New Tory Leader

[ricardo 7,349]

5 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Did you see the Panorama programme? Indeed the Norwegian gas is state owned but it must have a shell (no pun intended) company which carries out its business much like EDF.

Norway doesn't even account for half of our gas. Most still comes from the North Sea. And companies like Shell still receive handouts rather than paying Corporation Tax. One makes £100M a day profit.

Even if we cannot get much out of Norway, the others are there and 20% percent of something is better than 100% of nothing.

Why is it OK to tax UK companies but not foreign owned. Its like when Phillip Green was allowed to get away with paying no tax. They said he would pull his businesses. Total rubbish. The stores were all in the UK. In fact, the obfuscation and lying regarding tax makes me cringe.

I think we get about 25% of our gas from Norway but we also buy a lot of LNG on the world market. Our own production is now less than 50% and unfortunately we have actively discouraged further exploration of our own resources. Hopefully recent world events have demonstrated the folly of this approach. Renewables and nuclear will be the longterm solution but its the interim that is the problem and that could be longer than we think.

The Germans have an enormous amount of wind power already installed but we are shortly going to have a ringside seat of what happens on a cold winters night when the wind doesnt blow.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

3 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I think we get about 25% of our gas from Norway but we also buy a lot of LNG on the world market. Our own production is now less than 50% and unfortunately we have actively discouraged further exploration of our own resources. Hopefully recent world events have demonstrated the folly of this approach. Renewables and nuclear will be the longterm solution but its the interim that is the problem and that could be longer than we think.

The Germans have an enormous amount of wind power already installed but we are shortly going to have a ringside seat of what happens on a cold winters night when the wind doesnt blow.

 

Unfortunately, long term planning is sacrificed on the altar of profits. It seems we are terrified in the UK of upsetting anyone. The Renewable companies pay very little, certainly less than their subsidies and their profits have gone up five fold. Electricity prices shadow gas and there is no justification for it.

It seems paradoxical that many Pensioners may well die this winter because of energy price hikes just to boost Pension funds.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,515]

15 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Of course it is, but in this case no hindsight was required - by the time the numbers started building in the UK we should have been fore-warned by what had already happened elsewhere; the successes in SE Asia with early lockdown and the catastrophes in continental Europe with far too late lockdowns. There were plenty of people in the UK who had picked up those warnings and were urging the Government to take action and even the Premier League acted before Johnson for crying out loud!!!

Johnson was just far too late despite all the warnings and experience available from countries hit earlier than us. His initial strategy was the notorious disastrous 'herd immunity' stupidity but even when it became obvious that a lockdown would become essential at some point he still dithered when anyone who can do simple maths would have understood that with a virus spreading at an exponential rate that the sooner he locked down then the fewer deaths and the shorter lockdown necessary.

And that was only one of his many mistakes - he didn't appear to learn anything from those mistakes and u-turns first time around because repeated a lot of them in the second and third wave!! I seem to remember that his high point was 4 significant u-turns in a single week and 1 or 2 a week was the norm for quite a while - that is not the mark of a decisive or competent leader.

I also think you are wrong in saying 'We know for a fact that the lockdowns we had led to considerable suspicion of motives and even hysteria in some sections.', certainly with respect to the first lockdown which was extremely well observed by almost everyone despite it being a far worse experience for everyone because of Johnson's incompetence and indecision, which no doubt then did start suspicion of motives. Although I would suggest that suspicions were raised mainly by his largely incoherent and sometimes incomprehensible tiered lockdowns which appeared to have little rhyme or reason in many cases - it had become obvious by then that Johnson had never paid much attention to the scientific advice and was, as we always suspected, simply making up as he went along (and of course throwing in the u-turns so frequently because he got it obviously wrong so often).

 

I think that's unfair. Senior scientists were very much embraced by Johnson in communicating what was going on to the public, but there was a large part of the party (the chancellor to name just one) fighting furiously against measures that would disrupt the economy. Personally, I think if it was any other leader of the Conservative party the response could have been far weaker. 

I do also think it's a large part of why Sunak and co conspired to brief against Johnson to remove him, and why Truss, a Johnson loyalist, is now punishing them by freezing them out. 

Edited September 7, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[sonyc 5,492]

28 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Unfortunately, long term planning is sacrificed on the altar of profits. It seems we are terrified in the UK of upsetting anyone. The Renewable companies pay very little, certainly less than their subsidies and their profits have gone up five fold. Electricity prices shadow gas and there is no justification for it.

It seems paradoxical that many Pensioners may well die this winter because of energy price hikes just to boost Pension funds.

In my view KG the Tory party has been following a "trickle down" strategy for decades - though of course more obviously in the 80s (austerity under Cameron/Osborn was aimed at the lowest paid and the public services when there was 'no magic money tree'). Johnson's brief reign changed emphasis. With Truss we look like we are back on familiar territory...small state, tax cuts working to help those more wealthy. On Kuenssberg's programme she underlined her view again when challenged on the lack of redistribution.

The trouble with trickle down is just that! The effect is a trickle. It keeps inequality in place. It doesn't help the lowest paid or those from poorer backgrounds. Under Labour there was some narrowing of regional inequalities. Truss would argue that people should 'aspire' to better themselves. Right to Buy used to be the perfect example. No wonder there is fresh talk of upgrading it. Yet, for all the discounts governments never reinvested.

The tories have always placed a high emphasis on high finance, on pension funds etc. Small state ideology has meant much fewer infrastructure projects (Johnson's plans were far more unusual. Though they largely remained plans).

So we're back to the 80s in economic policy I think. But this time it precedes a recession. Ricardo is right that the energy problem will persist. Supply is of course an issue but there needs to be a bigger focus on demand too as well as renewables. Demand will drop because people are worried. We all are using less aren't we? Mother in law is in fear of using heating. As you suggest it won't be a good story.emerging later this winter. Excess deaths are already on the rise (and not to do with Covid). We could be revisiting the1930s but in less than a century later. 

https://www.theweek.co.uk/liz-truss/957856/what-is-trickle-down-economics

Edited September 7, 2022 by sonyc

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

50 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Of course it is, but in this case no hindsight was required - by the time the numbers started building in the UK we should have been fore-warned by what had already happened elsewhere; the successes in SE Asia with early lockdown and the catastrophes in continental Europe with far too late lockdowns. There were plenty of people in the UK who had picked up those warnings and were urging the Government to take action and even the Premier League acted before Johnson for crying out loud!!!

Johnson was just far too late despite all the warnings and experience available from countries hit earlier than us. His initial strategy was the notorious disastrous 'herd immunity' stupidity but even when it became obvious that a lockdown would become essential at some point he still dithered when anyone who can do simple maths would have understood that with a virus spreading at an exponential rate that the sooner he locked down then the fewer deaths and the shorter lockdown necessary.

And that was only one of his many mistakes - he didn't appear to learn anything from those mistakes and u-turns first time around because repeated a lot of them in the second and third wave!! I seem to remember that his high point was 4 significant u-turns in a single week and 1 or 2 a week was the norm for quite a while - that is not the mark of a decisive or competent leader.

I also think you are wrong in saying 'We know for a fact that the lockdowns we had led to considerable suspicion of motives and even hysteria in some sections.', certainly with respect to the first lockdown which was extremely well observed by almost everyone despite it being a far worse experience for everyone because of Johnson's incompetence and indecision, which no doubt then did start suspicion of motives. Although I would suggest that suspicions were raised mainly by his largely incoherent and sometimes incomprehensible tiered lockdowns which appeared to have little rhyme or reason in many cases - it had become obvious by then that Johnson had never paid much attention to the scientific advice and was, as we always suspected, simply making up as he went along (and of course throwing in the u-turns so frequently because he got it obviously wrong so often).

 

There's a conundrum at heart of the Tory defense of their Covid policy.

We hear on one hand that we rolled the vaccine out fastest but at the same time we apparently only have middling success vs our peers in fighting the virus on the overall numbers. Why didn't we do better?

Some countries - Italy - clearly got it first and hardest with little warning - their higher death rates would be understandable. We in the UK had lots of warnings and a fast vaccine roll out it seems but only middling success. I would hazard a guess it was indeed the dithering which has to be laid at the door of Johnson. I note Covid paid him a personal visit.

As to 'hindsight' - everybody needs to understand that decisions could only be taken on the evidence that existed at the time. We had some early visibility of the issues/mortality on the first wave and dithered (and paid for it) but, frankly were too slow again on the second but more fortunate on the 3rd and 4th etc. It could easily have turned out much much worse with our cavalier attitude on the later waves and next time (yes there will be a next time) we might not be so lucky.

What did we learn - go hard and go fast on pandemics if you want to control them / buy time - and yes we now have much better vaccine technologies but they will still take 12 months or more to have any significant impact. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Will the MP who hasn't had a Government job in the last five years please step forward. We don't know their name.

[ricardo 7,349]

6 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Will the MP who hasn't had a Government job in the last five years please step forward. We don't know their name.

Following equal opportunities legislation I reckon.

Give em all go.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

14 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Following equal opportunities legislation I reckon.

Give em all go.

At least our MP Eustice has been confined to the back benches. He might answer his emails now. I sent him nine while he was Minister and didn't get one reply. He might be a worried man as his constituency has a history of changing. In the 42 years I have lived here all three major parties have held sway.

[Naturalcynic 629]

2 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

At least our MP Eustice has been confined to the back benches. He might answer his emails now. I sent him nine while he was Minister and didn't get one reply. He might be a worried man as his constituency has a history of changing. In the 42 years I have lived here all three major parties have held sway.

If all of his constituents sent him 9 emails over a two year period it would take him every waking hour to get through them.  I imagine he used the delete button for those that were obviously frivolous or vexatious.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

23 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Following equal opportunities legislation I reckon.

Give em all go.

Its a squad game isn't it. 

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

On 'windfall profits' I suspect Truss's idealology is about to meet political reality rather like no hand outs. 

It will be impossible not to have a larger contribution from the excess unexpected profits of the oil and gas producers especially as their profits balloon and government debt explodes.

[Nuff Said 5,093]

18 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

On 'windfall profits' I suspect Truss's idealology is about to meet political reality rather like no hand outs. 

It will be impossible not to have a larger contribution from the excess unexpected profits of the oil and gas producers especially as their profits balloon and government debt explodes.

The issue for Truss will be that the “optics” of saying one thing - small state, no handouts and tax cuts - and doing another aren’t great, and will present an open goal to the Tories opposition. Fortunately.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

If all of his constituents sent him 9 emails over a two year period it would take him every waking hour to get through them.  I imagine he used the delete button for those that were obviously frivolous or vexatious.

Are you his PA or just sticking up for someone you know **** all about?

[Well b back 3,190]

1 hour ago, keelansgrandad said:

At least our MP Eustice has been confined to the back benches. He might answer his emails now. I sent him nine while he was Minister and didn't get one reply. He might be a worried man as his constituency has a history of changing. In the 42 years I have lived here all three major parties have held sway.

Wouldn’t be so sure KG, when on the backbenchers our MP Wendy Morton didn’t reply to emails, so now she is in the cabinet I guess there is no chance.

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

3 hours ago, sonyc said:

In my view KG the Tory party has been following a "trickle down" strategy for decades - though of course more obviously in the 80s (austerity under Cameron/Osborn was aimed at the lowest paid and the public services when there was 'no magic money tree'). Johnson's brief reign changed emphasis. With Truss we look like we are back on familiar territory...small state, tax cuts working to help those more wealthy. On Kuenssberg's programme she underlined her view again when challenged on the lack of redistribution.

The trouble with trickle down is just that! The effect is a trickle. It keeps inequality in place. It doesn't help the lowest paid or those from poorer backgrounds. Under Labour there was some narrowing of regional inequalities. Truss would argue that people should 'aspire' to better themselves. Right to Buy used to be the perfect example. No wonder there is fresh talk of upgrading it. Yet, for all the discounts governments never reinvested.

The tories have always placed a high emphasis on high finance, on pension funds etc. Small state ideology has meant much fewer infrastructure projects (Johnson's plans were far more unusual. Though they largely remained plans).

So we're back to the 80s in economic policy I think. But this time it precedes a recession. Ricardo is right that the energy problem will persist. Supply is of course an issue but there needs to be a bigger focus on demand too as well as renewables. Demand will drop because people are worried. We all are using less aren't we? Mother in law is in fear of using heating. As you suggest it won't be a good story.emerging later this winter. Excess deaths are already on the rise (and not to do with Covid). We could be revisiting the1930s but in less than a century later. 

https://www.theweek.co.uk/liz-truss/957856/what-is-trickle-down-economics

The trouble with "trickle-down" is that it doesn't.

Huge 20-Year Study Shows Trickle-Down Is a Myth, Inequality Rampant (businessinsider.com)

[Well b back 3,190]

Looks like promise is number 1 is about to be broken

Truss - ‘ My tax cuts will stop the U.K. going into recession ‘

BOE - ‘ It is now almost certain the U.K. will be in recession. This recession is likely to last until at least end 2023 ‘

O well same old s***.

[Well b back 3,190]

Promise number 2 ‘ when announced our policies will stop the slide on sterling and the markets ‘.

Reality - Today they have carried on falling, sterling to worrying levels.

[Well b back 3,190]

1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

If all of his constituents sent him 9 emails over a two year period it would take him every waking hour to get through them.  I imagine he used the delete button for those that were obviously frivolous or vexatious.

Or put another way, when my MP wanted my vote for Brexit, she mailed me most days, assuring me of the £350 m to the NHS, that Brits will fill the farm jobs etc. Once I realised she had not exactly told me the truth and I asked where the £350 m was, I never got a reply.

[Herman 9,725]

13 hours ago, Herman said:

It'll be a lot of fracking. The right wing have been ramping up talk of it for the last few months. 

That was quick.🤨

 

[Well b back 3,190]

Here’s another quick change of plan - 2 weeks ago During her campaign, Ms Truss hit out at the Bank of England, accusing it of being slow to react to rising prices and protect vulnerable households.

Today - 

But on Wednesday, the new Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng reiterated his "full support for the independent Bank of England and their mission to control inflation, which is central to tackling cost of living challenges". 

He also said he and Mr Bailey would meet twice a week from now on to discuss the cost-of-living crisis.

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

I can understand early U-turns or indeed being reticent to promise much before becoming Prime Minister when finally getting a full picture of what you have to work with. However, if it's happening so often, I have to question her grasp of current realities or indeed her analytical capacity.

Energy prices are soaring across Europe, but the extent is particularly severe in the UK.

Energy bills are soaring in Europe. This is what countries are doing to help you pay them | Euronews

[sonyc 5,492]

22 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Energy prices are soaring across Europe, but the extent is particularly severe in the UK.

One thing that struck me was that during her hustings she was asked whether we needed to ration our gas use as a country, to save what we could on usage. She was adamant that would not be the message from a government of hers. Yet the next day industry experts were saying that if things carried on in the same trajectory without cutting back on demand then we would run out! The spokeswoman (sorry can't recall her name) said that words were fine but there was a reality that would hit home.

I realise we need to up supply but it takes time to plan, invest in. We don't have the time it appears.

A better reply would have been to say that the government would respond to the data about energy use, available supplies and that nothing could be ruled out. But she didn't.

 

Ps. Germany has made their message loud and clear for a few weeks now. They aim to save 15% across the board if I remember rightly. And they've planned where and how the best they can. The country is preparing. I know it's different to here but the way they've gone about it seems reasonable.

Edited September 7, 2022 by sonyc

[Naturalcynic 629]

9 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

Are you his PA or just sticking up for someone you know **** all about?

Your angry response suggests your serial emails probably fell into the “delete” category.  In fact because you sent so many they were perhaps automatically filtered out as spam.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Naturalcynic

[A Load of Squit 5,137]

Today's announcement on energy is just another 'austerity' scam where the companies/banks that make all the profits (and give 2nd jobs, hospitality & executive directorships to MP's) will not take the hit, we will pay for it and then be told how lucky we are.

 

[Naturalcynic 629]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

Today's announcement on energy is just another 'austerity' scam where the companies/banks that make all the profits (and give 2nd jobs, hospitality & executive directorships to MP's) will not take the hit, we will pay for it and then be told how lucky we are.

 

Oh, it’s all so easy isn’t it?  How lovely it must be on the left to have all the answers and to know that any other view is utterly wrong and is designed by the evil Tories with the express purpose of oppressing and impoverishing the masses.  If only the world really was so black and white, but most people who’ve ever been in a position of responsibility and had to make difficult decisions know that it isn’t.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Naturalcynic

[A Load of Squit 5,137]

15 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Oh, it’s all so easy isn’t it?  How lovely it must be on the left to have all the answers and to know that any other view is utterly wrong and is designed by the evil Tories with the express purpose of oppressing and impoverishing the masses.  If only the world really was so black and white, but most people who’ve ever been in a position of responsibility and had to make difficult decisions know that it isn’t.

So you agree it's a scam.

[Well b back 3,190]

7 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Oh, it’s all so easy isn’t it.  How lovely it must be on the left to have all the answers and to know that any other view is utterly wrong and is designed by the evil Tories with the express purpose of oppressing the masses.  If only the real world really was so black and white.

As a lifelong Tory voter, isn’t what you are saying what the Tories are doing and that’s why us lifelong Tory voters are refusing to vote, in our droves, Tory anymore. Johnson in particular spouted lie after lie, and demanded we believe him and if I didn’t I was a leftie troublemaker. The next stage will be like other countries, believe me, or we will beat you up, as per the RNLI and vaccine task force. I saw you complain the other day people protested at the Tory hustings, yet when right wingers did the same to Corbin the other day not a word. And before you say I love Corbin, let me tell you, you are wrong.

[Naturalcynic 629]

2 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

So you agree it's a scam.

Are you telling me or asking me?  And anyway, the PM hasn’t set out the details yet.

[Naturalcynic 629]

2 minutes ago, Well b back said:

As a lifelong Tory voter, isn’t what you are saying what the Tories are doing and that’s why us lifelong Tory voters are refusing to vote, in our droves, Tory anymore. Johnson in particular spouted lie after lie, and demanded we believe him and if I didn’t I was a leftie troublemaker. The next stage will be like other countries, believe me, or we will beat you up, as per the RNLI and vaccine task force. I saw you complain the other day people protested at the Tory hustings, yet when right wingers did the same to Corbin the other day not a word. And before you say I love Corbin, let me tell you, you are wrong.

Isn’t it a bit early in the day to be drinking?

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

I always get worried with ideologues be they religious, political or indeed environmental. By their nature they believe they are right and have some privileged knowledge even in the absence of any facts or prior experience. I don't care if they are politically left or right - such ideologues are always one step removed from reality. The Tory's have been bedeviled by ideology since 2016 and look where we are! 

Truss is clearly such an ideologue on her proposed tax cuts from borrowing. It's been tried before and failed - the notorious Barber 'boom'. Then again her aversion to windfall taxes - nothing wrong in windfall taxes on such extreme unexpected profits. Thatcher did it when required for all you Truss ideologue blues! It simply called economic competence.