19-year old leader says Tories and Lib Dems are toast

The 19-year old leader of Warwickshire County Council strode confidently on to the steps of Shire Hall this week and predicted that the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats were finished.

This seemed a slightly odd claim given that he had been elected leader in a 23-23 tied vote against a Liberal Democrat, the Reform chair of the council using his casting vote.

My confidence in his ability to lead the cash strapped council was not enhanced when he proposed spending £190k on special political assistants to come up with new ideas.   He said that council officials has not responded to a challenge to come up with fresh ideas, but their job is to implement the plans of the political leadership.   Evidently these do not exist.

In addition local councils are effectively agents for implementing existing legislation and government policies.  Thus, county councils may assess individual SEND cases differently, but they have to have an effective SEND policy - which costs a large part of their budget along with adult social care.

Leaving aside the fact that a general election is three or four years away (despite the predictions from the Goodwin Sands that Labour will somehow spontaneously combust), the Lib Dems seem to be holding their own in local by-elections while the record of Reform is patchy, losing some seats they have had to defend.

As for the Conservatives, their still have a brand.   At some point they will decide that Kemi Kaze is not the answer and will opt either to appeal to Reform voters and appoint Generic (who knows how to do a Tik Tok stunt) or decide to be a One Nation party again and elect James Not So Cleverley (whose appeal is that he is sold rather than clever).

Or they get Penny Mordaunt back and she could point both ways.   In any event they are not finished.

BTW, I have one thing in common with Councilllor Finch.   Anyone who can work out what it is will win a small prize (yet to be determined).

Why does the BBC platform Farage?

This has been puzzling me and others for some time.  It's counter intuitive: Reform in office would defund the BBC regardless of how much of a boost they try to give them now.

A focus group report noted that one comment was that the Lib Dems were 'invisible'.   No wonder: they have over 70 seats in the Commons, but get very little air time.   The Greens have as many MPs as Reform and more councillors but might as well not exist.

One BBC answer is that Reform are ahead in the polls.   I don't recall that being the criterion for coverage in the past.  If Reform fall back, will coverage also reduce?   I doubt it.

Another is that they are a news story.   Last night the BBC's news values were that the death of an American wrestler was more important than a major trade deal with India.    It will be interesting to see what sort of coverage the new 'Fruit and Nut' party (as yet unnamed) gets.

BBC commentators will no doubt claim that it is their job to hold the Government to account.  It's a shame they didn't  pursue some of the scandals under the Conservatives as vigorously.

Part of the answer is that many of the high ups at the BBC, not least hapless supremo Tim Davie. were Tory appointees.   Commentators like the 'weasel' Chris Mason and Tory Laura come across as closet Tories or at least they miss the tip offs they got under the Tories (add the rat Peston on ITV to that crew). Laura's attempts to score 'gothchas' are a pathetic substitute for television journalism.    Davie has even floated changing programme content to align it with the values of Reform voters.

Impartial broadcasting?   Sadly no.   When I did TV work (starting at age 13) I preferred Sky to the BBC because the latter was so obsessed with 'balance' that it killed the story.   Perhaps it was a necessary price.

Good old London town

It's open season on London from right-wing commentators writing from exile in Dubai or filling the pages of the Spectator.   Even The Economist had an editorial on 'The price of public decay' which starts by talking about London.

Robert Jenrick staged his YouTube stunt at Stratford underground station, drawing attention to the number of young (mostly) men evading their fares.

The blame for all this is placed at the door of the mayor Sadiq Kahn whose religious affiliation is well known and presumably should be down the underground challenging fare evaders or cleaning graffiti on the Bakerloo Line.

I travelled across London twice last week and encountered no problems at all, just seeing the vibrant, cosmopolitan city I have always known.  When I was growing up in the 1950s black and brown faces were far from unknown.   Some were students, but my mother's best friends recruited Jamaican immigrants for their small factory and they stayed with them all their working lives.

My youngest (admittedly no spring chicken) tells me she is spending the weekend in the capital and is looking forward to the shows, the parks, the musuems and the river (which used to smell terribly in the summer in the 1950s).

Of course, the epidemic of smart phone thefts is a problem, but London is not the only city to suffer from global organised crime.  Don't be put off enjoying what this world city has to offer.

Letters to a great-granddaughter (7)

In May my great-granddaughter came from Spain to England for my wedding.  The concept of a great-grandfather was difficult for her to grasp, but she was soon calling me 'grandad'.

In this post I have tried to summarise the various forces that threaten her future.   At my stage of life it is very easy to take a 'glass half empty' stance and I should emphasise that there are many positive opportunities ahead, not least in her adopted home.

I have not discussed the challenges in any particular order, but it is clearly that AI is one of the most potentially transformative.  The analogue world I knew has largely disappeared and the digital world is here.   

There has been a certain amount of negative hyperbole about AI with visions of humanoid robots more intelligent than us roaming the Earth.  Scare stories about a decline in entry level jobs due to AI were effectively knocked on the head by David Smith writing in The Times.   However, we may be nearer the 15 hour week envisaged a century or so ago by J M Keynes and that is going to require some disruptive changes in the economy and society.   There will also be many benefits in areas such as health care.

The strength of organised crime relative to the state is an area of concern.   In Haiti the gangs seem to be taking control; in Mexico it is a continuing battle; and it is a growing problem in France.   If your phone is stolen in London it is likely to enter a chain that will see it rapidly exported  by criminals, the same goes for high performance cars. In Spain corruption appears to be widespread.  The role of organised crime in illegal migration is there for all to see.   The state is increasingly seen as unable to protect its own citizens.

I have great respect for William Hague (I greatly enjoyed being shown round his beautiful garden in Wales by him while his wife took me round their superb library).  He recently stated that nuclear proliferation was the greatest threat we face.

How near Iran was to developing a useable nuclear device and how far any efforts in that direction have been disrupted is way above my pay grade.   However, if Iran got nuclear weapons (leaving aside the reaction of Israel) Saudi Arabia and Turkey and probably the Gulf States would want them as well.  As tensions between Tirrkey and Israel increase, Turkey may decide that it needs that capability anyway.

All the scientific evidence on climate change is tossed aside by know nothings and as a consequence we are not taking the measures we need to take quickly enough.   As a result we may have to focus on adaptation, butt that is going to be expensive.

Unfortunately, our political responses to these challenges are becoming less sophisticated.   One can understand the despair of young people struggling with the cost of living and seeing public services deteriorate.   Belief in the big money tree seems to persist and nostrums like a wealth tax are advanced despite the fact that they have not worked wherever they have been tried.

Populism on the right and to an extent on the left (the proposed Fruit and Nut Party) is flourishing, although there have been one or two setbacks as in Australia and Canada.  Frustrated voters are attracted to 'none of the above' alternatives and simple solutions to complex problems.

I still believe in the need for evidence, expertise and effective policies.   In a society that is increasingly fragmented we need proportional representation, ideally STV, but constitutional tinkering will not be  enough.

But as Shakespeare said, our doubts are traitors.   We have to believe that better times are possible, however tough the road ahead.

The bureaucratic maze of the Economic Crime Act

If there is one generalisation I would extract from the political science literature, it is that it is no good passing legislation without considering issues of implementation and enforcement.   How much will the legislation cost to put into effect?   Will it impose time and money costs on actors outside government?

It is very tempting to act as a legislative factory: I well remember sitting in on the last few days of a California state legislature cycle and seeing a blizzard of bills passed, some of them contradictory and others devoid of any real content.   The EU is sometimes at risk of being a legislative factory, particularly as it is largely reliant on member states to implement and their willingness and capacity to do so varies considerably (even before we begin to consider the issue of corruption).

I do not think that company directors and even shareholders have taken fulyl on board the implications of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023.  Indeed, two company directors of a property management company I spoke to had never heard of it.

Let me try and briefly describe my 'journey' with this legislation.   I am the (unpaid) director of a niche publishing company.   Fortunately we have an on the ball company secretary who alerted us to this legislation.

Essentially it is intended to combat the use of corporate arrangements in the UK for illicit and illegal purposes.

I then tried to comply online and was unsuccessful despite providing my passport number, home address etc.. So much for Tony Blair's assertion that everything can be digitised.  In the meantime our company secretary had contacted Companies House (the enforcement body).  It took about an hour to speak to a human and it is evident that they were overwhelmed.

I was advised to go to Warwick Post Office with a print out sent to me online and my passport.  Having managed to find a parking place in Warwick, I was told that the QR code had not printed successfully. A fellow director was told in London that there was a fault with the chip on her passport.

With a deadline looming, I decided to have a second attempt at Warwick Post Office, this time using the bus.  Driver S Gonzalez gave me a whirlwind tour of the extensive Warwick suburbs and industrial estates.

Once again my QR code was rejected, but a kind lady took pity on me, used my passport to generate a new code and then took my photograph.  I was verified as a bona fide UK citizen!

Much to my surprise I then got a letter from a heritage railway company in which I have shares.  They stated that they were now required to keep a full record of all their (many) shareholders.   Fortunately they provided a disclosure form I could scan and send back, but they did warn me that failure to provide the required information 'was a criminal offence'.

I am quite busy so the time spent on this was an unintended consequence of the legislation and many of those affected have clearly not heard about it.

I should caution that I am not a lawyer and you may need to seek legal advice if you are affected by this legislation.  

The magic money tree is back

One of the unfortunate consequences of the restoration of winter fuel payments is that voters' faith in the magic money tree has been restored.   Shake it hard enough and it will deliver!

Pensioners, of course, are much more likely to vote and those over 55 voting exceeded those under 55 at the last general election.    

The Government has suffered political pain for little fiscal gain.  Ironically, although I will be (rightly) taxed on the payment I receive, my partner will receive it tax free.

The policy change encouraged more pensioners to apply for pension credit which is a good if unintended outcome but it reduces the fiscal benefits even further.

Why did the Government do it?   I think they were genuinely spooked by the state they found the public finances in and thought this would be a current financial year win.

It also means that no one is likely to challenge the triple lock although it has delivered pensions £800 higher than they would otherwise be because of the earnings link.

Its defenders will say that state pensions are lower in the UK than elsewhere in Europe, but private pensions are higher.   Not everyone has them, but that is why we have pension credit.

This policy change will encourage backbench Labour MPs to demand retreats on benefit payments and qualifications which means that it will be difficult to avoid tax rises in the autumn.

Two big challenges for the Chancellor

Those who admire David Smith's balanced and sensible assessments of the British economy are spoilt for choice in the Sunday Times this morning as he has two articles.

One points to the increasing cost of financing government debt as coupons on gilt edged stock increase.  Part of this is the result of the uncertainty created by Donald Trump's policies with interest on US Treasuries also rising.

However, UK gilt edged interest rates are also higher than in comparable economies.   Like the US we are running a twin deficit: on our spending and on our balance of payments.

More generally, Smith draws attention to the political reluctance to rein in public spending.   (My words) UK taxpayers continue to think that they can have American levels of taxes and Nordic standards of public services.   As for soaking the rich, the top one per cent already pay nearly one third of income tax receipts.

If I had been Chancellor, I would not have scrapped the winter fuel allowance, although I would have made it taxable for the one million or so pensioners who (like me) are higher rate taxpayers.   I would also have ended the emergency 5p Ukraine war cut in fuel duty introduced by Rishi Sunak.

Reeves is now hemmed in by Labour's election pledge not to increase the three main sources of tax revenue while welfare benefits continue to increase.  She is also hamstrung by her fiscal rules: breaking them could provoke a market panic.

I dislike the 'Rachel from accounts' misogyny from the right-wing press, but she has just two more chances to get it right: the impending spending review and the autumn budget.

The popularity of populism

The picture is really rather mixed.   Canada returned a centrist internationalist as its prime minister, although the margin wasn't large and hotheads in Alberta are talking of seceding.

Rather unusually Australia elected a left of centre government for a second term, rejecting the hard right opposition.  Now Romania has chosen a centrist liberal president over a hard right choice.

But then in Portugal far right Chega has broken the two party duopoly to become the second largest party in the legislature.     In the Netherlamds and Austria far right parties have received the largest share of the vote in the last two years.  They are also strong in Germany, Belgium, Sweden and Finland.   Italy offers an example of right-wing pragmatism, while the picture in France is currently confused with the Republicans choosing the hard right interior minister as leader.

In the UK Reform made substantial gains in the local government elections, albeit on low turnouts and focused on certain parts of the country.   However, it was enough to encourage right-wing newspapers to big up Nigel Farage as the next prime minister, not to forget the platform he is given by the BBC.

In my own ward the Liberal Democrats swept home with nearly 2,000 votes with every other party getting a few hundred each.   Reform got 370.

I know only one lady who backs Reform.   Somewhat paradoxically, she volunteers in a Global South charity shop.   However, she complains that going to the shop she hears people speaking other than English.

I don't generally eavesdrop on conversations as I walk along the street.   I doubt whether most foreign speakers are abusing me, but if they are saying 'Look at that fat, stupid Gammon' I wouldn't understand anyway.

The available evidence suggests that there is a hard core of Reform voters who also voted for UKIP, the Brexit Party and Leave in the referendum.   Typically, they are older working class white males living in deprived areas.   Thus Reform made big inroads in North Warwickshire, but made little headway in the south of the county.

However, it is evident that Reform also attracted some younger voters and more women than in the past.  In many ways this was a 'none of the above' vote.   There is plenty of evidence of failing public services and a lack of confidence in the mainstream parties to fix these problems, albeit it seems a bit hard to expect Labour to fix problems in ten months that have built up over 14 years.

More specifically, Reform have filled an unoccupied space in an increasingly complex political spectrum: conservative on social issues, especially immigration, but leaning left on standard economic issues, e.g., public ownership of public utilities and 'national champions'.   It was a space the remnants of the Social Democrats such as Rod Liddle - but they lacked a charismatic, high profile leader.

Anyway one can't predict 2029 general election results from 2025 local elections, although Nick Clegg may have a point when he says that the Lib Dems could face another coalition challenge.

Letters to a great-granddaughter (6)

My great-granddaughter currently lives in Spain with her mother and grandparents.  Spain has its own housing crisis, as evidenced in recent demonstrations and measures taken by the government.

However, today I want to focus on the UK and Generation Rent.  I am going to start with a fictionalised case of a couple who are distant relatives by marriage of my great-granddaughter.   They are in their mid-twenties and are both qualified to postgraduate level.  Consequently they have relatively well paid jobs, bur are subject to a 'graduate tax' of 9 per cent which eats into their disposable income.

For work reasons they live in the London outer commuter belt, although they work locally.  However, the area itself is very prosperous with many well-paid employment opportunities.   They are paying £1,500 a month rent for a two bedroom property.   They are relatively fortunate in that they have some funds for a deposit, but it may not be enough in the expensive local market.

Many graduates are finding it difficult to find jobs that reflect their qualifications and various reports I have seen indicate that the 'graduate premium' is probably decreasing.   Many graduates are living at home with parents while they seek suitable work.

In Germany, the AFD appears to have won some support from younger people who are disgruntled because their standard of living is below that of their parents.   This was particularly the case in the former DDR, but also applies to some industrial areas in the west.

Reform in the UK draws a lot of its support from Brexit voters who have supported other hard right parties such as UKIP in the past.   In particular, it is popular with older white males.   Of course, in time, this support base will naturally decline.  However, there are indications that Reform is making headway with younger males in particular.

I would like to give some stylised facts from family history about the changing housing market.   Go back to the 1921 census and my maternal grandfather, having lost his good wartime job in the defence industry, was renting privately and taking in lodgers to make ends meet.   My paternal grandfather was shortly to move into some of the first social housing provided by the Co-op.

In the late 1930s, my parents and all my uncles were in skilled manual or junior non-manual occupations.  They were all able to get mortgages to purchase terraced modern properties aimed at people like them.   One uncle who had a small business was able to pay cash for a semi-detached property.   There was effectively no planning system which did produce some sprawl and inefficient use of land.

When I got my first post in 1971 I was fortunate enough to be given rent free accommodation with all utilities and local tax covered.   In three years I was able to save enough for a substantial deposit on a flat.  The only problem I had was that I was single, having broken up with my then girl friend, and the Halifax was reluctant to lend to me, but I got an insurance broker to intervene on my behalf.  Following my marriage in 1978, we were able to purchase a large Victorian terrace needing some TLC for £16,250.   I still live there.

Clearly today's twenty somethings face a much tougher environment.   The ratio between incomes and house prices has exploded.   The Government is trying to increase supply by facing down Nimbys and freeing up planning permission, but the construction industry has shortages of skilled labour.   It is going to take time to turn things round and in the meantime it is easy to blame migrants.

Letters to a great-granddaugher (5)

I sent a card today to Spain for my great-granddaughter's 2nd birthday.   It is three weeks away, but the time post takes to reach rural Spain is unpredictable.   I am looking forward to seeing her when I get married in May.

I think that parenting is much more difficult today than in the analogue world of the 1970s and 1980s.  Social media poses challenges for parents that I didn't have to deal with and my great-granddaughter will live in a world in which AI will probably rule supreme.   Like all technologies, it has benefits and disadvantages, but it will be challenging to regulate effectively.

I also think that a lot more is expected today of parents in terms of intervening in the lives of their children.  My approach was rather laissez-faire, 'whatever'.   There were scrapes along the way, but that is unavoidable with teenagers.   It's also easier to deal with them when you are relatively young yourself which is why I was pleased when my granddaughter had her daughter at the age of 22.

Unfortunately, though, I was still hard at work when my grandchildren were growing up which meant I wasn't able to give them as much time as I would have liked.  

One threat in the modern world that I haven't really been able to deal with (I am not a criminologist) is the rise of global criminal organizations.   Of course, they have been around for a long time but one increasingly sees them challenging the power of the state in Mexico and increasingly in France, for example.

I am not convinced that drugs policies that focus on the supply side rather than demand really work, but lifting prohibition has its many risks.  However, is cannabis really more dangerous than alcohol?  Interesting that the younger generation consumes much less alcohol, but zero or law alcohol beers have improved considerably.

All these challenges demand better political leadership and the trend towards populist authoritarian regimes is worrying and will be the subject of my last letter.

Voters do believe in the big money tree

A survey published in the Financial Times ahead of the Spring Statement is rather concerning as it shows that many voters do believe in the big money tree: https://www.ft.com/content/1581a348-41b4-4a01-b900-b7310522794e (unfortunately it is behind a pay wall, although some universities have access).

As Rob Ford of Manchester University, it shows that voters have a 'cake and eat it' approach to tax and spending.  It has long been observed that British voters want Scandinavian levels of public services and American levels of taxes.   The result is public debt at 100 per cent of GDP and a £20 billion a year bill just to service that debt.

47 per cent of voters believe that it is possible for government to reduce taxes and debt while increasing spending.  This suggests an alarming level of economic illiteracy.

What is more alarming is that younger voters are more inclined to believe this is possible: 63 per cent of 18-24 year olds and 62 per cent of 25 to 24 year olds.   The figure for those over 65 is 35 per cent as against 50 per cent who this is not possible.

What this suggests is an increasingly ungovernable country whoever is in office as voter expectations clash with economic reality.   Inflation would be one partial way out but has all sorts of economic and social costs.

Labour's fiscal dilemma

A distinguished group of economists has written to the Financial Times advising against further spending cuts and any return to austerity: https://www.ft.com/content/4b0d4ec3-cfb8-44fa-93a6-4474866dc917

They advise that further taxation is going to be necessary, but beyond stating that it should fall 'on the broadest shoulders' do not specify where it might come from.

Meanwhile a discussion on BlueSky showed Labour supporters disillusioned with what they saw as a Labour government offering more effective implementation of Tory policies.

Some argue that the fiscal rules should be abandoned, referring to what has happened in Germany.  However, that country's ratio of debt to GDP is in the low sixties in percentage terms whereas in the UK it is not far short of 100 per cent.   Abandoning the fiscal rules would certainly force up the cost of government borrowing.

The cost of benefits has risen by something like 40 per cent in real terms since 2013 and is projected to rise further despite recent policy changes: harsh on the most vulnerable or tinkering at the edges, depending on your perspective.

Labour has to exert some fiscal discipline, otherwise the cost of the welfare state will become unsustainable.  Clearly many of those unable to work need more systematic support to enable them to do so.

The left's answer is a wealth tax but the Government has no mandate for that, it would deter investment in the UK and the really wealthy would find ways of evading it.

Personally I would have increased fuel duty, a small increase would have yielded significant revenue and would have been bearable.  I would also have reversed Jeremy Hunt's unfunded cuts in employees national insurance, but Labour boxed itself in before the election.

Labour faces some difficult choices, but a large majority means rebellions will be embarrassing rather than fatal.

Letters to a great-granddaughter (4)

Measures to combat climate change are being opposed by right-wing populists everywhere, not least in the United States.  Admittedly, China continues to build coal fired power stations, but it is also investing heavily in renewables.

Opponents of climate change policies either argue that it is not happening at all or that it is not the result of human activity but is part of a normal long-run weather cycle.

I don't have the time, space or knowledge to thoroughly review the evidence, but recent reports suggest that the recommended 1.5 degree increase in global temperatures is already being exceeded. 

However, let me just feature one study published in the reputable journal Nature yesterday which suggests that the melting of glaciers is accelerating alarmingly with the equivalent of three Olympic swimming pools being lost each second.

These losses can be seen as a canary in the coal mine with implications for the melting of the ice sheets in Greenland and the Antarctic which would lead to a rise in global sea levels affecting vulnerable islands and coastal areas (not to mention flood defences in the River Thames).

What we are also seeing is an increase in the incidence of extreme weather incidents, notably floods.  These had a devastating effect close to my great-granddaughter's home in the Valencia region of Spain.

Admittedly, some of the policy responses to global warming have been defective.   Investing in heat pumps is of little use if houses are not properly insulated.   The UK has the oldest housing stock in Europe and as someone who lives in a 150 year old house, I know how difficult and expensive it is to exclude draughts.

For me carbon capture is still an unproven technology which requires further development to establish that it offers a long-term solution rather than a quick fix.

I also think that some of the direct action taken by climate change activists is counter productive.  Disrupting people's lives does not persuade them of the case for effective policy.

Some young people think that climate change is a real threat to their survival.  If unchecked, it is going to cause some very serious problems and the chances of effective international cooperation are not good.    Firms like BP are under shareholder pressure to invest in fossil fuels rather than renewables.

Recent international developments persuade me that nuclear war is a greater and more proximate threat. Without the US defence umbrella, and its own conventional land forces beset with challenges, Europe might be tempted to resort to a nuclear response to an invasion of its territory.   But the 515 or so nuclear weapons possessed by Britain and France are strategic and they lack the tactical weapons possessed by the United States and Russia.  These are worrying enough, but they are a stage short of all out escalatio.

In defence of 'Rachel from accounts'

The media love to campaign against a particular minister and bring them down to demonstrate their power.  Tulip Siddiq, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, is in their sights at the moment.  KemiKaze has called for Starmer to dismiss her. She has reported herself for investigation and in any case is a minor prize.

The major target is Rachel Reeves with the right-wing media gleefully reporting that she will be out of a job in a year. Quite a bit of this commentary is misogynistic, not least from buffoon Boris Johnson whio likes to call her 'Rachel from Accounts'.   

As she is lockstep with Keir Starmer, he is the real target.   There have been allegations online that a prominent British commentator is colluding with Elon Musk to find ways of bringing down a legitimately elected government.  I didn't hear so many complaints about the first past the post system when the referendum to make a modest reform of ir was voted down.

There have been a few missteps.   Limiting the winter fuel allowance was the right decision but too politically costly for the sums saved.   It was not a measure targeted on those who needed it: last year I had to spend time and effort researching energy charities to give away the money I had received as a higher rate taxpayer.

As for the employers' national insurance surcharge, I am surprised that larger companies with substantial profits such as retailers cannot absorb it.   As for smaller business, to judge by the town I live in, the hospitality industry has substantial structural overcapacity.   Business has not made any constructive suggestions about how the fiscal gap might otherwise be filled.

Reeves is alleged to have 'fled' to Beijing on a prearranged visit because of some turmoil in the gilts markets which was evident in the equivalents in France and Germany.   The real issue here is concern about the impact of the Trump presidency on the US economy with tariffs stoking inflation and hence affecting the willingness of the Federal Reserve to reduce interest rates which in turn has global impacts.

Comparisons with the IMF intervention in 1976 are invalid.   In ant case, the subsequent literature shows that the extent and depth of the problem then was exaggerated, but played into the hands of those who wanted to cut public expenditure.

David Smith in the Sunday Times today offers a balanced, informed and proportionate analysis of recent events.  He points out that although the pound has weakened against a strong dollar, although less so against the euro.   He comments: 'Comparisons with the autumn of 2022, when Liz Truss was prime minister and there was a loss of control of fiscal policy, are silly. Although gilt yields are higher now than then, they are close to the level of short-term official interest rates, the 4.75 per cent Bank rate.'

What we need to do, as Smith urges, is to focus on the underlying causes of our present problems: weak economic growth and very weak productivity.   I agree, but these problems predate the arrival of Rachel from Accounts.  

Farmers voted Tory after all

After many declaring that they were fed up with the Conservatives, the majority of farmers stayed close to their traditional allegiance and voted for the Tories in the 2024 general elecion after all, according to a survey conducted by Farmers Weekly.  (N = 767, 'strong spread by region and farm type', but owner-occupiers may be over represented. Self-selected sample).

Prospective voting surveys showed farmer support for the Conservatives decline from 72 per cent in 2020 to just over 40 per cent in 2024 before the general election.

In the event 57 per cent voted Conservative, while 15 per cent opted for Reform.   Despite the success of the Liberal Democrats in rural constituencies, only 8 per cent voted for them.  4 per cent voted for other (probably mainly the Plaid and the Scottish Nationalists).   Just 4 per cent voted for Labour with the balance made up by non voters and 'prefer not to say'.