advertisement


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

I didn't think there was anyone left on Earth who believed Tory commitments about, well, anything, but it appears I was wrong,

(Unless you were joking of course, in which case, haha).
Quite. We will protect the NHS. Until it’s no longer possible to protect it. It’s the single largest item of government expenditure by a huge margin and a dripping roast that has the IEA, Tax Payers Alliance, Dan Hannan, Crispin & Friends and their American backers engorged.

Meanwhile conference off to a great start in the host city-

RjBSE8r.jpg




Apologies for any offence…
 
  • Like
Reactions: PsB
Worried Tory MPs in red wall seats had better cross the floor if they want to stay on the gravy train. It could all come crashing down quite quickly if someone triggers an exodus.
 
With nurses and GPS already leaving the NHS in droves, this government has already broken its promise to protect the NHS.

The promise was very specific. 20 hospitals upgraded and 40 new ones built, a £33.9bn budget increase. What I expect will happen is that the health service infrastructure , management and delivery will involve more and more private enterprise, like in education.
 
The '40 new ones built' was a lie, and was exposed as such almost as soon as it was uttered.

https://fullfact.org/health/48-new-hospitals/

'In its 2019 manifesto, the Conservative Party pledged to build 40 new hospitals across the country. Since then, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has variously claimed that the government is building “48 new hospitals” or “40 new hospitals” by 2030, but this has been a matter of contention.

It is correct that the government is funding a large number of building projects for hospitals around the country, however there is some debate over whether these projects really constitute “new hospitals”.'

The majority of the projects are either replacements for existing hospitals, new wings or buildings for existing hospitals, or refurbishments.
 
Quite. We will protect the NHS. Until it’s no longer possible to protect it. It’s the single largest item of government expenditure by a huge margin and a dripping roast that has the IEA, Tax Payers Alliance, Dan Hannan, Crispin & Friends and their American backers engorged.

Meanwhile conference off to a great start in the host city-

RjBSE8r.jpg




Apologies for any offence…

I enjoyed the article that highlighted the three previous occasions he'd slagged off Birmingham on Twitter. No doubt he was angry and tweeted without thinking then too.

It's odd really because from his profile pic he doesn't look like your stereotypical Young Conservative.

Ah well, I imagine he'll be in the cabinet by Thursday.
 
That assumes pragmatic, cynical cunning harnessed to some sort of a plan. The other possibilities involve some combination of sheer incompetence, arrogance and corruption. The beauty of this crew is that none of these possibilities have to be mutually exclusive.

It's interesting because it's a case of people (Truss, Kwartung) whose actions are hard to make sense of from the outside. It's easy to say that she's a bit mad (arrogance to the point of madness, toxic incompetence) but as other people have said, when you consider these people as a whole, that sort of explanation, though possible and very conceivable, is maybe slightly surprising. Kwartung especially has had an impressive career and though we all know that anyone can go off the rails and slip into irrationality, it surely shouldn't be the first line of explanation.

A more charitable approach would be to reconstruct a rational line of thought governing what they do. One which minimises falsehoods and fallacies, and is coherent and consistent. And in all fairness to Truss, she's given us lots of clues during her election campaign. They've both even written a book about it (which I haven't read.)

Re Kwarteng's "budget" and the resultant market reaction, they were, of course, aware that the markets could react like they did, it was no doubt a scenario they had planned for. I believe they will take it in their stride. We are, I think, being softened up for some severe austerity measures, maybe more means testing for some benefits which are currently universal, for example, and tighter rules about unemployment benefit and income support. To get it into perspective, they have only to show that they are a safe pair of hands, make up for £45bn of tax cuts and develop a believable plan for growth. I expect they can do that by changes to UK welfare rules, more Public/Private partnerships, massive de-regulation and moving the furniture around.
 
We can say what we want about Truss and kwartung but the conservatives voted them in the position they are. Mind you the choice was pretty low.
 
To get it into perspective, they have only to show that they are a safe pair of hands, make up for £45bn of tax cuts and develop a believable plan for growth. I expect they can do that by changes to UK welfare rules, more Public/Private partnerships, massive de-regulation and moving the furniture around.

'"Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."'
 
It's interesting because it's a case of people (Truss, Kwartung) whose actions are hard to make sense of from the outside. It's easy to say that she's a bit mad (arrogance to the point of madness, toxic incompetence) but as other people have said, when you consider these people as a whole, that sort of explanation, though possible and very conceivable, is maybe slightly surprising. Kwartung especially has had an impressive career and though we all know that anyone can go off the rails and slip into irrationality, it surely shouldn't be the first line of explanation.

A more charitable approach would be to reconstruct a rational line of thought governing what they do. One which minimises falsehoods and fallacies, and is coherent and consistent. And in all fairness to Truss, she's given us lots of clues during her election campaign. They've both even written a book about it (which I haven't read.)

Re Kwarteng's "budget" and the resultant market reaction, they were, of course, aware that the markets could react like they did, it was no doubt a scenario they had planned for. I believe they will take it in their stride. We are, I think, being softened up for some severe austerity measures, maybe more means testing for some benefits which are currently universal, for example, and tighter rules about unemployment benefit and income support. To get it into perspective, they have only to show that they are a safe pair of hands, make up for £45bn of tax cuts and develop a believable plan for growth. I expect they can do that by changes to UK welfare rules, more Public/Private partnerships, massive de-regulation and moving the furniture around.
I agree with your point about not assuming madness in people we disagree with, but I'm not sure which aspects of Kwarteng's career you consider impressive. While he's made it to Chancellor and is obviously a bright bloke with a good memory and a high class education that consolidated his sense of his own brilliance, I'm not sure that his career as a journalist, historian or financial analyst was particularly distinguished. I haven't seen his book on colonialism, but the bits of Britannia Unchained I read were very underwhelming.

The problem with that is that if we assume these are clever, high level leaders and experienced people, their actions become even harder to understand let alone defend. Kwarteng is not a banker or an economist (crunching numbers at JP Morgan does not make you a banker, writing a book on 17th century economic history does not make you an economist, etc.) yet his first actions were to dismiss experienced staff at the Treasury and refuse to listen to the advice of others. They have blocked publication of this advice, contrary to the norms established by their predecessors for valid reasons. If, as you say, they were aware of what they were unleashing and of the possible consequences of their actions, the least one would expect from a competent minister would be to have a set of contingency plans (B, C, D etc.) and countermeasures to implement the moment things start to go pear-shaped. There hasn't been much sign of that.
 
I expect they can do that by changes to UK welfare rules, more Public/Private partnerships, massive de-regulation and moving the furniture around.

Yes, I fear this is our future, be it with the Blues or The Reds in charge.
 
If, as you say, they were aware of what they were unleashing and of the possible consequences of their actions, the least one would expect from a competent minister would be to have a set of contingency plans (B, C, D etc.) and countermeasures to implement the moment things start to go pear-shaped. There hasn't been much sign of that.



There's an expression that new MDs use when they come into the underperforming business and change things, and people flounce and resign. They say "you can't make an omelette without cracking eggs." Or they say, "No pain no gain."

That's what Truss is saying. And that's her way of dealing with the pear shape. Of course, the BoE have done other things, and we're told that Kwartung has been on the phone to them every day.

They've hit the ground running. Were they precipitous? Should they have bided their time, waited until Nov 23 before doing anything other than supporting households and business with some energy subsidies? Possibly.
 
I agree with your point about not assuming madness in people we disagree with, but I'm not sure which aspects of Kwarteng's career you consider impressive. While he's made it to Chancellor and is obviously a bright bloke with a good memory and a high class education that consolidated his sense of his own brilliance, I'm not sure that his career as a journalist, historian or financial analyst was particularly distinguished. I haven't seen his book on colonialism, but the bits of Britannia Unchained I read were very underwhelming.

The problem with that is that if we assume these are clever, high level leaders and experienced people, their actions become even harder to understand let alone defend. Kwarteng is not a banker or an economist (crunching numbers at JP Morgan does not make you a banker, writing a book on 17th century economic history does not make you an economist, etc.) yet his first actions were to dismiss experienced staff at the Treasury and refuse to listen to the advice of others. They have blocked publication of this advice, contrary to the norms established by their predecessors for valid reasons. If, as you say, they were aware of what they were unleashing and of the possible consequences of their actions, the least one would expect from a competent minister would be to have a set of contingency plans (B, C, D etc.) and countermeasures to implement the moment things start to go pear-shaped. There hasn't been much sign of that.
I fear that Mandryka is correct in that we make a big error in ascribing economic woes to individuals. ISTM we live in a system dominated by a synthesis between monetarism and what Adam Tooze calla a prim concern for inequality. That demure concern leaves the holy trinity of deregulation, privatisation and spending cuts in control of the top table.

The market reacted to Truss and Kwarteng sticking two fingers up to their prim concerns, but business will return to normal soon enough and mainstream economists will ensure Milton Friedman’s troika rumbles on unhindered by individual incompetence.

It is the system that is dominant and strong enough to absorb the stupidity of particular people.
 
There's an expression that new MDs use when they come into the underperforming business and change things, and people flounce and resign. They say "you can't make an omelette without cracking eggs." Or they say, "No pain no gain."

But they don't just say that. They also explain their plan and how and why the painful and damaging decisions were necessary.
 
There's an expression that new MDs use when they come into the underperforming business and change things, and people flounce and resign. They say "you can't make an omelette without cracking eggs." Or they say, "No pain no gain."

That's what Truss is saying. And that's her way of dealing with the pear shape. Of course, the BoE have done other things, and we're told that Kwartung has been on the phone to them every day.

They've hit the ground running.
After several decades in business I have heard all those expressions before. They were always used by dull people that took over under-performing businesses, proceeded to asset-strip them and then turned them into dead businesses. I've never heard a skilled turn around expert use them.
 


advertisement


Back
Top