bitterly regret that Brexit-referendum decision. It was all done to stave off Nigel Farage. Okay, so the Tories might have suffered a few defections or had a few years in opposition because of him, but that is nothing compared to the Tory horrors that single decision unleashed. We're talking the death of a major political party here.
His error was not in holding the referendum, which absolutely was needed - there was no democratic consent for all the changes beginning with Maastricht including especially Lisbon (which Brown signed despite a specific manifesto commitment against it).
His errors were:
(a) treating the referendum as something to be won for Remain, rather than as somethign to settle the EU issue one way or the other; and (b) flouncing immediately after it.
I agree that a referendum was right.
His mistake however was simply treating it as another “game” in the grid. Pure hubris.
He failed in his negotiation in Europe; his failed to sell that negotiation to the public; and he failed to engineer a serious referendum mechanic.
The big mistake was not having a confirmatory referendum built in after the negotiations.
The problem there is the incentive that would given the EU to agree the worst possible deal.
And an even bigger leave vote leading to a no deal crash out.
It can't be gamed.
There's no scenario where a Brexit referendum could have been avoided indefinitely absent a major renegotiation of our relationship with the EU.
By the same token, returning to the status quo antebellum (or worse) isn't a sustainable option either.
Jut looking at the Betfair odds for next prime minister, I see Keir Starmer at 110/130.
Is that not free money in a week? Could someone walk me through exactly how it's meant to work?
The risk is, I think, that if Boris or Sunak wins and enough MPs leave the party in disgust, Truss wouldn't be able to tell HMK that any successor could command a majority, in which case there might have to be a general election with Truss still as PM but with Boris/Sunak leading the Tory campaign.
Whether that's ~1% likely is the quiestion.
Would HMK not more or less have to give the official winner a chance to form a government, though?
Not if Truss advises him that the winner can't command a majority, I don't think.
Wouldn't that mean that (purely hypothetically) a deranged party leader who had been ousted by his/her own party could force an election even though the party was united behind a successor?
No, because if the party is united behind a successor and has a majority, then the successor can command a majority in the House and the outgoing party leader would have to advise HMK accordingly.
Did you not read the word "deranged", and grasp the point I was making?
A party leader - sane or otherwise - could always force an election rather than allow a leadership contest. But if the leadership contest happens and the party unites behind a successor then, no, HMK wouldn't have to allow a general election under the Lascelles Principles.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Those are poor numbers for Boris.
Happy to continue with my lay of him at current odds for now.
If I'm interpreting the consensus correctly (and it's right!), then this looks like the way each candidate can win:
Sunak: Be the only one to get nominated or face Boris in the MP vote and win decisively. Boris: Get nominated and get close enough in the MP vote to force a member vote against Sunak. Mordaunt: Do a deal for Sunak to withdraw in her favour.
Boris - get Mordaunt to join him Sunak - get Boris to join him Sunak - get Mordaunt to join him The only combination I don't see as possible is Sunak joining under Boris.
Sunak's interests are served by him dangling carrots to persuade Mordaunt to stay in the race even if she knows that she's going to be short of 100 votes. That makes it harder for Johnson to get to the 100 threshold.
What should happen to underpin Hunt's ongoing attempts to maintain the UK financial system stability is for all 3 candidates (or 2 if Mordant doesn't make it) to have a meeting with Hunt, get the outline or even the detail of what he is planning and state publicly that whoever wins will maintain Hunt's proposals at least until there has been time to assess their effectiveness or otherwise. I know this would be an extraordinary thing to do but these are extraordinary times and for the next few months stability and reassurance to the markets seems to me to be the key.
Any candidate who is not able to make that pledge for the good of the country probably shouldn't be let near No.10
Yes, something like that is needed. Alternatively, especially if the winner is Sunak, I suppose they could postpone the budget for a short time, say a week or two, without spooking the markets, if they handled the announcement carefully. That would mean the new PM could form the replacement government and then give a stronger political stamp of approval to the financial plans.
The main thing will be to convince the markets that there's a credible plan, that they are committed to it, and that they can deliver it. Clearly none of this is ideal, and it could easily be blown up by on-going political chaos.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Those are poor numbers for Boris.
Happy to continue with my lay of him at current odds for now.
Guido has him in the 60s, but take that with a pinch of salt given 15 or so of those are “A Mystery MP On The Committee For Widget Affordability” types.
I wouldn't read too much into it - but it does sound as though nukes aren't quite as imminent as @Leon keeps assuring us.
FWIW, the reality is that Putin's best hope is to prolong the war as long as he can and hope for Europe getting fatigue and Trump coming back.
And we shouldn't be flying our elint planes quite so close to Russian airspace.
I think that Fiona Hill made a good point, that in any 'peace' deal, the ability of Ukraine to defend itself with Western support should not be compromised. Because Russia won't stop. It may perversely be in our interest to prolong the war, whilst Russia is struggling - if a lot of mobilised soldiers die because of the incompetence of the Russian Army, then it may have some effect on Russians and their willingness to do these types of wars in the future.
I don't think it's in our interest to prolong the war; it's in our interest for it to finish as soon as possible with a defeat for the invasion. And I don't think there will be a deal until at least one of Russia and Ukraine realises they can't win. As it's existential for Ukraine, that side is unlikely to be them.
The war is not finishing anytime soon. See the thread posted earlier; Putin thinks if he plays it long enough he is in with a chance.
And, given a possible return from Trump, he is not necessarily wrong.
I didn't say it would - see my comment above. Just pointing out it's not in our interest to try to 'prolong' it. We want Ukraine to win as fast as possible.
I wouldn't read too much into it - but it does sound as though nukes aren't quite as imminent as @Leon keeps assuring us.
FWIW, the reality is that Putin's best hope is to prolong the war as long as he can and hope for Europe getting fatigue and Trump coming back.
And we shouldn't be flying our elint planes quite so close to Russian airspace.
I think that Fiona Hill made a good point, that in any 'peace' deal, the ability of Ukraine to defend itself with Western support should not be compromised. Because Russia won't stop. It may perversely be in our interest to prolong the war, whilst Russia is struggling - if a lot of mobilised soldiers die because of the incompetence of the Russian Army, then it may have some effect on Russians and their willingness to do these types of wars in the future.
I don't think it's in our interest to prolong the war; it's in our interest for it to finish as soon as possible with a defeat for the invasion. And I don't think there will be a deal until at least one of Russia and Ukraine realises they can't win. As it's existential for Ukraine, that side is unlikely to be them.
The war is not finishing anytime soon. See the thread posted earlier; Putin thinks if he plays it long enough he is in with a chance.
And, given a possible return from Trump, he is not necessarily wrong.
Even if the US suddenly went isolationist, I don't think it necessarily means Putin would win, but it would dramatically increase the pressure on Europe to act, and would therefore increase the chance of other countries getting directly involved.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Those are poor numbers for Boris.
Happy to continue with my lay of him at current odds for now.
I’ve already cashed in on Boris. Now looking for value elsewhere.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Er, he could be doing the job he's fucking paid to do??
I think Rishi can probably count on about half of the party. Say, 180.
I think Boris will scrape through (105) and Penny will fall short (72).
The indicative vote will then result in something like 230 / 127 to Rishi, and then it is over to members.
I think it will be very hard though for the members to flout the clear direction of the PCP.
I agree with the essence of this. I actually *don't* think BJ will get the 100 but if he does - which ok he might - he'll end up a 'bad' 2nd and unlikely to prevail by forcing a venerables vote and winning it. Hence why he's a screaming lay at 3 imo. I just wish I hadn't screamingly laid him at 6. Ah well. A win's a win.
What should happen to underpin Hunt's ongoing attempts to maintain the UK financial system stability is for all 3 candidates (or 2 if Mordant doesn't make it) to have a meeting with Hunt, get the outline or even the detail of what he is planning and state publicly that whoever wins will maintain Hunt's proposals at least until there has been time to assess their effectiveness or otherwise. I know this would be an extraordinary thing to do but these are extraordinary times and for the next few months stability and reassurance to the markets seems to me to be the key.
Any candidate who is not able to make that pledge for the good of the country probably shouldn't be let near No.10
Yes, something like that is needed. Alternatively, especially if the winner is Sunak, I suppose they could postpone the budget for a short time, say a week or two, without spooking the markets, if they handled the announcement carefully. That would mean the new PM could form the replacement government and then give a stronger political stamp of approval to the financial plans.
The main thing will be to convince the markets that there's a credible plan, that they are committed to it, and that they can deliver it. Clearly none of this is ideal, and it could easily be blown up by on-going political chaos.
The challenges here are immense. The most fundamental change between Kwarteng and Hunt was not really the tax changes but the recognition that if we were going to be subsidising everyone's gas bill this winter the (unknown) cost of that had to be offset by cuts elsewhere rather than being stuck on the credit card. We are about to divert tens of billions from social security, defence, education, local government and possibly even social care to paying for gas.
On one view we have gone from one extreme to the other. KK thought he could just ignore the cost of his 2 year scheme and carry on spending on everything else regardless. That was reckless. Hunt is looking to recoup the costs of the truncated scheme over a very short period of time. That is arguably unnecessarily severe but you can see why he had to do something like that to assuage the markets.
The gas scheme will end for the vast majority of the population and businesses in 6 months time: we simply cannot afford this redirection of resources. All we can hope is that by then gas prices are much lower.
On the subject of Boris, I think he has a higher floor than Truss (or Morduant), and I would be surprised to see the Conservatives poll less than 30% in the General with him in charge.
But I also think he is - to some extent - damaged goods. And his return will coincide with rising energy bills for millions of households.
So: floor of 30% in the GE, ceiling of 40%. Will do better in the North than the South.
In October 2021 the Tories polled as high as 41%.
In the month before Johnson was forced to resign the highest the Tories polled was 35%.
It's striking given how much the polls have moved since then that he lost relatively little support despite the crises he created.
The Tories were polling about 40% last autumn, since when Labour has been in the lead. The Tories were consistently about 32% this year until the Truss disaster, so a loss of one fifth of Tory support under Johnson. Current floor hard to determine due to volatility, but looks to be low twenties.
Questions. Can Johnson win back the support he previously lost? Seems unlikely. Can he stabilise support above current wipeout levels? Possibly. Is he more likely to stabilise support than another Tory leader? Not necessarily.
Henry Mance @henrymance · 1h absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Where’s he meant to be?
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Er, he could be doing the job he's fucking paid to do??
Working From Holiday.
I suspect rather he's relaxing in the Main.
Nice pun EXCEPT that "Spanish Main" referred - oddly enough - to the Mainland, not the Islands.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
Those are poor numbers for Boris.
Happy to continue with my lay of him at current odds for now.
Guido has him in the 60s, but take that with a pinch of salt given 15 or so of those are “A Mystery MP On The Committee For Widget Affordability” types.
According to Guido, Ben Wallace is backing BJ - I think that endorsement will have disproportionate weight.
Endorsements 68 - Rishi Sunak 36 - Boris Johnson 17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
I would quite like PM4PM but I just worry she's a bit too... nice the nest of snakes and vipers that is the Tory Party!
She knows what they're like.
Neither the Royal Navy nor Portsmouth politics are soft environments!
Comments
NTY - Berlusconi, caught on tape gushing over Putin, heightens anxiety about Italy
ROME — Silvio Berlusconi, the former Italian prime minister, campaigned to be the protector of democratic, pro-European values in a new right-wing coalition that is expected to take power in days after winning elections last month.
But even before a government can be sworn in, the 86-year-old billionaire media mogul has proved himself to be less of a stable, moderating force, than the source of renewed anxiety after the leak of surreptitiously recorded remarks revealed that he blamed Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for forcing President Vladimir Putin of Russia to invade Ukraine.
The remarks, complete with talk about a “sweet letter” and vodka from Putin, raise concerns that the new right-wing government, led by Giorgia Meloni, herself a solid supporter of Ukraine, is wobblier than expected and could, if it ever actually comes together with another Putin-admiring partner, potentially lead Italy to undercut Europe’s united front against Russia.
“I reconnected a little bit with President Putin,” Berlusconi could be heard saying on the audio published on the website of La Presse on Tuesday, in which he addresses a meeting of loyal Forza Italia party members, and some apparently not-so-loyal leakers. In the audio, he added that Putin had sent him 20 bottles of vodka “and a very kind letter” for his 86th birthday last month. Berlusconi said he responded by sending bottles of Lambrusco wine and “an equally sweet letter.”
Berlusconi has not disputed the authenticity of the remarks. On Wednesday, a European Commission spokeswoman said it was investigating whether the vodka shipment constituted a violation of European sanctions against Russia.
The thinking is: he has pressed to escalate the war to a nuclear test/tactic already and he has met too much resistance from his elite generals and oligarch comrades
This might explain why the rumours now are that Russia will blow up a dam. Non nuclear. Non WMD. But still shows that Russia is big and tough and might even be militarily useful: flooding south Ukraine and slowing any Ukrainian advance
If there'd been proposed a confirmatory referendum had we voted Leave then Leave would have won even more votes in 2016, which is why it wasn't done that way.
I think a dozen is about right.
Con: 19% (-4 from 11-12 Oct)
Lab: 56% (+5)
Lib Dem: 10% (+1)
Reform UK: 5% (+2)
Green: 4% (-3)
SNP: 4% (-1)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/10/21/voting-intention-con-19-lab-56-20-21-oct-2022 https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1583482907691474944/photo/1
They were right: he is unfit to be PM. They should stand by that opinion.
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1583095043593682945
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1583091554574831617
In the month before Johnson was forced to resign the highest the Tories polled was 35%.
It's striking given how much the polls have moved since then that he lost relatively little support despite the crises he created.
I would be so happy if it was a Rishi/Penny showdown with Big Dog in 3rd
Naive or what?
Fairly or not, the tories will be blamed by a lot of people who are finding themselves hundreds of pounds a month worse off because of their mortgage payments (let alone energy, food etc.). The memory of the current turmoil may fade, but millions will have monthly reminders of this governments economic ineptitude for years to come.
@henrymance
·
1h
absolutely superb. calling MPs *from his holiday* to assure them he has changed
Still, even taken at face value, these figures would amount to huge swings in their target seats.
What's almost inevitable, whoever wins, is that the supposed majority will vanish as there's so much rancour and willingness to rebel.
Over 40 MPs willing to keep holding rhe whip, but to march through opposition lobbies on all but confidence matters, no matter who wins on Friday.
She’s currently trading at 8+ …
It certainly is an important and a neglected area of economic policy.
Endorsements
68 - Rishi Sunak
36 - Boris Johnson
17 - Penny Mordaunt
If this is right, it suggests Boris may not have the momentum he needs, and that in turn explains why Penny has confirmed she's standing. She would have a decent chance if Boris decides that the party is not yet ready for his Second Coming.
I think Boris will scrape through (105) and Penny will fall short (72).
The indicative vote will then result in something like 230 / 127 to Rishi, and then it is over to members.
I think it will be very hard though for the members to flout the clear direction of the PCP.
Can’t blame him for being in the Caribbean writing his memoirs where it’s 30C and sunny rather than Herne Hill where it’s << checks notes >> 15C, overcast, and lightly drizzling
*stares out at beautiful cloudless Moab Utah desert sky*
Perhaps what he should have done instead is not had a preliminary renegotiation at all but simply held the referendum on the basis of seeking a mandate to negotiate a new relationship with the EU. Then he would have been free to campaign against the status quo and wouldn't have ended up on the wrong side.
Say 6 “independents”, 4 defections to LD, 2 defections to Labour.
(Thanks for the header, by the way, Richard, interesting as ever)
VERY pleased to announce that air quality in Seattle this morning is among best in the world, with AQI = 15 (good).
Similar story for Portland, Vancouver and most of the rest of the Pacific North West. With bad air pushed back to Spokane, WA in the east, and Eugene, OR down south.
PLUS we are forecast to get later today the FIRST significant rainfall since May! Already sprinkling in Seattle, with more to come. Which will help put out raging forest fires, replenish our snow pack up in the Cascades, and possibly prevent a drought next year that would have severe impact on agriculture in Eastern WA, including over 2/3 of US apple crop and other major sources of fruit, vegetables and grain.
Rejoice!
He is undoubtedly an attentive student of the Treasury, but imaginative or heterodox he is not, and the Treasury is a castle of quite tired groupthink.
Truss was right about “interest rates” in the abstract (not that this is a supply side reform). She just failed to note that we’re already climbing. Her notions of actual supply side reform amount to “move fast and break things”.
What should happen to underpin Hunt's ongoing attempts to maintain the UK financial system stability is for all 3 candidates (or 2 if Mordant doesn't make it) to have a meeting with Hunt, get the outline or even the detail of what he is planning and state publicly that whoever wins will maintain Hunt's proposals at least until there has been time to assess their effectiveness or otherwise. I know this would be an extraordinary thing to do but these are extraordinary times and for the next few months stability and reassurance to the markets seems to me to be the key.
Any candidate who is not able to make that pledge for the good of the country probably shouldn't be let near No.10
Confirmatory VOCs in parliament early next
week.
And I don't think there will be a deal until at least one of Russia and Ukraine realises they can't win. As it's existential for Ukraine, that side is unlikely to be them.
The problems come entirely from him so strongly taking one side and then losing. If he had either put EEA on the ballot paper as a subsidiary question (Q2: If Q1 = Leave, then EEA = Yes/No?) or allowed the government to put forward a position on what Leave meant, then the vast majority of problems that arose wouldn't have done.
But he didn't want to settle the issue fairly, he just wanted to win.
NEW: Hearing that former chancellor and former health secretary
@sajidjavid
is going to come out for Rishi Sunak. Big endorsement
Good. The grown ups are making sense rather than the adult pretenders.
See the thread posted earlier; Putin thinks if he plays it long enough he is in with a chance.
And, given a possible return from Trump, he is not necessarily wrong.
That's long since baked in.
There's no scenario where a Brexit referendum could have been avoided indefinitely absent a major renegotiation of our relationship with the EU.
By the same token, returning to the status quo antebellum (or worse) isn't a sustainable option either.
Happy to continue with my lay of him at current odds for now.
The main thing will be to convince the markets that there's a credible plan, that they are committed to it, and that they can deliver it. Clearly none of this is ideal, and it could easily be blown up by on-going political chaos.
Just pointing out it's not in our interest to try to 'prolong' it. We want Ukraine to win as fast as possible.
Tories get one seat.
On one view we have gone from one extreme to the other. KK thought he could just ignore the cost of his 2 year scheme and carry on spending on everything else regardless. That was reckless. Hunt is looking to recoup the costs of the truncated scheme over a very short period of time. That is arguably unnecessarily severe but you can see why he had to do something like that to assuage the markets.
The gas scheme will end for the vast majority of the population and businesses in 6 months time: we simply cannot afford this redirection of resources. All we can hope is that by then gas prices are much lower.
Questions.
Can Johnson win back the support he previously lost? Seems unlikely.
Can he stabilise support above current wipeout levels? Possibly.
Is he more likely to stabilise support than another Tory leader? Not necessarily.
Rishi 81 + 3 unnamed Officers
Boris 45 + 17 unnamed Officers
Penny 21 + 3 unnamed Officers
Much depends on the unnamed Officers - if they are genuine then Boris is at 62 with just over 50% still to declare.
Looks as if Boris is going to be in range 90-120.
Neither the Royal Navy nor Portsmouth politics are soft environments!
I'm backing @RishiSunak - he has the leadership our country needs, and the values our party needs.
https://twitter.com/sajidjavid/status/1583487778003636225