I watched Ros Atkins On… a couple of days ago with a guest analysing what Rishi has said so far. And she used a term along the lines of ‘Rishi and Starmer are the same’ or suggesting they are cut from the same cloth.
Although Labour still look in a good position, this is the uphill battle they will face, with all the Conservative supporting media sending wave after wave of subliminal messaging over the next two years to ensure Labour is seen as nothing more than ‘the same as a competent Conservative government’. And therefore the extension of that idea is why would you pass government over to a party with no experience running the economy when the current PM is an ex-chancellor? After all, Rishi correctly called the car crash that was Liz Truss (hello! The entire world minus 170,000 people did!) and he isn’t the one who broke the economy.
Without the media, which he will never get, Starmer has a difficult battle.
That’s a startup rather than the plant supplying the Nissan factory. It’s not a good sign though. You would hope that they would be creating an industry cluster around that part of the world.
Might be naive, but shouldn’t it be possible to give the Home Secretary two Government issued phones, so she’s able to video chat and read simultaneously?
The more stories I hear about the everyday handling of secrecy issues in Western governments (including Germany btw)…
The standards applied to salaried employees and elected officials are remarkably different. There are meant to be official channels to be used if it is believed that documents or data are being compromised but, as ever, the elected officials police themselves. Badly.
The Ministerial Code is a joke. I think the data protection laws have more bite but, again, that would require the political will to prosecute offenders.
100%, Rishi is also enjoying a bit of a honeymoon period as PM despite the COP 27 and Braverman as the poll ratings have eased a bit in response to the slight steadying of the economy ship. If he can build on that then a Labour in looks increasingly unlikely.
I still think it was a mistake for Labour not to table a motion of no confidence in Truss. They really needed to ram the message of incompetence home and they’ve let it slip.
Would have made absolutely no difference. No-one is going to vote for or against their MP or the government on the basis of them supporting Truss in a no confidence vote.
No, but it would have forced Tory MP’s to either support Truss or oust her. If they voted with Labour we get a GE, if they voted with Truss it’s another stick Labour could use against them.
The Labour tactic of watching the Tory party implode is fine but it cant last forever. They will need to actually compete with them and the right wing press one day.
It makes no difference. The Tories wouldn’t have voted against her in a formal no confidence vote as they were kicking her out anyway and wouldn’t want to bring about an election. Using the fact they voted for Truss again would not have given Labour any extra benefit. Letting the Tories make their mistakes and have to take ownership for them is far better than wasting time with frivoulous no confidence votes.
The party imploding will last long enough to minimise the chances of them winning the next election. The full hit from higher inflation, energy costs etc are yet to hit, we are forecast to be in recession over the next 12 months and Sunak has been in power a week and appears to have little political sense. He is already rolling back on some of his commitments, Braverman appointment is proving a disaster and his attack lines on Starmer are to link him with Corbyn which simply doesn’t work.
Sunak’s support comes from the more liberal/ practical element but his natural view of the world leads him to a small government/cutting spending which pushes them away. The voters from the 2019 election come from 2 main positions - higher spending to level up and small state/ lower taxes - an alliance which can’t really exist in this economic environment especially now that brexit is ‘done’.
