"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
£81bn to find and the government can't even make a change to the winter fuel allowance stick.
How long until Reeves has to hand the budget over to the OBR for grading? Labour have backed themselves into an impossible position over the budget now.
Been out for my lunch in Manchester City centre and I’ve SWP type complaining about the rich whilst wearing Balmain trainers.
I wear Skechers. Are they better than them ?
The cheapest Balmain trainers are around £350 quid and the most expensive ones north of £1,000.
You talk like Marlene Dietrich And you dance like Zizi Jeanmaire Your clothes are all made by Balmain And there's diamonds and pearls in your hair, yes there are
Dunno when the song was written but it was number one in the hit parade in the late sixties so Balmain have been around a while.
Peter sarstadt
Where do you go to my lovely.
Copyright youtube
His brother did a great version of ‘Mr resistance is Low’ in the seventies. Appeared on TOTP with the gorgeous Patti, from Legs and Co, providing the eyes.
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
We overlook this massively when analysing politics - an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality.
Algarkirk hit the nail on the head in saying "Time for a grown up PM, quite prepared to risk being a one term wonder, to go on all media every week for 10 minutes to tell the truth and explain the problems and the plan. When it has a plan."
We on this website - and the country at large - spend an astonishing amount of time talking about culture war issues, or about very small tweaks of budgets etc - when ultimately, pensions this high by 2030 - coupled with the NHS at 50% of gov spending - is a huge part of the current backdrop.
At this point Starmer and Labour might genuinely have a better chance in 2029 by sticking to their guns on widespread reform of the above, hoping that the bond markets etc decisively back their bravery, and that the people start to see the benefits of this action in 2029. Instead they are left hoping for a sudden growth miracle, or FPTP and a divided opposition seeing them squeak out another majority.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
The government should have just stuck to its guns on the WFP.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
We overlook this massively when analysing politics - an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality.
Algarkirk hit the nail on the head in saying "Time for a grown up PM, quite prepared to risk being a one term wonder, to go on all media every week for 10 minutes to tell the truth and explain the problems and the plan. When it has a plan.
At this point Starmer and Labour might genuinely have a better chance in 2029 by sticking to their guns on widespread reform of the above, hoping that the bond markets etc decisively back their bravery, and that the people start to see the benefits of this action in 2029. Instead they are left hoping for a sudden growth miracle, or FPTP and a divided opposition seeing them squeak out another majority.
Problem is Starmer and Reeves get it but a significant chunk of the PLP are fiscal dunces who will always vote against any change.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
The government should have just stuck to its guns on the WFP.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
I think if they'd not u-turned on WFP there was a chance they'd have managed to get the PIP change through. As it was the risible spin they put on the WFP u-turn (we can afford it because we fixed the economy) invited Labour backbenchers to rebel on PIP reform.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
The government should have just stuck to its guns on the WFP.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
Social care hasn't been left alone. Almost the very first thing this government did was scrap the planned social care cost cap for Oct 2025 which originated in Dilnot report a decade ago.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
£81bn to find and the government can't even make a change to the winter fuel allowance stick.
How long until Reeves has to hand the budget over to the OBR for grading? Labour have backed themselves into an impossible position over the budget now.
As you said before, the grading will not be by the OBR, it will be by the bond market and it will be brutal. As I said the other day this is not likely to just be a problem for us, although our ranking with our comparators is falling rapidly, but for the whole of the western world, making recovery extremely difficult.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
The government should have just stuck to its guns on the WFP.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
I think if they'd not u-turned on WFP there was a chance they'd have managed to get the PIP change through. As it was the risible spin they put on the WFP u-turn (we can afford it because we fixed the economy) invited Labour backbenchers to rebel on PIP reform.
Exactly. If we have the cash for rich pensioners then we must have it for kids in poverty, disabled folk, cycle lanes, tax cuts for working people - right? Right?!
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
The government should have just stuck to its guns on the WFP.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
I think if they'd not u-turned on WFP there was a chance they'd have managed to get the PIP change through. As it was the risible spin they put on the WFP u-turn (we can afford it because we fixed the economy) invited Labour backbenchers to rebel on PIP reform.
I wonder if the government could successfully revisit all this after the fabled Timms review comes out. Or will the backbenchers just tell him where to stick it?
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
We overlook this massively when analysing politics - an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality.
Algarkirk hit the nail on the head in saying "Time for a grown up PM, quite prepared to risk being a one term wonder, to go on all media every week for 10 minutes to tell the truth and explain the problems and the plan. When it has a plan.
At this point Starmer and Labour might genuinely have a better chance in 2029 by sticking to their guns on widespread reform of the above, hoping that the bond markets etc decisively back their bravery, and that the people start to see the benefits of this action in 2029. Instead they are left hoping for a sudden growth miracle, or FPTP and a divided opposition seeing them squeak out another majority.
Problem is Starmer and Reeves get it but a significant chunk of the PLP are fiscal dunces who will always vote against any change.
They could be a lot more effective at selling a cohesive vision.
The WFA situation was part of this.
If there was a much more consistent narrative that "We can't just keep paying tons to rich pensioners who often don't need it, when 27% of pensioners are in millionaire households - but we want to make sure we can still pay for those who need it" - then maybe it's easier to overturn the triple lock too.
Parties of all stripes are too scared of losing the grey vote. Quite frankly - Labour should be prepared to lose 2029 if it means delivering the long term reform this country needs
As long as the non-union members are happy with a pay freeze when the union members get the pay rise negotiated by their union, then no need for a closed shop.
Otherwise we have the Free Rider Problem.
Ah, so you don't believe in equal pay for equal work. Cool.
You think you get that in non-unionised workplaces, where nobody knows what their colleagues get paid?
Then somebody discovers that the newby is on £10k more than them and all hell breaks loose.
The evils of the closed shop are being forgotten; or excused. It is a club; if your face did not fit, or you did not pay the dues to the 'correct' hand, then you could not join. Unite is not the first union to show itself to be utterly corrupt.
Which is a shame, as unions can do a heck of a lot of good.
Now it is just the professional institutions (and that invisible entity the Engineering Council) that essentially run a closed shop. And they don't even negotiate pay and conditions for their members.
So you would argue it's a bad thing for them to 'essentially' run a closed shop?
It is a bad thing that they do not operate like unions and look after the interests of their members, rather than being a mouthpiece for the employers and senior executives.
"When it was introduced in 2012, initial estimates assumed that triple lock uprating would result in state pension increases averaging 0.2 percentage points above earnings growth. Based on these assumptions, the move from an earnings-linked to a triple-locked pension would have cost an equivalent of £5.2 billion in 2029-30. In fact, inflation has turned out to be significantly more volatile over this period and earnings growth has been lower, with the non-earnings elements of the lock triggered in eight of the 13 years to date. As a result, and despite the suspension of the triple lock for one year during the pandemic, the triple lock is expected to have cost £15.5 billion annually by 2029-30, around three times higher than initial expectations."
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
What's instructive is all the cuts and tax increases have been ones that *other people* have to deal with. Say what you like about PIP and Employer NICs, but they are hidden away somewhat.
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
The government should have just stuck to its guns on the WFP.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
I think if they'd not u-turned on WFP there was a chance they'd have managed to get the PIP change through. As it was the risible spin they put on the WFP u-turn (we can afford it because we fixed the economy) invited Labour backbenchers to rebel on PIP reform.
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
To be fair, while this is delusional, they are probably thinking of "government" as simply parliament rather than the state, let alone government spending as a whole.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
£81bn to find and the government can't even make a change to the winter fuel allowance stick.
How long until Reeves has to hand the budget over to the OBR for grading? Labour have backed themselves into an impossible position over the budget now.
As you said before, the grading will not be by the OBR, it will be by the bond market and it will be brutal. As I said the other day this is not likely to just be a problem for us, although our ranking with our comparators is falling rapidly, but for the whole of the western world, making recovery extremely difficult.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
£81bn to find and the government can't even make a change to the winter fuel allowance stick.
How long until Reeves has to hand the budget over to the OBR for grading? Labour have backed themselves into an impossible position over the budget now.
As you said before, the grading will not be by the OBR, it will be by the bond market and it will be brutal. As I said the other day this is not likely to just be a problem for us, although our ranking with our comparators is falling rapidly, but for the whole of the western world, making recovery extremely difficult.
The BBB in the USA being case in point.
When historians talk of the financial collapse of the Western world the BBB will be up there with the Gold Standard and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in terms of avoidable mistakes.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
We overlook this massively when analysing politics - an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality.
Algarkirk hit the nail on the head in saying "Time for a grown up PM, quite prepared to risk being a one term wonder, to go on all media every week for 10 minutes to tell the truth and explain the problems and the plan. When it has a plan.
At this point Starmer and Labour might genuinely have a better chance in 2029 by sticking to their guns on widespread reform of the above, hoping that the bond markets etc decisively back their bravery, and that the people start to see the benefits of this action in 2029. Instead they are left hoping for a sudden growth miracle, or FPTP and a divided opposition seeing them squeak out another majority.
Problem is Starmer and Reeves get it but a significant chunk of the PLP are fiscal dunces who will always vote against any change.
They could be a lot more effective at selling a cohesive vision.
The WFA situation was part of this.
If there was a much more consistent narrative that "We can't just keep paying tons to rich pensioners who often don't need it, when 27% of pensioners are in millionaire households - but we want to make sure we can still pay for those who need it" - then maybe it's easier to overturn the triple lock too.
Parties of all stripes are too scared of losing the grey vote. Quite frankly - Labour should be prepared to lose 2029 if it means delivering the long term reform this country needs
Country over Party
Plus the grey vote is less inclined to Labour anyway.
The political prostitutes that are the Lib Dem’s will, of course, pander to the sense of grievance for a few cheap votes as will the Tories but they should simply tough it out.
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
Last year I was in the bar of the Queen’s Hotel in Leeds I saw older people bemoaning about how the cutting the WFA meant they couldn’t go on holiday to Spain this year.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
They'll keep pretending as long as the financial markets let them.
The voters reward this dishonesty.
True but a source of utter despair. And as for those back bench muppets voting against ridiculously modest benefits cuts.... No wonder our Chancellor was weeping.
£81bn to find and the government can't even make a change to the winter fuel allowance stick.
How long until Reeves has to hand the budget over to the OBR for grading? Labour have backed themselves into an impossible position over the budget now.
As you said before, the grading will not be by the OBR, it will be by the bond market and it will be brutal. As I said the other day this is not likely to just be a problem for us, although our ranking with our comparators is falling rapidly, but for the whole of the western world, making recovery extremely difficult.
The BBB in the USA being case in point.
When historians talk of the financial collapse of the Western world the BBB will be up there with the Gold Standard and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in terms of avoidable mistakes.
I suspect you’re right and, on this, Musk is correct.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Reform would be stupid to run against Lowe at the next election.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
Lies, lies and more lies judged against forecasts from an unreliable pin-sticker whose report has only just been published. If you must use this emotive language, at least use a baseline that was available at the time.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Reform would be stupid to run against Lowe at the next election.
They'd lose so, yes. Although Lowe might well run on some sort of Tory tie in ticket
Been out for my lunch in Manchester City centre and I’ve SWP type complaining about the rich whilst wearing Balmain trainers.
I wear Skechers. Are they better than them ?
The cheapest Balmain trainers are around £350 quid and the most expensive ones north of £1,000.
You talk like Marlene Dietrich And you dance like Zizi Jeanmaire Your clothes are all made by Balmain And there's diamonds and pearls in your hair, yes there are
Dunno when the song was written but it was number one in the hit parade in the late sixties so Balmain have been around a while.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Reform would be stupid to run against Lowe at the next election.
They'd lose so, yes. Although Lowe might well run on some sort of Tory tie in ticket
Labour could win the seat with 25% if the votes are fairly evenly split between Lowe, Reform and Tory.
Is this a business you know anything about? AFAIUI, they are in the business in renting unnecessarily high-end student accommodation to the pay-anything far-eastern market. But I could be way off here.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Reform would be stupid to run against Lowe at the next election.
They'd lose so, yes. Although Lowe might well run on some sort of Tory tie in ticket
If Lowe outcompetes Farage in getting people to work with him in parliament, he could end up as the key powerbroker on the right.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
Lies, lies and more lies judged against forecasts from an unreliable pin-sticker whose report has only just been published. If you must use this emotive language, at least use a baseline that was available at the time.
This has not come out of the blue. It has been blindingly obvious to anyone willing to look since 2019. The last government was every bit as dishonest about this as the new one had been. Covid, and our absurd over reaction to it, cost us as much as a major war. The ridiculously over generous response to the energy crisis added much to the depth of the hole we were in.
There is plenty of blame to go around here and the last government has a large share. Reeves, however, had a chance to reset us on a more realistic path and completely ducked it. And she must have known. Even now she will continue to pretend. Its what our political class do.
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Reform would be stupid to run against Lowe at the next election.
They'd lose so, yes. Although Lowe might well run on some sort of Tory tie in ticket
Labour could win the seat with 25% if the votes are fairly evenly split between Lowe, Reform and Tory.
Yes, but I am dubious that Labour get over 20% in Yarmouth next time, they are not well loved there. In any case, if Reform are standing the Tories will do some sort of deal with Rupert, he is moving towards them, has Susan Hall on his Restore board etc
Dan Wooton also notimg McMurdock has been nobbled by Nigel (as well as his own actions possibly)
Given Nigel's track record with UKIP, and current performance with RefUK, the idea that he can gather together 326+ MPs to run a government is for the birds, isn't it?
And being PM at the head of a coalition government is even more absurd.
Emporers New Party vibes - the King is naked, and deeply unpleasant to work for and that's becoming increasingly exposed and obvious
In a way, it's what we saw with Boris. Nigel's superficial appeal is understandable (bows down to nobody, says what he thinks). You have to get pretty close up to be let down by him.
But, as with Boris, that process only happens one person at a time and plenty never get close enough to be properly betrayed.
And the bad news for old party optimists is that people let down by one charlatan are likely to move on to another one.
In reality, rather than it be down to some kind of personality defect of Farage’s, the truth is McMurdock was a paper candidate who scraped into what was a very Reformy seat, (SBET was one of my best value losers in 2015) and turns out to have at least two skeletons in his closet. Reform would probably be pleased to have the opportunity to replace him.
He praised Rupert Lowes enquiry and now hes ex Reform just like Rupert.
Reform would be stupid to run against Lowe at the next election.
They'd lose so, yes. Although Lowe might well run on some sort of Tory tie in ticket
If Lowe outcompetes Farage in getting people to work with him in parliament, he could end up as the key powerbroker on the right.
Lowe and Restore will probably be a factor in any Tory recovery - see Kemis 'its fine' response to Susan Hall joining up. Lowe and Jenricks lunch date a couple months ago seems to have set up some arms length cooperation
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
Lies, lies and more lies judged against forecasts from an unreliable pin-sticker whose report has only just been published. If you must use this emotive language, at least use a baseline that was available at the time.
This has not come out of the blue. It has been blindingly obvious to anyone willing to look since 2019. The last government was every bit as dishonest about this as the new one had been. Covid, and our absurd over reaction to it, cost us as much as a major war. The ridiculously over generous response to the energy crisis added much to the depth of the hole we were in.
There is plenty of blame to go around here and the last government has a large share. Reeves, however, had a chance to reset us on a more realistic path and completely ducked it. And she must have known. Even now she will continue to pretend. Its what our political class do.
For COVID and the energy crisis the government had a rock-solid explanation for why things were going to hurt for a while. In fact during COVID saving rates went through the roof.
The tweet can be fisked in various ways, but the most obvious (I have no idea) is that 'circumstances render it unlikely that a Reform party which plans to form a government would take me back because they would have more sense and I am plainly a pompous idiot, so I won't try my luck, but there is nothing which, with a fair wind behind me, will prevent me drawing my meagre stipend as an MP for the next four years, at least my solicitor/barrister has thus indicated'.
Off thread: The internet is generally fairly route-1 in selling you things ("he's recently googled sheds! Let's give him adverts of sheds!") But occasionally it makes quirky choices. At present, I'm being presented with an advert for life-size cardboard cutouts of people: specifically two Dr. Who assistants and Jo Swinson. I cannot imagine how any of these are reflected by my internet activity.
The tweet can be fisked in various ways, but the most obvious (I have no idea) is that 'circumstances render it unlikely that a Reform party which plans to form a government would take me back because they would have more sense and I am plainly a pompous idiot, so I won't try my luck, but there is nothing which, with a fair wind behind me, will prevent me drawing my meagre stipend as an MP for the next four years, at least my solicitor/barrister has thus indicated'.
Id have expected him to wish them well and confirm he will continue to work towards the goals of Reform etc etc in that case. Id say its more likely hes found out praising Rupert Lowe upsets certain people who have recently had their own hokey cokey with Reform
Widespread support for the triple lock on the BBC news article. Lots of entitlement, lots of talk about it being too low.
This country is nearly ungovernable.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
We overlook this massively when analysing politics - an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality.
Algarkirk hit the nail on the head in saying "Time for a grown up PM, quite prepared to risk being a one term wonder, to go on all media every week for 10 minutes to tell the truth and explain the problems and the plan. When it has a plan."
We on this website - and the country at large - spend an astonishing amount of time talking about culture war issues, or about very small tweaks of budgets etc - when ultimately, pensions this high by 2030 - coupled with the NHS at 50% of gov spending - is a huge part of the current backdrop.
At this point Starmer and Labour might genuinely have a better chance in 2029 by sticking to their guns on widespread reform of the above, hoping that the bond markets etc decisively back their bravery, and that the people start to see the benefits of this action in 2029. Instead they are left hoping for a sudden growth miracle, or FPTP and a divided opposition seeing them squeak out another majority.
Rubbish.
If a quarter of people think MPs' expenses are in the top 3 costs for government then that does not mean “an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality” but rather that an ‘absolute ton’ of respondents were answering a different question from the one you and the pollsters thought they were asking.
Off thread: The internet is generally fairly route-1 in selling you things ("he's recently googled sheds! Let's give him adverts of sheds!") But occasionally it makes quirky choices. At present, I'm being presented with an advert for life-size cardboard cutouts of people: specifically two Dr. Who assistants and Jo Swinson. I cannot imagine how any of these are reflected by my internet activity.
It insisted for a while that I needed Rotherham piledrivers.
Is this a business you know anything about? AFAIUI, they are in the business in renting unnecessarily high-end student accommodation to the pay-anything far-eastern market. But I could be way off here.
All I know is they’re down 9% year on year and this reflects on our university industry and probably why they’re making so many people redundant.
Been out for my lunch in Manchester City centre and I’ve SWP type complaining about the rich whilst wearing Balmain trainers.
I wear Skechers. Are they better than them ?
The cheapest Balmain trainers are around £350 quid and the most expensive ones north of £1,000.
You talk like Marlene Dietrich And you dance like Zizi Jeanmaire Your clothes are all made by Balmain And there's diamonds and pearls in your hair, yes there are
Dunno when the song was written but it was number one in the hit parade in the late sixties so Balmain have been around a while.
"Underlying public debt is now at its highest level since the early 1960s and is projected to rise further over the medium term. Arresting this increase has become considerably more challenging as economic growth has slowed and interest rates risen. Despite the tax-to-GDP ratio rising to the highest level in the period since 1950, borrowing is still 3 per cent of GDP above the level that would be needed to durably stabilise debt. And the Government has left itself very small margins against its objectives of restoring the current budget to balance and getting net financial liabilities to fall by the end of the decade. Despite this, public expectations of what government can and should do in response to emerging threats and future emergencies seem to be rising."
GDP is roughly £2.7trn so 1% is roughly £27bn and 3% £81bn.
So, our Chancellor claimed we had a £22bn black hole. That was a lie. It was much, much worse than that. She told us that her last budget reset the economy on a sustainable path for the Parliament. Another lie. She told us she would not need to increase taxes again. Another lie. She blew the £22bn raised by NI on wage increases for the public sector meaning that there was no improvement in the underlying situation (since those wage increases will continue to use the additional tax going forward).
How much longer are our political classes going to keep pretending?
Lies, lies and more lies judged against forecasts from an unreliable pin-sticker whose report has only just been published. If you must use this emotive language, at least use a baseline that was available at the time.
This has not come out of the blue. It has been blindingly obvious to anyone willing to look since 2019. The last government was every bit as dishonest about this as the new one had been. Covid, and our absurd over reaction to it, cost us as much as a major war. The ridiculously over generous response to the energy crisis added much to the depth of the hole we were in.
There is plenty of blame to go around here and the last government has a large share. Reeves, however, had a chance to reset us on a more realistic path and completely ducked it. And she must have known. Even now she will continue to pretend. Its what our political class do.
The first interesting question is When are they going to be straight with their own MPs and the voters?
The second interesting question is When is the alternatrive government in waiting, Reform, going to give us a budget and fiscal plan for the next 10 years, and what will the IFS have to say about it?
IMHO Labour's best chance of staying in power (supposing by then they even want to) is honesty with us. Crisis stuff. Address the nation. All pledges from the past null and void. Blame the Tories. These are the figures. This is the plan....
Is this a business you know anything about? AFAIUI, they are in the business in renting unnecessarily high-end student accommodation to the pay-anything far-eastern market. But I could be way off here.
My son rented from Unite in Bristol. Anything but high end.
Off thread: The internet is generally fairly route-1 in selling you things ("he's recently googled sheds! Let's give him adverts of sheds!") But occasionally it makes quirky choices. At present, I'm being presented with an advert for life-size cardboard cutouts of people: specifically two Dr. Who assistants and Jo Swinson. I cannot imagine how any of these are reflected by my internet activity.
These are usually usually called standees - is that similar to your recent activity?
Comments
The big stuff, like NHS spending, income tax, pensioner benefits, fuel duties, VAT, social care have all been left alone, or gone catastrophically wrong in the case of WFP.
How long until Reeves has to hand the budget over to the OBR for grading? Labour have backed themselves into an impossible position over the budget now.
See this poll from last year (source) which showed that over a quarter of people think MPs expenses are amongst the top 3 costs for government.
We overlook this massively when analysing politics - an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality.
Algarkirk hit the nail on the head in saying "Time for a grown up PM, quite prepared to risk being a one term wonder, to go on all media every week for 10 minutes to tell the truth and explain the problems and the plan. When it has a plan."
We on this website - and the country at large - spend an astonishing amount of time talking about culture war issues, or about very small tweaks of budgets etc - when ultimately, pensions this high by 2030 - coupled with the NHS at 50% of gov spending - is a huge part of the current backdrop.
At this point Starmer and Labour might genuinely have a better chance in 2029 by sticking to their guns on widespread reform of the above, hoping that the bond markets etc decisively back their bravery, and that the people start to see the benefits of this action in 2029. Instead they are left hoping for a sudden growth miracle, or FPTP and a divided opposition seeing them squeak out another majority.
Pensioners do not need it, and most do not vote Labour.
The WFA situation was part of this.
If there was a much more consistent narrative that "We can't just keep paying tons to rich pensioners who often don't need it, when 27% of pensioners are in millionaire households - but we want to make sure we can still pay for those who need it" - then maybe it's easier to overturn the triple lock too.
Parties of all stripes are too scared of losing the grey vote. Quite frankly - Labour should be prepared to lose 2029 if it means delivering the long term reform this country needs
"When it was introduced in 2012, initial estimates assumed that triple lock uprating would result in state pension increases averaging 0.2 percentage points above earnings growth. Based on these assumptions, the move from an earnings-linked to a triple-locked pension would have cost an equivalent of £5.2 billion in 2029-30. In fact, inflation has turned out to be significantly more volatile over this period and earnings growth has been lower, with the non-earnings elements of the lock triggered in eight of the 13 years to date. As a result, and despite the suspension of the triple lock for one year during the pandemic, the triple lock is expected to have cost £15.5 billion annually by 2029-30, around three times higher than initial expectations."
Utterly unsustainable.
Oops
https://x.com/peterproperty/status/1942480377928442179?s=61
Plus the grey vote is less inclined to Labour anyway.
The political prostitutes that are the Lib Dem’s will, of course, pander to the sense of grievance for a few cheap votes as will the Tories but they should simply tough it out.
Even more weirdly, I'm convinced they had it for the B side, which was this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zVPKXTAxAQ&list=RD4zVPKXTAxAQ&start_radio=1
I cannot explain why.
There is plenty of blame to go around here and the last government has a large share. Reeves, however, had a chance to reset us on a more realistic path and completely ducked it. And she must have known. Even now she will continue to pretend. Its what our political class do.
Lowe and Jenricks lunch date a couple months ago seems to have set up some arms length cooperation
I cannot imagine how any of these are reflected by my internet activity.
NEW THREAD
Id say its more likely hes found out praising Rupert Lowe upsets certain people who have recently had their own hokey cokey with Reform
If a quarter of people think MPs' expenses are in the top 3 costs for government then that does not mean “an absolute ton of voters are very disconnected from fiscal reality” but rather that an ‘absolute ton’ of respondents were answering a different question from the one you and the pollsters thought they were asking.
It is a polling failure, pure and simple.
That’s not good.
The second interesting question is When is the alternatrive government in waiting, Reform, going to give us a budget and fiscal plan for the next 10 years, and what will the IFS have to say about it?
IMHO Labour's best chance of staying in power (supposing by then they even want to) is honesty with us. Crisis stuff. Address the nation. All pledges from the past null and void. Blame the Tories. These are the figures. This is the plan....