politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » An interim government would need more than just a PM

TOPPING said:

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

Thankfully the opposition parties have seen sense and not fallen for a trap .

To have tried to VONC Bozo now would have allowed him to say they ruined negotiations as allegedly concrete proposals will be put forward early next week .

Secondly the 21 Tory rebels are reluctant to pull the plug, some want the whip back and others want to be seen to giving him a chance to secure a deal.

The off record briefings about a loophole in the Benn Act were a desperate attempt to frighten the opposition into an early VONC.

The so called loopholes are just more nonsense from Cummings .

But if they are not nonsense, they have lost time to do something about them......

So they will have fallen for the trap.

I’ll take what the experts say who agree even if Bozo refuses to obey the law the courts will take quick action to make sure he does .

His threats at the judiciary won’t go down well.

Good to see you prejudging what the courts will decide. They are truly no longer independent if you can rely upon them to do your bidding.....

Good point. If I drive at 130mph on the A1(M) and get caught I have no idea what will happen.

You might. Especially if you happen to know the police haven't propery calibrated their speed guns.....

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

Thankfully the opposition parties have seen sense and not fallen for a trap .

To have tried to VONC Bozo now would have allowed him to say they ruined negotiations as allegedly concrete proposals will be put forward early next week .

Secondly the 21 Tory rebels are reluctant to pull the plug, some want the whip back and others want to be seen to giving him a chance to secure a deal.

The off record briefings about a loophole in the Benn Act were a desperate attempt to frighten the opposition into an early VONC.

The so called loopholes are just more nonsense from Cummings .

But if they are not nonsense, they have lost time to do something about them......

So they will have fallen for the trap.

I’ll take what the experts say who agree even if Bozo refuses to obey the law the courts will take quick action to make sure he does .

His threats at the judiciary won’t go down well.

Good to see you prejudging what the courts will decide. They are truly no longer independent if you can rely upon them to do your bidding.....

Clearly you haven’t read the experts views on the so called loopholes . The courts will uphold the law . And please spare us the faux outrage over the independence of the judiciary . I said before the SC case I’d respect their ruling if it went for the government , they’re the experts . Sadly Leavers only respect judges and other bodies if they agree with them . The so called Leave mantra to get back parliamentary sovereignty and British judges deciding is yet another pack of lies . Leavers seem instead to want to live in a dictatorship given the insults hurled at the judges whose decision means a future PM doesn’t have unrestricted power .

Scott_P said:

ROFL

https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1178703550026616839

However 62% do not believe Labour is ready for Government in the same poll and 63% do not believe Corbyn is ready to be PM

viewcode said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I unusual in knowing my NI number off by heart?

No. I also.

No and would expect most to know it

noneoftheabove said:

The_Taxman said:

NickPalmer said:

noneoftheabove said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

BBC News - Tory conference: National Living Wage to rise to £10.50, says chancellor
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49881980

Why on earth are we setting this 5 years in advance? What if there is deflation in that time? Or 10% inflation? Its not exactly the most predictable economy ever at the moment.

It is meaningless, apart from confirming the country is being managed for opinion poll outcomes, not economic (or other socially good) outcomes.

And it's not a commitment - like Labour's 32-hour week over 10 years, it's something they will "aim to" do. I'm not especially cynical about politics, but there is wriggle room there.

I have long taken the view that as society develops it is only logical that it becomes more social democratic. From my perspective it seems to be only that technology has not yet evolved to a level sustainable level to cut working hours and also some parts of the world will always be able to do things cheaper by human activity. Personally i have been on a political journey from a Tory to a progressive, even as a Tory i was always worried about human impacts. The Tories now are so repulsive i am embarassed i ever supported them!

Parties change very rapidly. No reason to be ashamed of supporting them pre 2019 nor supporting Labour pre 2015. No reason not to consider either of them again when they return to their senses.

Thats a good point. I think i am a centrerist. Some movements economically and socially are necessary but i believe it is a slow process. Too much too soon is bad. Hence my opposition to no deal brexit! I have also come to the conclusion that life is brittle and not every human is able to function as a net giver. Some state intervention is not only necessary but desirable.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

malcolmg said:

viewcode said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I unusual in knowing my NI number off by heart?

No. I also.

No and would expect most to know it

Was it an Urban (or my internal family) Myth that knowing it off by heart was a sign that you were rubbish at work and had had a lot of jobs?

More likely to be evidence that one is actually paying one's correct taxes - one way or another - via the annual tax return and ensuing correspondence.

Scott_P said:

ROFL
Voters think May's a better leader than Johnson
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1178703550026616839

Screamingly obvious

Any chance we could get her back? The past two months have made her reign feel like an oasis of honesty, decency and sound judgement. And NO GROPING

HYUFD said:

Good move from Javid to promise to raise the minimum wage, targeted at precisely the working class Leave voters the Tories need to win a Tory majority

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1178679760018391040

MarqueeMark said:

TOPPING said:

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

Thankfully the opposition parties have seen sense and not fallen for a trap .

To have tried to VONC Bozo now would have allowed him to say they ruined negotiations as allegedly concrete proposals will be put forward early next week .

Secondly the 21 Tory rebels are reluctant to pull the plug, some want the whip back and others want to be seen to giving him a chance to secure a deal.

The off record briefings about a loophole in the Benn Act were a desperate attempt to frighten the opposition into an early VONC.

The so called loopholes are just more nonsense from Cummings .

But if they are not nonsense, they have lost time to do something about them......

So they will have fallen for the trap.

I’ll take what the experts say who agree even if Bozo refuses to obey the law the courts will take quick action to make sure he does .

His threats at the judiciary won’t go down well.

Good to see you prejudging what the courts will decide. They are truly no longer independent if you can rely upon them to do your bidding.....

Good point. If I drive at 130mph on the A1(M) and get caught I have no idea what will happen.

You might. Especially if you happen to know the police haven't propery calibrated their speed guns.....

In North Yorkshire Police area , they have no fixed speed cameras.
They have mobile speed vans , which go to differing areas each day.
The vans are manned by civilians.
I believe the fines collected , pay for the wages , vehicles, and equipment.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

malcolmg said:

viewcode said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I unusual in knowing my NI number off by heart?

No. I also.

No and would expect most to know it

Was it an Urban (or my internal family) Myth that knowing it off by heart was a sign that you were rubbish at work and had had a lot of jobs?

JBriskinindyref2 said:

malcolmg said:

viewcode said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I unusual in knowing my NI number off by heart?

No. I also.

No and would expect most to know it

Was it an Urban (or my internal family) Myth that knowing it off by heart was a sign that you were rubbish at work and had had a lot of jobs?

Dont confuse changing jobs frequently for being shit! When i was working i was the best at several employers, the problem was i either did not agree with the ethics or was hated by other employees due to success who made it a very depressing environment and i wanted to get out! Life can be very unfair!

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Carnyx said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

malcolmg said:

viewcode said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I unusual in knowing my NI number off by heart?

No. I also.

No and would expect most to know it

Was it an Urban (or my internal family) Myth that knowing it off by heart was a sign that you were rubbish at work and had had a lot of jobs?

More likely to be evidence that one is actually paying one's correct taxes - one way or another - via the annual tax return and ensuing correspondence.

Never done a tax return. Although I did have some shares at one point. Obviously they had decreased in value.

That's certainly possible if one's affairs are simple and don't exceed the relevant allowances.

noneoftheabove said:

HYUFD said:

Good move from Javid to promise to raise the minimum wage, targeted at precisely the working class Leave voters the Tories need to win a Tory majority

Last week you were saying it was skilled manual workers - they earn well above minimum wage.

64% of unskilled DE workers voted Leave, no harm throwing a shot across Corbyn's bow with his core vote

https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

Richard_Nabavi said:

His Twitter profile is:

Robert Rowland
@RowlandBrexitSE
@brexitparty_uk
MEP for the South East. Campaigning against the #brexitbetrayal and to #ChangePoliticsForGood #TungstenTippedBrexiteer

... so it's probably fair to say that he's not exactly the most impartial of writers.

Is it true though?

MarqueeMark said:

nico67 said:

I’ll take what the experts say who agree even if Bozo refuses to obey the law the courts will take quick action to make sure he does .

His threats at the judiciary won’t go down well.

Good to see you prejudging what the courts will decide. They are truly no longer independent if you can rely upon them to do your bidding.....

They do that. I have them on standby. I have my instructions piped directly into their brains. Their eyes flash briefly red when I download my instructions.

Pause.

OK, I might be making that up...

Drutt said:

I have been absent-mindedly scrolling this thread on my phone and I think I have marked about half a dozen comments off-topic with my fat fingers. Sorry if one of them was yours.

By the way, I think the PM takes the political, rather than the legal, loophole and resigns (VONCing himself to start the FTPA clock) a couple of hours before he has to send the letter. No emergency PM arises for, inter alia, all the reasons we have discussed.

Cummings isn't a legislative affairs guy, he's a how-to-win-votes guy. There's no secret legal plot.

What is not mentioned often enough is that as well as employing Cummings, No 10 took on Nikki da Costa too. She is very much a legislative affairs genius.

I think this means a full time (35 hours a week working 233 days a year) wage is about £17,100 in 2024, but that equates to about £15,500 today, in real terms, so not quite as generous as it looks in nominal.

I’d hope The Saj would cut employer NI rates to help them pay for it too, and mitigate impact on employment.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1178707566148366339

But the Tories have long ceased to be a conservative party. They're part of the death cult now.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

viewcode said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

The_Taxman said:

NickPalmer said:

noneoftheabove said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

BBC News - Tory conference: National Living Wage to rise to £10.50, says chancellor
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49881980

Why on earth are we setting this 5 years in advance? What if there is deflation in that time? Or 10% inflation? Its not exactly the most predictable economy ever at the moment.

It is meaningless, apart from confirming the country is being managed for opinion poll outcomes, not economic (or other socially good) outcomes.

And it's not a commitment - like Labour's 32-hour week over 10 years, it's something they will "aim to" do. I'm not especially cynical about politics, but there is wriggle room there.

I have long taken the view that as society develops it is only logical that it becomes more social democratic. From my perspective it seems to be only that technology has not yet evolved to a level sustainable level to cut working hours and also some parts of the world will always be able to do things cheaper by human activity. Personally i have been on a political journey from a Tory to a progressive, even as a Tory i was always worried about human impacts. The Tories now are so repulsive i am embarassed i ever supported them!

TEN POUNDS FIFTY!

So if Corbyn offered you TWELVE POUNDS...you'd take it?...

Very Good - From a personal perspective, being signed off and that, and have never earned 10 fifty in my life- and since they got there first, I'm taking the Tory offer.

£10.50 per hour, assuming a 37hour week and a 48week year, is £18,500pa.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1178707737745731586

Replacing the PM trying to deliver Brexit with one trying to delay it is literally the only bear trap the Remainers have yet to walk into WRT Boris.

Whether it’s through a VONC or dismissal, it won’t end well for Remain City when they face Brexit United at home on the return leg....

Mr. Indyref2, I'm just self-employed.

Edited extra bit: as a writer, incidentally, so if anyone wants some writing done, give me a bell.

Casino_Royale said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1178705530635898880

Isn’t this a bit silly?

Everyone knows he’s a shagger.

It’s his incompetence and conduct in office as PM that’ll be his downfall. This is a distraction.

I would broadly agree if his character wasnt in question generally, and particularly a refusal to apologise. If he said "it was a very long time ago, I dont recollect it at all but if I caused any offence I apologise" that would make a big difference. The character he is playing as PM is not allowed to apologise though, Trump has set the guidelines he follows.

Mortimer said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1178707737745731586

Replacing the PM trying to deliver Brexit with one trying to delay it is literally the only bear trap the Remainers have yet to walk into WRT Boris.

Whether it’s through a VONC or dismissal, it won’t end well for Remain City when they face Brexit United at home on the return leg....

Will your Golden Rule still be operational when we're still in the EU in 2022 after a series of own goals by Remainers?

Byronic said:

It looks like the WA EIB stuff is at least partly true.

This is from parliament's analysis of the agreement.

"Under the Withdrawal Agreement, the UK will, over a period of 12 years,
receive the €3.5 billion of capital it has paid in to the EIB. However, the UK
will not receive any share of the profits that the EIB has accumulated, nor any
interest or dividends. Given that this could amount to €7.6 billion, almost 20
percent of the UK’s obligations under the £35–39 billion financial settlement,
we regret that the Government has failed to provide an adequate explanation of
the position taken in the negotiations."

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldeucom/269/269.pdf

OK, fair enough, although the claim made by Rowland goes further than that.

Richard_Nabavi said:

HYUFD said:

Good move from Javid to promise to raise the minimum wage, targeted at precisely the working class Leave voters the Tories need to win a Tory majority

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1178679760018391040

Whenever someone (usually from the far left) makes proposals for a steep rise of minimum wages in Germany there are questions being asked:

- will only the min wage rise, the other three out of four workers unaffected?
-what about the 50% economically inactive, will benefit recipients enjoy the same rises of income?
-who will pay for the wage rises, will profitability of businesses be affected, or will prices rise?
-in the likely case of the latter (inflation), how will competitiveness of export businesses be affected?

Who is asking the Tories these questions?

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think this means a full time (35 hours a week working 233 days a year) wage is about £17,100 in 2024, but that equates to about £15,500 today, in real terms, so not quite as generous as it looks in nominal.

I’d hope The Saj would cut employer NI rates to help them pay for it too, and mitigate impact on employment.

Noone works 35 hours a week.

No-one?

Many employment contracts are drafted around that. Some more at 37.5 hours per week and another good chunk at 40 hours. It depends.

It may be that people work more, of course, and it might be different for shift workers but I’ve based it on a 9-5 with an hour for lunch.

matthiasfromhamburg said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

HYUFD said:

Good move from Javid to promise to raise the minimum wage, targeted at precisely the working class Leave voters the Tories need to win a Tory majority

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1178679760018391040

Whenever someone (usually from the far left) makes proposals for a steep rise of minimum wages in Germany there are questions being asked:

- will only the min wage rise, the other three out of four workers unaffected?
-what about the 50% economically inactive, will benefit recipients enjoy the same rises of income?
-who will pay for the wage rises, will profitability of businesses be affected, or will prices rise?
-in the likely case of the latter (inflation), how will competitiveness of export businesses be affected?

Who is asking the Tories these questions?

Those are excellent questions, but the opposition are certainly not asking them. They are asking only why more free money isn't being doled out more quickly.

Mr. Indyref2, capitalism works a hell of a lot better than socialism.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

viewcode said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

viewcode said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

The_Taxman said:

NickPalmer said:

noneoftheabove said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

BBC News - Tory conference: National Living Wage to rise to £10.50, says chancellor
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49881980

Why on earth are we setting this 5 years in advance? What if there is deflation in that time? Or 10% inflation? Its not exactly the most predictable economy ever at the moment.

It is meaningless, apart from confirming the country is being managed for opinion poll outcomes, not economic (or other socially good) outcomes.

And it's not a commitment - like Labour's 32-hour week over 10 years, it's something they will "aim to" do. I'm not especially cynical about politics, but there is wriggle room there.

I have long taken the view that as society develops it is only logical that it becomes more social democratic. From my perspective it seems to be only that technology has not yet evolved to a level sustainable level to cut working hours and also some parts of the world will always be able to do things cheaper by human activity. Personally i have been on a political journey from a Tory to a progressive, even as a Tory i was always worried about human impacts. The Tories now are so repulsive i am embarassed i ever supported them!

TEN POUNDS FIFTY!

So if Corbyn offered you TWELVE POUNDS...you'd take it?...

Very Good - From a personal perspective, being signed off and that, and have never earned 10 fifty in my life- and since they got there first, I'm taking the Tory offer.

£10.50 per hour, assuming a 37hour week and a 48week year, is £18,500pa.

There's 52 weeks in a year and a thing called "holiday pay"

Not to be too old fashioned about it but it kind of depends if you’re on a salary, according to an employment contract, or paid an hourly wage for regular clocked hours.

Byronic said:

The WA does seem to be a shockingly bad deal. Almost as if some of the UK and EU negotiators decided to make it so dreadful, MPs would vote against, and in the end we would stay.

I detect an echo here.

It simply reflects our weak bargaining position. Why would anyone be surprised that we don't great a brilliant deal when the alternative is dramatically worse for us?

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think this means a full time (35 hours a week working 233 days a year) wage is about £17,100 in 2024, but that equates to about £15,500 today, in real terms, so not quite as generous as it looks in nominal.

I’d hope The Saj would cut employer NI rates to help them pay for it too, and mitigate impact on employment.

Noone works 35 hours a week.

No-one?

Many employment contracts are drafted around that. Some more at 37.5 hours per week and another good chunk at 40 hours. It depends.

It may be that people work more, of course, and it might be different for shift workers but I’ve based it on a 9-5 with an hour for lunch.

hour long lunches are a bit old school I thought - but if people you know are working 35 hours fair play to them. We work to live not live to work after all (unless you get lucky like me and just have to watch sky news/sports, post on PB and pray to Coffey everyday)

My contracted hours are 40 hours per week, personally, and i work between 45-50 a week. So not too bad.

TfL and other public bodies operate off 35 hours.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

malcolmg said:

viewcode said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Am I unusual in knowing my NI number off by heart?

No. I also.

No and would expect most to know it

Was it an Urban (or my internal family) Myth that knowing it off by heart was a sign that you were rubbish at work and had had a lot of jobs?

Given you only ever get issued one NI number it most certainly must have been.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Drutt said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

The_Taxman said:

NickPalmer said:

noneoftheabove said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

BBC News - Tory conference: National Living Wage to rise to £10.50, says chancellor
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49881980

Why on earth are we setting this 5 years in advance? What if there is deflation in that time? Or 10% inflation? Its not exactly the most predictable economy ever at the moment.

It is meaningless, apart from confirming the country is being managed for opinion poll outcomes, not economic (or other socially good) outcomes.

And it's not a commitment - like Labour's 32-hour week over 10 years, it's something they will "aim to" do. I'm not especially cynical about politics, but there is wriggle room there.

I have long taken the view that as society develops it is only logical that it becomes more social democratic. From my perspective it seems to be only that technology has not yet evolved to a level sustainable level to cut working hours and also some parts of the world will always be able to do things cheaper by human activity. Personally i have been on a political journey from a Tory to a progressive, even as a Tory i was always worried about human impacts. The Tories now are so repulsive i am embarassed i ever supported them!

TEN POUNDS FIFTY!

It's 5.5% a year. Average wage inflation is 4% right now.

So you're saying the National Living Wage has become Livable? Sounds great to me.

My comment was just the figures. But the figures are a two-edged sword. It's neither so mean a policy as to be consumed by inflation, nor so profligate as to be a major drama.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Byronic said:

The WA does seem to be a shockingly bad deal. Almost as if some of the UK and EU negotiators decided to make it so dreadful, MPs would vote against, and in the end we would stay.

I detect an echo here.

It simply reflects our weak bargaining position. Why would anyone be surprised that we don't great a brilliant deal when the alternative is dramatically worse for us?

I thought you thought it was a brilliant deal?

Anyway, I'm off. Play nicely, everyone.

Drutt said:

If you look back through my postings you'll recognise I'm nothing of the sort. I don't like the idea of a government telling employees and employers what the price of the former's labour must be at all. I do, though, like to see a greater labour share of income. I don't think NMW or NLW is the best way to go about it

But the figures are the figures. It's an increase, but in the context of current wage growth it's a modest increase. We shouldn't lose our shit over it.

I wasn't suggesting you were, although on re-reading I can see how it could be inferred.

I was referencing the deeply tribal Labour supporters who mindlessly criticize even if they would be delighted with a particular policy if it came from their side.

It is just embarrassing.

Stereotomy said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Byronic said:

The WA does seem to be a shockingly bad deal. Almost as if some of the UK and EU negotiators decided to make it so dreadful, MPs would vote against, and in the end we would stay.

I detect an echo here.

It simply reflects our weak bargaining position. Why would anyone be surprised that we don't great a brilliant deal when the alternative is dramatically worse for us?

I thought you thought it was a brilliant deal?

The concession our side got on the backstop was a major achievement (so it's really bizarre that this is the bit that got most flak). Otherwise it's much as expected: the best available given the poor starting position.

SunnyJim said:

Drutt said:

It's 5.5% a year. Average wage inflation is 4% right now.

CPI is running at 1.7%.

The Tories are offering OVER 3 TIMES the current rate of inflation to the lowest paid in society.

You would have to be a swivel-eyed Labour drone to criticize that.

Point of order: if Labour is offering £10/hr from 2020 with inflationary rises, then the Tories are offering less. So criticising it is legitimate.
I'm not, by the way. This is good step forward from both parties.

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Re: Republicans in the NYT

Simply put it's them and us. I'm sure many Republicans in their hearts don't agree with everything Trump says or does but they still like him a lot better than the likes of Pelosi or Sanders.

The left are no better. Look at the way, Labour brushed away the Bercow bullying allegations as we was on their side over Brexit. Look at the way Momentum operate.

Indeed.
Corbyn/Johnson - two cheeks etc.

malcolmg said:

I see Boris is trying to get Scotland back on side.

Boris Johnson tells ScotTories he will block Scotland's First Minister from COP26 global climate change summit in Glasgow and cover it in union flags

If Boris gets Brexit done either pre or post GE what would you estimate the likelihood of Sindyref 2 being won by the SNP?

It would surely be greater than 50/50 would it not?

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Indyref2, have to fill in the NI number every year on a tax return. I'm reasonably sure I know it off the top of my head just from that.

You pay Capital Gains Tax every year? How much you got left?

Tax returns self assessment, self employed, higher rate tax payers, etc unfortunately once you have to fill one in they never let you go, my wife has had zero income for 12 years or more but I still have to complete one for her.

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Drutt said:

SunnyJim said:

Drutt said:

It's 5.5% a year. Average wage inflation is 4% right now.

CPI is running at 1.7%.

The Tories are offering OVER 3 TIMES the current rate of inflation to the lowest paid in society.

You would have to be a swivel-eyed Labour drone to criticize that.

If you look back through my postings you'll recognise I'm nothing of the sort. I don't like the idea of a government telling employees and employers what the price of the former's labour must be at all. I do, though, like to see a greater labour share of income. I don't think NMW or NLW is the best way to go about it

But the figures are the figures. It's an increase, but in the context of current wage growth it's a modest increase. We shouldn't lose our shit over it.

I, for one, am totally losing my shit over it.

Labour were a calling with their banning of private schools and 32 hours.

But Tories have just played their pocket rockets.

I judge parties by their policies and I can sit on the fence no more.

The 32 hours a week policy, on the same review, is actually a policy that nobody gets a pay rise for eight years but at the end you'll only be working four days a week.

Also bear in mind that if you're on NMW now, the best way to get a raise over a five year period is not to wait for HMG to mandate it for you

Mortimer said:

JBriskinindyref2 said:

Casino_Royale said:

I think this means a full time (35 hours a week working 233 days a year) wage is about £17,100 in 2024, but that equates to about £15,500 today, in real terms, so not quite as generous as it looks in nominal.

I’d hope The Saj would cut employer NI rates to help them pay for it too, and mitigate impact on employment.

Noone works 35 hours a week.

Quite a lot of people I know work a 35 hour week.

Never heard of zero hours contracts Mr B?