Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

If Sunak goes on until January it would only because he knows something that will save him (like a war that allows to him postpone an election), he is just grabbing as much money and goodies as he can, or he is just like a rabbit in the headlights and unable to do anything. He really ought to be able to see the writing on the wall (*); if this government were a pet the RSPCA would be prosecuting for keeping it alive in such terminal wretchedness.

* - Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin is actually quite appropriate.

At this point I can't see why they would go any earlier than next winter. The only hope they have is 'something turns up'

DC1989 said:

At this point I can't see why they would go any earlier than next winter. The only hope they have is 'something turns up'

Click to expand...

If that's what they're thinking then it was a mistake to do an earth-salting budget. They absolutely don't want to be anywhere near power when the spending cuts come piling in. As it is Labour are piling effortlessly into their trap by committing to implementing the NI cuts

DC1989 said:

At this point I can't see why they would go any earlier than next winter. The only hope they have is 'something turns up'

Click to expand...

What like Steiner launches his counter-attack?

Anyway i see Mordaunt is saying we should be grateful for Donelan not taking her redundancy when she resigned as Education secretary a few years ago, she was in post for 2 days. Apparently that should cancel out the money the taxpayer has had to pay out due to what she said. Hmm.

Regarding Michelle Donolan, Prospect Magazine (link) seems to have a good explanation of what happened and some plausible suggestions as to why the Government stepped in to pay the legal bills:

Prospect said:

There are two obvious explanations for why the government felt it was directly on the libel hook.

The first is that, although the letter was posted from a personal account, officials viewed this publication to the public as being connected to her ministerial responsibilities. This would mean that the department would also be a tortfeasor for the post. Perhaps this was because Donelan’s personal account was badged as being that of the secretary of state (and it would seem there were not even any disclaimers, to the extent they would have made a difference).

The second is that the department was not altogether comfortable about the letter to the agency itself, even though that would normally be protected by qualified privilege. The department would certainly be responsible for that correspondence. If the litigation continued, the process by which the letter came about would have been examined. At some stage in the litigation, various internal emails and other materials would have to be disclosed, revealing just how the allegations ended up being in the letter and how that letter ended up being published on social media. If so, such disclosures may well have been awkward.

Click to expand...

There's a lot more explanation in the article. None of it puts either Michelle Donolan or the Government in a good light, but it possibly makes it understandable why civil servants would have felt they needed to step in and have the Government handle the case.

nw1 said:

A government minister accusing someone of being a Hamas supporter when they're not, is vile and disgusting in my book.

Click to expand...

Even if the minister concerned genuinely believed what they were saying? There is after all no suggestion that Donolan knowingly lied, merely that she wasn't sufficiently diligent about fact-checking, and was too keen to publish stuff publicly.

Out of interest, if you regard someone stating something that turns out to be untrue and defamatory on social media as making that person 'vile and disgusting', what words would you use to describe - say - someone who actually does commit acts of terror or murder or rape? That after all seems to me orders of magnitude worse than simply writing something that's false about someone, but I'm not sure what language you can use to describe them that's much stronger than 'vile and disgusting'.

DynamicSpirit said:

I wouldn't say that writing something that's wrong makes a person 'vile and disgusting'

Click to expand...

What about (ab)using a position of power and authority to make potentially career-ending unfounded and unchecked accusations against an academic purely for political ends?

That's a damn sight more than "writing something that's wrong".

It was deliberate, pre-meditated, and ill-intentioned

(Oh, and the £15k quoted isn't the full cost the taxpayer has to bear either is it? There's two lots of costs on top of the damages)

Gloster said:

If Sunak goes on until January it would only because he knows something that will save him (like a war that allows to him postpone an election), he is just grabbing as much money and goodies as he can, or he is just like a rabbit in the headlights and unable to do anything. He really ought to be able to see the writing on the wall (*); if this government were a pet the RSPCA would be prosecuting for keeping it alive in such terminal wretchedness.

* - Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin is actually quite appropriate.

Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence for that allegation?

DC1989 said:

At this point I can't see why they would go any earlier than next winter. The only hope they have is 'something turns up'

Click to expand...

Much more realistic than Gloster's post. They are like ducks proceeding down a narrowing decoy tunnel, hoping for an exit, but in the end there'll be nowhere else to go.

DynamicSpirit said:

Even if the minister concerned genuinely believed what they were saying? There is after all no suggestion that Donolan knowingly lied, merely that she wasn't sufficiently diligent about fact-checking, and was too keen to publish stuff publicly.

Click to expand...

Not knowingly lied, but made unfounded accusations, quite possibly for political reasons. There was absolutely no reason to make unsubstantiated accusations about these academics.

DynamicSpirit said:

Out of interest, if you regard someone stating something that turns out to be untrue and defamatory on social media as making that person 'vile and disgusting', what words would you use to describe - say - someone who actually does commit acts of terror or murder or rape? That after all seems to me orders of magnitude worse than simply writing something that's false about someone, but I'm not sure what language you can use that's much stronger than 'vile and disgusting'.

Click to expand...

Ah, the "they're not Putin, so they must be OK" argument.

Also, it's not just "someone", it's a government minister who has a special responsibility to act properly. This is the same argument I have made about statements made by the likes of Anderson and Braverman in the past, though I believe Donelan has committed a far worse wrong than either of those two (believe it or not!)

DC1989 said:

At this point I can't see why they would go any earlier than next winter. The only hope they have is 'something turns up'

Click to expand...

A January election would be absurd and insane, and the electorate would deeply resent them for it.

Can you imagine a Christmas campaigning period? Forcing people out to the polls when it's cold, wet, dark and perhaps snowy?

It'll probably be October, but if we're lucky it might be May.

I can't see why they would want to hold on for an extra three months, most of which is Christmas, its run-up and its aftermath anyway, so no real time for any new legislation. And remember January is when fuel bills are likely to bite. "Blue Monday", supposedly the most gloomy day of the year, is in late January. It would be an absolutely crazy time for an incumbent party to hold an election, if they want to maximise their chances.

If they want 10% in the polls, then yes, by all means they can go for a January election. If they want 30%, I'd suggest October. And if they want 35%, I'd suggest May.

This government are past their sell-by date and have no new ideas, they should for heaven's sake just go. Every month the unelected Sunak squats in 10 Downing Street is another month the country makes no forwards progress whatsoever, and if anything regresses backwards.

nw1 said:

Not knowingly lied, but made unfounded accusations. There was absolutely no reason to make unsubstantiated accusations about these academics.

Ah, the "they're not Putin, so they must be OK" argument.

Click to expand...

Not at all. If you recheck my comments, you'll find that at no point have I ever suggested that what Donolan did is OK.

It's more like, if you use such extraordinarily extreme language to describe someone whose crime is, basically, gross carelessness and negligence, then you don't have anything more to turn to to describe someone who actually does commit utterly awful and malicious acts or crimes against humanity. And I would hope even you could see that it's unreasonable to use the same kind of language to describe Michelle Donolan as you would for - say - a Hamas terrorist who's been going around raping innocent civilians for political ends.

DynamicSpirit said:

Not at all. If you recheck my comments, you'll find that at no point have I ever suggested that what Donolan did is OK.

It's more like, if you use such extraordinarily extreme language to describe someone whose crime is, basically, gross carelessness and negligence, then you don't have anything more to turn to to describe someone who actually does commit utterly awful and malicious acts or crimes against humanity. And I would hope even you could see that it's unreasonable to use the same kind of language to describe Michelle Donolan as you would for - say - a Hamas terrorist who's been going around raping innocent civilians for political ends.

Click to expand...

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree there. In my opinion Donelan has done something quite unforgivable, and thus, robust and emotive criticism is perhaps not totally inappropriate. I never said she was as bad as a Hamas terrorist!

Personally I think it's more than mere negligence. She didn't have to say anything. So why did she?

I refer you to @SteveM70's post above, which sums up my own opinion on the situation nicely.

This government are, in my opinion, intent on fighting culture wars with any cause associated with the left or liberalism. They seem to think the only way of getting close to winning the election is courting the votes of the hard-right.

birchesgreen said:

What like Steiner launches his counter-attack?

Click to expand...

Starmer?

nw1 said:

A government minister accusing someone of being a Hamas supporter when they're not, is vile and disgusting in my book. Abuse of power of the worst kind. She could have ruined her targets' lives.

Just another reason why we need an election ASAP to replace this reactionary right-wing Government.

Click to expand...

And may well have left her out of pocket. Much of the reported £15k will be going to lawyers fees, no doubt.

Typhoon said:

And may well have left her out of pocket. Much of the reported £15k will be going to lawyers fees, no doubt.

Click to expand...

Costs are being paid in addition to the compo

SteveM70 said:

Costs are being paid in addition to the compo

Click to expand...

That is good - I read somewhere that they were not.

I seriously cannot understand why anybody with a sliver of intelligence would look at this never ending omnishambles and think, yeah they represent my views. I mean come on now

London and the South East, the most prosperous regions in the country, have the most immigrants. it

Click to expand...

should be noted these are the regions where the Tories have gone backwards in recent years, especially London. The Tories, Liz Truss style, want to be the party of growth but increasingly they are the party of the slow growth regions while the prosperous vote for Labour and the Lib Dems. You're likely to see even more of this at the next election. Even Westminster and the City of London could go Labour for the first time in history. The heart of British capitalism. That sorta sums up the state of the modern, so called, pro capitalism, pro growth, Tories. They're really the party of the angry, left behind (largely older) moaners that don't seem to like modern Britain. Enoch was right and all of that. And that's fine, if that's what you want the Tories to be, but don't try and pretend to be the party of tomorrow, the party of innovation, the party of capitalism and entrepreneurs (many of whom are immigrants) while being the party of angry old white man

Click to expand...

An interesting point from a comment on Conservative Home - have the Tories largely given up on business and enterprise?

Is there a link to the full article?

Howardh said:

The economic future probably needs a separate thread; but as someone who is about to hit state pension age I'm very worried that NI will eventually be scrapped as headlines suggest, replaced by a significant increase to income tax to make up the shortfall. That will drag pensioners into paying a lot more income tax, many like myself will have planned future expenses on income tax being around 20%, not suddenly having to find the extra when it's 30-35%. (Otherwise where does the money come from for public services?)

That is unless state pensioners are exempt from this add-on; or the threshold is significantly higher, but if not then how will many cope? A basic pension + couple of private ones + maybe some savings interest will put a pensioner into the £20-30k/yr bracket, having to find £800-£1700 more than anticipated.

Not many votes in that!!

Click to expand...

Correct !
As things stand we are heading towards the (new full) state pension being taxable unless there is a specific exemption / allowance.

Howardh said:

A lot of pensioners have sacrificed a lot during their working life (holidays, cars, decent homes etc) in order to have a comfortable retirement where they are not relying on state hand-outs. If people like that feel that they'd have been better off saving nothing, spending like there's no tomorrow and when in retirement simply get all the benefits we are entitled to - is that a fiscal win or loss for the government?? Especially as OAP's are expected to reach a ripe old age these days??

If you are on basic state pension alone, and paying little/no income tax, what benefits/allowances are you entitled to? Council tax help, housing benefit, heating benefit etc? A lot of those are means-tested, which those who have saved don't pay.

Click to expand...

I feel over the last 30 years I have made a fundamental mistake saving into a personal pension so I can have holiday and days out in retirement. On top of this as you say much is means tested so you get nothing or a reduced amount if you have funds. If you have spent all your disposable income you get the payout. You have not mentioned any form of care / living assistance either.

At the 2021 - 2022 rate there was £3250 gap between the (new full) state pension. From April the gap is ~£1000 and under current plans is likely to become zero. Add to this the lack of fund growth since 2020, which the government must take some responsibility for, and there is is significant loss.

Consider this possible scenario
- due to inflation £3600 is required to pay for the accommodation, travel etc that did cost £3000.
- the £3000 gap between the state pension and the tax threshold become zero
- tax is 20%
- the fund now is the same as 4 years ago
- going forward from now long term the fund value increase matches inflation
To get £3600 nett £4500 gross i.e. 50% more has to be drawn from the fund.
If the fund would have paid out for 18 years now it will only pay out for 12.

Someone will mention that 25% can be drawn from the personal pension fund tax free. That part is to be allocated to buy major capital purchases as required.

For those with a defined benefit index linked occupational pension while the tax paid will increase they are independent of fund performance.


While totally correct to say that the triple lock has given a significant increase in the state pension that has to be offset against the proportion spent on essential items that have increased in cost well above the headline inflation rate. Just two items are food and energy. The kWh of energy used by someone retired is significantly higher than for someone working full time away from home, presuming weekdays the heating is only programmed to be on early morning then late afternoon and evening.
Maybe someone retired can comment if in buying power terms with £11,500 over April 2024 to March 2025 they expect to better or worse off than with £8,800 over April 2019 - March 2020.

Teresa May has announced she is also standing down at next election (MP for Maidenhead, and former PM)

Will be joining lots of others former ministers including Dominic Raab, Chris Grayling, Ben Wallace, Sajid Javid and George Eustice etc. in standing down

ainsworth74 said:

Is there a link to the full article?

Click to expand...

Sorry it's this one

Snow1964 said:

Teresa May has announced she is also standing down at next election (MP for Maidenhead, and former PM)

Will be joining lots of others former ministers including Dominic Raab, Chris Grayling, Ben Wallace, Sajid Javid and George Eustice etc. in standing down

Click to expand...

She gives as reasons:

She said: "Since stepping down as prime minister I have enjoyed being a backbencher again and having more time to work for my constituents and champion causes close to my heart, including most recently launching a Global Commission on Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking.
"These causes have been taking an increasing amount of my time.
"Because of this, after much careful thought and consideration, I have realised that, looking ahead, I would no longer be able to do my job as an MP in the way I believe is right and my constituents deserve.
"I have therefore taken the difficult decision to stand down at the next general election."

Click to expand...

Provided she sticks to that (and I have no reason to doubt her), she will be use her experience and influence to make a difference. At the time her premiership seemed to be rather weak (not helped by her selection of Foreign Secretary, who not only appeared to be completely useless - according to selections from Alan Duncan's biography - but was plotting from the moment he went through the doors at King Charles Street) but compared to those that followed ..... at least competent.

Given that Cameron has now been "kicked upstairs" and the trend is for it to be offered in sequence - has she been told she's going into Sunak's resignation honours?

If she gets given a seat in the Lords - can they title her "Baroness of Hostile Environment"?

Snow1964 said:

Teresa May has announced she is also standing down at next election (MP for Maidenhead, and former PM)

Will be joining lots of others former ministers including Dominic Raab, Chris Grayling, Ben Wallace, Sajid Javid and George Eustice etc. in standing down

Click to expand...

Echoes of Tony Benn giving up standing for Chesterfield in 2001 “to devote more time to politics”.

sor said:

Given that Cameron has now been "kicked upstairs" and the trend is for it to be offered in sequence - has she been told she's going into Sunak's resignation honours?

Click to expand...

Cameron was only given a peerage to get him back into government. Major, Blair, and Brown didn't get one so I don't think it sets much of a precedent for May to get one.

JamesT said:

Cameron was only given a peerage to get him back into government. Major, Blair, and Brown didn't get one so I don't think it sets much of a precedent for May to get one.

Click to expand...

Major and Blair did accept some sort of honour though. I said "offered" - for all we know they were offered peerages, didn't want them, but took a knighthood/KG instead

The timing does point towards it being a possibility.

sor said:

Major and Blair did accept some sort of honour though. I said "offered" - for all we know they were offered peerages, didn't want them, but took a knighthood/KG instead

The timing does point towards it being a possibility.

Click to expand...

The other thing to look at is that Theresa May is 67. Does she really want to do another five years as an MP? Quite understandable if not. I’d tend to that being the major factor rather than anything else - often the answer is very straightforward rather than the conspiracy theories.

YouGov (https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48862-what-did-uk-public-make-of-2024-spring-budget-poll) reports that 52% of the people it polled prefer Labour's (former?) policy of using the money gained by abolition of "non-dom" status to go towards the NHS versus 21% who favour the Conservative policy of using the money to reduce National Insurance contributions by 2%.

I can't say I'm surprised. Yet another Conservative policy which overwhelmingly favours the wealthy, those earning £35,000, rather than the poor, unemployed or otherwise disadvantaged.

Asked which of the two policies they’d prefer, the public favour the Labour policy by 52% to 21%. The Labour Party option was chosen by three-quarters (73%) of those who voted for the party at the last election, and was also marginally more popular amongst those who voted Conservative (38% to 29%).

Click to expand...

jfollows said:

I can't say I'm surprised. Yet another Conservative policy which overwhelmingly favours the wealthy, those earning £35,000, rather than the poor, unemployed or otherwise disadvantaged.

Click to expand...

Surely someone who earns £35,000 isn't wealthy!?

Theresa May is one I'm surprised about since she's by all accounts a good local MP but I wonder if wants to retire now rather than be in opposition again.

It does mean we're likely to see a lot of new blood come the next Parliament which could be a good thing.

Thirteen said:

It does mean we're likely to see a lot of new blood come the next Parliament which could be a good thing.

Click to expand...

Or we could see the Conservative party taken over by wet-behind-the-ears twenty-year olds who want to go further than even Truss did: privatise the army, block the Channel Tunnel, reducing everything to a single tax rate for all, etc. They will be the true believers who have never lived in the real world…and they will carry through their policies when they finally get in power.