Sunak – are we approaching the end days? – politicalbetting.com

Mexicanpete said:

Yesterday's disastrous whining performances from Sunak and Keegan is the legacy of long- Johnson.

Long-Johnson will blight the Conservatives for a while yet. By Johnson promoting duds, duffers are being over promoted even after he is gone. Sunak (who I like) is a case in point.

It must be painful for lifelong one nation Tories to accept there is room in the party for Braverman but not Grieve.

And grieve they shall.

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

SouthamObserver said:

Mexicanpete said:

Yesterday's disastrous whining performances from Sunak and Keegan is the legacy of long- Johnson.

Long-Johnson will blight the Conservatives for a while yet. By Johnson promoting duds, duffers are being over promoted even after he is gone. Sunak (who I like) is a case in point.

It must be painful for lifelong one nation Tories to accept there is room in the party for Braverman but not Grieve.

Rishi Sunak was presented with compelling evidence that more money was needed to make schools safe for kids to go to and was warned of a critical risk to life if action wasn’t taken. His reaction was to cut the repairs budget. Judge him on deeds, not words. That’s the man he is.

Yep. Sunak is caught red handed.

Peter_the_Punter said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Thank you, Gardenwalker, for that outburst of good sense.

I caught the Keegan rant and didn't think it was so bad. Sure, as a Politician she should know there are cameras and recording equipment everywhere and she would never be safely off-air, but given it was an aside after the interview ended I think a few honest opinions and a bit of fruity language were perfectly reasonable.

What is interesting is that the Daily Hate-Mail should turn on her. (Does nobody there ever utter an expletive?) They have an agenda. This does not look good for her, and even worse for Sunak. The Mail speaks for What's Left Of The Tory Party and if he's lost them, he's on his way out, either before or by virtue of a General Election.

Will that help the Tories? Will it fuck. (Apologies to the snowflakes at the Mail but sometimes I can't help my language.) There is no Saviour, no Prince Over The Water, no option other than to keep buggering on with what might pass in some quarters for half-decent, competent Government, and hope the coming drubbing doesn't annihilate them completely.

Lose Mid-Beds? Yes, and High-Beds, Low-Beds, Flower Beds and any other Beds they try to lie in. Meanwhile, Starmer quietly prepares for the takeover.

Can't happen too soon, for everyone's sake.

Sunak's whining self- pity was worse than Keegan's.

Sunak implied Slater is a liar and he (Sunak) had not reduced the school refubishment programme to just fifty a year. How did he do this? By suggesting he was replacing schools at the more impressive rate of 500 a decade. It was Johnsonian fork-tongued chicanery at its finest.

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

Good morning and the first post I have read

I agree with your general sentiment and Sunak and Keegan are in office when this crisis hits and must face the music

However, anyone listening to Keegan at the dispatch box yesterday would be very churlish not to accept she knew the details inside out and her responses to the house were well informed

Reading the Welsh media about the closure of two North Wales schools and the ensuing comments there is widescale condemnation of Cardiff much as there is of Sunak and Keegan in England

This is a crisis that includes all parts of the UK and the ultimate cost could be in the billions

As far as Sunak is concerned I just do not see him being replaced, no matter how much the mail want a 'true conservative'.

He will lose to Starmer in 2024 and no doubt leave politics having been UK prime minister for 2 years, and at least not as discredited as Johnson and Truss

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

SouthamObserver said:

The crumbling schools, the turds pouring into our water, a collapsing health service, the social care crisis, appalling public transport, hugely expensive childcare, the lack of housing etc, etc … leads to only one conclusion: no serious government can escape the need for huge infrastructure investment. There’s no getting round it, so ways will have to be found unless we do just want to accept a decline into discrepitude and all the disasters that will bring.

The septic isle of shit in every river and all around the coast has really, really cut through on the doorsteps.

People are furious that the Tories are still giving out exemptions to the water companies, and the fact that several of these companies or their private equity backers are Conservative donors only stokes the wrath.

Septic Isle is a great phrase.

Almost Shakespeare 🤔

Boomtown Rats used it in Banana Republic in the 70s

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

"And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society. "

No. Just no. It may mark the end of the *selfish* society, one where people whinge about how much tax they pay whilst taking home very large amounts; the same people who claim to love the country then say they'll screech and stamp their feet and p*ss off to another country if they don't get what they want.

"Work has to pay and be rewarded."

I certainly would say no different. But how much reward for how much work?

"Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it. "

My politics isn't guttural, at all. You'll see I pointed out that there are iniquities in the current system that needs ironing out. But I have no doubt that there are problems in this country that only an increased tax take will fix. And it then becomes a question of who that burden falls on.

People who talk about "tax cuts" are ignoring reality.

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

Very true. Vote Labour to rebuild every school (and hospital and...and...) in the land is quite a challenging manifesto pledge.

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

Unfortunately, we are where we are.

The reason taxes haven't been higher than they have been since 2010 is the government's squeeze on capital spending. Now, it's a reasonable punt to take a capex holiday for a year or three. Most repair and replacement cycles can be stretched a bit without harm.

But we're now 13 years on from the start of the coalition, and we're still trying to deny that entropy is a thing. So the public realm is uniformly grotty, and in places unsafe. And the day to day delivery of stuff is increasingly inefficient as staff struggle with stuff rather her than doing their core job.

Like it or not, there's no way out of this that doesn't involve paying more taxes in the future, because we didn't pay enough on the past. Unless you can find a meaningful (so not Diversity Officers) thing that it's OK to cut that we've missed all these years.

That's not envy, it's arithmetic.

Or we could cut day to day spending and use the cash for infrastructure,

But then the politicos would have to make some painful decisions

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

We pay record taxes.

We do not pay record amounts for public services.

The proportion of our taxes that goes towards public services has been cut.

Where is our money going is the question? And no it's not public services, and it's not "spivs".

Our taxes are going ever higher to fund welfare. Public spending gets cut, and taxes go up, to feed the never ending demand for more welfare.

Which lefties won't agree with mainly because they view welfare as a good thing, which it can be if it's going to those who need it as a safety net. It's no longer a safety net though, it's a way of life for tens of millions, many of whom are the most fiscally secure in the country living rent and mortgage free in their own owned home, but still get triple locked welfare.

I see the top line welfare bill. I see the bottom line absolute lived crises where the recipients of this largesse are unable to feed themselves. Remember that a part of the schools crisis is that so many kids live in households being repossessed, being sent to school having had no breakfast with no money for lunch. A few kids in dirty clothes.

This is reality. A large welfare bill and growing millions unable to function in an economy which has abandoned them. Work simply does not pay no matter how many hours people are working, its never enough to keep up with the vast cost of everything.

I entirely agree with you that we need to cut the welfare bill - we need jobs to pay a wage that is viable. Why won't they? We have a corporate culture where money is hoovered out of actual service provision and into the right pockets. You say it isn't spivs, but every public contract there is costs £insane, the water industry have been allowed to half inch £70bn whilst refusing to invest or do basic maintenance - that is spivvery.

Cyclefree said:

FPT

jamesdoyle said:
https://twitter.com/CentralBylines/status/1698816462679400939?t=HQfnsGXitahdU6fSgyCWcQ&s=19

A whistleblower exclusively tells East Anglia Bylines the education secretary deliberately mounted a cover-up of the RAAC dangers

in early February, two months after the risk level was raised to high, Education Secretary Gillian Keegan remarked, “We just need to keep the lid on this for two years and then it’s someone else’s problem.“

A zillion headers write themselves.......

Excessive honesty in a politician.

Because no-one would have been rewarded for standing up and saying “we have a problem”.

In agreement that Keegans hot mic remarks are small fry. Who doesn't have a bit of a moan after all? Teachers moan about kids, doctors about patients, politicians about public.

The leaked remarks also ring very true and are much worse.

Casino_Royale said:

It's probably like Gordon Brown's bigoted woman outburst. Very funny, and captures the zeitgeist, but makes very little difference to the political landscape - just sums it up.

The big damage from the "Bigot-gate" recording, was not that Brown said it. He could have gone into damage limitation mode, apologiesed profusely etc. The problem was the images of him as the recording was played back to him. It was a radio interview, but there was a camera in the studio. We saw Brown completely crumble, it was the sign that he knew the game was up, his will to fight the election left him at that point.

Keegan won't lose her job because of what she said yesterday, as it is not such a critical moment, and there has been no kind of metdown in the followup. Her comments do though add another drip into the already overflowing water butt of Tory minister arrogance 'I've done my job well, everyone else around me is crap!'

TOPPING said:

Foxy said:

TOPPING said:

FF43 said:

Foxy said:

FF43 said:

AIUI the English Education Ministry changed government advice on RAAC a few days ago. Previously the advice was to inspect your buildings for RAAC, to keep a close eye on it, but to leave it in place unless it deteriorates.

Now it seems RAAC panels can disintegrate suddenly and without warning. Does that mean rooms containing RAAC should not be used? Keegan referred vaguely yesterday to mitigations. What are these mitigations?

Does anyone know more about this?

Mitigations presumably like the 2400 props holding up the roof at Kings Lynn Hospital.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-63137642

It must incentivise the operating team to get a move on, when the operating theatre roof is being held up by props...

From the article:

The hospital is undergoing a major programme to support the roof with huge wooden ceiling struts (so if parts of it collapse, it's less likely to hurt people).

Each one of these pieces of wood is counted as a "prop". So as they are only part way through the programme, we can expect the number of "props" to rise to even higher numbers over the next year.

And that will be the case until 2030 when the majority of the building will be classed as unsafe to work in.

All very reassuring. You would definitely be spending most of your time looking up at the ceiling.

Kings Lynn hospital is a shithole whatever is holding up the roof.

From what I hear the Fens are poorly served, but it is hard to attract quality staff to a hospital in such a state.

Acknowledging that the NHS staff there are of inferior quality is I suppose a start. Is it really because the place looks like it should have been demolished 40 years ago? I would be interested to know the minimum characteristics of a hospital for it to be able to attract good quality staff.

It was only opened in 1980!

Pay rates are set nationally, so why staff want to work in one place rather than another is largely determined by other factors, and that often is at speciality level to do with facilities, equipment, car parking, local town and schools etc. Supportive management too at both top and middle levels.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

Good morning and the first post I have read

I agree with your general sentiment and Sunak and Keegan are in office when this crisis hits and must face the music

However, anyone listening to Keegan at the dispatch box yesterday would be very churlish not to accept she knew the details inside out and her responses to the house were well informed

Reading the Welsh media about the closure of two North Wales schools and the ensuing comments there is widescale condemnation of Cardiff much as there is of Sunak and Keegan in England

This is a crisis that includes all parts of the UK and the ultimate cost could be in the billions

As far as Sunak is concerned I just do not see him being replaced, no matter how much the mail want a 'true conservative'.

He will lose to Starmer in 2024 and no doubt leave politics having been UK prime minister for 2 years, and at least not as discredited as Johnson and Truss

I have no problem with what she said, other than the slip of being caught doing so.

Lets assume for a minute that she is doing a fucking good job. She thinks. On what measure? She has already been told to do one by the treasury - no money even for emergency repairs. If somehow she is a mega negotiator and wrestles the billions needed from Hunt, that only gets the very worst schools fixed.

What she cannot do - and likely doesn't even believe is an issue - is fix education. And I'm not even talking about academic performance. She can't pay teachers the money they deserve to stop them leaving the profession, or fix an economy which has ever-larger numbers of kids coming into school hungry and dirty, or fund schools so that they can afford the things they need like SEND provision.

One decent minister - and we don't know if that is true - means nothing when the government is so disgracefully broken. And with respect to her, if she actually does care about those issues then why is she in a party which does not?

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

I cant see this concrete thing lasting that long, yes some bad headlines for Conservatives and a couple of tricky byelections but Apr/May 24 is a long way from all this. I reckon a few tricky headlines and it'll be forgotten

Crumbling schools is analogous for broken Britain. Sunak is looking like a loser.

Jettison Rishi at the end of October (which is a shame- but man, he was poor yesterday) replace with a shiny new leader and pretend the new boss isn't the old boss and hope the voters don't realise the sleight of hand.

Although who would want to take on the Con leader role to be PM for likely, 5 minutes?

Yesterday was a terrible day for Rishi and the Conservatives. Can they come back for a GE win? Yes, but not with Rishi.

Grenfell (and cladding) is perhaps a useful indicator as to how these bad news stories (and Grenfell was/is really bad) end up being forgotten.

Grenfell rolled on but fortunately it occurred immediately after a GE. One could argue Government's involvement was indirect, whereas yesterday's interjection by Slater pinned the blame directly on Sunak. The crumbling schools issue affects almost everyone with children or grand children. Combustible cladding just affected those living in higher rise properties who probably don't vote Conservative as a rule.

Of course, as MoonRabbit speculated yesterday this issue could be a big win for the Tories if it spurs them to eject loser Sunak and replace with a winner.

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

I cant see this concrete thing lasting that long, yes some bad headlines for Conservatives and a couple of tricky byelections but Apr/May 24 is a long way from all this. I reckon a few tricky headlines and it'll be forgotten

Crumbling schools is analogous for broken Britain. Sunak is looking like a loser.

Jettison Rishi at the end of October (which is a shame- but man, he was poor yesterday) replace with a shiny new leader and pretend the new boss isn't the old boss and hope the voters don't realise the sleight of hand.

Although who would want to take on the Con leader role to be PM for likely, 5 minutes?

Yesterday was a terrible day for Rishi and the Conservatives. Can they come back for a GE win? Yes, but not with Rishi.

Grenfell (and cladding) is perhaps a useful indicator as to how these bad news stories (and Grenfell was/is really bad) end up being forgotten.

Grenfell rolled on but fortunately it occurred immediately after a GE. One could argue Government's involvement was indirect, whereas yesterday's interjection by Slater pinned the blame directly on Sunak. The crumbling schools issue affects almost everyone with children or grand children. Combustible cladding just affected those living in higher rise properties who probably don't vote Conservative as a rule.

Of course, as MoonRabbit speculated yesterday this issue could be a big win for the Tories if it spurs them to eject loser Sunak and replace with a winner.

If Sunak went now the odds are the Tory membership would elect PM Badenoch or Braverman.

Which is why Tory MPs won't risk it and will keep Sunak in place. He has also had success in cutting inflation etc

Cutting inflation*? If that is a win, you are truly stuffed.* Remember kids inflation is cumulative, and falling inflation has a direct correlation with an increase in your mortgage rate.

You need someone like Penny Dreadful or Tommy Tugs. If you go Braverman, you better hope she has off-the wall, industrial-scale hanging and flogging populism up her sleeve**.

** I suspect she has.

The good thing about opposition is Labour will then have to deal with the economy and we Tories can trash their record

Foxy said:

TOPPING said:

Foxy said:

TOPPING said:

FF43 said:

Foxy said:

FF43 said:

AIUI the English Education Ministry changed government advice on RAAC a few days ago. Previously the advice was to inspect your buildings for RAAC, to keep a close eye on it, but to leave it in place unless it deteriorates.

Now it seems RAAC panels can disintegrate suddenly and without warning. Does that mean rooms containing RAAC should not be used? Keegan referred vaguely yesterday to mitigations. What are these mitigations?

Does anyone know more about this?

Mitigations presumably like the 2400 props holding up the roof at Kings Lynn Hospital.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-63137642

It must incentivise the operating team to get a move on, when the operating theatre roof is being held up by props...

From the article:

The hospital is undergoing a major programme to support the roof with huge wooden ceiling struts (so if parts of it collapse, it's less likely to hurt people).

Each one of these pieces of wood is counted as a "prop". So as they are only part way through the programme, we can expect the number of "props" to rise to even higher numbers over the next year.

And that will be the case until 2030 when the majority of the building will be classed as unsafe to work in.

All very reassuring. You would definitely be spending most of your time looking up at the ceiling.

Kings Lynn hospital is a shithole whatever is holding up the roof.

From what I hear the Fens are poorly served, but it is hard to attract quality staff to a hospital in such a state.

Acknowledging that the NHS staff there are of inferior quality is I suppose a start. Is it really because the place looks like it should have been demolished 40 years ago? I would be interested to know the minimum characteristics of a hospital for it to be able to attract good quality staff.

It was only opened in 1980!

Pay rates are set nationally, so why staff want to work in one place rather than another is largely determined by other factors, and that often is at speciality level to do with facilities, equipment, car parking, local town and schools etc. Supportive management too at both top and middle levels.

Ha! They should have had the ribbon cutting and demolition ball there on the same day.

There is the danger that you are condemning hospitals in shitholes (Kings Lynn is of course by far the only one) to the dregs of the NHS staff.

What would your solution be to ensure this is not the case.

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

We pay record taxes.

We do not pay record amounts for public services.

The proportion of our taxes that goes towards public services has been cut.

Where is our money going is the question? And no it's not public services, and it's not "spivs".

Our taxes are going ever higher to fund welfare. Public spending gets cut, and taxes go up, to feed the never ending demand for more welfare.

Which lefties won't agree with mainly because they view welfare as a good thing, which it can be if it's going to those who need it as a safety net. It's no longer a safety net though, it's a way of life for tens of millions, many of whom are the most fiscally se

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

We pay record taxes.

We do not pay record amounts for public services.

The proportion of our taxes that goes towards public services has been cut.

Where is our money going is the question? And no it's not public services, and it's not "spivs".

Our taxes are going ever higher to fund welfare. Public spending gets cut, and taxes go up, to feed the never ending demand for more welfare.

Which lefties won't agree with mainly because they view welfare as a good thing, which it can be if it's going to those who need it as a safety net. It's no longer a safety net though, it's a way of life for tens of millions, many of whom are the most fiscally secure in the country living rent and mortgage free in their own owned home, but still get triple locked welfare.

I see the top line welfare bill. I see the bottom line absolute lived crises where the recipients of this largesse are unable to feed themselves. Remember that a part of the schools crisis is that so many kids live in households being repossessed, being sent to school having had no breakfast with no money for lunch. A few kids in dirty clothes.

This is reality. A large welfare bill and growing millions unable to function in an economy which has abandoned them. Work simply does not pay no matter how many hours people are working, its never enough to keep up with the vast cost of everything.

I entirely agree with you that we need to cut the welfare bill - we need jobs to pay a wage that is viable. Why won't they? We have a corporate culture where money is hoovered out of actual service provision and into the right pockets. You say it isn't spivs, but every public contract there is costs £insane, the water industry have been allowed to half inch £70bn whilst refusing to invest or do basic maintenance - that is spivvery.

Don't look at the top bottom line and say we need more top line.

Look at the top line, look at the bottom, then ask "where is the money going".

I agree that those who are in crisis are struggling. The problem is that our modern welfare state is not a safety net for those in temporary crisis.

Our modern welfare state is giving well off individuals, some of whom post on this page, our taxes because "they've paid for it" and they vote.

Public sector contracts aren't taking the money. The money is going on welfare to those who literally do not need it, while those who do get bugger all.

First party that accepts that truth, will be able to fund their preference. Whether it is Labour boosting spending, or Tories cutting taxes, stop increasing the rate out taxes go to those who don't need it and you can fund those who do.

Mexicanpete said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Thank you, Gardenwalker, for that outburst of good sense.

I caught the Keegan rant and didn't think it was so bad. Sure, as a Politician she should know there are cameras and recording equipment everywhere and she would never be safely off-air, but given it was an aside after the interview ended I think a few honest opinions and a bit of fruity language were perfectly reasonable.

What is interesting is that the Daily Hate-Mail should turn on her. (Does nobody there ever utter an expletive?) They have an agenda. This does not look good for her, and even worse for Sunak. The Mail speaks for What's Left Of The Tory Party and if he's lost them, he's on his way out, either before or by virtue of a General Election.

Will that help the Tories? Will it fuck. (Apologies to the snowflakes at the Mail but sometimes I can't help my language.) There is no Saviour, no Prince Over The Water, no option other than to keep buggering on with what might pass in some quarters for half-decent, competent Government, and hope the coming drubbing doesn't annihilate them completely.

Lose Mid-Beds? Yes, and High-Beds, Low-Beds, Flower Beds and any other Beds they try to lie in. Meanwhile, Starmer quietly prepares for the takeover.

Can't happen too soon, for everyone's sake.

Sunak's whining self- pity was worse than Keegan's.

Sunak implied Slater is a liar and he (Sunak) had not reduced the school refubishment programme to just fifty a year. How did he do this? By suggesting he was replacing schools at the more impressive rate of 500 a decade. It was Johnsonian fork-tongued chicanery at its finest.

He should have gone for one every week!

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

I cant see this concrete thing lasting that long, yes some bad headlines for Conservatives and a couple of tricky byelections but Apr/May 24 is a long way from all this. I reckon a few tricky headlines and it'll be forgotten

Crumbling schools is analogous for broken Britain. Sunak is looking like a loser.

Jettison Rishi at the end of October (which is a shame- but man, he was poor yesterday) replace with a shiny new leader and pretend the new boss isn't the old boss and hope the voters don't realise the sleight of hand.

Although who would want to take on the Con leader role to be PM for likely, 5 minutes?

Yesterday was a terrible day for Rishi and the Conservatives. Can they come back for a GE win? Yes, but not with Rishi.

Grenfell (and cladding) is perhaps a useful indicator as to how these bad news stories (and Grenfell was/is really bad) end up being forgotten.

Grenfell rolled on but fortunately it occurred immediately after a GE. One could argue Government's involvement was indirect, whereas yesterday's interjection by Slater pinned the blame directly on Sunak. The crumbling schools issue affects almost everyone with children or grand children. Combustible cladding just affected those living in higher rise properties who probably don't vote Conservative as a rule.

Of course, as MoonRabbit speculated yesterday this issue could be a big win for the Tories if it spurs them to eject loser Sunak and replace with a winner.

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

I cant see this concrete thing lasting that long, yes some bad headlines for Conservatives and a couple of tricky byelections but Apr/May 24 is a long way from all this. I reckon a few tricky headlines and it'll be forgotten

Crumbling schools is analogous for broken Britain. Sunak is looking like a loser.

Jettison Rishi at the end of October (which is a shame- but man, he was poor yesterday) replace with a shiny new leader and pretend the new boss isn't the old boss and hope the voters don't realise the sleight of hand.

Although who would want to take on the Con leader role to be PM for likely, 5 minutes?

Yesterday was a terrible day for Rishi and the Conservatives. Can they come back for a GE win? Yes, but not with Rishi.

Grenfell (and cladding) is perhaps a useful indicator as to how these bad news stories (and Grenfell was/is really bad) end up being forgotten.

Grenfell rolled on but fortunately it occurred immediately after a GE. One could argue Government's involvement was indirect, whereas yesterday's interjection by Slater pinned the blame directly on Sunak. The crumbling schools issue affects almost everyone with children or grand children. Combustible cladding just affected those living in higher rise properties who probably don't vote Conservative as a rule.

Of course, as MoonRabbit speculated yesterday this issue could be a big win for the Tories if it spurs them to eject loser Sunak and replace with a winner.

If Sunak went now the odds are the Tory membership would elect PM Badenoch or Braverman.

Which is why Tory MPs won't risk it and will keep Sunak in place. He has also had success in cutting inflation etc

Cutting inflation*? If that is a win, you are truly stuffed.* Remember kids inflation is cumulative, and falling inflation has a direct correlation with an increase in your mortgage rate.

You need someone like Penny Dreadful or Tommy Tugs. If you go Braverman, you better hope she has off-the wall, industrial-scale hanging and flogging populism up her sleeve**.

** I suspect she has.

The good thing about opposition is Labour will then have to deal with the economy and we Tories can trash their record

Well the Conservatives got by blaming Brown for a solid decade. So why should this not apply in Labour's favour?

StillWaters said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

I could justify a high marginal tax rate on myself (like you it is very high), if we were getting something for it but under Tory Britain it’s an all time high and yet the public
services are on their face, schools are falling apart, nothing runs on time and
younger people get fleeced to pay for the

elderly and their gold-plated triple locked
pension.

You realise the state pension isn’t that much right?

It's a large expense due to the number of pensioners, many of whom are independently very well off vs younger people in schools falling apart.

Many parental benefits, including child benefit and much of the free nursury care, are means tested. Of course I'd welcome having more free money if they were universal, but I don't need them up live comfortably.

The government treats pension benefits as some universal right that should not only not be cut, but should on average be increased at an above inflation rate.

Means test state pensions and change the benefit linkage to a single lock or CPI. Use the savings to help repair our crumbling infrastructure.

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

I cant see this concrete thing lasting that long, yes some bad headlines for Conservatives and a couple of tricky byelections but Apr/May 24 is a long way from all this. I reckon a few tricky headlines and it'll be forgotten

Crumbling schools is analogous for broken Britain. Sunak is looking like a loser.

Jettison Rishi at the end of October (which is a shame- but man, he was poor yesterday) replace with a shiny new leader and pretend the new boss isn't the old boss and hope the voters don't realise the sleight of hand.

Although who would want to take on the Con leader role to be PM for likely, 5 minutes?

Yesterday was a terrible day for Rishi and the Conservatives. Can they come back for a GE win? Yes, but not with Rishi.

Grenfell (and cladding) is perhaps a useful indicator as to how these bad news stories (and Grenfell was/is really bad) end up being forgotten.

Grenfell rolled on but fortunately it occurred immediately after a GE. One could argue Government's involvement was indirect, whereas yesterday's interjection by Slater pinned the blame directly on Sunak. The crumbling schools issue affects almost everyone with children or grand children. Combustible cladding just affected those living in higher rise properties who probably don't vote Conservative as a rule.

Of course, as MoonRabbit speculated yesterday this issue could be a big win for the Tories if it spurs them to eject loser Sunak and replace with a winner.

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

Mexicanpete said:

swing_voter said:

I cant see this concrete thing lasting that long, yes some bad headlines for Conservatives and a couple of tricky byelections but Apr/May 24 is a long way from all this. I reckon a few tricky headlines and it'll be forgotten

Crumbling schools is analogous for broken Britain. Sunak is looking like a loser.

Jettison Rishi at the end of October (which is a shame- but man, he was poor yesterday) replace with a shiny new leader and pretend the new boss isn't the old boss and hope the voters don't realise the sleight of hand.

Although who would want to take on the Con leader role to be PM for likely, 5 minutes?

Yesterday was a terrible day for Rishi and the Conservatives. Can they come back for a GE win? Yes, but not with Rishi.

Grenfell (and cladding) is perhaps a useful indicator as to how these bad news stories (and Grenfell was/is really bad) end up being forgotten.

Grenfell rolled on but fortunately it occurred immediately after a GE. One could argue Government's involvement was indirect, whereas yesterday's interjection by Slater pinned the blame directly on Sunak. The crumbling schools issue affects almost everyone with children or grand children. Combustible cladding just affected those living in higher rise properties who probably don't vote Conservative as a rule.

Of course, as MoonRabbit speculated yesterday this issue could be a big win for the Tories if it spurs them to eject loser Sunak and replace with a winner.

If Sunak went now the odds are the Tory membership would elect PM Badenoch or Braverman.

Which is why Tory MPs won't risk it and will keep Sunak in place. He has also had success in cutting inflation etc

Cutting inflation*? If that is a win, you are truly stuffed.* Remember kids inflation is cumulative, and falling inflation has a direct correlation with an increase in your mortgage rate.

You need someone like Penny Dreadful or Tommy Tugs. If you go Braverman, you better hope she has off-the wall, industrial-scale hanging and flogging populism up her sleeve**.

** I suspect she has.

The good thing about opposition is Labour will then have to deal with the economy and we Tories can trash their record

And Labour can trash your record on investment. Like in 1996 you leave the next government with collapsing schools and hospitals.

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

We pay record taxes.

We do not pay record amounts for public services.

The proportion of our taxes that goes towards public services has been cut.

Where is our money going is the question? And no it's not public services, and it's not "spivs".

Our taxes are going ever higher to fund welfare. Public spending gets cut, and taxes go up, to feed the never ending demand for more welfare.

Which lefties won't agree with mainly because they view welfare as a good thing, which it can be if it's going to those who need it as a safety net. It's no longer a safety net though, it's a way of life for tens of millions, many of whom are the most fiscally se

Alanbrooke said:

Mexicanpete said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

That's a little like slashing someone's tyres and accusing them of being unable to afford replacement tyres and suggesting they don't have the skill and capability to drive on flat tyres.

We are where we are. Labour are quite happy to do the same ploy on the Tories. Its what our political system does these days.

But the facts remain - all the problems out there will be Labours, Labour have painted themselves in to a corner on tax rises and their front bench have less experience and talent than the bozos in situ.

We will get several years of continued decline covered over by spin.

The problems out there can be fixed.

Merge all income related taxes into one, so everyone pays the same rate regardless of how they earn their income, and the highest taxed don't have to pay any more taxes but the lowest taxed have to pay their share.

Problem solved.

Of course it will also show what a staggeringly high tax rate there currently is. But honestly is the first way to resolve a problem.

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

Mexicanpete said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

That's a little like slashing someone's tyres and accusing them of being unable to afford replacement tyres and suggesting they don't have the skill and capability to drive on flat tyres.

We are where we are. Labour are quite happy to do the same ploy on the Tories. Its what our political system does these days.

But the facts remain - all the problems out there will be Labours, Labour have painted themselves in to a corner on tax rises and their front bench have less experience and talent than the bozos in situ.

We will get several years of continued decline covered over by spin.

Person for person, I'd say the shadow cabinet is a lot more talented than the actual cabinet. But would also concede that is not a high hurdle.

From what we have seen of them, and assuming they were available and motivated, how many of the combined cabinet and shadow cabinet would you be desperate to employ to manage a team of 20 on a salary of £70k?

I could probably find a quarter to a third of them that I would expect to be really good value at that rate. Maybe some of you could get to half of them.

Yet we pay them double to manage a teams of many thousands.

BartholomewRoberts said:

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

Unfortunately, we are where we are.

The reason taxes haven't been higher than they have been since 2010 is the government's squeeze on capital spending. Now, it's a reasonable punt to take a capex holiday for a year or three. Most repair and replacement cycles can be stretched a bit without harm.

But we're now 13 years on from the start of the coalition, and we're still trying to deny that entropy is a thing. So the public realm is uniformly grotty, and in places unsafe. And the day to day delivery of stuff is increasingly inefficient as staff struggle with stuff rather her than doing their core job.

Like it or not, there's no way out of this that doesn't involve paying more taxes in the future, because we didn't pay enough on the past. Unless you can find a meaningful (so not Diversity Officers) thing that it's OK to cut that we've missed all these years.

That's not envy, it's arithmetic.

"Meaningful thing that it's OK to cut that we've missed all these years"

Hmm, let me think. The Triple Lock?

You know, the single largest expenditure the Government has.

Expenditure that outweighs spending on every single public sector employee in the entire country put together?

How's that for starters?

Though the problem there is the existence of state pensions.

The triple lock is secondary. It's an ominous rachet over years, but the pensions bill wouldn't be much smaller had we stuck to a single lock, whether wages or inflation.

Again- we are where we are. It would have been better had pensions not been set up as PAYG, or had companies not seen their 1980s surpluses as anything more than a temporary artefact. But we can't change the past, even if it's hurting us now.

So. Higher taxes or undesirable spending cuts. And probably both.

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

Mexicanpete said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

That's a little like slashing someone's tyres and accusing them of being unable to afford replacement tyres and suggesting they don't have the skill and capability to drive on flat tyres.

We are where we are. Labour are quite happy to do the same ploy on the Tories. Its what our political system does these days.

But the facts remain - all the problems out there will be Labours, Labour have painted themselves in to a corner on tax rises and their front bench have less experience and talent than the bozos in situ.

We will get several years of continued decline covered over by spin.

Person for person, I'd say the shadow cabinet is a lot more talented than the actual cabinet. But would also concede that is not a high hurdle.

Maybe, we can go back and forth on it, but we can at least agree we dont feel that impressed by either side.

I agree with you that unless fundamental and potentially very unpopular decisions are taken there is only one way things are going in this country and that is downwards. Our current trajectory is ruinous. Neither major party seems to be serious about changing that. The one advantage that Labour has over the Tories is that we do not know it for certain about them yet because they are only saying stuff right now, not doing it.

RochdalePioneers said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Don't look at the top bottom line and say we need more top line.

Look at the top line, look at the bottom, then ask "where is the money going".

I agree that those who are in crisis are struggling. The problem is that our modern welfare state is not a safety net for those in temporary crisis.

Our modern welfare state is giving well off individuals, some of whom post on this page, our taxes because "they've paid for it" and they vote.

Public sector contracts aren't taking the money. The money is going on welfare to those who literally do not need it, while those who do get bugger all.

First party that accepts that truth, will be able to fund their preference. Whether it is Labour boosting spending, or Tories cutting taxes, stop increasing the rate out taxes go to those who don't need it and you can fund those who do.

Mega snip to fix Vanilla.

The big thing we could fix is making work pay. A vast amount of money is spent subsidising crap employers like Asda. Whilst I understand why Brown brought in Tax Credits, they have to go. Corporation Tax is very low yet these big employers are asked for nothing in return.

CTax is to rise from 19% to 25%. Tell companies they can have it back to 19% if they behave. A 4% cut if they pay a living wage (and thus remove the need for tax credits) and a further 2% cut if they invest in skills.

Make employers good corporate citizens again, and the welfare bill collapses. Stop subsidising Asda.

Yeah and similarly slash housing benefit, and let the market find a non subsidised floor rate to pay landlords.

RochdalePioneers said:

I have some sympathy with @Casino_Royale 's point. Hard work should be rewarded. All hard work, and so many people work themselves into the ground doing much harder jobs than ours for little reward and recognition.

At the same time, taxes are already so high with service provision so low. As it was in 1996 the incoming Labour government next year inherits a decade plus backlog of investment - schools and hospitals and other facilities literally falling down around people. This is what Tory government delivers.

What the next government needs to do is to take a step back from the micro. This is not cut x to fund y. We are fiscally sovereign. We can borrow to fund capex which grows the economy. The problem with the public debt isn't so much the size of it as what it has been spent on.

The markets are very supportive of proper long-term capitalism, borrow, invest, deliver a return, reinvest. And when you read that Spiv Water PLC is substantially owned by foreign pension operators it becomes very clear that we've been left behind totally.

The big change Starmer could do is launch a sovereign wealth fund. Use that to build the future our kids deserve. Schools. Hospitals. Fibre Broadband. Green energy technology sold to the world. Or we can cut. Say we can't afford to feed poor kids. Until we genuinely do swap places with Slovenia.

Hard work should be rewarded, but there are a lot of people who work hard but still need UC to give them a wage they can just about get by on. I think they have more cause to complain than people on a 62% marginal tax rate.
I would add that this problem is not just a British problem, it's also a big issue here in germany and 10 times worse in the USA.

148grss said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

If you're paying the 62% marginal tax rate you earn between £100k and £120k; your take home pay will be around £70-75k? That's double the median average household income; double the average income of a nurse or teacher.

And about 1/10th that of a senior consultant performing also in private practice.

So what? Nurses can become investment bankers if they so wish, or project managers.

It's not like the nursing payscales are a state secret, only revealed upon qualification.

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

Mexicanpete said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

That's a little like slashing someone's tyres and accusing them of being unable to afford replacement tyres and suggesting they don't have the skill and capability to drive on flat tyres.

We are where we are. Labour are quite happy to do the same ploy on the Tories. Its what our political system does these days.

But the facts remain - all the problems out there will be Labours, Labour have painted themselves in to a corner on tax rises and their front bench have less experience and talent than the bozos in situ.

We will get several years of continued decline covered over by spin.

Person for person, I'd say the shadow cabinet is a lot more talented than the actual cabinet. But would also concede that is not a high hurdle.

Maybe, we can go back and forth on it, but we can at least agree we dont feel that impressed by either side.

I agree with you that unless fundamental and potentially very unpopular decisions are taken there is only one way things are going in this country and that is downwards. Our current trajectory is ruinous. Neither major party seems to be serious about changing that. The one advantage that Labour has over the Tories is that we do not know it for certain about them yet because they are only saying stuff right now, not doing it.

I can agree with you the unknown might favourably surprise us but Im a bit pressimistic.

The problem for me is the system as a whole needs reform and none of the parties has the guts to go down that route, So we will be left with a state of decline and pure spin. Its like two two crap doctors fighting across the bed of a dying patient

Alanbrooke said:

eristdoof said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

Your politics has led to a country where you feel you pay too much tax, and yet the schools, the roads, and the hospitals are crumbling, much of the NHS aren't able to attract good staff, the train service is not quite getting there and the water companies are shitting into the rivers and coastal waters.

What then *has* the Conservative government done with your tax money in the last 13 years?

Covid, cost of living or did you miss that ?

Remind us - how many billions was it spaffed on useless PPE supplied by cronies and other spivs?

noneoftheabove said:

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

Mexicanpete said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

That's a little like slashing someone's tyres and accusing them of being unable to afford replacement tyres and suggesting they don't have the skill and capability to drive on flat tyres.

We are where we are. Labour are quite happy to do the same ploy on the Tories. Its what our political system does these days.

But the facts remain - all the problems out there will be Labours, Labour have painted themselves in to a corner on tax rises and their front bench have less experience and talent than the bozos in situ.

We will get several years of continued decline covered over by spin.

Person for person, I'd say the shadow cabinet is a lot more talented than the actual cabinet. But would also concede that is not a high hurdle.

From what we have seen of them, and assuming they were available and motivated, how many of the combined cabinet and shadow cabinet would you be desperate to employ to manage a team of 20 on a salary of £70k?

I could probably find a quarter to a third of them that I would expect to be really good value at that rate. Maybe some of you could get to half of them.

Yet we pay them double to manage a teams of many thousands.

I think most of them could manage a team of 20. I think that's part of the problem. I'd give Sunak a senior job in a finance team, though not the CFO one. I'd put Starmer in charge of managing, though not developing, a big project. But would I put either of them in charge of creating a viable turnaround strategy for a failing business that still has a relatively strong brand and some other pretty decent assets at its disposal? Not if I had a choice. They are managers, not gamechangers.

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

We pay record taxes.

We do not pay record amounts for public services.

The proportion of our taxes that goes towards public services has been cut.

Where is our money going is the question? And no it's not public services, and it's not "spivs".

Our taxes are going ever higher to fund welfare. Public spending gets cut, and taxes go up, to feed the never ending demand for more welfare.

Which lefties won't agree with mainly because they view welfare as a good thing, which it can be if it's going to those who need it as a safety net. It's no longer a safety net though, it's a way of life for tens of millions, many of whom are the most fiscally secure in the country living rent and mortgage free in their own owned home, but still get triple locked welfare.

Indeed. My higher rate taxes are being spent on benefit scrounging boomers and their triple locked pensions.

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

Mexicanpete said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

Yeah I think so. I listened to Keegan yesterday and she seemed fine - why am I being held accountable for something that happened in 1994, etc - and this is obviously a long-standing problem.

However, as was shown yesterday in the HoC yesterday, "Britain is literally falling apart under 13 years of Conservative rule" is a zinger and super effective to seed (yet) further discontent with this govt.

The only reprieve for them would be if the minutes to a secret meeting in 1997 were somehow discovered wherein Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jeremy Corbyn, and Keir Starmer together conspired to put RAAC into every school and hospital.

Which is entirely possible, of course. But still Rishi I think is going down and he will go down screaming "it's not fair" in that irritating way of his.

On the other hand one cant help but think Labour are setting themselves up for when theyre in government.

The problems will be theirs, theres no money and they are seriously short of talent.

That's a little like slashing someone's tyres and accusing them of being unable to afford replacement tyres and suggesting they don't have the skill and capability to drive on flat tyres.

We are where we are. Labour are quite happy to do the same ploy on the Tories. Its what our political system does these days.

But the facts remain - all the problems out there will be Labours, Labour have painted themselves in to a corner on tax rises and their front bench have less experience and talent than the bozos in situ.

We will get several years of continued decline covered over by spin.

Person for person, I'd say the shadow cabinet is a lot more talented than the actual cabinet. But would also concede that is not a high hurdle.

Maybe, we can go back and forth on it, but we can at least agree we dont feel that impressed by either side.

I agree with you that unless fundamental and potentially very unpopular decisions are taken there is only one way things are going in this country and that is downwards. Our current trajectory is ruinous. Neither major party seems to be serious about changing that. The one advantage that Labour has over the Tories is that we do not know it for certain about them yet because they are only saying stuff right now, not doing it.

I can agree with you the unknown might favourably surprise us but Im a bit pressimistic.

The problem for me is the system as a whole needs reform and none of the parties has the guts to go down that route, So we will be left with a state of decline and pure spin. Its like two two crap doctors fighting across the bed of a dying patient

It does feel that way. But there is possible upside under Labour. Do I have a great deal of hope that things will pan out that way? Nope. But I know for certain that the Tories have had their go and messed up big time. It's time for a change.

RochdalePioneers said:

I have some sympathy with @Casino_Royale 's point. Hard work should be rewarded. All hard work, and so many people work themselves into the ground doing much harder jobs than ours for little reward and recognition.

At the same time, taxes are already so high with service provision so low. As it was in 1996 the incoming Labour government next year inherits a decade plus backlog of investment - schools and hospitals and other facilities literally falling down around people. This is what Tory government delivers.

What the next government needs to do is to take a step back from the micro. This is not cut x to fund y. We are fiscally sovereign. We can borrow to fund capex which grows the economy. The problem with the public debt isn't so much the size of it as what it has been spent on.

The markets are very supportive of proper long-term capitalism, borrow, invest, deliver a return, reinvest. And when you read that Spiv Water PLC is substantially owned by foreign pension operators it becomes very clear that we've been left behind totally.

The big change Starmer could do is launch a sovereign wealth fund. Use that to build the future our kids deserve. Schools. Hospitals. Fibre Broadband. Green energy technology sold to the world. Or we can cut. Say we can't afford to feed poor kids. Until we genuinely do swap places with Slovenia.

Wages are not linked to hard work.

Jobs that are higher paying are jobs that benefit capital by making excess profits - so you have bankers who gamble with money making huge salaries whereas people who do backbreaking physical labour often get paid very little. Which is more important to society, the person who picks your food or the stock trader? The cleaner or the CEO? If offices didn't have cleaners for a month it would be impossible for workers to work; would many places notice if their CEO went on holiday for a month?

The reason people like Casino Royale get annoyed is because of the conservative axiom that some people deserve to be on the bottom and others (namely themselves) deserve to be on top. That this is shown via the market and the wage the market gives them. And that individuals in a society have little to no duty to their fellow human, that bootstrapperism is the only true way for prosperity. Anything to the left of Thatcherism is Venezuela, and left wing politics is responsible for all the negative aspects of their societies - whereas market capitalism has no down sides, ignore how it is funded on slave labour, mass incarceration, the immiseration of the poor and the destruction of the environment. Society would collapse if all the rich went Galt, but striking workers just need a firm hand to get them back to it, the lazy bastards.

That we have been doing the neoliberal experiment my entire life and everything has got steadily worse matters not - that you can see the inflexion both for the USA and the UK where productivity decouples from wages, with wages stagnating and other outcomes for workers worsening is just a sign of economic growth (for the rich). We're seeing another age of populism, with far right parties rising across the globe since the 2008 crash and even supposedly liberal governments are more willing to falsely blame immigrants or wokism rather than the excesses of capitalism. The ratchet can only go one way for the likes of Casino - rightwards.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

RochdalePioneers said:

SouthamObserver said:

My grandson’s school makes it into the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another school year in which his education suffers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66710706

The mind-blowing thing is that Sunak was presented with all the evidence of the problems and how serious they were, and decided to cut the repairs budget in half. I just don’t see how you come back from a decision like that. It’s unforgivable.

I and other commentators have been saying for a while that the country is literally falling apart. Public services that we pay record amounts for whilst getting something that barely works. This isn't a woke lefty hit the Tories perspective, it is the lived experience of ordinary voters.

Crumbling schools is the perfect illustration of life under the Conservatives. We pay record taxes. We have crappy infrastructure and services where you now have to pay a spiv for a driving test - corruption is bedding in across all sectors. Schools are already buggered - teachers having to spend their own poor salaries on food and clothes for poor kids abandoned by the system.

And now this. They stopped replacing schools. They stopped repairing schools. And faced with repeated warnings about schools literally collapsing around the kids they cut funding for that as well.

As so utterly infuriates @Casino_Royale when we point to the evidence, his party Do Not Care about the lives of ordinary people. They simply aren't important. Which is why this scandal is already resonating across the political spectrum so loudly.

Is Sunak about to face a visit from Mrs Brady? I think that depends on how he responds to this. A starter for 10 is reversing yesterday's "go fuck yourselves" statement from the Treasury and finding money to fix this mess. Some genuine humility - "we got this wrong whilst we were busy fighting Covid, we'll sort it" - would help. But I'm not sure he can do either.

If he tries to bat it aside and Tory MPs start feeling the heat then he will be gone. But replaced by what? And when Braverman or Hunt or Anderson tries to claim they have a mandate to govern, the howling laughter will only sink them even lower in the polls.

Give up.

Good morning and the first post I have read

I agree with your general sentiment and Sunak and Keegan are in office when this crisis hits and must face the music

However, anyone listening to Keegan at the dispatch box yesterday would be very churlish not to accept she knew the details inside out and her responses to the house were well informed

Reading the Welsh media about the closure of two North Wales schools and the ensuing comments there is widescale condemnation of Cardiff much as there is of Sunak and Keegan in England

This is a crisis that includes all parts of the UK and the ultimate cost could be in the billions

As far as Sunak is concerned I just do not see him being replaced, no matter how much the mail want a 'true conservative'.

He will lose to Starmer in 2024 and no doubt leave politics having been UK prime minister for 2 years, and at least not as discredited as Johnson and Truss

I don't agree that Keegan is on top of her brief. People running a school will have four basic questions:

1. Why has the advice changed?
2. What do I need to know?
3. What do I need to do?
4. Where's the money coming from?

The Education Department should have had clear answers on all four questions at the point they made the announcement.

Keegan partly answered question 3 yesterday, days late. The other three questions barely at all. People running schools night be angry at the situation but their first priority is to keep the children safe. They will whatever measures are necessary. She's not really helping.

Alanbrooke said:

eristdoof said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

Your politics has led to a country where you feel you pay too much tax, and yet the schools, the roads, and the hospitals are crumbling, much of the NHS aren't able to attract good staff, the train service is not quite getting there and the water companies are shitting into the rivers and coastal waters.

What then *has* the Conservative government done with your tax money in the last 13 years?

Covid, cost of living or did you miss that ?

Every European country had Covid and high inflation for 18 months. Most countries have dealt better with those problems. Also the problems I listed are not post 2020 problems, they are a drip drip drip consequence of long term underinvestement (and/or poor regulation) from a government that has been in power for 13 years

Owen Jones is not happy with the Labour reshuffle.

The ascendancy of the Blairites is bad news for the rest of us.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/after-the-reshuffle-blairites-dominate-starmer-s-shadow-cabinet-that-s-bad-news-for-the-rest-of-us/ar-AA1gemxw?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=5dd78c69a6a0427ebcb59c6c51200c62&ei=13

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

If you're paying the 62% marginal tax rate you earn between £100k and £120k; your take home pay will be around £70-75k? That's double the median average household income; double the average income of a nurse or teacher.

And about 1/10th that of a senior consultant performing also in private practice.

So what? Nurses can become investment bankers if they so wish, or project managers.

It's not like the nursing payscales are a state secret, only revealed upon qualification.

I am reminded of the Oscar Wilde quote: you know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

If every nurse had decided to be an investment banker instead, our society wouldn't function. If every investment banker had instead decided to be nurses, whilst I'm sure society would be wildly different, I think it would still function.

Stuartinromford said:

148grss said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I have some sympathy with @Casino_Royale 's point. Hard work should be rewarded. All hard work, and so many people work themselves into the ground doing much harder jobs than ours for little reward and recognition.

At the same time, taxes are already so high with service provision so low. As it was in 1996 the incoming Labour government next year inherits a decade plus backlog of investment - schools and hospitals and other facilities literally falling down around people. This is what Tory government delivers.

What the next government needs to do is to take a step back from the micro. This is not cut x to fund y. We are fiscally sovereign. We can borrow to fund capex which grows the economy. The problem with the public debt isn't so much the size of it as what it has been spent on.

The markets are very supportive of proper long-term capitalism, borrow, invest, deliver a return, reinvest. And when you read that Spiv Water PLC is substantially owned by foreign pension operators it becomes very clear that we've been left behind totally.

The big change Starmer could do is launch a sovereign wealth fund. Use that to build the future our kids deserve. Schools. Hospitals. Fibre Broadband. Green energy technology sold to the world. Or we can cut. Say we can't afford to feed poor kids. Until we genuinely do swap places with Slovenia.

Wages are not linked to hard work.

Jobs that are higher paying are jobs that benefit capital by making excess profits - so you have bankers who gamble with money making huge salaries whereas people who do backbreaking physical labour often get paid very little. Which is more important to society, the person who picks your food or the stock trader? The cleaner or the CEO? If offices didn't have cleaners for a month it would be impossible for workers to work; would many places notice if their CEO went on holiday for a month?

The reason people like Casino Royale get annoyed is because of the conservative axiom that some people deserve to be on the bottom and others (namely themselves) deserve to be on top. That this is shown via the market and the wage the market gives them. And that individuals in a society have little to no duty to their fellow human, that bootstrapperism is the only true way for prosperity. Anything to the left of Thatcherism is Venezuela, and left wing politics is responsible for all the negative aspects of their societies - whereas market capitalism has no down sides, ignore how it is funded on slave labour, mass incarceration, the immiseration of the poor and the destruction of the environment. Society would collapse if all the rich went Galt, but striking workers just need a firm hand to get them back to it, the lazy bastards.

That we have been doing the neoliberal experiment my entire life and everything has got steadily worse matters not - that you can see the inflexion both for the USA and the UK where productivity decouples from wages, with wages stagnating and other outcomes for workers worsening is just a sign of economic growth (for the rich). We're seeing another age of populism, with far right parties rising across the globe since the 2008 crash and even supposedly liberal governments are more willing to falsely blame immigrants or wokism rather than the excesses of capitalism. The ratchet can only go one way for the likes of Casino - rightwards.

The irony is that there is an excess of people who want to be investment bankers and a shortage of people who want to be nurses.

Which, if you believe in the wisdom of the market, implies that one is offering too much in pay and rations, and the other too little.

It doesn't make sense if you really believed the marketplace worked based on need of people - whereas it actually works based on the needs of capital. Capital cares not for public healthcare, those who have a lot of it can get private healthcare when they need it.

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

SouthamObserver said:

The crumbling schools, the turds pouring into our water, a collapsing health service, the social care crisis, appalling public transport, hugely expensive childcare, the lack of housing etc, etc … leads to only one conclusion: no serious government can escape the need for huge infrastructure investment. There’s no getting round it, so ways will have to be found unless we do just want to accept a decline into discrepitude and all the disasters that will bring.

The septic isle of shit in every river and all around the coast has really, really cut through on the doorsteps.

People are furious that the Tories are still giving out exemptions to the water companies, and the fact that several of these companies or their private equity backers are Conservative donors only stokes the wrath.

Septic Isle is a great phrase.

Almost Shakespeare 🤔

Actually it was Jonathan Dimbleby first used it, about Majorca (I think) just when it was becoming popular as a tourist destination but didn't have a proper sewage system.

(He was of course punning on John of Gaunt's speech in Richard II, but it was still a clever line then.)

Alanbrooke said:

eristdoof said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Casino_Royale said:

Foxy said:

Cicero said:

Gardenwalker said:

I think Keegan is safe.
It’s a fuck-up, but she does “human” reasonably ok, which is a rare thing in Tory politics.

As for Sunak, he is of course fucked.
Unlike Keegan, he’s *personally* responsible for slashing school repair budgets.

The Mail AND the Telegraph are turning against him.
Not just with these front pages, you can see the commentariat start to re-position itself, too.

Meanwhile, Keir’s re-shuffle has quietly impressed the more thoughtful analysts with its decisive and lack of sentimental focus on being a government-in-waiting.

I would not rule out a kamikaze leadership bid by Suella Braverman, but not until after next year’s locals.

In the shorter-term, I think the Tories lose Mid-Beds even if Labour/LD cannot agree who to rally behind.

Tories third? If so, they are not even in for a 97 shellacking, but something worse...

Third is very possible. It would be interesting to see a betting market on that.

Why would anyone vote for this shitshow?

Because it's in me and my family's interests to do so.

I don't share the values of SKS, or their hangers-on quite frankly, and I know Labour will be coming for me.

Playing devil's advocate: why is it bad for Labour to come for you?

You're apparently in a well-paid job, and have a comfortable life. You live in a society where lots - millions, in fact - of people don't have the advantages you have. Yes, you pay lots of tax. But many of the things that are wrong with this country can only be fixed with an increased tax take - and the question is where that comes from.

Someone has to pay tax - the question, as always, is how much of the burden falls on which individuals.

I pay 62% marginal rate on my income at the moment.

How much would you like me to pay? 70%? 80%? 100%?

Sentiments like this are stagnating the country and will lead to a brain drain from Britain, which will cost the exchequer not add to it.

It depends on how much you earn (as it happens, we're in a similar situation).

But if you want improved public services, it will hurt people financially. The questions become: do you want improved public services, and do you want people who can already not afford to put food on the table to have *less* money, or reduced services?

You're in a blooming fortunate position. Yes, there are iniquities in the way tax brackets are arranged, which should be fixed. But lots of people work just as hard as you, or even harder, and don't get the same rewards.

And comments like this highlight the death of the aspiration society.

I have only been in the position I am in now for the last 22 months. It took nearly 20 years of building a career to get there. Now I am there, you think there's no level of taxation I cannot bear because I earn a bit more than you.

This is a socialist sentiment and it's a well-worn path that ends up impoverishing the whole country.

Work has to pay and be rewarded. Both @MaxPB and myself, and even @NickPalmer, have highlighted on here before how the current tax burden is distorting incentives to work and leading people to work fewer hours, and thus holding back productivity, whilst also contributing to a brain drain.

Your guttural politics will lead to less tax, and worse public services, not more. That's what happens when you put envy at the heart of it.

Your politics has led to a country where you feel you pay too much tax, and yet the schools, the roads, and the hospitals are crumbling, much of the NHS aren't able to attract good staff, the train service is not quite getting there and the water companies are shitting into the rivers and coastal waters.

What then *has* the Conservative government done with your tax money in the last 13 years?

Covid, cost of living or did you miss that ?

Yes. important to remember the Covid crisis, which the Tories used to shovel our taxes to their chums for dodgy PPE contracts.

eek said:

Nigelb said:

TOPPING said:

It goes without saying that we need to keep the children safe and having the ceiling fall down on Class 3B during double maths is no one's idea of a good outcome.

That said, I notice that schools are reverting to online learning for some affected pupils. Online learning, one of the most pernicious aspects of lockdown. And in this case engendering a fear in children that their school is not safe. Now, there may be some dodgy concrete in there but are they saying that they can't manage via other classrooms, portakabins, the gym, to have all pupils in school?

This is (yet) another reason why lockdowns were such a mistake. And people use "lockdown sceptic" as a term of insult.

Schools don't get portakabins at a day's notice.

Many schools won't be getting portakabin this year - there were reports yesterday that portakabins hired for delivery in September are now going to arrive in December

Surely time to befriend a Tory MP and set up a new portakin business that promises fast tracked delivery (that it won't actually deliver but still gets paid a massive bung, sorry premium, for).

noneoftheabove said:

Nigelb said:

TOPPING said:

It goes without saying that we need to keep the children safe and having the ceiling fall down on Class 3B during double maths is no one's idea of a good outcome.

That said, I notice that schools are reverting to online learning for some affected pupils. Online learning, one of the most pernicious aspects of lockdown. And in this case engendering a fear in children that their school is not safe. Now, there may be some dodgy concrete in there but are they saying that they can't manage via other classrooms, portakabins, the gym, to have all pupils in school?

This is (yet) another reason why lockdowns were such a mistake. And people use "lockdown sceptic" as a term of insult.

Schools don't get portakabins at a day's notice.

Not really sure what this has got to do with lockdown, but I do think closing schools is a mistake.

Buildings are not safe or unsafe. Our building controls to date have given us an arbitrary level of safety that is indeed very safe. Knowing what we now about the dodgy concrete, that level has dropped a bit but evidently by the rarity of serious incidents, is still very safe and safer than most schools in the rest of the world.

I assume you don't have school age children? Or perhaps simply an above average tolerance for their school falling down on top of them.

Cyclefree said:

SouthamObserver said:

Mexicanpete said:

Yesterday's disastrous whining performances from Sunak and Keegan is the legacy of long- Johnson.

Long-Johnson will blight the Conservatives for a while yet. By Johnson promoting duds, duffers are being over promoted even after he is gone. Sunak (who I like) is a case in point.

It must be painful for lifelong one nation Tories to accept there is room in the party for Braverman but not Grieve.

Rishi Sunak was presented with compelling evidence that more money was needed to make schools safe for kids to go to and was warned of a critical risk to life if action wasn’t taken. His reaction was to cut the repairs budget. Judge him on deeds, not words. That’s the man he is.

I would like to know what other options were presented to him. Maybe he was presented with other options with a critical risk to life and had to choose between them.

My view is that the triple lock has to go, as do other non-means tested benefits like winter fuel allowance etc. But it is delusional to think that with a few more taxes on wealthy pensioners we can get ourselves out of this hole.

It's not just repairing existing infrastructure which is needed but investing in infrastructure for the future to enhance productivity, and building houses and so on. A lot of money will need to be spent - wisely - and until that generates growth to pay for more sensible investment taxes will need to be levied on everyone, including at the bottom end even if the burden should be higher on those with more.

We don't simply have to pay for the things we want but also for the cost of what we have spent in the past eg on Covid and furlough, which largely benefited workers.

And then there is stuff like defence - if Trump is elected Nato is finished so we are going to have to prepare for a more dangerous world and, specifically, a revanchist and even more dangerous Russia and China. NI on pensioners' income simply is not going to be enough.

I see no sign that the Tories or Labour get this. But it looks pretty much certain that Labour will have to grapple with this. In a year or so.

Excellent post @Cyclefree

A preview of the Tories in opposition...


@NileGardiner
Ejecting Truss was a terrible mistake

https://twitter.com/NileGardiner/status/1698721987806253223