2022 Conservative Leadership Election - Liz Truss chosen as party leader (and subsequent reshuffle)

[brad465]

BBC are reporting that only one Sunak supporter is likely to get a 'top cabinet job' (Michael Ellis - Attorney General). Considering 137 voted for him in the MPs vote, this doesn't seem like a step to unite the party.

Michael Ellis was on at least two occasions the only MP of a Minister/Junior Minister level prepared to stand at the despatch box to defend Johnson's recently uncovered behaviour, one of them being during the Pincher scandal just before Johnson resigned.

Are the white men waiting for their time to stab her in the back, or is she going woke by not choosing them?

We’ve been sold many lies before many elections. This is the seventh government since Cameron said “stability with me or chaos with Ed”.

Some of those high profile names who call others woke and attack diversity action in general are also prepared to either stay quiet or even promote the equality/diversity of a Tory Cabinet/leader. While I think everyone should be entitled to views, providing they don't cause very serious harm, what I really hate is double standards.

 

[RichJF]

Less than half a day as PM & I'm already sick of her

The energy price cap is a good idea but will burden future generations. Loopy Liz will promise one thing this week but then totally change her agenda on a few days again.

 

[Morgsie]

Party cohesion is a major issue given how she ended in the final 2 and her Cabinet appointments. What she is promising has to work otherwise she is toast.

 

[nw1]

That is fair enough, its about 30 years since i nearly joined the Young Conservatives. Oh i was so wild at poly.

Strangely my views are pretty much the same as they were in 1994, and, while not exactly the same age, I am of the same kind of generation as Truss. I tended to form my base beliefs in my late teens and they've stuck with me ever since. But perhaps I'm just a bit odd.

Less than half a day as PM & I'm already sick of her

The energy price cap is a good idea but will burden future generations. Loopy Liz will promise one thing this week but then totally change her agenda on a few days again.

Or how about "Mad Lizzie"?

(anyone else remember the original Mad Lizzie? Know nothing about her politics but probably wouldn't be a worse PM, at any rate...)

Michael Ellis was on at least two occasions the only MP of a Minister/Junior Minister level prepared to stand at the despatch box to defend Johnson's recently uncovered behaviour, one of them being during the Pincher scandal just before Johnson resigned.

"Michael Ellis", to me, was some mystery character everyone kept going on about in a late and rather bizarre edition of Monty Python.

Probably better known to most people than some obscure Tory non-entity...

His wife has the best tweet of the night ive seen so far

https://twitter.com/mercer_felicity/status/1567229997881987078

The wife of a Tory MP calling the PM an imbecile, one day in? Not sure even Johnson managed that!

I’m having serious concerns that this woman will not win a general election.

Or, perhaps, for some of us, serious hopes.

 

[Typhoon]

So Sunak supporters all sent to the backbenchers along with most of Boris's sycophantic supporters.

They may not be out of the limelight though, there will be places on the Parliamentary Selected Committees to fill, including their chairs. One that will definitely need replacing is that for Foreign Affairs, its incumbent is Tugendhat (the only reason that people outside of Tonbridge had heard of him); I would have thought Hunt was likely to keep Health so there is some potential for considerable scrutiny of government policy in two high profile ministries that will doubtless keep News channels in material should the chairs wish it.

Ben Wallace was hoping to get the Secretary General job at NATO from 1st October, but the incumbent Jens Stoltenberg had his second four year term extended by a further year to 30/9/23, probably in the main because of the Ukraine/Russia situation. I suspect he still harbours ambitions, and why not? He'll mark time, politically speaking, keeping well out of the upcoming domestic chaos.

Thanks, I hadn't realised. He had better hope that Truss doesn't go back on her word and call an early election. (Although I could see Starmer putting his name forward, no obvious UK alternatives, safe pair of hands, competent, potential Conservative leader out of the way.)

... especially now Dorries is soon to depart to another place.

Her replacement, Michelle Donelan. achieved a degree of fame by being Secretary of State for Education for thirty-six hours. She has also worked in marketing for Marie Claire, The History Channel and World Wrestling Entertainment (so she has Culture and Media tied up, not so sure about Digital and Sport). I'm just hoping she'll have another look at Dorries' bonkers plans on Channel 4 in particular.

Johnny Mercer reportedly very unhappy at losing his (only recently acquired) place in the Cabinet. Another by-election in Devon soon?!

I know that he has been passed over for another former veteran, but Armed Forces and Veterans is not exactly a high-profile post. Lydon Johnson was probably pretty low down in the list of Best US Presidents, but he did come up with a decent quote about J Edgar Hoover, something to do with tents and urination. Truss would have done well to look it up.

Additionally. Brandon Lewis may find his in-tray pretty full (thanks to 'do-nothing' Raab), not only are are Criminal Barristers striking but court Legal Advisors are too. But not over pay - but an IT system that has been equated to the Post Office 'Horizon' software. I knew nothing about it until I listened to a programme on it

It was to be one of the most ambitious just reform programmes in the world – a ‘common platform’ that would share information between the courts, lawyers and police, from arrest to court. But the quarter-of-a-billion pound IT project now stands accused of causing wrongful arrests and unlawful detentions. File on 4 has spoken with whistle-blowers from within the court service who say the system is unsafe, unfinished and beset with bugs, errors and glitches. Sources say early warnings were ignored and worry that the software continues to be rolled out to courts across England and Wales despite serious concerns about the risk it poses.

Programme synopsis from https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001brqf

 

[AlterEgo]

I think the UK is at heart a fairly centrist, moderate country but we were sold a lie at the 2019 election and a culture war has been propagated by those at the extremes of the political spectrum.

The UK is an inherently conservative country, mostly resistant to change, and Labour will always need to work harder for votes than the Tories. New Labour was the most radical government of the post-WWII era and only got in through a combination of political genius and luck.

 

[Typhoon]

The UK is an inherently conservative country, mostly resistant to change, and Labour will always need to work harder for votes than the Tories. New Labour was the most radical government of the post-WWII era and only got in through a combination of political genius and luck.

While I don't disagree with the first sentence in any way, I would question the second. Attlee's first ministry, 1945 -1950 (at a time when the country was on its knees)?

In fact, it was probably helped by the country being on its knees!

 

[AlterEgo]

While I don't disagree with the first sentence in any way, I would question the second. Attlee's first ministry, 1945 -1950 (at a time when the country was on its knees)?

In fact, it was probably helped by the country being on its knees!

Attlee's ministry was marked by rebuilding and renewal (Getting Things Done!), but was steered and dominated by an already extant post-war consensus about what should be done.

New Labour changed what the consensus was in this country for ever, and, among its successes, made a critical error and irreparably fractured the coalition between traditional working classes and metropolitan middle classes.

 

[nw1]

The UK is an inherently conservative country, mostly resistant to change,

But perhaps it's the Conservatives who have delivered the most radical changes in the past 40 years. Wholesale privatisations, closing the coalmines, and Brexit, for starters.

And I'm not sure the UK is any more inherently conservative than many other countries. It's just that we're going through a particularly right-wing phase at the moment. People like Farage and, more recently, the Tory Party, seem to have stirred up prejudice towards immigrants and people have gone along with this right-wing nonsense.

(And actually, blaming everything on others, whether that be immigrants, the last Labour government, benefit claimants, and whoever else is a perfect way of deflecting the blame away from the Tories whose austerity policies may have contributed not insignificantly to people's woes).

Compare the 20 years starting in about 1989, there seemed to be a much more progressive mood then so I am not convinced that the UK has been a hotbed of conservatism throughout modern history. And similarly, though before my time, the 1960s and early 70s seemed to be similarly progressive.

 

[oldman]

New Labour was the most radical government of the post-WWII era and only got in through a combination of political genius and luck.

More radical than the blessed Maggie? Laissez-faire industrial policies, financial deregulation, denationalisation of utilities and right to buy were quite radical and had some long-lasting consequences.

 

[nw1]

More radical than the blessed Maggie? Laissez-faire industrial policies, financial deregulation, denationalisation of utilities and right to buy were quite radical and had some long-lasting consequences.

If there were a "like" button on this forum I'd definitely use it here!

New Labour changed what the consensus was in this country for ever,

New Labour more than Thatcher? Struggle to even begin to believe that.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

(And actually, blaming everything on others, whether that be immigrants, the last Labour government, benefit claimants, and whoever else is a perfect way of deflecting the blame away from the Tories whose austerity policies may have contributed not insignificantly to people's woes).

Would that be like blaming everything on 'bankers' or 'neoliberalism' or 'multinationals' or 'greedy bosses' (as Labour has had a long habit of doing), or - the recent one - blaming everything on 'Brexit' or on 'Brexiters' (see the parallel railforums thread for this).

To be clear, scapegoating is generally wrong, whoever the target is, and the Tories are not guilt-free on that score. But it's not correct to single them out as if they are the only ones that do it. Labour and the LibDems are just as bad at scapegoating - it's just, they tend to have different targets.

Compare the 20 years starting in about 1989, there seemed to be a much more progressive mood then so I am not convinced that the UK has been a hotbed of conservatism throughout modern history. And similarly, though before my time, the 1960s and early 70s seemed to be similarly progressive.

Yet in the 1970s and 1980s, and to some extent even through to the 1990s, prejudice against gays was rampant and considered completely normal in most of our society; racial prejudice was becoming less acceptable through the 70s and 80s but still at far higher levels than today; society was much more insular and less cosmopolitan, with immigration levels that would be insignificant by today's standards; health and safety standards were generally far lower; capital punishment had only just been abolished and there was majority support in the population for reinstating it.

I would say you have to be looking at the past through peculiarly rose-tinted spectacles to imagine it was somehow more progressive than today.

 

[Herefordian]

I’m having serious concerns that this woman will not win a general election.

That wouldn't be a bad thing.

However, a lot will depend on what Truss does about the cost of living crisis.

I don’t doubt it, but as someone who’d rather Labour didn’t get their hands on the keys to No. 10, it’s a more concerning prospect.

I'd say the chances of that happening are now, as things stand, more likely.

A more concerning prospect is nineteen years of Conservative rule.

Particularly when there's currently nothing conservative about the Conservatives.

 

[nw1]

Yet in the 1970s and 1980s, and to some extent even through to the 1990s, prejudice against gays was rampant and considered completely normal in most of our society; racial prejudice was becoming less acceptable through the 70s and 80s but still at far higher levels than today; society was much more insular and less cosmopolitan, with immigration levels that would be insignificant by today's standards; health and safety standards were generally far lower; capital punishment had only just been abolished and there was majority support in the population for reinstating it.

I would say you have to be looking at the past through peculiarly rose-tinted spectacles to imagine it was somehow more progressive than today.

To be fair I did say the 60s and early 70s was before my time, but remember it was 1967 when homosexuality became legal and it was during the 20 years starting in 1989 when the gay age of consent was equalised. So both in those periods which I highlighted as progressive. And while things were not perfect in the 60s, at least they were getting better, and that's the key thing. Progressiveness by definition means "getting better". We were starting from a low base, but moving in the right direction, while to my mind in the current era we are on a downhill slope.

The main period I was focusing on was the end of the 80s, the 90s and the 00s, and by a whole range of areas (including many you mention, such as increasing unacceptability of homophobia and racism), that period showed a clear progressive trend.

 

[Scotrail12]

Seems like no LGBT cabinet members, disappointing given that the Tories do actually have a fair amount of gays. ️‍

And of course, Coffey and Rees-Mogg get in who both have homophobic voting records.

 

[AlterEgo]

More radical than the blessed Maggie? Laissez-faire industrial policies, financial deregulation, denationalisation of utilities and right to buy were quite radical and had some long-lasting consequences.

It would be a mistake to conflate Things That Got Done by government fiat with true political radicalism. Thatcherism didn't change the political consensus and its echoes are found primarily within the right wing of the Conservative Party. Thatcherites haven't populated the civil service or the popular consciousness since 1997 when they were quickly swept away. New Labour by contrast still has acolytes all over the elite - it made sure, by the use of quangos and tight control of the civil service, to root out old Thatcherites, and dinosaurs from even longer ago. Its main legacies of political correctness, surveillance culture, harm-policing and multiculturalism remain very much in evidence despite 12 years of right wing Tory (and coalition) government which have found all of them impossible to destroy.

New Labour fundamentally changed the constitution of the United Kingdom, by being an architect of the Belfast Agreement, and by supporting and drawing up devolution for Scotland and Wales (the latter passed by a tiny majority and was aggressively supported by Labour).

We still live in the strong echoes of New Labour which is why it can be difficult to appreciate just how radical and left-wing the administration was, but kids in 2050 will be writing essays about how important New Labour was above all over postwar governments in shaping how the UK (if it still exists) of 2070 looks and feels.

Particularly when there's currently nothing conservative about the Conservatives.

Quite. They have no ideology, they use the party as a vehicle to govern and that's about it.

 

[nw1]

Suella de vil (Braverman) taking over as Home Secretary. No thank you!

Why are they so obsessed in hiring hardline right-wingers for this role? Clearly no attempt whatsoever to appeal to the centre.

Ditto for Coffey as Health Minister, really?

Oh, the bad karaoke singer?

 

[JamesT]

Why are they so obsessed in hiring hardline right-wingers for this role? Clearly no attempt whatsoever to appeal to the centre.

I'm not sure where you'd define the 'centre' on law and order is, but generally the public seem quite happy with at least the appearance of being tough on crime. Certainly the calculation is whether they lose more votes from lefties than they gain from the right-wing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure where you'd define the 'centre' on law and order is, but generally the public seem quite happy with at least the appearance of being tough on crime. Certainly the calculation is whether they lose more votes from lefties than they gain from the right-wing.

I reckon if you looked at the views within society, there would be strong support for some right wing policies e.g. more policing, and for some left wing policies e.g. nationalising the railway, power generation etc. This fits with a view (which may have fed into Brexit, unfortunately, despite the EU not always* having to do with it) that the balance on some matters was better in the 1970s and 1980s, i.e. pre Thatcher. And on these basics I would certainly agree.

It is a bit odd that we need to choose left or right rather than being able to choose "pragmatism that will make people feel safe and have quality public services".

This is one reason I felt the Tory-LD coalition was the closest any UK Government in my lifetime has ever got to actually representing me, though it was by no means perfect, as it included both "wings".

* If taken literally some EU policies force a neoliberal line, but countries such as France seem quite capable of ignoring them, as should we have done.

 

[JamesT]

I reckon if you looked at the views within society, there would be strong support for some right wing policies e.g. more policing, and for some left wing policies e.g. nationalising the railway, power generation etc. This fits with a view (which may have fed into Brexit, unfortunately, despite the EU not always* having to do with it) that the balance on some matters was better in the 1970s and 1980s, i.e. pre Thatcher. And on these basics I would certainly agree.

It is a bit odd that we need to choose left or right rather than being able to choose "pragmatism that will make people feel safe and have quality public services".

This is one reason I felt the Tory-LD coalition was the closest any UK Government in my lifetime has ever got to actually representing me, though it was by no means perfect, as it included both "wings".

* If taken literally some EU policies force a neoliberal line, but countries such as France seem quite capable of ignoring them, as should we have done.

YouGov appear to have done a study into this a few years ago - https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...08/14/left-wing-vs-right-wing-its-complicated
People that identify as one wing often have some beliefs associated with the other.

 

[Senex]

YouGov appear to have done a study into this a few years ago - https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...08/14/left-wing-vs-right-wing-its-complicated
People that identify as one wing often have some beliefs associated with the other.

It's a fascinating study, and well worth reading, if only just for the way it shews how politicans and their PR advisers seek to over-simplify to a quite ridiculous extent a really very complicated picture. The two things the most caught my eye were the figure of just 19% for the people identifying themselves as centre and the paragraph on euthanasia: "The data also shows that supporting euthanasia – the political view Britons were most likely to see as neither left nor right – is also the most closely held bipartisan view, with 83% of left-wingers and 82% of right-wingers backing the right for doctors to end the life of consenting terminally ill patients." If anything demonstrated how absurdly out of touch their Lordships and the Commoners are, it's this one! (These comments from one would happily nationalise land and things like utilities and feels strongly republican but would also identify as pretty hard right on law-and-order and immighration matters. Where does that put me on the spectrum?)

 

[Grecian 1998]

The main period I was focusing on was the end of the 80s, the 90s and the 00s, and by a whole range of areas (including many you mention, such as increasing unacceptability of homophobia and racism), that period showed a clear progressive trend.

Worth pointing out that s.28 - forbidding the 'promotion' of homosexuality in schools, whatever that means - came into force in 1988. You could hardly call that progressive. Few long-standing Conservative MPs would suggest its repeal in 2003 was a mistake (though Robert Blackman seemed to in 2012).

I did once read a Guardian columnist (I forget who) suggesting that Tory MPs were campaigning to re-criminalise homosexuality in 1990, although I'm not sure how much of this was hyperbole - I've never heard of any serious campaign myself.

If you watch any football clips from the late 1980s you can clearly hear racist grunts aimed at away team players of a certain ethnic origin. Only the away team obviously. Not as persistent as it had been 5-10 years earlier perhaps but still very noticeable.

I'm not sure where you'd define the 'centre' on law and order is, but generally the public seem quite happy with at least the appearance of being tough on crime. Certainly the calculation is whether they lose more votes from lefties than they gain from the right-wing.

Home Secretaries always seem to feel the need to sound tough on crime in order to get good headlines. Jack Straw and David Blunkett come to mind. There is of course a difference between rhetoric and practice though.

 

[oldman]

It would be a mistake to conflate Things That Got Done by government fiat with true political radicalism.

That is a very odd argument. Government led by politician with radical political convictions does radical (and enduring) things in the economy but isn't truly radical. I suppose it makes sense if you don't think the economy matters, which is a luxury not everyone can afford.

Its main legacies of political correctness, surveillance culture, harm-policing and multiculturalism remain very much in evidence despite 12 years of right wing Tory (and coalition) government which have found all of them impossible to destroy.

Have they been trying to destroy these things, and would you like them to?

 

[TwoYellas]

I predict Truss will be the worst leader in all of (modern) human history. That's roughly 100,000 years!

 

[Gloster]

I predict Truss will be the worst leader in all of (modern) human history. That's roughly 100,000 years!

I fear that you are wrong. She will probably be the worst this decade, but by 2050, or even 2040, somebody worse will have got in. The whole system is on the slide.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I predict Truss will be the worst leader in all of (modern) human history. That's roughly 100,000 years!

Worse than Trump? Putin? Ramzan Kadyrov? Kim Il Sung? Idi Amin? General Galtieri? Hitler? Stalin? What on Earth do you think she's going to do?

 

[AlterEgo]

That is a very odd argument. Government led by politician with radical political convictions does radical (and enduring) things in the economy but isn't truly radical.

Not in the same way New Labour was, no.

I suppose it makes sense if you don't think the economy matters, which is a luxury not everyone can afford.

A bad faith reading to an in-depth argument, for sure - you don't seem to have any other point to make to my lengthy reply. You could for example point out New Labour continued in the vein of privatising things and deregulating industries if you wanted to show Thatcherism as an enduring radical political force, which is the sort of rebuttal I'd expect and could then continue a discussion about.

To repeat my argument for the third time, my position is that New Labour, unlike all other postwar governments, changed the political consensus in a way that one-dimensional policy radicalism by governments like Thatcher and Attlee's didn't.

Have they been trying to destroy these things, and would you like them to?

Yes they have, especially since the departure of Cameron, and whether I would like them to or not is immaterial to the crux of the argument, which you have failed to rebut in any meaningful way, instead attempting to my my position personal, suggesting I either "have the luxury" of not caring about the economy, or asking whether I would like to see New Labour's achievements dismantled.

For the record I'd certainly rather live under New Labour with all its attendant flaws than whatever mendacious, vacillating cloud of nefarious public schoolchildren we have now. Had I been old enough I would have voted for New Labour! This government is not radical at all and in fact has no real ideology, which is the most dangerous type of government to defend against.

 

[TwoYellas]

Worse than Trump? Putin? Ramzan Kadyrov? Kim Il Sung? Idi Amin? General Galtieri? Hitler? Stalin? What on Earth do you think she's going to do?

If her rhetoric is anything to go by - accelerate the race towards the end of human life as we know it.

 

[nw1]

Worse than Trump? Putin? Ramzan Kadyrov? Kim Il Sung? Idi Amin? General Galtieri? Hitler? Stalin? What on Earth do you think she's going to do?

While I would certainly agree about the others (no idea who Kadyrov is, though) is there a vast difference between Truss and the 2016 version of Trump, before he'd gone completely crazy?

Certainly the similarity between Truss and the 2016 Trump is, in my view, very much closer than the similarity between the 2016 Trump and the likes of Putin, Hitler, Stalin etc.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If her rhetoric is anything to go by - accelerate the race towards the end of human life as we know it.

How is she going to do that? (Bear in mind that, if by any chance you're referring to CO2 emissions, the UK currently contributes something like about 1% of global emissions, so not enough to make any significant global difference whatever the UK Government does) Or do you think she can bring about the end of human life in some other way?