The Conservative Party

Mr Kobayashi said:
It was never necessary. Not even a year or two.
Click to expand...
I would agree with that but I can understand the thinking that may have been behind it happening for a year or so. There was no excuse for it going on longer.

Having said that it's now clear that it was never done for economic reasons and was purely ideological, otherwise they would changed course after a year or so.
 
west didsblue said:
I would agree with that but I can understand the thinking that may have been behind it happening for a year or so. There was no excuse for it going on longer.

Having said that it's now clear that it was never done for economic reasons and was purely ideological, otherwise they would changed course after a year or so.
Click to expand...

Osborne did change course in 2013, he planned to cut further but financial situation turned on him because of the effects of austerity.

It’s a junk idea based on junk economics and has been debunked many times.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Osborne did change course in 2013, he planned to cut further but financial situation turned on him because of the effects of austerity.

It’s a junk idea based on junk economics and has been debunked many times.
Click to expand...
Although it was Tory ideology, the Lib Dems have a lot to answer for for enabling it just to get a taste of power.
 
Gaudion M said:
Indeed.

The FT today has a breakdown of the cost of different elements so you have the impact to hand when the news drops. The whispers are it will be today maybe tomorrow.

Given two ministers have been wheeled out yesterday and this morning to deny it - we are in crazy times.
Click to expand...
Gilts are rallying on the expectation of an imminent coup, not a budget u-turn.

A budget u-turn would just be Truss trying to save her own neck, rather than any genuine shift in policy. The fact that senior ministers have until this morning been downplaying the prospect of any backtracking suggests that the fallout from her disastrous performance in front of her MPs last night is the catalyst here.

But it’s too late for her now. And if she’s devoid of any authority within the party, why would Tory MPs want her sticking around anyway?

She’ll never be viewed as competent after the events of the past week, the polls suggest that she simply isn’t likeable, she hasn’t an ounce of charisma and she can’t even give a good speech or show any kind of gumption in the commons. Keeping her around will only make matters worse given what’s happening to mortgage rates, so they can’t even keep her in place to soak up some of the bad news either.
 
Brewster's millions said:
But it’s too late for her now. And if she’s devoid of any authority within the party, why would Tory MPs want her sticking around anyway?
Click to expand...
This is indeed what they have been wrestling with.

The majority of MPs did not want her. Even with almost full support of the right wing press where she was the inevitable winner with members she scraped 2nd with MPs. So we know the backbenchers don't like her or want her as PM.

It seems they are going to try to basically drive from the back seat and ensure all her policy going forward is tempered by back benches having a say. This would get them through but cause huge internal conflict over time. All of her big policy commitments would be out of the window. She could even do a BJ and start sacking MPs - she would of course go down guns blazing.

Or they just pull the plug now and think we cant go on like this we need a new leader that has a chance and maybe if we do it now 2 years is enough to go into the next GE with some order restored.

2 very bad options - if you are a tory.
 
Gaudion M said:
This is indeed what they have been wrestling with.

The majority of MPs did not want her. Even with almost full support of the right wing press where she was the inevitable winner with members she scraped 2nd with MPs. So we know the backbenchers don't like her or want her as PM.

It seems they are going to try to basically drive from the back seat and ensure all her policy going forward is tempered by back benches having a say. This would get them through but cause huge internal conflict over time. All of her big policy commitments would be out of the window. She could even do a BJ and start sacking MPs - she would of course go down guns blazing.

Or they just pull the plug now and think we cant go on like this we need a new leader that has a chance and maybe if we do it now 2 years is enough to go into the next GE with some order restored.

2 very bad options - if you are a tory.
Click to expand...

If they had any sense they would ditch her and Kwarteng and hope that the new team could make improvements in those 2 years - lets face it this is the bottom of the barrel so I'd imagine the only way is up.

Biggest issue they have with that is that I doubt the country will just allow them to change leader after leader via the means of a members only bun fight so they will probably have to go to the electorate to get a mandate to govern
 
bluethrunthru said:
If they had any sense they would ditch her and Kwarteng and hope that the new team could make improvements in those 2 years - lets face it this is the bottom of the barrel so I'd imagine the only way is up.

Biggest issue they have with that is that I doubt the country will just allow them to change leader after leader via the means of a members only bun fight so they will probably have to go to the electorate to get a mandate to govern
Click to expand...
I think the option they would look at is a process where the MPs just pick the leader (as per T May). On the basis the members just voted in a car crash leader they could justify it. My understanding is that the 1922 have full control over the system so can do what they want.

But you would need almost full support of the plan and the proposed successor. You are not going to get that and if you do it with people wavering and complaining it could go disastrously wrong. Its a big risk to assume a PM selected by tory MPs in a back room would have any authority. But then they have a PM with zero authority now so its a debate worth having. The upside is they have a decent leader and have 2 years to claw back. Or the party just breaks up wile in office and they break into factions and lose a confidence vote.
 
bluethrunthru said:
If they had any sense they would ditch her and Kwarteng and hope that the new team could make improvements in those 2 years - lets face it this is the bottom of the barrel so I'd imagine the only way is up.

Biggest issue they have with that is that I doubt the country will just allow them to change leader after leader via the means of a members only bun fight so they will probably have to go to the electorate to get a mandate to govern
Click to expand...

If they don't do something it will probably be curtains for the Conservative party brand.

Hopefully that happens anyway, they are a vile anachronistic political party that represents the interests of an ever dwindling proportion of the population.
 
Gaudion M said:
I think the option they would look at is a process where the MPs just pick the leader (as per T May). On the basis the members just voted in a car crash leader they could justify it. My understanding is that the 1922 have full control over the system so can do what they want.

But you would need almost full support of the plan and the proposed successor. You are not going to get that and if you do it with people wavering and complaining it could go disastrously wrong. Its a big risk to assume a PM selected by tory MPs in a back room would have any authority. But then they have a PM with zero authority now so its a debate worth having. The upside is they have a decent leader and have 2 years to claw back. Or the party just breaks up wile in office and they break into factions and lose a confidence vote.
Click to expand...
Who's this decent leader that they could have. The decent Tories have long since gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top