UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[Geoffrey Howe]

Didn't see anyone point it out but only MLAs and MPs actually have a vote in the leadership election. Another rule which could potentially change states that the leader must be an MLA.

They would surely want an MLA as leader because the First Minister would need to be there.  The co-option system means it's easy enough to get someone into the Assembly, but double jobbing is banned, so anyone who's current an MP would have to resign their Westminster seat at the same time.

As well as Poots, Robinson and Donaldson, the Guardian mentions Sammy Wilson, MP for East Antrim, as a possible candidate.  I have an image of him as a bit of a backwoodsman...

Born and raised in Belfast and went to a fairly posh private school there. He's not rustic, just painfully, painfully stupid.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Somehow I had never come across this from our PM:

[Geoffrey Howe]

Somehow I had never come across this from our PM:

So, has he freed Great Britain from the yoke of wearing an onion around their necks?  Or was it just the fashion of the day?

Believe you me, Boris is doing his utmost to free us from the Brussels bureaucratic supermarkets. It’s about time the opposition stopped complaining and talking down Britain!    

[Geoffrey Howe]

Does anybody have any estimate/idea/guesses of how much higher the % of people voting via postal votes is going to be in these locals?

I keep seeing people say ignore the polls because 'everyone' is on a postal vote... which seems to ignore the fact that I haven't seen any numbers & I only received mine towards the end of last week!

I know a family who for some reason all did postal votes in the London mayoral election. I doubt they ever used to. I should imagine it'll be higher.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Today has made me realise just how much more interesting I find British election results than American ones.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Interesting analysis from Matthew Parris. Effectively, he says, the levelling-up agenda will not work. In the short term, the Tories will keep on winning because they will compensate for that by going further on 'culture war' type issues. But this will come at the cost of educated, wealthier, entrepreneurial voters. Likewise for the country: the North will not succeed even with free ports and lots of cash, but focusing on it at the expense of places like London, Cambridge, Thames Valley may bring those places down - precisely the places that generate the wealth and keep Britain somewhat dynamic.

https://epaper.thetimes.co.uk/the-times/20210508/282200833794287

[Geoffrey Howe]

The Daily Express seems to be the mouthpiece of Boris Johnson. I have not seen a single critical headline from them. By contrast, the Daily Mail is quite anti-lockdown.

It's usually the Daily Mail which has massive quotes from Priti Patel on the front page; today it's the Sunday Express: 'And Priti Patel says 'we're coming after the criminals''.

(I don't read these 'newspapers;' I get their headlines from the BBC.)

[Geoffrey Howe]

The Daily Express seems to be the mouthpiece of Boris Johnson. I have not seen a single critical headline from them. By contrast, the Daily Mail is quite anti-lockdown.

They were also the mouthpiece of Theresa May (to a lesser degree, mind). The Daily Express website is one of the most awful news websites you could find, unless you like reading about yesterday's episode of The Chase, in which case you are exactly its core readership.

Did they deride Red Ed's idea to cap energy prices and then laud Theresa May doing it?
They endorsed UKIP in 2015. They're definitely the worst of the major 'newspapers.'

[Geoffrey Howe]

The Daily Express seems to be the mouthpiece of Boris Johnson. I have not seen a single critical headline from them. By contrast, the Daily Mail is quite anti-lockdown.

It's usually the Daily Mail which has massive quotes from Priti Patel on the front page; today it's the Sunday Express: 'And Priti Patel says 'we're coming after the criminals''.

(I don't read these 'newspapers'; I get their headlines from the BBC.)

Surprisingly the Torygraph (which I subscribe to) has lost its love for Boris since the last election.  Probably because he and Farage no longer write columns for them.  Instead they cheerlead Starmer's fight against "Trots".

Did you like Charles Moore's article yesterday?

[Geoffrey Howe]

The Daily Express seems to be the mouthpiece of Boris Johnson. I have not seen a single critical headline from them. By contrast, the Daily Mail is quite anti-lockdown.

It's usually the Daily Mail which has massive quotes from Priti Patel on the front page; today it's the Sunday Express: 'And Priti Patel says 'we're coming after the criminals''.

(I don't read these 'newspapers'; I get their headlines from the BBC.)

Surprisingly the Torygraph (which I subscribe to) has lost its love for Boris since the last election.  Probably because he and Farage no longer write columns for them.  Instead they cheerlead Starmer's fight against "Trots".

Did you like Charles Moore's article yesterday?

Rather!

The first paragraph sums up what I think of Labour.  Like Thatcher (pbuh) I have a soft spot for Labour.

However I disagree With Baron Moore that Labour is on its deathbead.

Matthew Parris seems to think (and hope) Labour is on its deathbed.

[Geoffrey Howe]

The Times is pretty bad nowadays.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Maybe journalists are amongst those AI said need a holiday.

[Geoffrey Howe]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/09/scots-independence-union-nationalism

I have some sympathy for Boris' views on this, but, as I said on the Scottish election page, he is the wrong man to keep the union together. I do fear.

(By the way, should there be a separate Scottish general page, or should it be appended to the Scottish election page?)

[Geoffrey Howe]

What are the chances Mr Sunak finds just before the election that the recovery is so good he doesn't need to implement any tax rises?

[Geoffrey Howe]

As for Batley, there is a much smaller Brexit Party vote for the Tories to gain, but it still seems quite possible to me.

[Geoffrey Howe]

On a separate note, there’s an interesting article in The Spectator about what is likely to become an important political issue (and divide Northern and Southern Tories?) - selling homes for social care.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/selling-the-family-home-to-pay-for-care-is-not-an-injustice

It reminded of the farrago in 2017 when Mrs May unveiled her policy to make some pay by selling their homes only to U-turn a few days later. Ken Clarke said it was the only sensible policy proposed in the entire campaign.

[Geoffrey Howe]

New poll has Tories+13 and says they would expand their majority.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1393606260822585351

If we don't have many problems caused by the 'Indian variant,' I can imagine this being the case for much of the summer as we open up. Frankly, however, I do not think it worth much time predicting beyond that; after all, we do not know what Mr Sunak will do in the aftermath of COVID, and it must be remembered what we were thinking in December. Things are changing rather quickly.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Furthermore there is growing frustration within the party at Johnson's embrace of all the green crap that the left normally promotes.  This could become a problem too.

Eh? What has he done?

[Geoffrey Howe]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57176858

Rail to come under unified state control. There will be private contracting though.

When will the Tory right get fed up?

[Geoffrey Howe]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57176858

Rail to come under unified state control. There will be private contracting though.

When will the Tory right get fed up?

I personally don't care but I'm sure somebody somewhere will.

A little bit sad to see the GWR name will be dropped but hopefully they will keep the branding despite the actual organisation disappearing.

I think Great British Railways is a good name.

In honour of Michael 'choo-choo' Portillo?

The Adam Smith Institute seem to care about it...

In all seriousness, their articles on it are quite interesting.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Here are two interesting articles. I'm sure it's more complicated than they make out, but the figures are striking.

First of all, much of the reason ticket prices are higher than in Europe is that less of it is subsidised; i.e. we expect commuters to pay a greater share of the ticket.

In 1995, when privatisation came in, rail usage was half of what it was in 1913. In twenty years that gap was made up, with rising customer satisfaction (around 85% in 2013). This has coincided with, well, little rise in motoring costs, lower GDP growth than before, much greater comparative growth in rail usage than other European countries, lower government funding, some of the lowest accident rates in Europe (lower than France, Denmark, Germany etc.), no decline in freight along the lines, and much of the rise not driven by London.

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/planning-transport/nationalising-the-trains-wont-solve-this-problem/
https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/regulation-industry/what-would-we-consider-a-successful-railway-system/

[Geoffrey Howe]

David Cameron claims he earnt more money as a lobbyist than as PM. A lot of these problems might be solved if we paid PMs anything near what they might earn if they weren't in politics.

[Geoffrey Howe]

FWIW the Adam Smith institute kind of have to put up some sort of rear-guard against rail nationalisation of any form but it's worth pointing out that a lot has changed even since 2015- when those articles were written.

The fundamental reason why the Government did what it did last week was because the state has for the last 10 years been propping up expensive & poorly ran train services at huge cost to the treasury because the franchise system is so broken, and when it does break the Government have to take over running the service.

It's not about a single issue like would nationalisation lower train fares- it's about the Government wanting to be able to actually have some control over a private network that we spend billions supporting in the subsidy alone.

David Cameron claims he earnt more money as a lobbyist than as PM. A lot of these problems might be solved if we paid PMs anything near what they might earn if they weren't in politics.

This is because a lobbyist who is an ex-prime minister is going to earn a lot more than a former parliamentary bag carrier or a graduate- someone like Cameron is hired for a reason. No matter how well you pay them while they're in office they will eventually leave...  

It's also rather charitable to Johnson who called his £250,000 telegraph fee 'chicken-feed'; he is a man who has a problem with money because of his own personal choices.

About the railways - sure, and I haven't seen any articles from them published since 2018. If the Tories are 'nationalising' something there's probably a good reason.
I'm not defending Boris' personal life, I'm just saying that we would be in a better position if we paid people like the PM more - after all, many people who go into politics could be earning much, much more elsewhere. There is always enormous public opposition to this - which was effectively the cause for the expenses scandal; from what I understand they were encouraged to do this as a way of earning more. Interestingly, during the late 1970s pay policy farrago when many professions were getting double digit percentage pay rises, MPs were the only group not to get any pay rise.

[Geoffrey Howe]

What's happened, sorry?

A furore over their coverage of Nadia Whittome, mostly on Twitter unfortunately, but hopefully it puts pressure on the BBC not to give them the airtime. A shame that that GB News outfit has employed some of their former staff.

Is this Andrew Neil’s thing?

[Geoffrey Howe]

Hancock & co are only there because Boris doesn't want anyone to overshadow him - he wants a Cabinet of yes-men.