When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?

[Purple Orange]

Theresa May?!

The only party where the next leader is always worse than the previous!

May worse than Cameron?

 

[Howardh]

May worse than Cameron?

I liked, and voted for, Cameron. 2010 wasn't it? Unfortunately.....

 

[Yew]

Carefully targeted tax cuts could help growth.

Whereas carefully targeted investment is proven to stimulate growth.

 

[najaB]

Whereas carefully targeted investment is proven to stimulate growth.

I would much rather that the government spent money by direct investment, rather than by cutting taxes. An example of government investment that could really go a long way would be a large tidal power system - big spending now with benefits for a century or more.

 

[Yew]

I would much rather that the government spent money by direct investment, rather than by cutting taxes. An example of government investment that could really go a long way would be a large tidal power system - big spending now with benefits for a century or more.

But will the benefits manifest before the next election cycle?

 

[najaB]

But will the benefits manifest before the next election cycle?

Nope. Which is why it will never happen.

Except, I guess, the construction jobs.

 

[brad465]

Nope. Which is why it will never happen.

Except, I guess, the construction jobs.

This didn't stop Hinkley Point C getting approval, even though its costs and management have spiralled. I imagine though at this point in time "creating jobs" is not going to have any political gains, as vacancies outstripping number of unemployed means new jobs will be hard to fill. Of course what this actually reveals is our economy is too large for the population to run/use, hence why no-one did anything about immigration controls, whether necessary or not.

 

[The Ham]

I would much rather that the government spent money by direct investment, rather than by cutting taxes. An example of government investment that could really go a long way would be a large tidal power system - big spending now with benefits for a century or more.

Although some targeted spending could build some tidal schemes very fast.

A classic example would be the installation of turbines to the entry points to existing tidal basins, such as to Carnsew Pool in Hayle (Cornwall):

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

That would likely generate more power on the falling tide than the rising (due to the lock gates allowing free flow in as the tide rises), but given it creates whirlpools there's plenty of scope for power generation.

Investing in tidal would aid in reducing the need for hydrocarbons, which reduces our carbon emissions, limiting inflationary pressures, reduces the world need to use Russian (or other dubious authorities) oil (aiding indirectly Ukraine) and improving air quality (through fewer ICE vehicles); to make a few.

Unfortunately, chances are is now likely to be tax cuts on air passenger duty and fuel duty.

 

[Yew]

This didn't stop Hinkley Point C getting approval, even though its costs and management have spiralled. I imagine though at this point in time "creating jobs" is not going to have any political gains, as vacancies outstripping number of unemployed means new jobs will be hard to fill. Of course what this actually reveals is our economy is too large for the population to run/use, hence why no-one did anything about immigration controls, whether necessary or not.

How many of these jobs are jobs that people actually want to do? Over the last 40 years we have seen high-quality careers replaced with low quality unskilled jobs.

 

[Falcon1200]

In the interim, please feel free to provide evidence of a Boris "success "....the toxic legacy of the "oven ready deal " with Brexit is far, far from over and never will be...Covid ?....the credit for the vaccine and the roll out goes to those directly involved...NOT Boris as he likes to claim given how late was he in imposing sanctions initially

How, precisely, does the Covid vaccine roll-out qualify as a success that's attributable to Boris? What did he do that others would or could not?

So, any successes during Boris's reign were entirely down to other people, not him, but any and all failures were directly his fault ? Fair enough, as long as that standard is applied to all politicians in all parts of the UK.....

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How many of these jobs are jobs that people actually want to do? Over the last 40 years we have seen high-quality careers replaced with low quality unskilled jobs.

Since your posting above responded to the matter of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. in that facility what would be the referred-to low quality unskilled jobs in a nuclear power station?

 

[jfollows]

Hinkley Point C, in my opinion, is one of the few cases of "things going right for the Tories". Mind you, it was because of a decision Theresa May made and not Boris Johnson. At the time I considered it to be the wrong decision, but today I've changed my mind - the facts have changed. It will still be late and over budget when it finally works, but I think in the longer term we'll be grateful for it.

 

[Yew]

Since your posting above responded to the matter of Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. in that facility what would be the referred-to low quality unskilled jobs in a nuclear power station?

That's exactly the point, HPC has high skilled, well paid work; much better than a warehouse or supermarket.

For too long we have judged high levels of employment to be simply "number of people not unemployed" , whereas a maximally productive economy is one where people are not working at jobs below their level of skill.

 

[Lost property]

So, any successes during Boris's reign were entirely down to other people, not him, but any and all failures were directly his fault ? Fair enough, as long as that standard is applied to all politicians in all parts of the UK.....

Correct, although credit where credit is due....he was the most successful liar as PM the UK has ever had....until now.

 

[nw1]

A colleague at work said to me a few months ago that she'd make it to PM one day. He's further to the right than Genghis Khan, but other than that he's alright!

Patel would guarantee a disastrous defeat for the Conservative Party at the next election as she is a hard-right authoritarian and has absolutely no appeal whatsoever to anyone except those firmly on the right.

Such a defeat would of course be good, but remember we'd have perhaps 21 months of Patel as PM to endure first...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2022 ==

It's going to be one of the lunatic fringe that win isn't it (Braverman/Patel/Badenoch/Truss)

If so it shows the Conservative Party have become utterly obsessed with small-c conservatism.

To my mind the obvious choices are the relative moderates, such as Hunt, Javid, Shapps, Sunak, and Tugendhat (ordered alphabetically, not personal preference).

Relatively recently, the Conservative Party's message was economic conservatism but relatively socially liberal and internationalist attitudes. You had that under Major and you had that under Cameron. It seems they moved to the right to counter the threat of Farage but now it seems that small-c conservative hard right attitudes have permeated the party like never before.

Why don't they realise that they would have more chance of success, and respect, if they moved back to the economically-conservative-but-socially-liberal stance, rather than trying to completely alienate those of us with progressive, socially liberal, and pro-Europe attitudes? Sticking with the hard-right small-c conservative line is just going to cause more divisions within the country and now that people are getting wise to Brexit being a load of hot air and empty promises, I suspect that small-c conservatism is going to work less and less well as a strategy in the coming years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2022 ==

Is this class 87 "the wolf of badenoch" of which you speak?

That was my first thought when I saw the name (never heard of her before), I have to admit!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2022 ==

May worse than Cameron?

Difficult. Cameron decided to have that silly, badly-designed referendum (Brexit must happen if 50.00000000001% of participants in the poll voted for it) whereas May didn't give the result the critical analysis it deserved (i.e the only valid Brexit for such a marginal result would be one which maintained freedom of movement and the customs union).

Whatever, both can be considered "moderate" Tories and thus clearly better than Johnson (and a majority of the current candidates).

Major is the least bad Tory PM I can remember by a country mile; perhaps the best of my lifetime is Heath but I cannot remember him.

 

[DerekC]

Is this class 87 "the wolf of badenoch" of which you speak?

That was my first thought when I saw the name (never heard of her before), I have to admit!

Now just hold on - quick reference to my 1959 "British Railway Locomotives" reveals that the name "Wolf of Badenoch" was borne by Thompson A2 Pacific 60506 long before Class 87s were a twinkle in the designer's eye. Back in the dear dead days of Harold Macmillan, I think.

 

[nw1]

Now just hold on - quick reference to my 1959 "British Railway Locomotives" reveals that the name "Wolf of Badenoch" was borne by Thompson A2 Pacific 60506 long before Class 87s were a twinkle in the designer's eye. Back in the dear dead days of Harold Macmillan, I think.

Very much a generational thing I guess

I will say that I correctly remembered the number of the 87 all those years later. I don't remember all of them, but some of the 87 names were particularly evocative and this was one of them.

I wonder if she was born on 6 May 1960 (60/5/06) or 7 February 1987 (87/02/7) ? That really would be strange. (Have to admit I have no idea how old she is).

Whatever, with her right-wing views, I think the "Wolf of Badenoch" would be an appropriate nickname

 

[najaB]

So, any successes during Boris's reign were entirely down to other people, not him, but any and all failures were directly his fault ? Fair enough, as long as that standard is applied to all politicians in all parts of the UK.....

If he (or any politician) wants to take personal credit for the successes, then they have to take personal credit for the failures.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If he (or any politician) wants to take personal credit for the successes, then they have to take personal credit for the failures.

I have no problem with that, but you need consistency, and the reverse is also true: If you want to blame Boris personally for the failures of his Government, then you should also give him credit for the successes. This bit of the discussion emerged from a post (#4921) that sought to blamed Boris personally for the failures of his Government while simultaneously finding excuses not to give him credit for the successes.

 

[najaB]

If you want to blame Boris personally for the failures of his Government, then you should also give him credit for the successes.

First step there will be identifying the successes.

 

[jfollows]

First step there will be identifying the successes.

I think he "got Brexit done" which was what he was mainly elected for, after false starts, breaking the law, and something which I very much oppose, but he was "able" to do this whereas Theresa May wasn't.
The rest of it - no. I just don't think any other person would have done a worse job for the implications of Covid-19, he took a bit of a punt on vaccines early on perhaps, but most of the rest of it was either worse than others would have been or no better. However it's hard to compare reality with hypothesis here.
So I'd give him credit for the Brexit thing, even though he now wants to break the treaty he signed and the whole thing is a self-inflicted disaster of large proportions for the UK - in my opinion of course.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2022 ==

Patrick Flynn (an analyst at a betting firm, not the UKIP bloke) predicts Sunak + Mordaunt as the last two (https://twitter.com/patrickjfl/status/1546601353589493761/photo/1).
I think Sunak + other, and that the other will win in the constituency of old white men in the south of England.
The picture shows total votes as:
Rishi Sunak 154
Penny Mordaunt 126
Liz Truss 78
Tom Tugendhat 65 eliminated after third ballot
Nadhim Zahawi 42 eliminated after second ballot
Priti Patel 29 eliminated after first ballot
Suella Braverman 28 eliminated after first ballot
Jeremy Hunt 26 eliminated after first ballot
Kemi Badenoch 25 eliminated after first ballot
Sajid Javid 20 eliminated after qualification round
Grant Shapps 19 eliminated after qualification round


Simon Jenkins points out - I agree - that Labour will be praying for anyone other than Rishi Sunak to win, so they can carry on with the "we're different from Boris" line which has generally worked OK for them recently. I tend to agree that Rishi Sunak currently seems to offer the greatest chance of the Conservatives winning the next election, but that's only a feeling I have at the moment, it's too far in the future and too many things will happen between now and then.

 

[Gloster]

My opinion, for what it is worth, is that a couple of times (vaccines, support for Ukraine) he started off reasonably, but soon let everything slip. Whether this was because he got bored or because of his lack of attention to detail or because he is only interested in the big things that get him on TV, I leave others to consider. You may not want a PM who works twenty-four hours a day examining every tiny detail, but you do need one who keeps themselves informed on all major matters. He does give the impression that he is constantly trying to pull new rabbits out of the hat in order to get himself to the centre of attention. Some of these get dropped, but others, even if they are daft, will keep coming back if they turn the spotlight on him.

 

[dosxuk]

I think he "got Brexit done" which was what he was mainly elected for, after false starts, breaking the law, and something which I very much oppose, but he was "able" to do this whereas Theresa May wasn't.
...
So I'd give him credit for the Brexit thing, even though he now wants to break the treaty he signed and the whole thing is a self-inflicted disaster of large proportions for the UK - in my opinion of course.

You can only credit him with that success though if you consider Brexit to be "done" - which it quite patently isn't. There's a whole raft of measures which still aren't implemented that are going to cause further issues and disruption, but for some reason the Government keeps pushing back the implementation date. Then there's the obvious (and predictable) issues in Northern Ireland, which are going to keep rumbling on until somebody with some sense gets involved.

Boris pulled the trigger on all this chaos, but he's not going to be around to see the end result - someone else will pick up the credit for getting it finished - provided Brexit can ever even be described as "done" that is.

 

[jfollows]

Grant Shapps must have believed the chart I posted above, he's just dropped out and endorsed Rishi Sunak.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

First step there will be identifying the successes.

Off the top of my head...

1. Getting Brexit done (yes, I know lots of people don't like the particular details of the Brexit or think it was too hard or still wish we hadn't voted for Brexit in the referendum, but the point is - at the time Boris came to power, the UK was paralysed, with Parliament totally unable to agree on how to do Brexit, and for 3 years almost nothing had happened in UK politics besides arguing about Brexit. For better or worse, Boris did end that paralysis, achieve Brexit, and therefore allow the Government to start getting on to other stuff - at least until Covid came along).
2. Vaccine rollout - far quicker than most comparable countries, which saved a lot of lives
3. Lockdown - wasn't perfect, but we did in the end have a lockdown that was both reasonably successful in keeping the virus contained until vaccines, but was also less restrictive and avoided most of the more bureaucratic absurdities of many other European countries.
4. Ukraine - seems to be widely recognised that early UK military support was a significant factor in Ukraine being able to hold back the Russian invasion in the early days, and it seems we also played some role in persuading more reluctant countries to support Ukraine, and in isolating Russia diplomatically
5. HS2 - is being built, despite significant opposition to it at the time Boris came to power and much campaigning in Parliament for it to be cancelled
6. Furlough - allowed lockdown to be implemented, while making sure most people still had an income (although we are now paying an economic price for it)
7. Railways kept being supported during the lockdown, and thanks to the Restoring your Railway scheme, we now have business cases being prepared for a number of possible re-openings.
8. Environment - COP26 happened. Somewhat mixed in outcome, but very notable that the UK was heavily pushing for steeper CO2 reductions, and generally taking a more environmentalist approach than was the case under previous governments.
9. Hong Kong - there's perhaps not a lot we can do to ease the terrible situation there, but we have made it possible for not far off 100K people so far from Hong Kong to escape to the UK.

That's a quick round-up of things I can instantly think of. I'd be pretty surprised if delving into a history of the last 3 years didn't turn up other things.

(And yes, I do realise that what counts as a 'success' or a 'failure' is to some extent subjective)

 

[Bald Rick]

Shapps is now 400/1 on betfair - at those sort of odds you have to consider if it is worth putting your name forward.

Edit: just seen he’s dropped out!

 

[Howardh]

What I'm reading now isn't "get Brexit done" but "make Brexit better" and if that's true, I haven't a clue what that means.

 

[brad465]

Hinkley Point C, in my opinion, is one of the few cases of "things going right for the Tories". Mind you, it was because of a decision Theresa May made and not Boris Johnson. At the time I considered it to be the wrong decision, but today I've changed my mind - the facts have changed. It will still be late and over budget when it finally works, but I think in the longer term we'll be grateful for it.

I think Cameron was the one who got that underway. There is one aspect though that they got wrong, and that was letting a Chinese firm get involved in it, in light of the CCP's ways. This is also evident in Kwarteng recently having to find an alternative backer in the Sizewell proposals to remove the Chinese stake.


Back to the main contest Raab is backing Sunak.

 

[Bald Rick]

There is one aspect though that they got wrong, and that was letting a Chinese firm get involved in it, in light of the CCP's ways.

Yes, the Security Service had a conniption fit over that and needed the smelling salts.

 

[jfollows]

I think Cameron was the one who got that underway. There is one aspect though that they got wrong, and that was letting a Chinese firm get involved in it, in light of the CCP's ways. This is also evident in Kwarteng recently having to find an alternative backer in the Sizewell proposals to remove the Chinese stake.

Yes, for sure, I was not clear that I was referring to the review Theresa May conducted from July 2016 before giving final approval in September 2016. I thought she was wrong to do so then, but now I think she made the right decision.