Conservative Party of the UK Leadership Election, 2022

[Joe Republic]

I forget if I made this point already, but if Truss wins this, she'll have the dubious honor of winning despite going into the final membership vote with the lowest ever share of MPs' votes.  Even IDS won a slightly bigger share (but still less than a third) of MPs before managing to pull off a decisive win from the membership.  His trouble after that was having to constantly watch his own back throughout his brief leadership, until it was finally stabbed.  So my piping hot take here is that Liz will be constantly watching hers too for the next two or so years.

[Blair]

Well that’s the end of Rishi.

[JimJamUK]

I presume Blair is referring to this… 😳

https://twitter.com/rewearmouth/status/1555475661917421568?s=21&t=9Je1d0KLYM...

[Tintrlvr]

Is it just that they're not allowed to say the quiet part out loud? Because that statement is surely Tory 101.

[Oryxslayer]

Is it just that they're not allowed to say the quiet part out loud? Because that statement is surely Tory 101.

Yes, and while it may not damn him eternally in this contest, winning the hypothetic next one will be more more difficult. Those marginal seats in the 'red wall' certainly don't like getting shafted. Like this is just another side effect of the Tories not having an idea why the 'red wall' and 'blue wall' are behaving as they are presently (which is in turn a side effect of lingering in govt), combined with a membership electorate that does not exactly reflect these future marginals.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's... remarkable how many people are sharing this video.

[rc18]

Is it just that they're not allowed to say the quiet part out loud? Because that statement is surely Tory 101.

Yes, an while it may not damn his eternally in this contest, winning the next one will be more more difficult. Those marginal seats in the 'red wall' certainly don't like getting shafted. Like this is just another side effect of the Tories not having an idea why the 'red wall' and 'blue wall' are behaving as they are presently (which is in turn a side effect of lingering in govt), combined with a membership electorate that does not exactly reflect these future marginals.

He is talking about Blair-era channelling of funds into very inner-city areas, primarily in London. These continue to be places where Labour weighs votes. This has nothing to do with Red Wall seats.

The so-called Red Wall seats aren't inner-city urban areas that had money thrown at them by Blair. They tend to be peripheral suburban sinkhole estates which were ignored in the Blair years. That's why C2DE participation in elections cratered during and after the Blair era, only to make a slight comeback during the EU referendum.

Nobody in the Red Wall is going to be complaining about all that money they never got in the first place being taken away by Rishi. They tend to resent those inner city areas just as much as the bankers of Tunbridge Wells.

The Left doesn't understand the Red Wall, that's why they left you.

[Blair]

Is it just that they're not allowed to say the quiet part out loud? Because that statement is surely Tory 101.

Yes, an while it may not damn his eternally in this contest, winning the next one will be more more difficult. Those marginal seats in the 'red wall' certainly don't like getting shafted. Like this is just another side effect of the Tories not having an idea why the 'red wall' and 'blue wall' are behaving as they are presently (which is in turn a side effect of lingering in govt), combined with a membership electorate that does not exactly reflect these future marginals.

He is talking about Blair-era channelling of funds into very inner-city areas, primarily in London. These continue to be places where Labour weighs votes. This has nothing to do with Red Wall seats.

The so-called Red Wall seats aren't inner-city urban areas that had money thrown at them by Blair. They tend to be peripheral suburban sinkhole estates which were ignored in the Blair years. That's why C2DE participation in elections cratered during and after the Blair era, only to make a slight comeback during the EU referendum.

Nobody in the Red Wall is going to be complaining about all that money they never got in the first place being taken away by Rishi. They tend to resent those inner city areas just as much as the bankers of Tunbridge Wells.

The Left doesn't understand the Red Wall, that's why they left you.

I'm sorry but I'm not sure this is right.

The fund he introduced as Chancellor was the towns fund. This was talked about & sold as the flagship levelling up fund.

The real point which is very obvious by where his audience is located is that the new funds that were bought in by the post-2019 Conservatives were sold to the public as being about levelling up e.g helping areas with historically bad outcomes.

Yet the funds in reality where written & delivered in a way that ensured that a large amount of funding went to affluent seats (often those with Conservative Ministers) to use- take a look at the brownfield release fund for just one example. I mean places like Tonbridge would not be high on the list when you think of areas needing to access a towns fund- but he is boasting that the rules were rewritten to benefit affluent seats!

If he was saying to a red wall association in say Darlington or Redcar 'I changed the treasury rules to get funding into areas based on regional inequalities' it would be make sense! But no he isn't doing this- he is telling a southern association 'don't worry, we talked about levelling up, but who was the one who kept the tap running?'

Don't take my word for it- the Public Accounts Committee did a very good report which revealed that the funding criteria was only made after they received the bids which would suggest some reverse engineering no?

Or perhaps Jake Berry, the Conservative MP.

https://twitter.com/JakeBerry/status/1555507873395970049

It also makes no sense for him to claim that the funding provisions he inherited were some sort of 'evil New Labour inner city dogma' when they had been the same funding provisions used by the Treasury under George Osborne & Philip Hammond.

[IceAgeComing]

Also they've been in office for twelve years; at some point you can't simply blame the previous administration for all the problems that you could have mitigated

[Zinneke]

It's... remarkable how many people are sharing this video.

The British public collectively want this to be a Leadsom moment so this horrific leadership contest ends?

[rc18]

Is it just that they're not allowed to say the quiet part out loud? Because that statement is surely Tory 101.

Yes, an while it may not damn his eternally in this contest, winning the next one will be more more difficult. Those marginal seats in the 'red wall' certainly don't like getting shafted. Like this is just another side effect of the Tories not having an idea why the 'red wall' and 'blue wall' are behaving as they are presently (which is in turn a side effect of lingering in govt), combined with a membership electorate that does not exactly reflect these future marginals.

He is talking about Blair-era channelling of funds into very inner-city areas, primarily in London. These continue to be places where Labour weighs votes. This has nothing to do with Red Wall seats.

The so-called Red Wall seats aren't inner-city urban areas that had money thrown at them by Blair. They tend to be peripheral suburban sinkhole estates which were ignored in the Blair years. That's why C2DE participation in elections cratered during and after the Blair era, only to make a slight comeback during the EU referendum.

Nobody in the Red Wall is going to be complaining about all that money they never got in the first place being taken away by Rishi. They tend to resent those inner city areas just as much as the bankers of Tunbridge Wells.

The Left doesn't understand the Red Wall, that's why they left you.

I'm sorry but I'm not sure this is right.

The fund he introduced as Chancellor was the towns fund. This was talked about & sold as the flagship levelling up fund.

The real point which is very obvious by where his audience is located is that the new funds that were bought in by the post-2019 Conservatives were sold to the public as being about levelling up e.g helping areas with historically bad outcomes.

Yet the funds in reality where written & delivered in a way that ensured that a large amount of funding went to affluent seats (often those with Conservative Ministers) to use- take a look at the brownfield release fund for just one example. I mean places like Tonbridge would not be high on the list when you think of areas needing to access a towns fund- but he is boasting that the rules were rewritten to benefit affluent seats!

If he was saying to a red wall association in say Darlington or Redcar 'I changed the treasury rules to get funding into areas based on regional inequalities' it would be make sense! But no he isn't doing this- he is telling a southern association 'don't worry, we talked about levelling up, but who was the one who kept the tap running?'

Don't take my word for it- the Public Accounts Committee did a very good report which revealed that the funding criteria was only made after they received the bids which would suggest some reverse engineering no?

LOL. I'm glad you edited the first line to be a bit less certain...

He literally says;

"...we inherited a bunch of formulas from the Labour party that shoved all the funding into deprived urban areas..."

So yes he is definitely talking about Blair/Brown era funding for inner cities. It's got nothing to do with the red wall which was ignored during this time and contributed to its changed political allegiance we now see.

For the rest of your point, which isn't really a rebuttal but more "But the Tories aren't helping the red wall!", I'm not saying the Tories (and especially Sunak) are committed to levelling up the red wall. Personally I'm no fan of Sunak, but his comments are not related to the red wall and post-referendum 'levelling up'. The red wall and inner city Labour strongholds are two completely different places, it is the lefty twitterati that confuses them. I guess largely because for people on the left the only deprived parts of the country are particular inner city estates, everyone else is 'rich' regardless of reality.

It also makes no sense for him to claim that the funding provisions he inherited were some sort of 'evil New Labour inner city dogma' when they had been the same funding provisions used by the Treasury under George Osborne & Philip Hammond.

It makes plenty of sense if you are a Tory member in Tunbridge Wells, who may feel not enough was done to overturn these parts of Blair-era policy earlier. You aren't the audience.

[Blair]

Yes I thought it was a bit combative & rude to say that I thought you were wrong so I edited it.

[Continential]

Out of curiosity, what does "levelling up" even mean?

[rc18]

Out of curiosity, what does "levelling up" even mean?

No idea, but if you find out can you tell the politicians?

If you ask local councils it's building "arts centres", 'cos that's what all their middle class pals want. If you ask Labour its shoving more money at their client voters in the inner cities. If you ask the Tories it's promising money to the northern oiks for some white elephant scheme, and then studiously cutting the funds when no one is looking.

Of course none of which is actually helping anyone who needs it, because no one with any power cares to understand what the problems actually are in the first place. And as I keep banging on about, we can't even agree who it is we're actually meant to be 'levelling up', let alone what needs to be done.

[Torrain]

Out of curiosity, what does "levelling up" even mean?

It's a sloganeering way to infer that the Government will try and minimise regional inequality in funding and investment between the different regions and countries of the UK. London and its satellites gets a disproportionate amount of cash, and the North of England, along with the non-English constituent countries are supposed to be redressed by the policy.

It was part of Johnson's successful outreach to Leave-voting Labour seats in the post-industrial parts of the North. Whether it had any real impact on the election, or whether it was subservient to the impact of Brexit and Corbyn, are unclear.

But either way, a significant portion of Tory MPs were elected on that manifesto, with slim majorities. They've kept fighting for it, in group like the Northern Research Group, aware that their political survival is likely dependent on increases in local spending and investment. It's also potentially a lifeline for vulnerable Welsh and Scottish Conservatives (although unlikely to save most of the really marginal ones).

[JimJamUK]

To add to the discussion, polling from a while ago found that most people have absolutely no idea what ‘levelling up’ specifically means or even is. I suspect more important was the fact that the Conservatives seemed the most bothered about the ‘left behind’ (or whatever term you want to use) than they had been for ages/ever and Boris seemed willing to spend money and get on with doing things that they’d like, such as Brexit.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He is talking about Blair-era channelling of funds into very inner-city areas, primarily in London. These continue to be places where Labour weighs votes. This has nothing to do with Red Wall seats.

The so-called Red Wall seats aren't inner-city urban areas that had money thrown at them by Blair. They tend to be peripheral suburban sinkhole estates which were ignored in the Blair years. That's why C2DE participation in elections cratered during and after the Blair era, only to make a slight comeback during the EU referendum.

What utter nonsense. New Labour positively threw money at postindustrial towns and at peripheral estates, every bit as much as it did to the inner cities. Masses of money were spent (and spent well! There's a reason why most of these places are comparatively average in their labour market and earnings profiles these days) on rebuilding functional local economies* and integrating those into wider regional economies in the former, masses amounts of money were spent on refurbishing the housing stock (many large suburban estates are physically unrecognisable compared to twenty five years ago: in particular there are far fewer system-built tower blocks around), amenities and public services in the latter. The inner cities were, it is true, especially favoured in terms of education spending, but that is because the state of the education system in our inner cities by the late 1990s was a humiliating national disgrace. Everyone, as one American influence on New Labour once noted, is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

_{*Especially through employment in the public sector. This was very much a victim of post 2010 Austerity but that doesn't mean that it never happened.}

[Joe Republic]

My understanding of the Department for Levelling Up is that it was the new name for the Department of Social Affairs and Citizenship?

[Cassius]

My understanding of the Department for Levelling Up is that it was the new name for the Department of Social Affairs and Citizenship?

There’s an excellent comedy just waiting to be written about a Department for Levelling Up, that’s for sure.

[Joe Republic]

My understanding of the Department for Levelling Up is that it was the new name for the Department of Social Affairs and Citizenship?

There’s an excellent comedy just waiting to be written about a Department for Levelling Up, that’s for sure.

Now I think of it, the show would be better handled by the Twenty Twelve / W1A people.  The real life name of the Department sounds like it was created by Jessica Hynes' character.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

New Labour, if anything, had a far shakier hold on city cores than postindustrial areas - they lost control (or majorities) of Birmingham, Sheffield, Cardif, Leeds, Liverpool, Newcastle,  Swansea, Edinburgh , Bristol and a suite of inner London boroughs during the Blair years.

[Blair]

New Labour, if anything, had a far shakier hold on city cores than postindustrial areas - they lost control (or majorities) of Birmingham, Sheffield, Cardif, Leeds, Liverpool, Newcastle,  Swansea, Edinburgh , Bristol and a suite of inner London boroughs during the Blair years.

Yeah I mean it's remarkable looking back at various London boroughs; to take just one example in 2006 Labour lost their majority in Lewisham-a borough where the party now holds every single seat.

[CumbrianLefty]

Sunak's team now starting to respond to the incredibly tin eared Truss "no help except tax cuts for the better off" approach to the coming storm.

Could it yet turn things around, at least to some extent?

Even the well off boomers who form their core voters (and members) aren't going to escape the next year unscathed if nothing is done.

[JimJamUK]

Sunak's team now starting to respond to the incredibly tin eared Truss "no help except tax cuts for the better off" approach to the coming storm.

Even the well off boomers who form their core voters (and members) aren't going to escape the next year unscathed if nothing is done.

The fact that a large proportion of Conservative members/voters are pensioners and therefore will get little to no benefit from work related tax cuts should probably be more front of mind for Truss/Sunak.

[GoTfan]

My understanding of the Department for Levelling Up is that it was the new name for the Department of Social Affairs and Citizenship?

There’s an excellent comedy just waiting to be written about a Department for Levelling Up, that’s for sure.

Somehow, Peter Mannion would be a better choice for leader than Liz or Rishi.