Liz Truss and the Conservative Party.

[Nicholas Lewis]

Hunt was essentially a Cameron/Osborne style pro-austerity type.

Would calm the markets and satisfy the IMF, I suspect - but I doubt he could win an election.

Thats what Hunt is doing all this weekend getting out there to make the point things are going to be different and talking the language the markets want to hear. If this works it will lower gilt yields next week allow the Bank of England to cease intervention and potentially allow the next interest rate rise in early November to be lower than it would have been. This all matters to majority of people with mortgages as whilst majority have fixed rates these are expiring at the rate of 100k/month and people are finding on average a doubling of rates causing a huge increase in monthly payments. In part this is because the mortgage companies panicked, understandably, and to cover themselves jacked up rates ahead of what was necessary to avoid getting burnt. If the trajectory rate increases now looks lower it should allow a lowering of mortgage rates. Nothing is more important for the health of our economy as destruction of peoples disposables income has a massive impact on our economy as peoples spending drives 75% of economic output.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Indeed. And (with the caveat that I am in no way a Tory supporter) they need to play the long game.

Impose Hunt or Sunak (or whoever) on us and keep them on until 2024 (or at worst, Jan 2025 but I can't see another winter election happening) and they will be seen as incredibly arrogant and desperate for power. The Tories will then be out, I suspect, for 10 to 15 years.

By contrast if they adopt "mea culpa" and call, say, an April 2023 election, they will of course lose but they can then go and regroup, and perhaps they come back as soon as 2027 or 2028.

Why would the Tories be unable to regroup after a 2024 election but they would be able to regroup today? That makes no sense to me. And why should they be more likely to be out for 10-15 years in 2024 compared to today? If anything, I'd expect the opposite: An election today would probably result in a Labour landslide even bigger than Tony Blair's 1997 one: That alone will make it almost impossible for the Tories to recover quickly because they'll have so few MPs. On the other hand, if the election doesn't happen until 2024, so Jeremy Hunt as Chancellor has a chance to calm things down somewhat, then it's possible that the election will produce less of a landslide, leaving the Tories as a more respectably sized opposition, and therefore in a better position to make a comeback.

Also, assuming a Labour victory is now inevitable (certainly today, probably in 2024 as well), whether Labour remains in power at the following election and is therefore able to shut the Tories out for 10+ years will depend more than anything else on how that Labour Government conducts itself in the intermediate 5 years. That's completely outside the Tories' control. And right now, it's largely unknowable.

 

[najaB]

Why would the Tories be unable to regroup after a 2024 election but they would be able to regroup today? That makes no sense to me. And why should they be more likely to be out for 10-15 years in 2024 compared to today?

The logic is that the longer they try to hold on to power the worse they will make themselves look, the more unpopular decisions they are going to have to defend and the more times they'll have to go out and whole-heartedly support positions that the leadership U-turns on a day later.

 

[nw1]

The logic is that the longer they try to hold on to power the worse they will make themselves look, the more unpopular decisions they are going to have to defend and the more times they'll have to go out and whole-heartedly support positions that the leadership U-turns on a day later.

Yes, that's my point.

Do the honourable thing and call an election in the spring, and I suspect their reputation will take less of a hit, hence they have more chance of coming back quickly.

Arrogantly stay in power until sometime in 2024, they just come across as adopting a "born to rule" attitude and that they're not getting the hint.

Also I doubt the number of Tories in parliament will plummet to very low levels with a spring 2023 election. It'll be, at worst (for them) something like 1997. If we assume it's not Truss leading them into such an election, I suspect they will lose, but not catastrophically. Just about all of rural England, and a good proportion of small-town England, will stay firmly in the Tory column I suspect. No way Truss, for example, will lose her seat, as was apparently suggested in one post above. Patel, Kwarteng and the rest will also be safe as those kinds of seats have always been Tory.

The fact that Dorries appears to want an election suggests that semi-rural London commuter belt seats are likely to remain Tory too, as that is what she represents - so presumably she feels confident about retaining her seat.

 

[jfollows]

To paraphrase someone on the TV (Sky News) just now:

1. The smartest thing Liz Truss has done during her entire premiership has been to appoint Jeremy Hunt as chancellor.
2. The dumbest thing Jeremy Hunt has done has been to accept the job.
3. But the bottom line is that there's now a grown-up in the room running UK economic policy

Most Conservative MPs are probably now resigned to losing the next election, but minimising their losses by the time it happens. I don't agree that we should have an election now, we have a system, it's what it is and we've gone back to it after the mess of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act. Moving the goalposts and changing the rules is unnecessary. But we now have a dead government for two years, which is moving towards its demise, and which has no credibility. As we did in 1995 I guess, it's not perfect but we need to work with it.

 

[nw1]

To paraphrase someone on the TV (Sky News) just now:

1. The smartest thing Liz Truss has done during her entire premiership has been to appoint Jeremy Hunt as chancellor.
2. The dumbest thing Jeremy Hunt has done has been to accept the job.
3. But the bottom line is that there's now a grown-up in the room running UK economic policy

Most Conservative MPs are probably now resigned to losing the next election, but minimising their losses by the time it happens. I don't agree that we should have an election now, we have a system, it's what it is and we've gone back to it after the mess of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act. Moving the goalposts and changing the rules is unnecessary.

We presumably wouldn't need to change the rules though, the government would just need to call an election. "Early" elections (as in four years after the last one) occurred before the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, after all.

But we now have a dead government for two years, which is moving towards its demise, and which has no credibility. As we did in 1995 I guess, it's not perfect but we need to work with it.

Do we need to work with it though?

 

[jfollows]

We presumably wouldn't need to change the rules though, the government would just need to call an election. "Early" elections (as in four years after the last one) occurred before the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, after all.


Do we need to work with it though?

Oh, I agree, the election could be called now, but it won't happen and where I disagree with you is that it shouldn't happen, much as though I'd like it to happen. So we need to think about how we work with its absence and the spiralling gurgling demise of the party "in power" between now and January 2025, which isn't ideal of course.

 

[nw1]

Oh, I agree, the election could be called now, but it won't happen and where I disagree with you is that it shouldn't happen, much as though I'd like it to happen. So we need to think about how we work with its absence and the spiralling gurgling demise of the party "in power" between now and January 2025, which isn't ideal of course.

Can we say it "won't happen" though?

I don't think the 1995 analogy is an exact one, as times were better economically then and also the Major government wasn't that terrible. So there wasn't such a strong push to get that government out.

We are in a political situation more or less unprecedented in recent times, so I don't think we can make accurate forecasts of what might or might not happen based on analogies from the past.

Whatever happens, I think the chance of the election being as late as January 2025 is practically zero. Who wants a winter election, when it's near-permanently dark, cold and raining? Will certainly not favour the incumbents to hold an election in the most miserable months of the year, when people are at their worst psychologically (Johnson in 2019 was of course a special case). Absolutely terrible for campaigning too; I'd still say June 2024 is the absolute latest it'll happen. (July, August and September also have decent amounts of daylight, but an election then would involve either the election or its campaigning period coinciding with peak holiday season).

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Hunt being interviewed by Peston on ITV News earlier

ITV News Peston/Hunt interview

Be in no doubt there is now a grown up in charge who is saying everything the markets wanted to hear including possible tax rises as well as spending reductions. He is in charge Truss is just a figurehead now with no future but will be left there as to change her out to someone else will precipitate a call for a general election and Tories don't want that.

Whilst this isn't bad news for Labour i reckon talk of big majorities will now be reduced and possibility of a hung parliament may even come into sight if he can hold it together. Hope has to be Tories continue to rip themselves apart but that is less likely. Im in no doubt the men in grey coats have orchestrated this in the background and gave Truss an ultimatum of go with our plan or your out. You get one chance to be PM she's not going to give up on that opportunity so this thread has legs yet.

 

[nw1]

Hunt being interviewed by Peston on ITV News earlier

ITV News Peston/Hunt interview

Be in no doubt there is now a grown up in charge who is saying everything the markets wanted to hear including possible tax rises as well as spending reductions. He is in charge Truss is just a figurehead now with no future but will be left there as to change her out to someone else will precipitate a call for a general election and Tories don't want that.

Whilst this isn't bad news for Labour i reckon talk of big majorities will now be reduced and possibility of a hung parliament may even come into sight if he can hold it together.

But if Truss remains in charge, I doubt the Tories will recover that much, certainly not to hung-parliament territory. On the other hand, if Truss does not remain in charge, people will see her replacement as being imposed upon them - so they're screwed either way.

While the IMF and the like will welcome spending cuts, the population aren't going to. Unless the Tories have some plot to blame it all on socialists, immigrants and any other minority group they care to mention.

Also I doubt people will take kindly to Hunt "ruling" as an unelected technocrat. I can just see the "Truss as puppet, Hunt as puppet-master" cartoons now. Certainly won't hold the Red Wall seats the Tories need to hold to prevent a Labour win.

It's telling that most of the comments on that Twitter post are pretty critical of Hunt. Personally, I like this one: https://twitter.com/TobiFrenzen/sta...nzen2Fstatus2F1581251063062986752widget=Tweet

 

[Busaholic]

The fact that Dorries appears to want an election suggests that semi-rural London commuter belt seats are likely to remain Tory too, as that is what she represents - so presumably she feels confident about retaining her seat.

She won't need to, she's guaranteed a peerage in Johnson's leaving present to a grateful nation ( )his Honours List, so Baroness Dorries of Love Island, or whatever, it will be.

 

[Typhoon]

The fact that Dorries appears to want an election suggests that semi-rural London commuter belt seats are likely to remain Tory too, as that is what she represents - so presumably she feels confident about retaining her seat.

Alternatively, she sees her future on the literary stage, but doesn't want to stand down mid-Parliament as there might be consequences for her, reputation wise, if the seat was lost at a by-election. As stated below, she would probably be happy moving to the 'Other Place'. She wasn't so successful a Secretary of State that she is likely to be offered a meaningful position again.

She won't need to, she's guaranteed a peerage in Johnson's leaving present to a grateful nation ( )his Honours List, so Baroness Dorries of Love Island, or whatever, it will be.

Agree. It would look good on the book jacket. She could drop in from time to time, when she is in town to see her literary agent. ('Lovely Lane' rather than 'Love Island'.)

 

[JamesT]

She won't need to, she's guaranteed a peerage in Johnson's leaving present to a grateful nation ( )his Honours List, so Baroness Dorries of Love Island, or whatever, it will be.

That was the speculation, but she wasn’t nominated - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/political-peerages-2022

 

[Gloster]

That was the speculation, but she wasn’t nominated - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/political-peerages-2022

I think that this is a separate list to Johnson’s resignation nominations, which is still to come. Will Paul Dacre be on that one?

 

[JamesT]

I think that this is a separate list to Johnson’s resignation nominations, which is still to come. Will Paul Dacre be on that one?

I’m pretty sure this is the resignation list, given reporting such as https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63263318

They were recommended by Prime Minister Liz Truss after being suggested by her predecessor Boris Johnson.
…
An outgoing prime minister has the right to draw up a dissolution or resignation honours list on leaving office, while considering nominations from other political parties.

 

[Gloster]

I’m pretty sure this is the resignation list, given reporting such as https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63263318

In The Grauniad there was an item ‘House of Lords / Boris Johnson gives peerages to string of Tory allies, but not Paul Dacre’ in which it says ‘This list is separate to Johnson’s still-to-come resignation honours...’

Sorry, I can’t do a link, but it is now down the front page in the From the UK section. With a mugshot of Paul Dacre, so be warned.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But if Truss remains in charge, I doubt the Tories will recover that much, certainly not to hung-parliament territory. On the other hand, if Truss does not remain in charge, people will see her replacement as being imposed upon them - so they're screwed either way.

For sure its going to be slow grind back but if they can keep the markets happy and deny Labour the opportunity to lay into their economic mismanagement the voters will come back although highly unlikely in enough numbers to get them re-elected but could still be disruptive.

While the IMF and the like will welcome spending cuts, the population aren't going to. Unless the Tories have some plot to blame it all on socialists, immigrants and any other minority group they care to mention.

Depends where the axe falls though.

Also I doubt people will take kindly to Hunt "ruling" as an unelected technocrat. I can just see the "Truss as puppet, Hunt as puppet-master" cartoons now. Certainly won't hold the Red Wall seats the Tories need to hold to prevent a Labour win.

Nobody voted for Churchill in 1940 either but he was seen as a safe pair of hands and thats largely what the populace want who lets be honest aren't really interested in any of this shenanigans they just want to get on with their lives.

 

[Typhoon]

In The Grauniad there was an item ‘House of Lords / Boris Johnson gives peerages to string of Tory allies, but not Paul Dacre’ in which it says ‘This list is separate to Johnson’s still-to-come resignation honours...’

Sorry, I can’t do a link, but it is now down the front page in the From the UK section. With a mugshot of Paul Dacre, so be warned.

(Mugshot free)

Dacre had been widely tipped to be made a peer, but there had been calls for this to be delayed or suspended after legal action begun by a series of prominent people over alleged intrusion into privacy by the Mail’s publisher.

This list is separate to Johnson’s still-to-come resignation honours, where it has been predicted he could elevate a series of loyal Conservative MPs and other allies.

Emphasis is mine. This could be the reason?

I may be imagining this, but I thought Resignation Honours was less prone to interference. It may have changed but that is how I thought Wilson got some contentious characters over the bar.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-to-string-of-tory-allies-but-not-paul-dacre

 

[brad465]

In The Grauniad there was an item ‘House of Lords / Boris Johnson gives peerages to string of Tory allies, but not Paul Dacre’ in which it says ‘This list is separate to Johnson’s still-to-come resignation honours...’

Sorry, I can’t do a link, but it is now down the front page in the From the UK section. With a mugshot of Paul Dacre, so be warned.

Dacre may have been on this list were it not for recent legal action against the Mail being announced. There were also reports of 8 current Tory MPs being on it, but pressure to delay them in order to avoid a load of by-elections.

 

[Gloster]

I may be imagining this, but I thought Resignation Honours was less prone to interference. It may have changed but that is how I thought Wilson got some contentious characters over the bar.

I think that even those nominated in a resignation honours have to be regarded by the House of Lords Appointments Commission as a fit and proper person. Not the Johnson is bothered, as he still appointed Lord Cruddas despite the Commission’s reservations.

The Commision only dates from 2000, so that was long after Wislon’s ‘Lavender List’. Though there is still the question of who chooses the non-partisan members of the Commission.

 

[takno]

Nobody voted for Churchill in 1940 either but he was seen as a safe pair of hands and thats largely what the populace want who lets be honest aren't really interested in any of this shenanigans they just want to get on with their lives.

That is, rather depressingly, where we've got to. Somebody who can stabilise the ship and defer the country's impending collapse for another 20 years or so genuinely seems like progress.

I'm not convinced that Hunt has the ability to do much more than calm the markets a bit though. He's not exactly charismatic, and it sounds like his personal finances are perhaps a little... interesting. Politically he's a rather depressing authoritarian and economic right-winger, who has only got a reputation for being on the moderate wing of the party because he dared to say that Brexit was a bit of a stupid move.

If he was the PM he'd still be saddled with a pretty awful bunch to build a cabinet from, and he's at absolute best only a match for Starmer. If he spends any significant amount of time as the spend-cutting chancellor in the current bin-scraping cabinet of idiots then he'll be toxic forever

 

[WatcherZero]

Truss done so badly the Torygraph is now saying we shouldnt have left the EU!

Project Fear was right all along​

Six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has brought a calamitous loss of standing

Project Fear was right all along

Six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has brought a calamitous loss of standing

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Cloud Strife]

But if Truss remains in charge, I doubt the Tories will recover that much, certainly not to hung-parliament territory. On the other hand, if Truss does not remain in charge, people will see her replacement as being imposed upon them - so they're screwed either way.

Truss can still claw her way back, but she's not going to do it with the current cabinet. In her position, while she won't have the support to do it, it wouldn't be a terrible idea to simply address the nation and say "Look, I got it wrong" and announce a new move to the centre ground. Sign a quick deal with the EU to end all the petty squabbling, rejoin the Customs Union with some reasonable FoM allowances (not complete FoM, but maybe something like 'working and retired people can move freely as long as they have a job offer or have enough funds'), do the right thing financially, and maybe she'd have a chance at a hung parliament.

But keeping the cancer that is Rees-Mogg among others around? Forget it.

Although we should really be careful what we wish for, Michael Gove might come back yet again!

 

[jfollows]

Truss done so badly the Torygraph is now saying we shouldnt have left the EU!

Project Fear was right all along

Six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has brought a calamitous loss of standing

www.telegraph.co.uk

Can you provide the full article, I get hit by requests to sign in when I try and read it? Thank you!

 

[Busaholic]

Dacre may have been on this list were it not for recent legal action against the Mail being announced. There were also reports of 8 current Tory MPs being on it, but pressure to delay them in order to avoid a load of by-elections.

Informed speculation that should the Mail group be eventually found to have phonetapped (it could take years to resolve) then Dacre could be said to have perjured himself at the Leveson enquiry. The influential Hacked Off group have been busy!

 

[Spamcan81]

Geoffrey Howe being the most revered one, effectively ending Thatcher's reign with his 'dead sheep' speech.

Howe didn’t make the “dead sheep” speech. That quote came from a jibe made by Dennis Healey aimed at Howe.

 

[WatcherZero]

Can you provide the full article, I get hit by requests to sign in when I try and read it? Thank you!

12ft

 

[Busaholic]

Howe didn’t make the “dead sheep” speech. That quote came from a jibe made by Dennis Healey aimed at Howe.

The speech featured a rather laboured reference to the cricket team captain sending out their opening batsmen (sic) and them finding said captain had broken their bats beforehand (it's the way you tell 'em!!) Anyhow, it had the desired effect on the Tory backbenchers.

 

[AM9]

Howe didn’t make the “dead sheep” speech. That quote came from a jibe made by Dennis Healey aimed at Howe.

He made a speech that effectively ended Thatcher's political career which after Healey commented "Like being savaged by a dead sheep" has frequently been referred to as Howe's dead cat event.

 

[yorksrob]

I do find it ironic that this whole fiasco has occurred in suspending the "slow decline" of the nation.

If they were interested in suspending the decline of the Nation, they'd do something about the sell-off's of our industries and the dependence on foreign powers.

Nuclear is a case in point. We need new nuclear but our agency and ability to develop it has been flogged off.

This is the fundamental problem at the core of the crisis, and without a massive re-alignment of Tory philosophy, this won't be resolved.