I’ve held my tongue so far on the Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas spectacle of the Conservative Leadership selection; think bags of truth-altering drugs and disjoint snarling faces. Ralph Steadman could paint it.
There’s a guy who made a fortune in the finance business and a woman on a PR trip. The guy wasn’t much of a chancellor, imagination and strategic vision were in short supply, but there is evidence he can count. After the country spent a fortune on the pandemic he put tax up to pay for it. The woman seems to think numbers are things you pick out of the air. But the Torylectorate who will pick our next head of government don’t like taxes (or logic it seems). She’s the odds-on favourite.
The (former Saint) Rishi has been excommunicated because he put taxes up (although he had to), and was allegedly disloyal to his former boss Honest Boris Johnson. Now it always looked to me that by being a PM’s slightly sensible and competent right-hand man he gave the otherwise chaotic administration a thin veneer of stability and respectability. Sticking with him throughout his shambles counted as the biggest and longest endorsement Johnson could get. But maybe I’ve been taking the wrong drugs.
Lookatme Truss is another Johnson. She’s trying to play a Thatcher character, rather than Blackadder III Prince Regent, but behind it is just ambition.
Marketing herself as the Change candidate, Truss is actually the continuity one on international relations as she proposes to keep offending everyone. Her economic plans are… interesting, but no great change from Conservative orthodoxy. If Johnson – who thought money grew on trees – is considered an aberration, then Truss is just more of the previous on steroids. This is interesting as it displays an utter inability/refusal to learn.
In 2010 Osborne and Cameron introduced their Austerity Programme, which meant radically cutting back public services. The results of this were manifold, but never good: public dissatisfaction which led to Brexit and support for Scottish secession; an overstretched health service which proved woefully unprepared for a pandemic; a struggling education system failing to deliver a skilled workforce. The effects linger.
For example…
We now have the second lowest per capita health spending in the G7 and – funnily enough – the longest queues in fifteen years. The number on waiting lists has been rising steadily since about 2012. Whether there’d been a pandemic or not we don’t provide the resources to treat all that need it. And then there was Covid: all UK nations’ excess deaths beat our comparable neighbours quite comfortably (Lancet figures here).
According to an Institute for Fiscal Studies study in real terms education spending in 2024 will remain 3% below 2010. This is shocking.
Lookatme Truss’s sales pitch is cutting taxes. Eh? How do you pay for the missing public services? There is a valid argument that less tax means more for business to invest, which leads to economic growth. But it has to be researched, considered and targeted. Truss is to targeting as a H-bomb is to marksmanship. (And Thatcher’s principle was to balance the books first.)
And then, and then…
And then this morning I thought Monty Python had taken over the news. Truss was proposing to save money by paying less to public servants in poor parts of the country. She expects this to save £8.8bn (I estimate about 3% of the current wage bill).
So, what she is saying is that the Levelling Up policy (making poorer places do better) will be revoked. Future government policy will be to:
- Cut wages. Is the so-called Cost of Living Crisis over now?
- Actively discriminate against people from less successful parts of the country by lowering incomes. The state can be a major employer in some places, and thus dictates the base wage
- Encourage migration to successful ones. If you were offered the same job at £X here or £X+10% in the Big Smoke which would you pick?
- Refute all previous Conservative orthodoxy on State is Bad, Market Forces are Good. Such a strong and immediate lever on society and economics in the hands of a Parliamentary Committee would be a Jeremy Corbyn fantasy
Interesting.
[03/08/2022 update]
Truss denied ever saying such a heinous thing yesterday. Her proposal had been “wilfully misrepresented” (although commentators had been quoting the figures from her press release).
This is a great example of democracy and free press in action. Policy gets reviewed because expert economists, lawyers and social scientists observe in advance. Because there’s clearly none of those advising Truss.