Incomprehensible why she was brought back within a week. Inexcusable.
Starmer is doing well today. Sunak is doing OK, but he's made so many mistakes before and Starmer is hitting the open goals before him.
I think you are saying there a lot a baggage now at fag end of term in office, not all his mistakes but he carries them, like a good horse heavily handicapped.
Yes Braverman will resign soon, but that is more opportunity than disaster for Sunak.
A really poor performance by Sunak. The serious tone of yesterday was a fake. He’s like an ageing music hall comedian dragging out his predecessor’s old jokes and looking wounded when the only people who laugh are the rest of the cast.
Doesn’t change the fundamentals. Tory party still in a hole. Still Keir Starmer’s election to lose. But that was a massacre. Rishi Sunak was ready for Keir Starmer on every question. Labour MPs will be concerned.
Rishi's response to Caroline Lucas looks as if fracking is over and Lucus smiled and clapped
Fracking? Over? But I have heard from various Tories out there and even on here that fracking isn't just wonderful, it will actually improve the environment...
Another Truss policy binned
Hes going for the 'completely new thing' approach (cabinet appointments notwithstanding), trying to convince the 15% that resiled in horror from Trussteng that its safe to come straight back then work on the '19 ConLab transferees and now non voters
We currently export £29m/year of meat *total* to the US. The US consumes approximately zero lamb. And yet we are predicting ~£7m of Welsh Lamb exports per year. That's about a 25% increase in the export value! I find that hard to believe.
It's not that it isn't good to open that market, but it sounds like bobbins to me.
Interestingly Americans used to be much less sheepish about eating lamb. Americans ate an average of 5 pounds of lamb per capita per annum a century ago, its now just 0.6 pounds.
However lamb has started to become more popular there again, primarily due to immigrants eating it which has made it see a revival in shops and restaurants. So there's a huge potential growth market there if it could take off.
England & Wales are showing persistently high excess age-standardised mortality than the 2019 baseline, but Scotland doesn't appear to be (although the smaller sample size means this might not be a robust conclusion). Paul suggests that this might be related to ambulance response times, which aren't as bad in Scotland. Some food for thought there.
A really poor performance by Sunak. The serious tone of yesterday was a fake. He’s like an ageing music hall comedian dragging out his predecessor’s old jokes and looking wounded when the only people who laugh are the rest of the cast.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
Wow. This is quite something. A Russian soldier says it is perfectly normal to punish their comrades who have let the side down by forcing them to perform a sexual act on another. Apparently it is not gay in the slightest unlike those men who hold hands walking down the street waving rainbow flags who deserve to be beaten. There are an awful lot of Russian soldiers who are in the closet! (To be fair they don't have much other option)
TW: sexual violence
russian soldier is trying to justify rape and sexual violence as a legitimate and very normal way of punishment in the ru army.
according to him, it’s still not as horrible as a consensual gay sex and “rainbow flags”.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
Congratulations on producing a contender for the same prize that the ridiculous Roger attempted to claim an unsurpassable ownership of.
I am right of centre, though have always been a harsh critic of Johnson and his populism. I have paid Starmer a number of compliments over the years when many were unable to see his ability (SKS fans please explain etc.).
If you are unable to see how well Sunak did today, you are a partisan fool and have no political judgement
We currently export £29m/year of meat *total* to the US. The US consumes approximately zero lamb. And yet we are predicting ~£7m of Welsh Lamb exports per year. That's about a 25% increase in the export value! I find that hard to believe.
It's not that it isn't good to open that market, but it sounds like bobbins to me.
Hmm, new role for Truss, going to the States to open new lamb markets?
She has a fair bit of experience in the slaughtering of lambs.
Rishi's response to Caroline Lucas looks as if fracking is over and Lucus smiled and clapped
Hmmmm. Wonder how the ScoTories feel, after their loooooong stream of demands for fracking in Scotland, in the teeth of opposition from the other parties. Right down to Mr Ross et al voting for fracking* last week.
*OK, to allow the possibility of considering it, or whatever weasel words were used.
Doesn’t change the fundamentals. Tory party still in a hole. Still Keir Starmer’s election to lose. But that was a massacre. Rishi Sunak was ready for Keir Starmer on every question. Labour MPs will be concerned.
But if it's Dan Hodges saying it, that could mean that the Tories aren't in a hole, it's Sunak's election to lose but Sunak was hopeless and Labour MPs will be releived.
Hodges talking bollocks. Rishi's answers on Braverman and non-doms was not great.
I would phrase it differently, because they weren’t actually answers. The problem was it was so patently a rehearsed non answer, he couldn’t disguise the planned non answers as well as Boris did it.
But it’s just one nervous performance we are going on, it’s only if he’s exactly the same for the next 5 PMQs we can say the Tories have a problem.
I don't think Sunak's "of course they told me not to appoint Braverman" deflection will work. The question will keep coming back, someone will leak, and he will be forced to accept that he appointed her above the heads of the civil service.
The thing is I'd almost expect, or indeed, want, the civil service to question every ministerial decision, to be a bucket of cold water on the fires of their enthusiasm. It should be a key part of their role to act as a reality check.
So you'd expect that it would be part of the normal course of things for ministers to make decisions that went against concerns raised by civil servants. How many decisions are there that are so simple that there are no concerns to be raised about them?
You don't want civil servants to be simply yes men, and nor do you want ministers who are too scared by risks that they fail to act.
I really dislike the implications of that question from Starmer, and it unhelpfully politicises the civil service.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
A really poor performance by Sunak. The serious tone of yesterday was a fake. He’s like an ageing music hall comedian dragging out his predecessor’s old jokes and looking wounded when the only people who laugh are the rest of the cast.
Simon Hoare creating a hostage to fortune in this BBC follow up. Good job for Sunak that no-one knows who the heck he is, and that no-one is watching. More confirmation that this is a good line to take, though.
I thought Starmer was impressive. Sunak did fine, certainly for first time out and having only been in post 24 hours. Overall if the House was a little over-excited it felt like a return to seriousness after the nonsense and silliness of recent years.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
Starmer is under-rated - at least from the perspective of improving Labour's fortunes - I've always said so.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
I thought Starmer was impressive. Sunak did fine, certainly for first time out and having only been in post 24 hours. Overall if the House was a little over-excited it felt like a return to seriousness after the nonsense and silliness of recent years.
I detected a much lighter feel from all sides. A kind of collective sigh of relief.
** EXCLUSIVE: The UK is seeking to fill a fiscal shortfall of £35 billion on Nov 17, according to officials familiar with current Treasury and OBR data **
** The Treasury has drawn up a menu of 104 options to cut spending **
Rishi's response to Caroline Lucas looks as if fracking is over and Lucus smiled and clapped
Hmmmm. Wonder how the ScoTories feel, after their loooooong stream of demands for fracking in Scotland, in the teeth of opposition from the other parties. Right down to Mr Ross et al voting for fracking* last week.
*OK, to allow the possibility of considering it, or whatever weasel words were used.
Specifically, not to make Sir Keir de facto PM for a day to ban something which isn't actually going to happen.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
Starmer is under-rated - at least from the perspective of improving Labour's fortunes - I've always said so.
Must have just been you and me then. Most people said he was boring. I have always rated him. Tories that have underrated him have been dumb.
A really poor performance by Sunak. The serious tone of yesterday was a fake. He’s like an ageing music hall comedian dragging out his predecessor’s old jokes and looking wounded when the only people who laugh are the rest of the cast.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
Congratulations on producing a contender for the same prize that the ridiculous Roger attempted to claim an unsurpassable ownership of.
I am right of centre, though have always been a harsh critic of Johnson and his populism. I have paid Starmer a number of compliments over the years when many were unable to see his ability (SKS fans please explain etc.).
If you are unable to see how well Sunak did today, you are a partisan fool and have no political judgement
Sunak was not good in my opinion, based on his non answers were far too patently yah boo non answers, something Boris did far better than Sunak did today.
I don’t want to be rude but I don’t think you understand what PMQs is. It’s not a session where you ask a question and someone answers it, it’s political cage fighting.
I’m sure Sunak has a range of great skills, but political cage fighting is clearly not one of them, and you are just going to embarrass yourself claiming Sunak is great political cage fighter every week.
I don't think Sunak's "of course they told me not to appoint Braverman" deflection will work. The question will keep coming back, someone will leak, and he will be forced to accept that he appointed her above the heads of the civil service.
The thing is I'd almost expect, or indeed, want, the civil service to question every ministerial decision, to be a bucket of cold water on the fires of their enthusiasm. It should be a key part of their role to act as a reality check.
So you'd expect that it would be part of the normal course of things for ministers to make decisions that went against concerns raised by civil servants. How many decisions are there that are so simple that there are no concerns to be raised about them?
You don't want civil servants to be simply yes men, and nor do you want ministers who are too scared by risks that they fail to act.
I really dislike the implications of that question from Starmer, and it unhelpfully politicises the civil service.
Implications? The machinery of government is entitled to raise security concerns about someone fired for a double breach of the ministerial code, one of which was a serious security screw up.
A Tory MP is now on Politics Live stating very explicitly that the PM does everything correctly, so if she was appointed there cannot have been a concern raised by Simon Case. This is a serious hostage to fortune - it isn't party political for senior civil servants to state the proposed minister (a) broke the code or (b) was highlighted as a security risk.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
Starmer is under-rated - at least from the perspective of improving Labour's fortunes - I've always said so.
Must have just been you and me then. Most people said he was boring. I have always rated him. Tories that have underrated him have been dumb.
Yes. We agree. Starmer is overall a bad thing from the Tories POV.
His weakness, of course, is much of the electorate don't like him. To be honest he isn't much my cup of tea either - I think it's his tone and earnestness that is so off-putting.
I'd much rather have a pint with Sunak. By orders of magnitude.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Sadly it did. More a damning indictment of the maturity of MPs than evidence of a zinger. Its the Daily f*cking Star/Beano for goodness sake. I honestly think 'i used to be somebody important' was a misstep though. Painted himself as yesterdays man
We currently export £29m/year of meat *total* to the US. The US consumes approximately zero lamb. And yet we are predicting ~£7m of Welsh Lamb exports per year. That's about a 25% increase in the export value! I find that hard to believe.
It's not that it isn't good to open that market, but it sounds like bobbins to me.
Interestingly Americans used to be much less sheepish about eating lamb. Americans ate an average of 5 pounds of lamb per capita per annum a century ago, its now just 0.6 pounds.
However lamb has started to become more popular there again, primarily due to immigrants eating it which has made it see a revival in shops and restaurants. So there's a huge potential growth market there if it could take off.
Improbable, but certainly possible.
Damn. Beat me to it. I looked it up on various sites. I'm shocked. They are really missing out. It is such a low consumption. Assuming some eat quite a lot I assume most never touch it. Opportunity obviously. Cost may be an issue.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
The trick with comedy and jokes is delivery, even nuance. I always feel it funnier the shorter and more words you take out - might rain having more instinctive impact than it might rain today, in that sense Starmer’s delivery was good.
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
I actually think Sunak did a bit better than that, but this is definitely a very honest and fair summary of PMQs.
As I suspected, by appointing Braverman, Sunak has allowed that to become the story rather than his nice, shiny, new, responsible government (which should have been the message). He is better than his 3 immediate predecessors at PMQs, from the looks of things, but he could do with fewer unforced errors - Starmer is getting very good at picking these out now and scoring the goals.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
Starmer is under-rated - at least from the perspective of improving Labour's fortunes - I've always said so.
Chronically under-rated, and long May of stay that way for the sake of Labour fortunes.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Sadly it did. More a damning indictment of the maturity of MPs than evidence of a zinger. Its the Daily f*cking Star/Beano for goodness sake. I honestly think 'i used to be somebody important' was a misstep though. Painted himself as yesterdays man
While I won't have you traduce the Beano - one of the last bastions of excellence in our benighted island - I do agree that harking back to his role with the CPS as evidence of strength on Law and Order* needs to stop.
Lines need to be crafted such that Labour are what you think about going forward, the Tories representing the failures of the past.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
Congratulations on producing a contender for the same prize that the ridiculous Roger attempted to claim an unsurpassable ownership of.
I am right of centre, though have always been a harsh critic of Johnson and his populism. I have paid Starmer a number of compliments over the years when many were unable to see his ability (SKS fans please explain etc.).
If you are unable to see how well Sunak did today, you are a partisan fool and have no political judgement
Sunak was not good in my opinion, based on his non answers were far too patently yah boo non answers, something Boris did far better than Sunak did today.
I don’t want to be rude but I don’t think you understand what PMQs is. It’s not a session where you ask a question and someone answers it, it’s political cage fighting.
I’m sure Sunak has a range of great skills, but political cage fighting is clearly not one of them, and you are just going to embarrass yourself claiming Sunak is great political cage fighter every week.
Lol. You weren't being rude, you were being very silly. I have watched/listened to PMQs for the best part of my 55 years, so I think I might just understand how it works, thanks. I will leave it for others to judge my understanding of politics versus yours, but I am reasonably confident that you might get as much support in that analysis as a Tory in a Glasgow working mens club.
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
On the delay to the 17th - my guess is that the government wants to bake in the new lower debt interest rate assumptions and potentially a new significantly lower energy price assumption.
The original £70bn will be lower than half that figure by the time the new numbers are out. Substantially lower. My finger in the air number is £10bn in spending cuts, £10bn in tax rises and £5-7bn in additional borrowing per year for two or three years which closes as growth picks back up.
I think the triple lock and benefits go up by CPI. Income tax goes up by 1p in all brackets and the most controversial - NI now payable by all people on all income types. The second measure pays for the uprating of benefits and state pension benefits, the first closes half of the fiscal gap.
£10bn in cuts is more difficult to predict, I'd guess at local authority subsidies and unnamed "efficiency savings" of which there are still billions to cut. I'd also look out for a new "bonfire of quangos" narrative. The who public administration body is due a 50-60% chop, it would save £2-3bn and no one would notice.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
I think Starmer probably spend too much time in the Westminster political bubble. PMQs is good chance each week, as leader of the opposition, to set the political agenda. It's a rare and valuable resource.
He needs to make better use of it than chasing the latest preoccupation of the lobby journalists.
The next election turns on tying the blame for a decline in living standards onto the Tories and whoever happens to be Tory leader at the time of the next GE. Today's PMQs didn't do anything to advance that argument. It was wasted.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
Not if they stay well away from policy on focus on process. I was worried that they wouldn't have the discipline to do that - but they did.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
How is ot a culture war issue?
Not everything is 12d chess. Sometimes people just make shit awful decisions.
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
Labour will focus primarily on the circumstances of Braverman's re-appointment, not her actual policies or political beliefs.
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
No it wouldn’t. It would be a huge bonus for Sunak to be honest.
She’s full of herself, not a team player, not even proved her talent and delivery for holding a big 3 office.
In just a short period of time, everyone on all sides of politics regard her as toxic. That’s quite remarkable really.
Quite a lot of so called in the know commentators say Sunak had no choice but to appoint her has promised, as he done a deal so she wouldn’t back Boris, I’m sceptical of that, how much of a blow would it have if she backed Boris, was Sunak really thinking he had to prevent that? Free marketers instinctively choose Rishi anyway, as closer to their own beliefs than Boris.
I think Starmer probably spend too much time in the Westminster political bubble. PMQs is good chance each week, as leader of the opposition, to set the political agenda. It's a rare and valuable resource.
He needs to make better use of it than chasing the latest preoccupation of the lobby journalists.
The next election turns on tying the blame for a decline in living standards onto the Tories and whoever happens to be Tory leader at the time of the next GE. Today's PMQs didn't do anything to advance that argument. It was wasted.
I disagree - this is shaping the battlefield (to coin a contemporary analogy).
First they need to confirm the idea in everyone's minds that these are the same old faces, lacking integrity. Then they need to hammer them on every piece of bad economic news as they come through. Until you've done the former, you can't do the latter as any perceived "freshness" gives them the benefit of the doubt.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
Starmer is under-rated - at least from the perspective of improving Labour's fortunes - I've always said so.
Must have just been you and me then. Most people said he was boring. I have always rated him. Tories that have underrated him have been dumb.
Yes. We agree. Starmer is overall a bad thing from the Tories POV.
His weakness, of course, is much of the electorate don't like him. To be honest he isn't much my cup of tea either - I think it's his tone and earnestness that is so off-putting.
I'd much rather have a pint with Sunak. By orders of magnitude.
Don't know what that says.
His biggest achievement has been the dispatching of the Trots. That really didn’t look possible when he took over.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Sadly it did. More a damning indictment of the maturity of MPs than evidence of a zinger. Its the Daily f*cking Star/Beano for goodness sake. I honestly think 'i used to be somebody important' was a misstep though. Painted himself as yesterdays man
While I won't have you traduce the Beano - one of the last bastions of excellence in our benighted island - I do agree that harking back to his role with the CPS as evidence of strength on Law and Order* needs to stop.
Lines need to be crafted such that Labour are what you think about going forward, the Tories representing the failures of the past.
*(doink doink)
Yes, thats probably a good strategy. Its better than todays hasbeenery
Without sounding too partisan I am really very pleased with Rishi and labour have a whole new problem to deal with
Indeed today's PMQ was, if one can say quite, enjoyable for the first time in months
The grown-ups are back in charge of both major parties. We are back to a better place politically.
I was thinking the same thing. Starmer and moreso Labour have had it too easy for too long. If they are going to be good when they get into government they need a competent government to be up against beforehand. Boris was one easy tap in after another. Truss crashed the team bus. At least hopefully now we will have what in normal times would be considered the very minimum which is competently administration. I voted for Blair in 97 as he had a plan and agenda. I don't sense that in Labour at the moment. Hopefully that will come soon.
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
It’s beginning to look like this a boil that has to be lanced.
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
How is ot a culture war issue?
Not everything is 12d chess. Sometimes people just make shit awful decisions.
Yeah, a bad decision by Sunak that’s overshadowing the positives of his launch week.. 😕
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Without sounding too partisan I am really very pleased with Rishi and labour have a whole new problem to deal with
Indeed today's PMQ was, if one can say quite, enjoyable for the first time in months
The grown-ups are back in charge of both major parties. We are back to a better place politically.
I was thinking the same thing. Starmer and moreso Labour have had it too easy for too long. If they are going to be good when they get into government they need a competent government to be up against beforehand. Boris was one easy tap in after another. Truss crashed the team bus. At least hopefully now we will have what in normal times would be considered the very minimum which is competently administration. I voted for Blair in 97 as he had a plan and agenda. I don't sense that in Labour at the moment. Hopefully that will come soon.
Yes, Labour might be pissed off they'll have to work for it now but thats a very good thing for all of us
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
Sunak 6/10 - Did OK, but struggled with baggage and unnecessary own goals like Braverman. Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
This is by far the most useful judgment on here, the rest is just football chanting
Starmer is under-rated - at least from the perspective of improving Labour's fortunes - I've always said so.
Must have just been you and me then. Most people said he was boring. I have always rated him. Tories that have underrated him have been dumb.
Yes. We agree. Starmer is overall a bad thing from the Tories POV.
His weakness, of course, is much of the electorate don't like him. To be honest he isn't much my cup of tea either - I think it's his tone and earnestness that is so off-putting.
I'd much rather have a pint with Sunak. By orders of magnitude.
Don't know what that says.
His biggest achievement has been the dispatching of the Trots. That really didn’t look possible when he took over.
Agreed. He is a managerial politician, and I mean that in a complimentary way. I don't particularly want to see a Labour government, but I feel relatively happy that if we have to have one then we could do a lot worse than PM Starmer
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
It’s beginning to look like this a boil that has to be lanced.
(I don't see a salad pun in that reply. Am I missing something?)
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
Nobody is going after Badenoch or Davies on the same basis, which suggests it's about rule-breaking rather than woke.
I thought Starmer was impressive. Sunak did fine, certainly for first time out and having only been in post 24 hours. Overall if the House was a little over-excited it felt like a return to seriousness after the nonsense and silliness of recent years.
I detected a much lighter feel from all sides. A kind of collective sigh of relief.
Finished by 12.35 too. Unlike the days when we had them until nearly 1pm with Speaker Bercow
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
We must be entering salad days
You need a dressing down for that remark.
I thought I was taking a leaf out of your book
Is that a sign that you are green with envy?
Possibly but on the other hand I might not give a toss
Scottish schools have been urged to reject “derogatory, demeaning and dangerous” new NHS advice that suggests children who want to change gender may simply be going through a phase.
NHS England has issued new guidelines advising that most children identifying as transgender are going through a “transient phase”.
Doctors have been told to explore all underlying health problems, including mental ill health, before helping young people transition, amid concerns that the NHS is rushing children on to irreversible puberty-blocker medication.
Did the 2019 manifesto actually ban fracking? The words I saw recently suggested it wouldn't be done unless the science said it was safe. Leaving aside the economics it hardly looks like it would be happening anyway.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
We must be entering salad days
You need a dressing down for that remark.
I thought I was taking a leaf out of your book
Is that a sign that you are green with envy?
Possibly but on the other hand I might not give a toss
Doesn’t change the fundamentals. Tory party still in a hole. Still Keir Starmer’s election to lose. But that was a massacre. Rishi Sunak was ready for Keir Starmer on every question. Labour MPs will be concerned.
We currently export £29m/year of meat *total* to the US. The US consumes approximately zero lamb. And yet we are predicting ~£7m of Welsh Lamb exports per year. That's about a 25% increase in the export value! I find that hard to believe.
It's not that it isn't good to open that market, but it sounds like bobbins to me.
Presumably the hope is to export meat to higher end consumers and perhaps even fine-dining establishments, but as soon as any significant market is developed, American producers will surely step up.
I've very reluctantly come to the conclusion that it was either Braverman as HS or risking Johnson back as PM.
Those were probably the political choices.
I think Sunak probably expects Braverman to self-immolate at some point whereupon she will be replaced.
Frankly, I'd like Gove in slot as I think he'd sort the boats, and the department, inside 6 months.
I wonder when you were laying into Truss, whether you thought you'd be making lame excuses for Sunak a day into his premiership. Oh well.
You seem to see me as some sort of "traitor" to Adam Smith/Hayek who's sold-out to a high-tax high-spending globalist consensus.
Nah. I am a right-wing Conservative who recognised Truss and her tin-ear as an absolute disaster for our party.
She tried to launch a 1988 budget in the conditions of 1979, and as if deficits didn't matter. She was dogmatic and naïve. She was obstinate. She was foolish. And she seems unrepentant too. That doesn't make me some sort of wet you need to dry out. It makes me realistic - she's probably shat the bed for low tax for 20 yrs now.
She was nothing like Thatcher who was a consummate politician and both Thatcher, and Nigel Lawson, would agree with that.
If Truss has 'shat the bed for low tax for 20 yrs' then I'm actually glad. I just cannot see a sane way where 'low tax' is a practical and sustainable way forward for the UK. Austerity is fine; but you can only apply it so far before the system breaks. Growth cannot be commanded; only encouraged.
I see taxes as needing to rise a little. But I want any increased taxes to be spent *very* carefully. Yes, I know...
I think you can lower taxes once the deficit is under control, and a higher growth rate has been achieved.
This is the "sharing the proceeds of growth" approach that Cameron outlined in 2010.
I think working people are overtaxed, NI is too high and a tax on jobs, income tax thresholds need to start rising with earnings again, the 40p rate kicks-in too low, and the 100-120k tax trap zone is a mess causing all sorts of knock-on implications.
I would like to see all of that addressed.
"I think working people are overtaxed"
Yes and no, IMO. Workers on low pay are certainly overtaxed; workers with high pay are probably not paying enough tax. That's the problem with the word 'workers': it covers the guy who I bought a can of Red Bull from at Asda at five this morning, and the chap earning high six figures.
But in general, I think the total tax take in the country needs to increase. Who pays more, and how that money is spent, is where the issues become really difficult.
Income is overtaxed and capital is undertaxed.
There is an emerging consensus on this.
I'm not sure about this - "capital has already been taxed" is the common refrain.
But it has not been taxed enough
Everything is taxed too much. Yes there is a need to adjust where taxes are levied from but at the same time the overall tax burden is far too high. Truss was catastrophically wrong in the way she went about things but the underlying basic principle that the state is too large and we pay too much of overall in tax is absolutely right.
Its easy to say “the state is too big”. Its far harder to identify what it should stop spending on.
Not really.
I would scrap the automatic state pension and have it as a safety net just like other benefits. We should not be paying state pension to those who already have reasonable private pension provision or savings. I would increase the minimum wage to make it a proper living wage paid by employers so that the taxpayer is not subsidising companies who choose to pay their employees less than they need to live on. Associated with the above I would look at scrapping all benefits for anyone earning more than the average income.
That is just for starters. There are plenty more areas to look at.
Nice examples. These three alone would exhaust the political capital of any party in this country, and probably in the whole of western Europe.
And by the way to implement radical pension changes would take decades in a world where people have already spent their working lives calculating on assumptions based on present provision. (The state pension for a couple is about £19,000 and rising. It is a very serious bit of the total calculation people make).
I don't pretend it would be easy. But since the changes are absolutely necessary, it would be good to at least make a start. One way to start would be to simplify the tax system in a revenue neutral manner so it is far more obvious what the real tax burden is on both the country and the individual. Merging of NI and IC and their application on all forms of income not just earned.
Once we have a simpler, more transparent tax system then the arguments about how much is a reasonable or acceptable amount for the State to take can start.
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
It’s beginning to look like this a boil that has to be lanced.
(I don't see a salad pun in that reply. Am I missing something?)
I think the Braverman issue is an unintentional trap for Labour. By focusing on it, it shifts the political battleground back towards culture war issues and away from the economy, giving Sunak some breathing space as well as making a Tory split less likely.
Not if they stay well away from policy on focus on process. I was worried that they wouldn't have the discipline to do that - but they did.
Not everyone has that discipline. You have Labour peers calling her "Cruella Braverman".
I've very reluctantly come to the conclusion that it was either Braverman as HS or risking Johnson back as PM.
Those were probably the political choices.
I think Sunak probably expects Braverman to self-immolate at some point whereupon she will be replaced.
Frankly, I'd like Gove in slot as I think he'd sort the boats, and the department, inside 6 months.
I wonder when you were laying into Truss, whether you thought you'd be making lame excuses for Sunak a day into his premiership. Oh well.
You seem to see me as some sort of "traitor" to Adam Smith/Hayek who's sold-out to a high-tax high-spending globalist consensus.
Nah. I am a right-wing Conservative who recognised Truss and her tin-ear as an absolute disaster for our party.
She tried to launch a 1988 budget in the conditions of 1979, and as if deficits didn't matter. She was dogmatic and naïve. She was obstinate. She was foolish. And she seems unrepentant too. That doesn't make me some sort of wet you need to dry out. It makes me realistic - she's probably shat the bed for low tax for 20 yrs now.
She was nothing like Thatcher who was a consummate politician and both Thatcher, and Nigel Lawson, would agree with that.
If Truss has 'shat the bed for low tax for 20 yrs' then I'm actually glad. I just cannot see a sane way where 'low tax' is a practical and sustainable way forward for the UK. Austerity is fine; but you can only apply it so far before the system breaks. Growth cannot be commanded; only encouraged.
I see taxes as needing to rise a little. But I want any increased taxes to be spent *very* carefully. Yes, I know...
I think you can lower taxes once the deficit is under control, and a higher growth rate has been achieved.
This is the "sharing the proceeds of growth" approach that Cameron outlined in 2010.
I think working people are overtaxed, NI is too high and a tax on jobs, income tax thresholds need to start rising with earnings again, the 40p rate kicks-in too low, and the 100-120k tax trap zone is a mess causing all sorts of knock-on implications.
I would like to see all of that addressed.
"I think working people are overtaxed"
Yes and no, IMO. Workers on low pay are certainly overtaxed; workers with high pay are probably not paying enough tax. That's the problem with the word 'workers': it covers the guy who I bought a can of Red Bull from at Asda at five this morning, and the chap earning high six figures.
But in general, I think the total tax take in the country needs to increase. Who pays more, and how that money is spent, is where the issues become really difficult.
Income is overtaxed and capital is undertaxed.
There is an emerging consensus on this.
I'm not sure about this - "capital has already been taxed" is the common refrain.
But it has not been taxed enough
Everything is taxed too much. Yes there is a need to adjust where taxes are levied from but at the same time the overall tax burden is far too high. Truss was catastrophically wrong in the way she went about things but the underlying basic principle that the state is too large and we pay too much of overall in tax is absolutely right.
Its easy to say “the state is too big”. Its far harder to identify what it should stop spending on.
Not really.
I would scrap the automatic state pension and have it as a safety net just like other benefits. We should not be paying state pension to those who already have reasonable private pension provision or savings. I would increase the minimum wage to make it a proper living wage paid by employers so that the taxpayer is not subsidising companies who choose to pay their employees less than they need to live on. Associated with the above I would look at scrapping all benefits for anyone earning more than the average income.
That is just for starters. There are plenty more areas to look at.
Interesting. I could certainly see a time when the state pension becomes just a safety net/means tested.
Problem is that DC pensions are not going to come close to the standards offered by DB pensions.
I hear the median pension pot for under 50s is under £50,000.
They're not going to be Tory voting pensioners like the Boomers.
Of course raising the pension age into the low 70s means an increasing number will simply drop in their traces.
Which of course was both the case and the plan when the modern state pension system was introduced after the war.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
Congratulations on producing a contender for the same prize that the ridiculous Roger attempted to claim an unsurpassable ownership of.
I am right of centre, though have always been a harsh critic of Johnson and his populism. I have paid Starmer a number of compliments over the years when many were unable to see his ability (SKS fans please explain etc.).
If you are unable to see how well Sunak did today, you are a partisan fool and have no political judgement
Sunak was not good in my opinion, based on his non answers were far too patently yah boo non answers, something Boris did far better than Sunak did today.
I don’t want to be rude but I don’t think you understand what PMQs is. It’s not a session where you ask a question and someone answers it, it’s political cage fighting.
I’m sure Sunak has a range of great skills, but political cage fighting is clearly not one of them, and you are just going to embarrass yourself claiming Sunak is great political cage fighter every week.
Lol. You weren't being rude, you were being very silly. I have watched/listened to PMQs for the best part of my 55 years, so I think I might just understand how it works, thanks. I will leave it for others to judge my understanding of politics versus yours, but I am reasonably confident that you might get as much support in that analysis as a Tory in a Glasgow working mens club.
I can see why Malc calls you foreskin, combative arn’t you? 😄
Why can’t you just concede you are wrong? I’ll even give you your concession statement
“Yah boo shouty partisan politics is clearly not Rishi’s forte, it clearly was Boris’ but then he was useless in every other regard! but if you had been paying proper attention to PMQs MoonRabbit, you would have realised what Sunak’s forte actually is today and why he done well today - he is skilfully moving the Tory policy back onto sane ground where the party can rebut Labour with delivery, that’s where he is such a problem to Labour.”
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
OTOH Starmer had to resort to childish lettuce jokes and 'i used to be somebody' in the CPS
The childish lettuce joke did get an instinctive laugh from across the House, rather than the usual painful "Parliamentary Humour" and forced guffaws.
We must be entering salad days
You need a dressing down for that remark.
I thought I was taking a leaf out of your book
Is that a sign that you are green with envy?
Possibly but on the other hand I might not give a toss
I'm just egging you on.
Oh, no we mustn't start on the egg puns. Only yoking
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
It’s beginning to look like this a boil that has to be lanced.
(I don't see a salad pun in that reply. Am I missing something?)
It's all Greek to me
If we give him a bit of a rocket, maybe he'll get the message.
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
It’s beginning to look like this a boil that has to be lanced.
(I don't see a salad pun in that reply. Am I missing something?)
It's all Greek to me
If we give him a bit of a rocket, maybe he'll get the message.
When it comes to puns, I can see you are a man that knows his onions
The next election can be fought over ideology, we have decency and common sense back in our politics for the first time in a long time
Two parties who agree on managed economic decline to avoid upsetting any local interest anywhere. It may be common sense but what it's not is a contest of ideology.
I don't think Sunak's "of course they told me not to appoint Braverman" deflection will work. The question will keep coming back, someone will leak, and he will be forced to accept that he appointed her above the heads of the civil service.
The thing is I'd almost expect, or indeed, want, the civil service to question every ministerial decision, to be a bucket of cold water on the fires of their enthusiasm. It should be a key part of their role to act as a reality check.
So you'd expect that it would be part of the normal course of things for ministers to make decisions that went against concerns raised by civil servants. How many decisions are there that are so simple that there are no concerns to be raised about them?
You don't want civil servants to be simply yes men, and nor do you want ministers who are too scared by risks that they fail to act.
I really dislike the implications of that question from Starmer, and it unhelpfully politicises the civil service.
Implications? The machinery of government is entitled to raise security concerns about someone fired for a double breach of the ministerial code, one of which was a serious security screw up.
A Tory MP is now on Politics Live stating very explicitly that the PM does everything correctly, so if she was appointed there cannot have been a concern raised by Simon Case. This is a serious hostage to fortune - it isn't party political for senior civil servants to state the proposed minister (a) broke the code or (b) was highlighted as a security risk.
The implication is that ministers shouldn't ever do anything that the civil service express doubts about, which then leads to ministers wanting to appoint toady yes men to the civil service. It would be terribly bad.
Just watched Yvette Cooper's UQ on Braverman's appointment - of course Braverman had fled the chamber. It rather sounds as if Cooper has more on the HS, going from the follow-up questions (which weren't answered). A serial offender, perhaps?
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
It’s beginning to look like this a boil that has to be lanced.
(I don't see a salad pun in that reply. Am I missing something?)
It's all Greek to me
If we give him a bit of a rocket, maybe he'll get the message.
When it comes to puns, I can see you are a man that knows his onions
Changing the subject slightly I wonder whether Truss goes to church? It'll be a bit galling for her when the priest/vicar says "Let us pray"
On the delay to the 17th - my guess is that the government wants to bake in the new lower debt interest rate assumptions and potentially a new significantly lower energy price assumption.
The original £70bn will be lower than half that figure by the time the new numbers are out. Substantially lower. My finger in the air number is £10bn in spending cuts, £10bn in tax rises and £5-7bn in additional borrowing per year for two or three years which closes as growth picks back up.
I think the triple lock and benefits go up by CPI. Income tax goes up by 1p in all brackets and the most controversial - NI now payable by all people on all income types. The second measure pays for the uprating of benefits and state pension benefits, the first closes half of the fiscal gap.
£10bn in cuts is more difficult to predict, I'd guess at local authority subsidies and unnamed "efficiency savings" of which there are still billions to cut. I'd also look out for a new "bonfire of quangos" narrative. The who public administration body is due a 50-60% chop, it would save £2-3bn and no one would notice.
If Starmer does that controversial element he would win an incredible amount of respect from me.
Unfortunately I'm not as confident that he will be so "courageous".
I don't think Sunak's "of course they told me not to appoint Braverman" deflection will work. The question will keep coming back, someone will leak, and he will be forced to accept that he appointed her above the heads of the civil service.
The thing is I'd almost expect, or indeed, want, the civil service to question every ministerial decision, to be a bucket of cold water on the fires of their enthusiasm. It should be a key part of their role to act as a reality check.
So you'd expect that it would be part of the normal course of things for ministers to make decisions that went against concerns raised by civil servants. How many decisions are there that are so simple that there are no concerns to be raised about them?
You don't want civil servants to be simply yes men, and nor do you want ministers who are too scared by risks that they fail to act.
I really dislike the implications of that question from Starmer, and it unhelpfully politicises the civil service.
Implications? The machinery of government is entitled to raise security concerns about someone fired for a double breach of the ministerial code, one of which was a serious security screw up.
A Tory MP is now on Politics Live stating very explicitly that the PM does everything correctly, so if she was appointed there cannot have been a concern raised by Simon Case. This is a serious hostage to fortune - it isn't party political for senior civil servants to state the proposed minister (a) broke the code or (b) was highlighted as a security risk.
The implication is that ministers shouldn't ever do anything that the civil service express doubts about, which then leads to ministers wanting to appoint toady yes men to the civil service. It would be terribly bad.
It isn't that at all. We have a ministerial code, a strict set of guidelines which ministers of the crown MUST follow. She did not. We have the official secrets act, a strict legal framework which signatories MUST follow. The suggestion over her "security breach" is that she did not.
This is not remotely party political. She broke the code. Twice. With a serious security breach a part of that. According to the rules she absolutely should not have been reappointed.
The party political bit is that the Tory Party yet again treat the code with disregard. It is very sad that in his first action as PM Sunak would do this and side with idiots like Johnson instead of siding with the propriety shown by every previous PM of every party including his own.
Starmer is excellent. Sunak is just Johnson revisited
Don't be ridiculous. One of the most politically stupid and partisan posts I have ever seen on here
No.I think Roger summed it up pretty well there.
Just like Boris, Sunak came armed, with a sheet “if in trouble and can’t answer the question, reach for this instead”
Half way through his first PMQs Sunak looked down and he had used it all.
But Boris did evasive non answers far better than Sunak did. It was just too patently obvious Sunak wasn’t answering questions just shouting back yah boo stuff not remotely like what was asked.
Congratulations on producing a contender for the same prize that the ridiculous Roger attempted to claim an unsurpassable ownership of.
I am right of centre, though have always been a harsh critic of Johnson and his populism. I have paid Starmer a number of compliments over the years when many were unable to see his ability (SKS fans please explain etc.).
If you are unable to see how well Sunak did today, you are a partisan fool and have no political judgement
Sunak was not good in my opinion, based on his non answers were far too patently yah boo non answers, something Boris did far better than Sunak did today.
I don’t want to be rude but I don’t think you understand what PMQs is. It’s not a session where you ask a question and someone answers it, it’s political cage fighting.
I’m sure Sunak has a range of great skills, but political cage fighting is clearly not one of them, and you are just going to embarrass yourself claiming Sunak is great political cage fighter every week.
Lol. You weren't being rude, you were being very silly. I have watched/listened to PMQs for the best part of my 55 years, so I think I might just understand how it works, thanks. I will leave it for others to judge my understanding of politics versus yours, but I am reasonably confident that you might get as much support in that analysis as a Tory in a Glasgow working mens club.
I can see why Malc calls you foreskin, combative arn’t you? 😄
Why can’t you just concede you are wrong? I’ll even give you your concession statement
“Yah boo shouty partisan politics is clearly not Rishi’s forte, it clearly was Boris’ but then he was useless in every other regard! but if you had been paying proper attention to PMQs MoonRabbit, you would have realised what Sunak’s forte actually is today and why he done well today - he is skilfully moving the Tory policy back onto sane ground where the party can rebut Labour with delivery, that’s where he is such a problem to Labour.”
Malcolm is a loudmouth uncouth twat with a brain the size of an amoeba. If you think that referring to male anatomy is the height of wit I can see you have much in common with him. Your political analysis is about as balanced and nuanced as his, which I can assure you is not a compliment. But hey, you carry on believing Sunak isn't very good if it makes you sleep easier. You will be in exactly the same predicament as Tories who underestimated Starmer. A predicament known as Camp Stupid.
Day 1 of the new regime, and we are mired in Tory Sleaze.
Some things never change.
I did say that Rishi Rich needed to appoint an authoritarian as Home Sec, but I was thinking more of Priti making a comeback.
It beggars belief that they couldn't find a vaguely competent authoritarian that (checks notes) hadn't been sacked from the same job six days ago for a security breach, and who then subsequently lied to the Prime Minister about it.
Comments
Yes Braverman will resign soon, but that is more opportunity than disaster for Sunak.
Sunak was helped by having the screaming hoardes behind him but it's most unlikely that will not be the opinion of commentators
However lamb has started to become more popular there again, primarily due to immigrants eating it which has made it see a revival in shops and restaurants. So there's a huge potential growth market there if it could take off.
Improbable, but certainly possible.
https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1585226065378627584
England & Wales are showing persistently high excess age-standardised mortality than the 2019 baseline, but Scotland doesn't appear to be (although the smaller sample size means this might not be a robust conclusion). Paul suggests that this might be related to ambulance response times, which aren't as bad in Scotland. Some food for thought there.
Starmer 8/10 - Confident and hit the open goals before him.
Hopefully Sunak will improve with practice, but he needs to sharpen up and avoid unnecessary pitfalls like reappointing someone who has only just been sacked.
Starmer the better of the two today, but Sunak certainly could have done worse.
I am right of centre, though have always been a harsh critic of Johnson and his populism. I have paid Starmer a number of compliments over the years when many were unable to see his ability (SKS fans please explain etc.).
If you are unable to see how well Sunak did today, you are a partisan fool and have no political judgement
*OK, to allow the possibility of considering it, or whatever weasel words were used.
But it’s just one nervous performance we are going on, it’s only if he’s exactly the same for the next 5 PMQs we can say the Tories have a problem.
So you'd expect that it would be part of the normal course of things for ministers to make decisions that went against concerns raised by civil servants. How many decisions are there that are so simple that there are no concerns to be raised about them?
You don't want civil servants to be simply yes men, and nor do you want ministers who are too scared by risks that they fail to act.
I really dislike the implications of that question from Starmer, and it unhelpfully politicises the civil service.
I thought Starmer was impressive. Sunak did fine, certainly for first time out and having only been in post 24 hours. Overall if the House was a little over-excited it felt like a return to seriousness after the nonsense and silliness of recent years.
** The Treasury has drawn up a menu of 104 options to cut spending **
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-26/uk-seeking-to-plug-35b-fiscal-hole-on-nov-17-officials-say
I don’t want to be rude but I don’t think you understand what PMQs is. It’s not a session where you ask a question and someone answers it, it’s political cage fighting.
I’m sure Sunak has a range of great skills, but political cage fighting is clearly not one of them, and you are just going to embarrass yourself claiming Sunak is great political cage fighter every week.
A Tory MP is now on Politics Live stating very explicitly that the PM does everything correctly, so if she was appointed there cannot have been a concern raised by Simon Case. This is a serious hostage to fortune - it isn't party political for senior civil servants to state the proposed minister (a) broke the code or (b) was highlighted as a security risk.
His weakness, of course, is much of the electorate don't like him. To be honest he isn't much my cup of tea either - I think it's his tone and earnestness that is so off-putting.
I'd much rather have a pint with Sunak. By orders of magnitude.
Don't know what that says.
I honestly think 'i used to be somebody important' was a misstep though. Painted himself as yesterdays man
Wouldn't it be tragic if Braverman didn't last the week?
Lines need to be crafted such that Labour are what you think about going forward, the Tories representing the failures of the past.
*(doink doink)
The original £70bn will be lower than half that figure by the time the new numbers are out. Substantially lower. My finger in the air number is £10bn in spending cuts, £10bn in tax rises and £5-7bn in additional borrowing per year for two or three years which closes as growth picks back up.
I think the triple lock and benefits go up by CPI. Income tax goes up by 1p in all brackets and the most controversial - NI now payable by all people on all income types. The second measure pays for the uprating of benefits and state pension benefits, the first closes half of the fiscal gap.
£10bn in cuts is more difficult to predict, I'd guess at local authority subsidies and unnamed "efficiency savings" of which there are still billions to cut. I'd also look out for a new "bonfire of quangos" narrative. The who public administration body is due a 50-60% chop, it would save £2-3bn and no one would notice.
He needs to make better use of it than chasing the latest preoccupation of the lobby journalists.
The next election turns on tying the blame for a decline in living standards onto the Tories and whoever happens to be Tory leader at the time of the next GE. Today's PMQs didn't do anything to advance that argument. It was wasted.
Not everything is 12d chess. Sometimes people just make shit awful decisions.
She’s full of herself, not a team player, not even proved her talent and delivery for holding a big 3 office.
In just a short period of time, everyone on all sides of politics regard her as toxic. That’s quite remarkable really.
Quite a lot of so called in the know commentators say Sunak had no choice but to appoint her has promised, as he done a deal so she wouldn’t back Boris, I’m sceptical of that, how much of a blow would it have if she backed Boris, was Sunak really thinking he had to prevent that? Free marketers instinctively choose Rishi anyway, as closer to their own beliefs than Boris.
First they need to confirm the idea in everyone's minds that these are the same old faces, lacking integrity. Then they need to hammer them on every piece of bad economic news as they come through. Until you've done the former, you can't do the latter as any perceived "freshness" gives them the benefit of the doubt.
Sunak told PMQs he "stands by" 2019 Tory manifesto which banned fracking. Liz Truss briefly lifted the moratorium.
https://www.ft.com/content/a42f15f0-40cc-4efb-8cc7-b3227b71434b
The next election can be fought over ideology, we have decency and common sense back in our politics for the first time in a long time
NHS England has issued new guidelines advising that most children identifying as transgender are going through a “transient phase”.
Doctors have been told to explore all underlying health problems, including mental ill health, before helping young people transition, amid concerns that the NHS is rushing children on to irreversible puberty-blocker medication.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scottish-schools-told-to-reject-english-guidance-for-trans-children-s2q5jprst
Not particularly inspiring, but it’s a hurdle he cleared, which is the PM’s main task at PMQ’s.
Starmers difficulty level has suddenly gone up a couple of levels, since Boris/Truss.
A good thing for British politics, overall.
Once we have a simpler, more transparent tax system then the arguments about how much is a reasonable or acceptable amount for the State to take can start.
https://twitter.com/TimesRadio/status/1585183883485511681
Why can’t you just concede you are wrong? I’ll even give you your concession statement
“Yah boo shouty partisan politics is clearly not Rishi’s forte, it clearly was Boris’ but then he was useless in every other regard! but if you had been paying proper attention to PMQs MoonRabbit, you would have realised what Sunak’s forte actually is today and why he done well today - he is skilfully moving the Tory policy back onto sane ground where the party can rebut Labour with delivery, that’s where he is such a problem to Labour.”
Unfortunately I'm not as confident that he will be so "courageous".
Sunak said that Braverman had "made an error of judgment"* and he was delighted to have her back in cabinet
*He might also have added, on several occasions, and she then lied about it.
But, the Braverman thing is an open wound. Self-inflicted and utterly, utterly moronic.
It's not going to go away.
Some things never change.
I did say that Rishi Rich needed to appoint an authoritarian as Home Sec, but I was thinking more of Priti making a comeback.
"I have made an error of judgement. Braverman is delighted to be back in cabinet"
This is not remotely party political. She broke the code. Twice. With a serious security breach a part of that. According to the rules she absolutely should not have been reappointed.
The party political bit is that the Tory Party yet again treat the code with disregard. It is very sad that in his first action as PM Sunak would do this and side with idiots like Johnson instead of siding with the propriety shown by every previous PM of every party including his own.