Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[Broucek]

Not sure about the high rating for Brown. Good Chancellor but ill-suited to being the PM in terms of personality. (But a titan compared to some recent incumbents...)

 

[takno]

Not sure about the high rating for Brown. Good Chancellor but ill-suited to being the PM in terms of personality. (But a titan compared to some recent incumbents...)

I wasn't particularly a fan - as you say, he had a difficult temperament, and didn't really command the party in the way he needed to. Some of his less competent appointments hung around and really poisoned the well for Labour throughout the Milliband era. I actually thought he was a worse chancellor than he gets credit for, and a better prime minister though.

The key thing is that he perhaps doesn't get enough credit for how well we traversed a serious global financial crisis. Before Cameron slammed the brakes on in 2010, we coming out of the whole thing quite strongly. More importantly he wasn't afraid to face down lots of left wingers, and left them muttering about £200bn bail-outs when the actual cost to the Treasury was a tiny fraction of that. Arguably there could have been a profit if Osborne hadn't messed up both the reprivatisation of Lloyds, and the ongoing management of RBS.

 

[Thirteen]

I could have listed a whole lot more. I know that we are living at a time where there are so many sources of information and misinformation but I am conscious that Paxman put Cameron into Room 101, describing him as the worst Prime Minister since Lord North and I'm thinking 'he wasn't so bad after all' (even allowing for Greensill and all).


I don't know about that, at 47 she has probably got a lot more years in her yet. There is every likelihood that she will be mentioned in school history lessons as a side note. Less-than-taxing TV and radio quizzes can now ask the question of who was the shortest service PM ever,a question previously reserved for the likes of Mastermind and Brain of Britain. And the Aussies will still confuse her for a minor royal.

Truss also will go down in the history books for being the last serving PM of the Queen and the first serving monarch of the King.

Slightly off-topic but it'll be interesting who the Tories pick for the Mayoral Elections. I think Paul Scully or Samuel Kasumu will be the most likely candidate, I can't see going for Boff or Rogers.

 

[JamesT]

I wasn't particularly a fan - as you say, he had a difficult temperament, and didn't really command the party in the way he needed to. Some of his less competent appointments hung around and really poisoned the well for Labour throughout the Milliband era. I actually thought he was a worse chancellor than he gets credit for, and a better prime minister though.

"Difficult temperament", i.e. makes Raab look like a cuddly boss.

The key thing is that he perhaps doesn't get enough credit for how well we traversed a serious global financial crisis. Before Cameron slammed the brakes on in 2010, we coming out of the whole thing quite strongly. More importantly he wasn't afraid to face down lots of left wingers, and left them muttering about £200bn bail-outs when the actual cost to the Treasury was a tiny fraction of that. Arguably there could have been a profit if Osborne hadn't messed up both the reprivatisation of Lloyds, and the ongoing management of RBS.

How easily it's forgotten that all the major parties were promising austerity in 2010 - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/25/alistair-darling-cut-deeper-margaret-thatcher
I was under the impression that we had made a profit from the bailouts, once you set the fees and interest the banks paid against the costs of buying and selling them. How did Osborne mess up selling Lloyds?

 

[takno]

"Difficult temperament", i.e. makes Raab look like a cuddly boss.


How easily it's forgotten that all the major parties were promising austerity in 2010 - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/25/alistair-darling-cut-deeper-margaret-thatcher

They were, which wasn't ideal, but that interview was basically Darling saying that he'd be willing to do it if the economy didn't recover. As a matter of principle Labour were promising much more moderate cuts than the Tories. If I remember correctly the Guardian were rather enamoured by the Lib Dems at the time, and for a generally left-leaning paper were sticking every boot they could find into Brown.

It's likely that Labour wouldn't have gone through with the cuts on that scale, and they definitely wouldn't have stuck so doggedly with the policy for 6 years when it was so obviously not helping. All rather distant history for this thread on the current status of the other party anyway.

 

[brad465]

Sunak has resorted to doing cameos for his MPs it seems; even pro-Tory Telegraph reporter Tony Diver thinks it's painful viewing:

https://twitter.com/Tony_Diver/status/1652247923357372416

This is painful viewing

Video attached

 

[nw1]

Sunak has resorted to doing cameos for his MPs it seems; even pro-Tory Telegraph reporter Tony Diver thinks it's painful viewing:

https://twitter.com/Tony_Diver/status/1652247923357372416

ROFL!

 

[najaB]

even pro-Tory Telegraph reporter Tony Diver thinks it's painful viewing

Well, he's right - assuming you're a Conservative voter. For everyone else it's a case of "Where's the popcorn?"

 

[takno]

Sunak has resorted to doing cameos for his MPs it seems; even pro-Tory Telegraph reporter Tony Diver thinks it's painful viewing:

https://twitter.com/Tony_Diver/status/1652247923357372416

It's all a bit Barry Scott isn't it. Bang! And the Inflation is Gone!

 

[Typhoon]

Liz Truss is facing a £12,000 bill following the disappearance of items including bathrobes and slippers from her grace-and-favour country home.

She has been ordered to reimburse the Cabinet Office after the items went missing when she was using the Chevening estate to prepare to move into No10.

Ms Truss also needs to cough up the money for food and wine she and her aides tucked into as the meetings were political rather than state business, according to sources.

A source said: "Liz used Chevening as a mini No 10, holding meetings with her inner circle which often turned into parties in the evening.

"The Cabinet Office was told by staff at the house that items such as towelling robes and even slippers vanished during that period, and have asked her to cover the cost.

"They have also objected to the idea that the taxpayer should foot the bill for what were basically a series of summer parties, and say she owes more than £12,000 for it."

Looks like Johnson is not the only one who can't tell the difference between and work meeting and a party.

Still good news for Sunak, she'll have to spend more time touring the States hawking her pretty unique view of economic policy to get some money in, so less time causing trouble here.

source https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/oth...p&cvid=c03c4dd32f6a471fbd278a107b2cb597&ei=10

 

[317 forever]

The word on the street is Rishi will prerogue parliament (shut it down) after the local elections in May, and call a general election. They know The Tories are tanking support. All established parties are working to a global agenda where corporations will thrive, the small and medium sized businesses will be crushed and our NHS is in tatters. Both parties are on the same trajectory so they might as well let Labour pick up the slack.

The excess deaths, the young suddenly having heart attacks, rapid stage 4 cancer will continue to unfold. This gives me no pleasure writing this but we have been completely betrayed and sold out to faceless controllers who hold the real power

The data on the excess deaths, injuries from the roll out, the failure of The West in Ukraine, causing unnecessary deaths and destruction In a war they cannot win, the overspending of The government on the military industrial complex is into multi billions, the enormous debt, the fake race to get to planet zero, is getting worse and worse. Westminster is finished as a bastion of democracy.

I see this was posted on April 25th rather than 1st.

 

[nw1]

I see this was posted on April 25th rather than 1st.

A shame it all sounds so implausible, because many of us would welcome a general election being called shortly after the local election results!

 

[Intercity110]

A shame it all sounds so implausible, because many of us would welcome a general election being called shortly after the local election results!

I personally would wait until they publish their manifestos, so I can pick who i recommend everyone vote for (I am sadly not of voting age)

 

[317 forever]

A shame it all sounds so implausible, because many of us would welcome a general election being called shortly after the local election results!

In practice I often hear Autumn 2024 suggested. The most interesting such date was mentioned as the final Thursday before the clocks go back, so October 24th.

It would be funny if the General Election were on October 10th. Then we could have a Labour win on the 50th anniversary of another General Election they won.

 

[nw1]

In practice I often hear Autumn 2024 suggested. The most interesting such date was mentioned as the final Thursday before the clocks go back, so October 24th.

It would be funny if the General Election were on October 10th. Then we could have a Labour win on the 50th anniversary of another General Election they won.

Delaying until autumn rather than the traditional spring/summer date would smack of extreme arrogance by Sunak. This would not go down well, I suspect, and cause the Tories to lose more votes than they would have done by holding an election at a more sensible time of year. Do we really want this disaster of a government to continue for another 18 months? It needs to show some self-awareness and recognise that many of us are utterly fed up of it.

Also late October it's often dark and miserable, the winter is coming up, people are fearing about fuel bills and generally not in the best of moods. This also would work against the Tories.

Plus, long hours of darkness (essentially it would be dark Mon-Fri outside working hours) would harm campaigning. Is it not better to be light well after 6 or 7pm to allow candidates and their workers to go door-knocking in daylight?

There are good reasons for every GE since 1979, besides the strange Boris one, being held in the lighter months of the year.

Main thing is we need to do is trash these ridiculous anti-democratic five-year terms. We should do as sensible countries do and force a GE to be held at least every four years.

 

[ainsworth74]

I personally would wait until they publish their manifestos, so I can pick who i recommend everyone vote for (I am sadly not of voting age)

You won't get a manifesto until an election is called. Or at least much closer to when an election has to be called. So I wouldn't be waiting around for one!

 

[yorksrob]

A shame it all sounds so implausible, because many of us would welcome a general election being called shortly after the local election results!

I'll second that.

Seems unlikely though.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Delaying until autumn rather than the traditional spring/summer date would smack of extreme arrogance by Sunak.

Extreme arrogance? I fear you're allowing your hatred of the Tories to get in the way of rationality again . In reality, if Sunak held off until autumn 2024, it would be no different from what every prime minister in living memory has done when faced with poor opinion polls. Was Gordon Brown displaying 'extreme arrogance' when he delayed the 2010 election until close to the last possible moment? How about John Major when he did the same thing in 1997? Or Jim Callaghan in 1979 when he tried to do exactly the same thing until that no-confidence vote forced his hand?

 

[Gloster]

There have been suggestions floating about, although how trustworthy the sources are is unknown, that the government think that may be some real bombshell coming up. They therefore want out so that Labour has to cope with it while they (probably) sit on the sidelines sniping. If true, and there are plenty of doubts about that, it must be really bad for them to be prepared to give up power early rather than leading an emergency coalition. Sleep well.

 

[brad465]

There have been suggestions floating about, although how trustworthy the sources are is unknown, that the government think that may be some real bombshell coming up. They therefore want out so that Labour has to cope with it while they (probably) sit on the sidelines sniping. If true, and there are plenty of doubts about that, it must be really bad for them to be prepared to give up power early rather than leading an emergency coalition. Sleep well.

In 2021 there were suggestions that an election would take place late 2021/early 2022 because the Government believed that while things were up for them at that point, the belief was things would not get better for them, so would resort to an election even earlier than one would normally call an early election while they still had a chance of winning. Partygate fallout essentially stopped that happening.

 

[MikeWM]

In 2021 there were suggestions that an election would take place late 2021/early 2022 because the Government believed that while things were up for them at that point, the belief was things would not get better for them, so would resort to an election even earlier than one would normally call an early election while they still had a chance of winning. Partygate fallout essentially stopped that happening.

Not unreasonable given the result in the Hartlepool byelection, 2 years ago this week. People tend to have forgotten that the Tories took that from Labour on a swing of about 16%, an almost unthinkable result for a governing party in the middle of a parliament. A *lot* can happen in a short time nowadays in politics - while I still think the most likely result from the next election is a narrow Labour majority, particularly now they seem likely to pick up a good number of seats in Scotland with the implosion of the SNP, I don't think anything is off the table at this point. I've said it before and I'll say it again - this doesn't feel remotely like a repeat of the run-up to the 1997 election.

 

[yorksrob]

Extreme arrogance? I fear you're allowing your hatred of the Tories to get in the way of rationality again . In reality, if Sunak held off until autumn 2024, it would be no different from what every prime minister in living memory has done when faced with poor opinion polls. Was Gordon Brown displaying 'extreme arrogance' when he delayed the 2010 election until close to the last possible moment? How about John Major when he did the same thing in 1997? Or Jim Callaghan in 1979 when he tried to do exactly the same thing until that no-confidence vote forced his hand?

True.

Five years seems far too long to be stuck with a Government of any stripe.

If we are to have a fixed term parliament, it ought to be fixed at four years.

 

[JonathanH]

There have been suggestions floating about, although how trustworthy the sources are is unknown, that the government think that may be some real bombshell coming up.

What sort of bombshell? Fiscal issues, or personal misdemeanours?

It is fairly clear that there are significant fiscal issues which need to be resolved but surely those can be contained for eighteen months?

 

[najaB]

Main thing is we need to do is trash these ridiculous anti-democratic five-year terms. We should do as sensible countries do and force a GE to be held at least every four years.

How is four years democratic but five years undemocratic?

Be careful what you wish for. About the only thing I can think of that is worse than politicians being stuck in a five year, short-term mindset is politicians being stuck in a four year, short term mindset.

 

[DustyBin]

How is four years democratic but five years undemocratic?

Be careful what you wish for. About the only thing I can think of that is worse than politicians being stuck in a five year, short-term mindset is politicians being stuck in a four year, short term mindset.

I agree; five years is probably about right.

 

[Snow1964]

What sort of bombshell? Fiscal issues, or personal misdemeanours?

It is fairly clear that there are significant fiscal issues which need to be resolved but surely those can be contained for eighteen months?

There are a number of fiscal problems, and they are all in the OBR forecasts, you can pick many negatives like £6bn cost of subsidies to ex Bulb electricity/gas customers. Even if general public aren't aware all these problem areas are not really new news.

But Government Interest payments are climbing, they might have managed to issue lots of low interest bonds with 20-30 year life over past few years, but new and renewal borrowing is expensive. Seems to be that we are climbing towards 5% of Government spending or about £2000 per household just to cover debt interest. Not a good look when people are struggling to afford to eat to have someone point out that £2000 is being taken in tax to bail out the Government.

I'm guessing Ministers know SNP is a mess, and will look at how bad they do in Thursdays local elections and decide if it is better to go early, or stay a while and risk a worse reputation that might keep them out of power for longer. Whoever gets in inherits the mess and could be tarnished.

 

[JonathanH]

But Government Interest payments are climbing, they might have managed to issue lots of low interest bonds with 20-30 year life over past few years, but new and renewal borrowing is expensive. Seems to be that we are climbing towards 5% of Government spending or about £2000 per household just to cover debt interest. Not a good look when people are struggling to afford to eat to have someone point out that £2000 is being taken in tax to bail out the Government.

That just means that the government won't give way on the pay disputes, and that it would be completely reckless to implement the proposed cut to the basic tax rate.

It also means there is no chance that an incoming government will have a 'magic wand' to suddenly put everything right.

However, that isn't a bombshell that brings forward a general election because the issues aren't new news.

 

[Falcon1200]

Not sure what bombshell there could be bigger than a global pandemic or a war in mainland Europe.

 

[JonathanH]

Not sure what bombshell there could be bigger than a global pandemic or a war in mainland Europe.

Indeed, but neither of those things are known in advance. A general election to avoid being the government at a time of conflict would be odd.

 

[duncanp]

It would be funny if the General Election were on October 10th. Then we could have a Labour win on the 50th anniversary of another General Election they won.

.... with a majority of 3, which caused Harold Wilson to call another election two years later.

That the Conservatives will lose seats is almost certain.

However I don't think we will see a 1997 style landslide, or even a majority Labour government.

It could be a reversal of the 2010 result, in that the Conservatives lose their majority, but there is a hung parliament.