There may (or may not) be a lot to say about Sunak's wealth.
But his background and the story of his parents appears to be one of hard work and sacrifice for their kids. The line 'if you work hard and do well you cannot represent your ethnicity' seems an odd one for Labour to take. Especially since Starmer (and many Labour politicians) seems to have similar stories.
One thing I'd like to know: I'd guess Sunak has faced racism in the past. Has he ever talked about it?
The $64,000 question is how close was Rishi Sunak to resigning his seat in parliament? I know he'd officially said that he wasn't going to, but in reality he may have been considering it.
Old horse punters wisdom - don't throw your betting slip away until they're weighed in.
Cameron's - certain aesthetic, but lacks substance in the middle May's - straight and upstanding, but it doesn't look particularly strong or stable Johnson's - wide boy Truss's - Twisted, chaotic Sunak's - I think I'd use some scaffolding poles and go for 'rebuilding'
Anyone know how these lecterns are done?
What's the timeframe for designing and making them, and how much (if any) input does the incoming PM get?
Is there a cupboard with half a dozen lecterns ready to go?
Is it like wands in Harry Potter, and the lectern somehow chooses the Prime Minister?
A question for the future: if the Conservatives recover well but end up losing with something like 280 seats, would Sunak try to stay on as leader, and would he succeed?
"Congratulations to RishiSunak - I wish him well and, notwithstanding our political differences, will do my best to build a constructive working relationship with him in the interests of those we serve."
"That he becomes the first British Asian to become PM is a genuinely significant moment. It certainly makes this a special Diwali"
And then you go on to attack the policies, not the man nor his heritage nor his colour.
I think it shows more how crap that Labour MP is. Sturgeon's approach should be the response of any sane, decent person.
Yes it's not difficult to celebrate that aspect whilst attacking his politics. Although sometimes these comments are provoked in response to partisan hyperbole. Eg, "Sunak's ascent to PM shows the Tories are champions of diversity and that racism is dead and buried in Britain in 2022".
I do think it should be recognized that the Tories have had the first ethnic minority Prime Minister, three female Prime Ministers and now the first non-white Prime Minister. Meanwhile Labour have had an endless succession of white men in the role, with another one next in line. Does the Labour Party have a bigotry problem?
A question for the future: if the Conservatives recover well but end up losing with something like 280 seats, would Sunak try to stay on as leader, and would he succeed?
If he gets that many I think he has a chance, if he wants it. But I think even with that, relatively respectable, loss, he'd be out on his ear.
"Congratulations to RishiSunak - I wish him well and, notwithstanding our political differences, will do my best to build a constructive working relationship with him in the interests of those we serve."
"That he becomes the first British Asian to become PM is a genuinely significant moment. It certainly makes this a special Diwali"
And then you go on to attack the policies, not the man nor his heritage nor his colour.
I think it shows more how crap that Labour MP is. Sturgeon's approach should be the response of any sane, decent person.
Yes it's not difficult to celebrate that aspect whilst attacking his politics. Although sometimes these comments are provoked in response to partisan hyperbole. Eg, "Sunak's ascent to PM shows the Tories are champions of diversity and that racism is dead and buried in Britain in 2022".
I do think it should be recognized that the Tories have had the first ethnic minority Prime Minister, three female Prime Ministers and now the first non-white Prime Minister. Meanwhile Labour have had an endless succession of white men in the role, with another one next in line. Does the Labour Party have a bigotry problem?
Their MPs are diverse and support is diverse. There has been a rapid rise in MPs from ethnic minorities, and not many contests in that time, so I doubt it, at least above and beyond the nation in general.
So how ballsy is Rishi going to be at PMQs tomorrow? It'd be hilarious if he says, to the inevitable calls for a GE, that he would definitely win it but now is not the time, and in any case no one wants the chaos of a Labour government.
I'm struggling to understand the idea that Russia's economic contraction will only be 3% of GDP. If it is based on the very limited information they are providing us with that seems foolish. Why on earth would you trust any of the figures currently emanating from Moscow. And even if they are accurate surely the figures they are withholding are going to be much more damning about their position.
Over a million have left the country. Many of those among the best paid and most educated section of the population. The mobilisation means taking a further half million out of the economy. Rumours of people going into hiding to avoid being conscripted. Their prisons are full to bursting. Their workforce mus now be down 1.5 million. Foreign companies have left Russia en masse. They are extremely reliant on western tech and do not have much home-grown industry. They cannot access western capital. What they can do is export their raw materials. Oil did rise sharply at the start of the war but has come down again and Russia is not selling it at full price with the massive logistical difficulties of getting it to India and China. Gas prices surged, maybe they made massive sums from European countries wanting to replenish their stocks in time for winter?
I maintain my opinion that the medium to long term forecast for the Russian economy seems woeful. Even their hydrocarbon industry will struggle without western expertise and they won't have gas revenues. But the idea they have bought time this year also feels sceptical to me. They may have dug into their remaining accessible foreign reserves but that won't be sustainable. Still even if it is only 3%, given the amount of GDP now being spent on the war effort I suppose it will feel considerably worse for most Russians.
They are spending their reserves (both men and currency)
Wars do strange things to economies.
German output apparently rose till quite late in the war. Which often used to argue strategic bombing failed. But then you look at individual big ticket weapons - production collapsed in 1944 for many of them.
"Congratulations to RishiSunak - I wish him well and, notwithstanding our political differences, will do my best to build a constructive working relationship with him in the interests of those we serve."
"That he becomes the first British Asian to become PM is a genuinely significant moment. It certainly makes this a special Diwali"
And then you go on to attack the policies, not the man nor his heritage nor his colour.
I think it shows more how crap that Labour MP is. Sturgeon's approach should be the response of any sane, decent person.
Yes it's not difficult to celebrate that aspect whilst attacking his politics. Although sometimes these comments are provoked in response to partisan hyperbole. Eg, "Sunak's ascent to PM shows the Tories are champions of diversity and that racism is dead and buried in Britain in 2022".
I do think it should be recognized that the Tories have had the first ethnic minority Prime Minister, three female Prime Ministers and now the first non-white Prime Minister. Meanwhile Labour have had an endless succession of white men in the role, with another one next in line. Does the Labour Party have a bigotry problem?
Yes. As do the Tories. Both parties reflect society in this respect.
There may (or may not) be a lot to say about Sunak's wealth.
But his background and the story of his parents appears to be one of hard work and sacrifice for their kids. The line 'if you work hard and do well you cannot represent your ethnicity' seems an odd one for Labour to take. Especially since Starmer (and many Labour politicians) seems to have similar stories.
It reall should not be a hard line to walk for political opponents.
Say his policies do not help the country, particularly the less well off and more vulnerable. If they want say one reason for that is he is from a comfortable background and is stonkingly wealthy.
Then just don't add 'Therefore he is only superficially brown/doesn't represent brown people/I cannot tell he is of indian descent on the radio'.
"Congratulations to RishiSunak - I wish him well and, notwithstanding our political differences, will do my best to build a constructive working relationship with him in the interests of those we serve."
"That he becomes the first British Asian to become PM is a genuinely significant moment. It certainly makes this a special Diwali"
And then you go on to attack the policies, not the man nor his heritage nor his colour.
I think it shows more how crap that Labour MP is. Sturgeon's approach should be the response of any sane, decent person.
Yes it's not difficult to celebrate that aspect whilst attacking his politics. Although sometimes these comments are provoked in response to partisan hyperbole. Eg, "Sunak's ascent to PM shows the Tories are champions of diversity and that racism is dead and buried in Britain in 2022".
I do think it should be recognized that the Tories have had the first ethnic minority Prime Minister, three female Prime Ministers and now the first non-white Prime Minister. Meanwhile Labour have had an endless succession of white men in the role, with another one next in line. Does the Labour Party have a bigotry problem?
Their MPs are diverse and support is diverse. There has been a rapid rise in MPs from ethnic minorities, and not many contests in that time, so I doubt it, at least above and beyond the nation in general.
Yet they are never willing to out an ethnic minority, or even a woman, in the top job.
"Congratulations to RishiSunak - I wish him well and, notwithstanding our political differences, will do my best to build a constructive working relationship with him in the interests of those we serve."
"That he becomes the first British Asian to become PM is a genuinely significant moment. It certainly makes this a special Diwali"
And then you go on to attack the policies, not the man nor his heritage nor his colour.
I think it shows more how crap that Labour MP is. Sturgeon's approach should be the response of any sane, decent person.
Yes it's not difficult to celebrate that aspect whilst attacking his politics. Although sometimes these comments are provoked in response to partisan hyperbole. Eg, "Sunak's ascent to PM shows the Tories are champions of diversity and that racism is dead and buried in Britain in 2022".
I do think it should be recognized that the Tories have had the first ethnic minority Prime Minister, three female Prime Ministers and now the first non-white Prime Minister. Meanwhile Labour have had an endless succession of white men in the role, with another one next in line. Does the Labour Party have a bigotry problem?
Their MPs are diverse and support is diverse. There has been a rapid rise in MPs from ethnic minorities, and not many contests in that time, so I doubt it, at least above and beyond the nation in general.
Yet they are never willing to out an ethnic minority, or even a woman, in the top job.
Ah - I’ve never been so relieved to see the back of a prime minister
I wonder how much damage the Liz thing will do to the Tories. Rishi aside, will the public conclude: if the Tories can be that stupid with Truss then what might they do in future? Will the fact that they addressed the problem in record time give some salvation?
So Clarke/Donelan/Jayawardena/Smith/Badenoch/Ellis are the smiliest, so they are keeping their jobs?
It is a weird one, clearly no direction on whether this was a smile or serious photo. Cleverly and Zahawi look like they want to punch the cameraman, with Wallace looking like hs is sat on something uncomfortable, whilst others are beaming.
Whilst I await to see Rishi remove the lunatics (and "restore trust") it is a great relief that for the fist time in 5 or 6 years we can have a competent rational government again.
So far, sounds like the best PM since Cameron. More serious than the two immediate predecessors, more likeable than May.
But, it's just one speech.
He's saying all the right things. And he said it in plain English with a coherence altogether lacking in his predecessors.
It's whether he can actually turn those into concrete policies which will work that is the question. No details on any of them so far. Can't even really reconcile it with what he said in the summer.
"Hard working, stable, accountability, integrity, trust." "I will be grateful to Boris Johnson, but..." "I've inherited a mandate to deliver the 2019 manifesto..." "Opportunities of Brexit" "Cost of Covid" "Terrible war" "I know things are hard for you" "I bloody wanted to be PM, right enough"
You can see the talking points clearly enumerated.
Boris now being thrown under the bus as well. It wasn't a Boris mandate, it was a Tory manifesto.
Yes. Granted, a lot of people do vote for the leader, he gets credit. but officially that is not how it works. And if Borisites are saying it is a personal mandate, then they cannot complain about the 2019 manifesto not being followed, which they do.
Sunaks says his party's 2019 election mandate is "not the property of any one individual".
That rams home that the Tories are bigger than one man ie Johnson. But is also an attempt by Sunak to justify his own constitutional role as PM - and avoid an early election.
When was the last time that we had a Prime Minister who actually spoke to the country and not to themselves? Its all been introspective, selfish and stupid for what feels like an eternity.
I'm not someone who has ever rated Sunak super highly, I wonder if he has much substance, but I do appreciate at least seeming like he knows what he is saying, even if he does not.
A question for the future: if the Conservatives recover well but end up losing with something like 280 seats, would Sunak try to stay on as leader, and would he succeed?
If he gets that many I think he has a chance, if he wants it. But I think even with that, relatively respectable, loss, he'd be out on his ear.
At 280 seats the Tories would be pretty close to parity on seats with Labour, maybe a few ahead. It might depend on how secure any Labour-led coalition government looked. If there was a chance of another election within the year then he might have a better chance of holding on if he wanted to.
I'm struggling to understand the idea that Russia's economic contraction will only be 3% of GDP. If it is based on the very limited information they are providing us with that seems foolish. Why on earth would you trust any of the figures currently emanating from Moscow. And even if they are accurate surely the figures they are withholding are going to be much more damning about their position.
Over a million have left the country. Many of those among the best paid and most educated section of the population. The mobilisation means taking a further half million out of the economy. Rumours of people going into hiding to avoid being conscripted. Their prisons are full to bursting. Their workforce mus now be down 1.5 million. Foreign companies have left Russia en masse. They are extremely reliant on western tech and do not have much home-grown industry. They cannot access western capital. What they can do is export their raw materials. Oil did rise sharply at the start of the war but has come down again and Russia is not selling it at full price with the massive logistical difficulties of getting it to India and China. Gas prices surged, maybe they made massive sums from European countries wanting to replenish their stocks in time for winter?
I maintain my opinion that the medium to long term forecast for the Russian economy seems woeful. Even their hydrocarbon industry will struggle without western expertise and they won't have gas revenues. But the idea they have bought time this year also feels sceptical to me. They may have dug into their remaining accessible foreign reserves but that won't be sustainable. Still even if it is only 3%, given the amount of GDP now being spent on the war effort I suppose it will feel considerably worse for most Russians.
They are spending their reserves (both men and currency)
Wars do strange things to economies.
German output apparently rose till quite late in the war. Which often used to argue strategic bombing failed. But then you look at individual big ticket weapons - production collapsed in 1944 for many of them.
Output of what? Is the question.
Again, I'd like to recommend Francis Spufford's book 'Red Plenty'. It's a very odd book, which goes into the way the Soviet economy seemed to be booming in the 1950s and 1960s - but in reality they were just kidding themselves.
It's important, as lying to ourselves about the economy is a trap that is all too easy to fall into. Fortunately, we've never quite done it enough yet to crash our entire system of democratic capitalism.
Who would have thought a poll showing the Tories in the 20s would be an.. improvement for them.
The weirdist thing to me about all the polls recently is that the Lib Dems have barely moved. I would have thought they would have been in the high teens at least.
Considering Rishi's wife is so wealthy I was somewhat surprised she turned up at Buckingham Palace looking like she was going shopping at Primark. Quite a contrast to the always immaculately turned out Rishi.
Who would have thought a poll showing the Tories in the 20s would be an.. improvement for them.
The weirdist thing to me about all the polls recently is that the Lib Dems have barely moved. I would have thought they would have been in the high teens at least.
I concur.
One can only assume that they are working their (30?) target seats like madmen and completely ignoring the other 600+ seats.
"Congratulations to RishiSunak - I wish him well and, notwithstanding our political differences, will do my best to build a constructive working relationship with him in the interests of those we serve."
"That he becomes the first British Asian to become PM is a genuinely significant moment. It certainly makes this a special Diwali"
And then you go on to attack the policies, not the man nor his heritage nor his colour.
I think it shows more how crap that Labour MP is. Sturgeon's approach should be the response of any sane, decent person.
Yes it's not difficult to celebrate that aspect whilst attacking his politics. Although sometimes these comments are provoked in response to partisan hyperbole. Eg, "Sunak's ascent to PM shows the Tories are champions of diversity and that racism is dead and buried in Britain in 2022".
I do think it should be recognized that the Tories have had the first ethnic minority Prime Minister, three female Prime Ministers and now the first non-white Prime Minister. Meanwhile Labour have had an endless succession of white men in the role, with another one next in line. Does the Labour Party have a bigotry problem?
I think partially the Tories have been lucky.
That is, it needed to take some time after large-scale immigration from Commonwealth countries before this could have happened.
The country had to change, the sons and daughters, the grandsons and granddaughters of those first generations immigrants had to grow up and flex their political muscles. And so any party in power over the last decade could have achieved this. The Tories happened to be in power. They took the opportunity (for which they get the credit).
That said, Labour do seem to have been caught on the back foot -- I suspect the awkward tweets/sayings of Nadia Whitmore and Rupa Huq shows some of the real frustration of ethnic minority Labour MPs.
I think the lack of female Labour PMs is more shameful and requires more explaining.
There clearly have been excellent candidates, and the last Labour leadership election of 4 females plus dull SKS is not a good look.
I am very far from convinced that the best out of Rebecca Long-Bailey, Lisa Nandy, Jess Phillips, Emily Thornberry and SKS is SKS.
Comments
But his background and the story of his parents appears to be one of hard work and sacrifice for their kids. The line 'if you work hard and do well you cannot represent your ethnicity' seems an odd one for Labour to take. Especially since Starmer (and many Labour politicians) seems to have similar stories.
One thing I'd like to know: I'd guess Sunak has faced racism in the past. Has he ever talked about it?
I sincerely hope to lol at that one.
Probably not very auspicious having an eclipse today...
https://twitter.com/gerhard_gnauck/status/1584854704844337152
Just how many will survive?
This could be the political equivalent of a spot-the-ball competition.
#showingmyage https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1584858944845250561/photo/1
It would be a pathetic lie, pure and simple.
Wars do strange things to economies.
German output apparently rose till quite late in the war. Which often used to argue strategic bombing failed. But then you look at individual big ticket weapons - production collapsed in 1944 for many of them.
Output of what? Is the question.
Only joking.....
We haven't had one of those for a while.
Say his policies do not help the country, particularly the less well off and more vulnerable. If they want say one reason for that is he is from a comfortable background and is stonkingly wealthy.
Then just don't add 'Therefore he is only superficially brown/doesn't represent brown people/I cannot tell he is of indian descent on the radio'.
That would be unfair to twats.
Imagine what Phil would say to Truss….
'Not with words but with action.'
However - he's a bit light on what the actions will be. He's mostly saying fairly empty things here.
Survivors Hunt, Wallace, Mordaunt, Badenoch. Maybe Zahawi and Sharma?
'I won't call an election so go suck yourself Starmer' would have been quicker.
But, it's just one speech.
It is a weird one, clearly no direction on whether this was a smile or serious photo. Cleverly and Zahawi look like they want to punch the cameraman, with Wallace looking like hs is sat on something uncomfortable, whilst others are beaming.
It's whether he can actually turn those into concrete policies which will work that is the question. No details on any of them so far. Can't even really reconcile it with what he said in the summer.
"I will be grateful to Boris Johnson, but..."
"I've inherited a mandate to deliver the 2019 manifesto..."
"Opportunities of Brexit"
"Cost of Covid"
"Terrible war"
"I know things are hard for you"
"I bloody wanted to be PM, right enough"
You can see the talking points clearly enumerated.
LAB: 54% (-1)
CON: 21% (+2)
LDEM: 11% (-1)
GRN: 4% (-)
REF: 4% (-)
via @RedfieldWilton, 23 Oct
MoE stuff. A worry?
Hurrah!
At bloody last.
That rams home that the Tories are bigger than one man ie Johnson.
But is also an attempt by Sunak to justify his own constitutional role as PM - and avoid an early election.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1584861414086148098
Who would have thought a poll showing the Tories in the 20s would be an.. improvement for them.
Or the racist curry-waiter trope "Ruby ruby ruby ruby....."?
I wish him well and ask the question is it to early to say we have seen a new Blair
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2010/aug/08/red-plenty-francis-spufford
It's important, as lying to ourselves about the economy is a trap that is all too easy to fall into. Fortunately, we've never quite done it enough yet to crash our entire system of democratic capitalism.
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 54% (-1)
CON: 21% (+2)
LDEM: 11% (-1)
GRN: 4% (-)
REF: 4% (-)
via @RedfieldWilton, 23 Oct
Any other decision would have been Kwarteng to the Treasury levels of unwise.
One can only assume that they are working their (30?) target seats like madmen and completely ignoring the other 600+ seats.
That is, it needed to take some time after large-scale immigration from Commonwealth countries before this could have happened.
The country had to change, the sons and daughters, the grandsons and granddaughters of those first generations immigrants had to grow up and flex their political muscles. And so any party in power over the last decade could have achieved this. The Tories happened to be in power. They took the opportunity (for which they get the credit).
That said, Labour do seem to have been caught on the back foot -- I suspect the awkward tweets/sayings of Nadia Whitmore and Rupa Huq shows some of the real frustration of ethnic minority Labour MPs.
I think the lack of female Labour PMs is more shameful and requires more explaining.
There clearly have been excellent candidates, and the last Labour leadership election of 4 females plus dull SKS is not a good look.
I am very far from convinced that the best out of Rebecca Long-Bailey, Lisa Nandy, Jess Phillips, Emily Thornberry and SKS is SKS.
If anybody down the pub says politics is boring, punch them.
EXC: Jacob Rees-Mogg says he no longer believes Rishi Sunak is a "socialist" and would now serve in his Cabinet if asked.
He urges Tory unity and warns party faces wipeout at the next GE.
Tells @Telegraph he is proud of achievements as Business Secretary
https://twitter.com/Tony_Diver/status/1584858009192525824