The Premiership of Mary Elizabeth Truss.Sept 2022 - Oct 2022

[Cav]

Johnson won't be back as he's no longer a net electoral asset for the Tories. That is why he was defenestrated.

Give Truss 12 months and they will be all calling for Boris again.

 

[sideshowbob]

Hence I am now on board with coalitions of the non-arseholes and then electoral reform as the main priority. Indeed given what has happened in the US and places like Hungary, Turkey and Poland and I always surprised when people don't all agree that this is not only the most important thing but essentially the only thing that matters.

Exactly this. It really is the central question of this time. Everything else is subordinate to the defence of basic democratic norms, which we are very close to losing in a frightening number of countries.

 

[matthewr]

Johnson won't be back as he's no longer a net electoral asset for the Tories. That is why he was defenestrated.

I don't think this could be more wrong.

-- Until proven otherwise, their new coalition (Red Wall + populist right) basically is him.

-- The people who are willing to vote for Johnson already have zero problems with things like principles.

-- The main thing Tories and the Tory party care about is power (and using that power to maintain and protect their advantage). Their first thought is always "What do we need to do to win this election?".

 

[TheDecameron]

The Conservatives: Saving Britain for 12 Years.

 

[Seanm]

I think their support has shifted demographically for all the well discussed reasons but this new Trumpist populism is still a minority view. Which is why they fear PR more than they used to because it could lock them out of power because they have moved out of the ground where other mainstream parties would go into government with them. They are too far gone now even for whatever is left of Orange Book Lib Dems (haha!).

I also think they have a problem in that a lot of this has been Johnson related. Indeed we saw the same thing in London where the "bloke off the TV with the funny hair" thing realigned those politics as well primarily by driving turnout in unlikely places as much as anything else. I don't see any danger of them finding another Johnson any time soon -- which is almost certainly why he is coming back and the question is really before or after the election.

Which is also why I have shifted on PR. I was generally not a fan until recent years where the Tories are getting into the early days of Trump territory. Which is why the prorogation and gerrymandering things were so big -- it was the LOOK OUT! moment and we avoided the start of the descent only because our courts are actually still ok. But we would be foolish if we didn't note this and think about how we are going to make sure that crypto-fascist Tory party can't get back in and have another go which might well succeed.

Hence I am no on board with coalitions of the non-arseholes and then electoral reform as the main priority. Indeed given what has happened in the US and places like Hungary, Turkey and Poland and I always surprised when people don't all agree that this is not only the most important thing but essentially the only thing that matters.

I’m all for electoral reform although I wouldn’t expect it to do much unless it’s accompanied by deeper constitutional reform. I have mixed feelings about a coalition of non-arseholes because I think under the circumstances it could quite easily backfire and make things worse. It would be an admission that none of the participants is capable of offering a politics with any real popular appeal and it would make explicit what many already feel to be the case, which is that there is little to choose between any of these people and all the argy-bargy is just for show. That would tend to affirm the authenticity of the Tories' popular support as well as their anti-establishment credentials, by making the dividing line in British politics one between the Conservative Party and an alliance of unpleasant management geeks. When the whole set-up is already seen as a sham, and incapable of dealing with real and urgent problems, that could be quite dangerous.

I'm also not prepared to concede that the people who would be participating in this coalition are not, themselves, arseholes. I think they're self-interested, incompetent and detached from reality. I think they themselves identify much more closely with the Conservatives than they do the people they're supposed to represent. I think they and their media wing would frame the coalition as a return to common sense, grown up politics and a demonstration of their own brilliance, in a way that would piss off just about everyone, and that they would govern in a very disappointing way.

Anyway I don't think it should be necessary: Labour can win by themselves if they just don't f_ everything up. Then they can disappoint on their own terms.

 

[notaclue]

Steve Baker also get a Nothern Ireland gig. https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1567551639921246210

It's an ERG takeover. Truss playing fully to the right-wing gallery.

I'm sure they'll do all the crowd pleasers. Too many Papists on the Continent. 'No surrender' to the EU. Etc.

Baker might also say a prayer or two to right-wing Jesus to revoke the ban on sausage imports.

 

[kensalriser]

I don't think this could be more wrong.

-- Until proven otherwise, their new coalition (Red Wall + populist right) basically is him.

-- The people who are willing to vote for Johnson already have zero problems with things like principles.

-- The main thing Tories and the Tory party care about is power (and using that power to maintain and protect their advantage). Their first thought is always "What do we need to do to win this election?".

I agree with all your bullet points, but peak Johnson is very much in the past and there can't be any doubt that many who did vote for him would not do so again. Read the second part of your third point: if Tory MPs thought Johnson was their best chance at the next election he'd still be in post.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/boris-johnson-approval-rating

 

[davidsrsb]

If you translate the 2019 results into a PR system, nobody would have a majority. So the Lib Dems could form a coalition with the Tories or Labour. Labour might be able to count on the Green 1.6%, but the Tories would get UKIP's 1.8%. In any case, you would need a coalition to run the country, and coalition governments are fragile, with measures often being vetoed by a party, even a tiny one, that could threaten to bring the whole coalition down. You put together a few parties as "50.3% for the centre-left," even assuming they would all tamely join a Labour-led coalition. But you could equally put the Lib Dems with the Tories, add UKIP and Brexit Party, and say "53.6" for the centre-right.

Both Labour and the Tories would probably fragment into at least two smaller parties in a PR system, so a consensus centre is easier to assemble

 

[TheDecameron]

Steve Baker also get a Nothern Ireland gig. https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1567551639921246210

It's an ERG takeover. Truss playing fully to the right-wing gallery.

I'm sure they'll do all the crowd pleasers. Too many Papists on the Continent. 'No surrender' to the EU. Etc.

Baker might also say a prayer or two to right-wing Jesus to revoke the ban on sausage imports.

Another right wing religious fundamentalist- exactly what the people of Northern Ireland need right now.

 

[PaulMB]

Both Labour and the Tories would probably fragment into at least two smaller parties in a PR system, so a consensus centre is easier to assemble

I agree about the fragmentation, and it would be interesting to see how a "consensus centre" looks and works. It could be a new dawn or a new disaster, with the "charismatic leaders" of each faction jockeying for position rather than running the country.

 

[SteveS1]

For Labour to win, they will need the Tories to lose some seats where Labour can't win. It's important to prevent the arseholes from ever getting large seat majorities on minority votes and that will require voting reform. Labour have squandered many opportunities to do that and it shouldn't, but it will, require a coalition to deliver that.

I can also see both major parties fragmenting to some extent with the demise of FPTP which is presumably why they have proved reluctant to deal with it.

 

[ks.234]

I guess the wrong ideology (ring-fencing excessive corporate profits in an energy crisis/war) trumps no discernible perspective at all. I have to admit I was surprised she survived given how fundamentally stupid her argument, but when the opposition are as useless as they are spineless anything goes.

Yes, her argument is stupid, but neither Labour or the LD’s have a better one. Further, there is no alternative argument that gets anywhere near informing the matrimonial discussion. Our elections are constrained by FPTP, but our politics is constrained by TINA.

On the topic of PR, if it is important, why hasn’t it had it’s own thread on pfm yet? Surely if there is to be any progress on PR, there has to be some consensus on what it would look like, otherwise PR will die just as it did in the AV fiasco of 2011

 

[The Far North]

Glad that the US has confirmed its position on Northern Ireland from the outset. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ver-efforts-to-undo-northern-ireland-protocol

“There’s no formal linkage on trade talks between the US and the UK and the Northern Ireland protocol, as we have said, but efforts to undo the Northern Ireland protocol would not create a conducive environment, and that’s basically where we are in the dialogue,” Jean-Pierre said.

“Not conducive to a trade deal” is the administration’s established position on British threats, spearheaded by Truss, to pass legislation negating part of the Northern Ireland protocol.

 

[matthewr]

Read the second part of your third point: if Tory MPs thought Johnson was their best chance at the next election he'd still be in post.

They do of course hold different views on this over time as the Express covers shown above indicate.

 

[TheDecameron]

Mary Liz looks to getting John Bull’s gorge to rise

Glad that the US has confirmed its position on Northern Ireland from the outset. https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ver-efforts-to-undo-northern-ireland-protocol

We should get a clearer picture of the U.K. position in coming days but placing an anti-European Brexit hardliner and religious fundamentalist in the Northern Ireland office has obviously sent a signal and that signal has been received in Belfast, Washington and Brussels. The calculus for Truss is how much damage to international relations and the peace in N.Ireland is she prepared to accept to appease the Brexit voters in England?

 

[Tony L]

On the topic of PR, if it is important, why hasn’t it had it’s own thread on pfm yet? Surely if there is to be any progress on PR, there has to be some consensus on what it would look like, otherwise PR will die just as it did in the AV fiasco of 2011

It (or the lack of democracy we currently experience) is relevant to so many aspects of our politics it crops up on most political threads now, and certainly not only from me.

I’m actually very curious to see what happens at the Labour Party conference this year as whilst the PLP are clearly Stockholm Syndrome-suffering prisoners of a Tory establishment there is a huge groundswell in the trade unions and at the younger grassroots level. So much activity on Twitter etc. Even moderate mainstream figures like Andy Burnham and some in the PLP are championing it. It seems to be gaining real traction and as someone who has been arguing/voting for it for about 45 years now I can’t recall any other time it has had the prominence and trajectory it has now. If the unions can be persuaded to hold finance from Labour until they back electoral reform we might just get them on board.

PS Whilst I’m very positive about it I do believe the opportunity we have now needs to be taken fast. If Labour blow it the Tories will push ahead with their Republican-style gerrymandering and voter-suppression tactics very forcefully. The ‘Elections Bill’ was a very clear statement of intent and will disenfranchise a lot of young or poor voters.

 

[matthewr]

It would be an admission that none of the participants is capable of offering a politics with any real popular appeal

Anyway I don't think it should be necessary: Labour can win by themselves if they just don't f_ everything up.

Which was broadly my view on PR until recently when the modern right emerged into politics in multiple places at once.

by making the dividing line in British politics one between the Conservative Party and an alliance of unpleasant management geeks. When the whole set-up is already seen as a sham, and incapable of dealing with real and urgent problems, that could be quite dangerous.

I am not suggesting that we make this the dividing line but that we exclude the new populist right from power have the dividing line between the current centrist and progressive parties. I do sometimes wonder if there was the same debate in Poland and Hungary.

I'm also not prepared to concede that the people who would be participating in this coalition are not, themselves, arseholes. I think they're self-interested, incompetent and detached from reality. I think they themselves identify much more closely with the Conservatives than they do the people they're supposed to represent.

Which was also the view when Trump came along, not least on PFM, and what started me on this change of view.

 

[ks.234]

It (or the lack of democracy we currently experience) is relevant to so many aspects of our politics it crops up on most political threads now, and certainly not only from me.

I’m actually very curious to see what happens at the Labour Party conference this year as whilst the PLP are clearly Stockholm Syndrome-suffering prisoners of a Tory establishment there is a huge groundswell in the trade unions and at the younger grassroots level. So much activity on Twitter etc. Even moderate mainstream figures like Andy Burnham and some in the PLP are championing it. It seems to be gaining real traction and as someone who has been arguing/voting for it for about 45 years now I can’t recall any other time it has had the prominence and trajectory it has now. If the unions can be persuaded to hold finance from Labour until they back electoral reform we might just get them on board.

PS Whilst I’m very positive about it I do believe the opportunity we have now needs to be taken fast. If Labour blow it the Tories will push ahead with their Republican-style gerrymandering and voter-suppression tactics very forcefully. The ‘Elections Bill’ was a very clear statement of intent and will disenfranchise a lot of young or poor voters.

But the question has to be, what form of PR? Even if Labour passes a motion to adopt PR, (and if Starmer decides not to override that conference motion by for example saying that conference is only sovereign while it is sitting) the next question will be what sort of PR? In that complexity the Tory press will sow confusion and doubt which will be compounded when the Lib Dems, Greens and Labour all champion different flavours of PR.

Saying we need PR is like saying we need politics. The key question is what sort of politics. What is missing from the discussion of PR is what sort? If there is no discussion about what sort, then it will wither in between conflicting headlines.

 

[ks.234]

Which was broadly my view on PR until recently when the modern right emerged into politics in multiple places at once.

The modern right has emerged in multiple places at once only because the political landscape is neoliberal, because mainstream economists are neoliberal, and because neoliberal assumptions dominate mainstream political outlooks and thinking. The modern right is mainstream, it is orthodoxy.

Constitutional change did not bring about neoliberalism, so it will not solve it. The real problem is in the political ideology that has become orthodox, PR will not tackle political ideology. It might dilute it if there is sufficient willingness to challenge orthodoxy, but then again, if there isn’t, it might just entrench it further.

 

[Tony L]

Saying we need PR is like saying we need politics. The key question is what sort of politics. What is missing from the discussion of PR is what sort? If there is no discussion about what sort, then it will wither in between conflicting headlines.

We first need to get to the point of dialogue. For the past 45 years Labour have been the stumbling block, they have fully supported a system designed to return Tories to absolute power for the vast majority of the time in a minority voteshare. All the other non-Tory parties have grasped the system is flawed and stacked. The actual format of PR is very much up for debate, but we can’t even start that debate as long as Labour remain handcuffed to a radiator in the Tories FPTP basement praising their captor. Labour are the issue. They are the blockage.