I see Liz Truss is set to relaunch her bid for leadership

Baggs

Good points, maiz, but I wouldn't call it nonsense exactly. More like tradition, some of which needs changing. With care.

The 'nonsense, Baggs isn't the tradition. It is the idea that one leader can transfer seamlessly into the place of another because it's about fulfilling the manifesto on which the party was elected, not about who is the leader.

And of course, we all know that voters tend to vote for one leader over another, despite the fact that we don't (and I hope to God, never will) have a presidential system.

Baggs

Trouble is, Dickens, cutting taxes always benefits better off people more than less well off people because the former pay more tax.

I may be wrong but I didn't (back then during LT's short PM-ship) get the feeling that was the purpose of the tax cuts she wanted. I got the impression it was more about encouraging entrepreneurship and innovation because richer people tend to be the ones who can try out new ideas.

Also, what part did the electorate play in her downfall? The electorate had no vote.

I'm happy to accept your statement that LT is "full of her own importance" though I expect you have to have a bit of that to become an MP at all.

You could be right about the rich trying out new ideas but I think it's often the young, working out of a garage at home who come up with the new ideas, especially in the tech and IT areas.
The sad thing is that when they become successful they often sell up (and I don't blame them for that) to American companies or other competitors who don't want the competition.

I am still trying to work out who the left leaning establishment are, these well known liberals the oBR and BofE? Really? Not my idea of left, or is this right wing Tory speak for anyone who doesn't agree with them? Laughable really.

My first thought were for her teenage daughters ; not again, Mum, we have just got over the last time.....we'll have to change schools ......you are sooooo embarassing

Baggs

Trouble is, Dickens, cutting taxes always benefits better off people more than less well off people because the former pay more tax.

I may be wrong but I didn't (back then during LT's short PM-ship) get the feeling that was the purpose of the tax cuts she wanted. I got the impression it was more about encouraging entrepreneurship and innovation because richer people tend to be the ones who can try out new ideas.

Also, what part did the electorate play in her downfall? The electorate had no vote.

I'm happy to accept your statement that LT is "full of her own importance" though I expect you have to have a bit of that to become an MP at all.

I may be wrong but I didn't (back then during LT's short PM-ship) get the feeling that was the purpose of the tax cuts she wanted. I got the impression it was more about encouraging entrepreneurship and innovation because richer people tend to be the ones who can try out new ideas.

Yes, that's the theory. The way to growth. That's how it was sold. I'm aware of supply-side economics.

Also, what part did the electorate play in her downfall? The electorate had no vote.

No, we didn't, but I haven't suggested that!

The Tory peer - like other Tories, will be mindful of the electorate's response, which of course reflects on the party itself if it's negative. Truss damaged the party.

The electorate didn't choose Boris Johnson - but it was because of him that they got their majority. They didn't choose him - but they endorsed the choice.

b1zzle

So would she then retain her £115K p.a. ex PM payment and have a salary on top?

Would she if she became PM again get an additional £115k when she was kicked out again?

Whitewavemark2

lixy

The BBC news page has an article about her return.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64523277

A small extract from it sums it up for me.

^Like many in her tribe, Ms Truss has never been short of that priceless political quality: a brass neck. Despite presiding over what many in the party see as one of the most disastrous political reigns in history, she is expected to argue that, essentially, she was right.^

I wonder what is must be like to have such a lack of self awareness?

Dunning-Kruger

Trouble is, Dickens, cutting taxes always benefits better off people more than less well off people because the former pay more tax.

I may be wrong but I didn't (back then during LT's short PM-ship) get the feeling that was the purpose of the tax cuts she wanted. I got the impression it was more about encouraging entrepreneurship and innovation because richer people tend to be the ones who can try out new ideas.

Also, what part did the electorate play in her downfall? The electorate had no vote.

I'm happy to accept your statement that LT is "full of her own importance" though I expect you have to have a bit of that to become an MP at all.

Grantanow

She had no mandate at all and the concept of a left wing economic establishment obstructing her is crazy. It was the capital markets that reacted to her loony tax cutting ideas. She did a lot of damage (just think about pension funds having to be rescued by the Bank of England) and should never be PM or in any responsible post again.

The left-wing economic establishment - like the World Bank, the IMF, Goldman Sachs, etc...

... yep, I can see where she's coming from... 😂

She's full of her own self-importance - spurred on no doubt by talking to the 'right' people in the US (and the warmth and affection from Tufton Street).

Tory peer Lord Barwell, Theresa May’s chief of staff at No 10, was scathing about Ms Truss’s explanation for the failure of her premiership.

“You were brought down because in a matter of weeks you lost the confidence of the financial markets, the electorate and your own MPs,” he tweeted. “During a profound cost of living crisis, you thought it was a priority to cut tax for the richest people in the country.”

Good points, maiz, but I wouldn't call it nonsense exactly. More like tradition, some of which needs changing. With care.

So would she then retain her £115K p.a. ex PM payment and have a salary on top?

She had no mandate at all and the concept of a left wing economic establishment obstructing her is crazy. It was the capital markets that reacted to her loony tax cutting ideas. She did a lot of damage (just think about pension funds having to be rescued by the Bank of England) and should never be PM or in any responsible post again.

Baggs

Ramblingrose22

Sadly Liz Truss was always delusional. Fancy claiming that her mandate was never respected. What mandate - a few Conservative party members don't represent the British electorate?

Then she says she was "deeply dusturbed" when she had to sack her Chancellor. Well she was and still is deeply disturbed already!

Finally we hear all the usual excuses about how left-wing forces like the Bank of England and the OBR brought her down. There's also an implied criticism of Boris Johnson and his Chancellor (now Prime Minister) when she says that problems with the economy had been brewing for some time.

So she had the right ideas all along and none of the debacle was really of her making....! Let's hope her constituents vote for any other candidates but her at the next GE.

I agree that LT had no full electoral mandate.

Neither has Rishi.

I think that the justification goes something like this:

1) The tories were overwhelmingly (when counted by seats in the HoC) elected at the last General Election on their manifesto promises

2) We do not vote for a PM at a general election, we vote for an MP on the strength of their party's manifesto. We do not have a presidential system.

3) The leader of the party with the most seats in the HoC becomes the PM.

4) Even if the leadership of the party changes mid term it is assumed that they still intend to implement the manifesto with which the GE was won. Ergo, change of leadership doesn't change the direction of travel.

Of course, we know that is nonsense; but so are many of our constitutional conventions.

She had her chance and ruined normal life for many many people. How can a disgraced PM after just 40days even contemplate uttering a single word. Has she been in the Commons since? Or like the disgraced Johnson has she been too busy in America?

Ramblingrose22

Sadly Liz Truss was always delusional. Fancy claiming that her mandate was never respected. What mandate - a few Conservative party members don't represent the British electorate?

Then she says she was "deeply dusturbed" when she had to sack her Chancellor. Well she was and still is deeply disturbed already!

Finally we hear all the usual excuses about how left-wing forces like the Bank of England and the OBR brought her down. There's also an implied criticism of Boris Johnson and his Chancellor (now Prime Minister) when she says that problems with the economy had been brewing for some time.

So she had the right ideas all along and none of the debacle was really of her making....! Let's hope her constituents vote for any other candidates but her at the next GE.

I agree that LT had no full electoral mandate.

Neither has Rishi.

biglouis

She did have one good idea with which I thoroughly approve and that was to clamp down on people who only work a few hours a week and then get subbed out by the taxpayer.

At a time when there are so many jobs going in retail, hospitality and warehousing people should not be allowed to turn down full time jobs unless they are disabled or too sick to work. There are workplaces where people are reluctant to take on another shift because it "messes up their benefit". Meantime the full time workers mst feel quite angry about that. I would make the part timers get up off their lazy asses and do a weeks work.

An awful lot of part time workers are women juggling childcare and family responsibilities. It isn't laziness it's struggling to manage work and family responsibilities.

biglouis

She did have one good idea with which I thoroughly approve and that was to clamp down on people who only work a few hours a week and then get subbed out by the taxpayer.

At a time when there are so many jobs going in retail, hospitality and warehousing people should not be allowed to turn down full time jobs unless they are disabled or too sick to work. There are workplaces where people are reluctant to take on another shift because it "messes up their benefit". Meantime the full time workers mst feel quite angry about that. I would make the part timers get up off their lazy asses and do a weeks work.

so what if they are single Mums trying to do their best for their families? Paying for pre and after-school care would not make it worthwhile working full-time.
We see news items about parents struggling financially and quite often they are single mothers.

Yes, I know there are single fathers too before anyone points that out but they are not in the majority.

I'd be chasing up the men who abrogate their responsibilities to their children

She did have one good idea with which I thoroughly approve and that was to clamp down on people who only work a few hours a week and then get subbed out by the taxpayer.

At a time when there are so many jobs going in retail, hospitality and warehousing people should not be allowed to turn down full time jobs unless they are disabled or too sick to work. There are workplaces where people are reluctant to take on another shift because it "messes up their benefit". Meantime the full time workers mst feel quite angry about that. I would make the part timers get up off their lazy asses and do a weeks work.

Glorianny

Well Jan Raven will be pleased. She has Truss down to a t. This was from the first campaign. Liz and a hat for every Conservative.
www.tiktok.com/@drsean2022/video/7119178483707759877

Every cloud has a silver lining 😁

Glorianny

Well Jan Raven will be pleased. She has Truss down to a t. This was from the first campaign. Liz and a hat for every Conservative.
www.tiktok.com/@drsean2022/video/7119178483707759877

’I kno-ow!!’ 😃

Sadly Liz Truss was always delusional. Fancy claiming that her mandate was never respected. What mandate - a few Conservative party members don't represent the British electorate?

Then she says she was "deeply dusturbed" when she had to sack her Chancellor. Well she was and still is deeply disturbed already!

Finally we hear all the usual excuses about how left-wing forces like the Bank of England and the OBR brought her down. There's also an implied criticism of Boris Johnson and his Chancellor (now Prime Minister) when she says that problems with the economy had been brewing for some time.

So she had the right ideas all along and none of the debacle was really of her making....! Let's hope her constituents vote for any other candidates but her at the next GE.

Well Jan Raven will be pleased. She has Truss down to a t. This was from the first campaign. Liz and a hat for every Conservative.
www.tiktok.com/@drsean2022/video/7119178483707759877

Casdon

MaizieD

ExperiencedNotOld

So, for balance, I’ll throw in this:
www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj5_bH-lPz8AhXphv0HHU5GASEQFnoECCoQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2Fae77f761-d062-458f-a9cd-272fcd27a975&usg=AOvVaw0Uup-KigVsofycPfq7LZhz

Goodness, is Starmer plotting to lead the tory party too?

I don’t know, as ExperiencedNotOld has posted this which is behind a paywall, you can’t read it unless you subscribe, which is a shame.

Apologies - I’d forgotten that bit.

Oh please no! She was the worst PM in my lifetime, a complete disaster and the country is still paying for her disastrous economic policies.

Normandygirl

What I find hard to understand is how Johnson, Hancock, Dorries, Truss , etc find the time to go swanning around the world interfering in others affairs, speaking tours, book launches, jungle high jinks and hosting TV talk shows. I thought they were taxpayer paid, sitting members of Parliament. Their constituents must be thrilled with them.

They should be made to do their job, in the House and in Constituencies- or be sacked!

And to think I actually found myself slightly sorry for her because she’d been so humiliated….