When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?

[DanNCL]

Though Liz Truss is now the UK's lead negotiator in post Brexit talks, the office of Minister of State for Europe is now held by Chris Heaton-Harris. Replacing him at the DFT (and presumably now the junior Rail Minister) is Wendy Morton.

 

[AgentGemini]

And just how bad is Wendy Morton?

 

[DanNCL]

And just how bad is Wendy Morton?

Haven’t a clue. I hadn’t even heard of her until her name was mentioned in the BBC article this evening…

 

[birchesgreen]

And just how bad is Wendy Morton?

Is there a railway station in her constituency?

 

[Typhoon]

Haven’t a clue. I hadn’t even heard of her until her name was mentioned in the BBC article this evening…

Not surprising, she was first elected in 2015 and has held 5 positions - two as Parliamentary Private Secretary and this is her third as a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, so not exactly a big hitter. Each appointment has been at a different department. Heaton-Harris, on the other hand, is at Minister of State level (both in his old job and the new) so rail is now the responsibility of someone on a lower level of the ministerial tree. She might be fine but don't expect a rash of initiatives or legislation - maybe the odd interview when she deems something to be 'disappointing' or 'unfortunate'.

Is there a railway station in her constituency?

No, but a railway line goes through it. Isn't that good enough?
(Quite a few miles of very walkable canals, though.)

You can find out all about her at https://www.gov.uk/government/people/wendy-morton - or not.

 

[nw1]

And just how bad is Wendy Morton?

More to the point, who is she?

(Sorry - I see this has been answered above)

Someone's got his true-blue spectacles on. Cameron quit because of his failure to win the Brexit referendum, and his reputation has not been helped by the Greensill scandal. Brown was well-regarded as Chancellor but lost as PM because of the economic crash.

Thatcher and Cameron, of course, both prematurely ended their own careers by their own actions. In the case of Thatcher, she may not have survived much longer anyway, but Cameron quite dramatically and stupidly cut short his time as PM.

Thatcher because she thought that she could do anything and large sections of the electorate would still love her, Cameron because he was too weak and frightened of Farage.

If Thatcher had not implemented the poll tax, she would probably have remained prime minister, but maybe only for another 18 months as I suspect, with Thatcherism profoundly unfashionable in the early 90s, she would have lost the 1992 election. The early 90s recession would of course still have happened if Thatcher was PM in 1991, and her likely lack of sympathy for those falling on hard times as a result would have finished her off in 1992 I suspect.

If Cameron had not called for the referendum, he would have remained PM until 2020, and perhaps still be PM now. The 2020 result would rather have depended on who his Labour opponent was: I suspect he could have won again versus Corbyn, but lost to another Labour leader. Cameron, and May, are perhaps the two most profoundly politically naive leaders of modern (Thatcher onwards) times.

 

[Dai Corner]

If Cameron had not called for the referendum, he would have remained PM until 2020, and perhaps still be PM now. The 2020 result would rather have depended on who his Labour opponent was: I suspect he could have won again versus Corbyn, but lost to another Labour leader. Cameron, and May, are perhaps the two most profoundly politically naive leaders of modern (Thatcher onwards) times.

If we had had a pro-EU Labour leader during the referendum campaign I expect the result would have been different, and so would Cameron's career.

 

[brad465]

If Cameron had not called for the referendum, he would have remained PM until 2020, and perhaps still be PM now. The 2020 result would rather have depended on who his Labour opponent was: I suspect he could have won again versus Corbyn, but lost to another Labour leader. Cameron, and May, are perhaps the two most profoundly politically naive leaders of modern (Thatcher onwards) times.

Cameron planned to step down in 2020 and have another leader contest the 2020 election, had no referendum taken place or one happened and he won it. Also worth remembering that the 2020 election under that hypothesis would have taken place at the high of Covid, as we know now, so the election would likely have been postponed a bit, and the effects of the response so far would have influenced the result, with a "rally around the leader effect" likely to have helped the incumbent Government.

 

[Meglodon 5]

Fair enough, but I’m struggling to think of any others and his was a particularly extraordinary situation.

Spencer Perceval (1762 - 1812) is another one as he died while still in office.

 

[D6130]

Spencer Perceval (1762 - 1812) is another one as he died while still in office.

Not only did he die in office, but he was actually assassinated! Not that I would advocate such teatment for any of the current shower of incompetents of course!

 

[The Ham]

Not only did he die in office, but he was actually assassinated! Not that I would advocate such teatment for any of the current shower of incompetents of course!

Especially not on a public forum, as otherwise you may have to answer some awkward questions if someone does!!!

Joking aside, no matter how much I dislike someone's views (including which party that represent) making personal attacks isn't the way to go, especially if those attacks are violent. They are still a person and all people should be treated with respect.

By all means disagree with them and be passionate about what you believe, also by all means stand up for and stand with those are being treated unfairly, just try to never to belittle someone it cause them harm.

I very much subscribe to the view that if you have to resort to personal attacks (raking up someone's past, something that they said or did, etc.) to try and win an argument then perhaps you are worried that what you think isn't enough to win the argument. It's also the tactics of someone who probably shouldn't be in power.

It can be very subtle sometimes, such as the belittling of Milliband, however other times it can be much more overt, like Trump with Biden. When it happens it should be a warning to those of us who vote that maybe the person doing it shouldn't get our vote.

And when a candidate threatens violence they certainly shouldn't get our vote.

 

[yorksrob]

I would say you were right about health issues, but there were economic difficulties - rising inflation, unemployment, interest rates (the reason I remember - I was trying to get a mortgage), they got worse under Callaghan. Didn't we have to go to the IMF?

His resignation honours list (which pales compared to recent honours lists) was considered controversial at the time. Basically, he stayed on a bit too long (like most).

As well as the above, I believe Harold Wilson was weakened by losing out to the Conservatives in 1970, a contest that labor should have been in with a good chance of.

 

[Typhoon]

As well as the above, I believe Harold Wilson was weakened by losing out to the Conservatives in 1970, a contest that labor should have been in with a good chance of.

You are right in that; up until then he had been a winner. I seem to remember Labour were favourites (difficult to remember as I did not have the vote and was away from home).

 

[AM9]

You are right in that; up until then he had been a winner. I seem to remember Labour were favourites (difficult to remember as I did not have the vote and was away from home).

Wasn't the debate about the cost of a basket of shopping. Labour had devalued the pound against the dollar ($2.40 from $2.80 ISTR) and it resonated with enough of the electorate to get Heath across the line. Heath did of course get us into the EEC as was so he wasn't all bad.

 

[daodao]

Wasn't the debate about the cost of a basket of shopping. Labour had devalued the pound against the dollar ($2.40 from $2.80 ISTR) and it resonated with enough of the electorate to get Heath across the line. Heath did of course get us into the EEC as was so he wasn't all bad.

What a fool; 2x "non" from De Gaulle should have been sufficient to warn off Perfidious Albion from joining the EEC.

 

[Dai Corner]

Wasn't the debate about the cost of a basket of shopping. Labour had devalued the pound against the dollar ($2.40 from $2.80 ISTR) and it resonated with enough of the electorate to get Heath across the line. Heath did of course get us into the EEC as was so he wasn't all bad.

 

[Typhoon]

Wasn't the debate about the cost of a basket of shopping. Labour had devalued the pound against the dollar ($2.40 from $2.80 ISTR) and it resonated with enough of the electorate to get Heath across the line. Heath did of course get us into the EEC as was so he wasn't all bad.

They did devalue the pound, you are right (as in #856). The Three Day Week did for Heath; electricity on for so long then off, queuing for bread, couldn't buy a candle for love nor money - the country had had enough. Maybe a warning for current politicians.

 

[brad465]

A cost of living crisis is never good for the incumbent Government, and this Government knows it. SO much so that even Jacob Rees-Mogg is concerned, to the point he's joined calls to scrap the NI take hike due in April:

Subscribe to the Financial Times

A subscription to the Financial Times provides you with the insights and perspective you need to succeed, now.

on.ft.com

Boris Johnson has been challenged by a senior cabinet minister to scrap a planned £12bn tax rise in April, as Jacob Rees-Mogg [joined] a growing Tory cost of living revolt.

 

[MattRat]

A cost of living crisis is never good for the incumbent Government, and this Government knows it. SO much so that even Jacob Rees-Mogg is concerned, to the point he's joined calls to scrap the NI take hike due in April:

Subscribe to the Financial Times

A subscription to the Financial Times provides you with the insights and perspective you need to succeed, now.

on.ft.com

Oh look, another thing for Labour to help Johnson with....

 

[Typhoon]

Oh look, another thing for Labour to help Johnson with....

I would imagine that Rees-Mogg is pretty bored, his role is neither demanding or influential. Johnson will either need back down (and probably be seen as weak) or try to force it through the Commons. If Rees-Mogg votes against or abstains does he sack him? If not, then his decision to sack that very junior member of the government over Paterson will look vindictive. In either case Rees-Mogg's influence with the ERG/ CRG crew will probably rise. If NI is not raised Sunak is going to be placed in a difficult position - I've read that he is already unhappy with government spending.

Labour should abstain saying that the money needs to be raised but through a different means - burden to be carried on those with the broadest shoulders. This is a response to what would you do, while championing the lowest paid against 'Tory tax hikes'.

 

[Acfb]

There is some evidence that Johnson is recovering already from the nadir of December. In yesterday's Redfield and Wilton poll he was 2% ahead of Starmer in the best PM rating and the Tories gained 4% predominantly at the expense of the Lib Dems.

Expectation management could also be pretty easy for the local elections especially London where I can see the Tories overprerforming expectations as Labour are defending a fairly high watermark.

Of course paradoxically it's better for Labour and Lib Dems for Johnson to ride it out as long as possible so he hopefully isn't replaced by Sunak.

 

[brad465]

There is some evidence that Johnson is recovering already from the nadir of December. In yesterday's Redfield and Wilton poll he was 2% ahead of Starmer in the best PM rating and the Tories gained 4% predominantly at the expense of the Lib Dems.

Expectation management could also be pretty easy for the local elections especially London where I can see the Tories overprerforming expectations as Labour are defending a fairly high watermark.

Of course paradoxically it's better for Labour and Lib Dems for Johnson to ride it out as long as possible so he hopefully isn't replaced by Sunak.

Wouldn't surprise me if resisting covid restrictions largely explains this. But at the same time the cost of living crisis currently being felt, and expected to get worse and/or prolong for a long time yet, will not help him, in the same way it won't help anyone in charge at the time. For this reason I expect Johnson to stick around for a while so that once the crisis abates, he can be ditched and all the problems be put on him by a successor. If he's replaced before the crisis peaks his successor enters at the deep end.

 

[contrex]

Though Liz Truss is now the UK's lead negotiator in post Brexit talks, the office of Minister of State for Europe is now held by Chris Heaton-Harris. Replacing him at the DFT (and presumably now the junior Rail Minister) is Wendy Morton.

For a moment I really thought it was LYNNE Truss. "At least we'll have well-punctuated government", I thought. Then I twigged.

 

[MattRat]

Labour should abstain saying that the money needs to be raised but through a different means - burden to be carried on those with the broadest shoulders. This is a response to what would you do, while championing the lowest paid against 'Tory tax hikes'.

Labour abstaining still helps Johnson pass legislation, it's just the more slimy way of doing it.

 

[AM9]

Labour abstaining still helps Johnson pass legislation, it's just the more slimy way of doing it.

"Slimy"? Can you justify that description?

 

[Typhoon]

Labour abstaining still helps Johnson pass legislation, it's just the more slimy way of doing it.

Let us assume for a minute the the shadow cabinet think they can do a better job than the current crew. In order to do so they have to win (or not lose) a General Election so must appear to be a credible government.

There are four options for Labour:
Support the Government The measure comes into effect and Labour is saddled with an Act that adds to the tax burden of those on low to middle earned incomes the most (approx £10k-£50k)
Oppose the Government Some/ many Conservatives who are concerned about the effect the NI rises will have, are more concerned about the Government being defeated and the impression that that will have so 'reluctantly go into the 'Aye' lobby.
Abstain The Conservatives who are concerned about the effect the NI rises will have on their constituents will know they can make their opposition known by their vote, while confident they will not be defeating the government, They are free to vote against.
Abstain while proposing an alternative (maybe through an amendment?) As above but by suggesting a different policy indicate that they are offering a constructive way by which the government finances can be managed. My suggestion would be through Income Tax, which affects unearned income (so shifts the balance from wholly on those in employment, I would also marginally increase the higher rate bands (as in shifting the burden to those with the broadest shoulders).

I am not sure what is 'slimy' about that, seems like responsible opposition to me. These Conservative MPs are not trying to bring the government down, they want the measure to go through with a much reduced majority to send a warning shot (or get it to offer some form of concessions such as cut VAT on fuel). They can do their sums and will ensure that by manipulating the votes against/ abstentions that that is what happens.

 

[daodao]

Labour abstaining still helps Johnson pass legislation, it's just the more slimy way of doing it.

In the summer of 2015, while interim leader, Harriet Harman made the decision for Labour to abstain, rather than oppose, the Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015. Most Labour MPs, including 3 of the 4 then leadership contenders, supported this position, but 48 more principled Labour MPs defied the party whip, and one of them (Corbyn) deservedly won the leadership election. Unfortunately, while his heart is in the right place, and he appears to be a decent man, his intellectual ability proved to be a weakness. Starmer is the opposite, but doesn't seem to have the skills to deal with Johnson, and I suspect that it will be sometime yet (not until the next but one general election at best) before it all goes wrong for the Tories/Johnson.

 

[MattRat]

In the summer of 2015, while interim leader, Harriet Harman made the decision for Labour to abstain, rather than oppose, the Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015. Most Labour MPs, including 3 of the 4 then leadership contenders, supported this position, but 48 more principled Labour MPs defied the party whip, and one of them (Corbyn) deservedly won the leadership election. Unfortunately, while his heart is in the right place, and he appears to be a decent man, his intellectual ability proved to be a weakness. Starmer is the opposite, but doesn't seem to have the skills to deal with Johnson, and I suspect that it will be sometime yet (not until the next but one general election at best) before it all goes wrong for the Tories/Johnson.

Thank you for making my argument for me.

 

[Typhoon]

In the summer of 2015, while interim leader, Harriet Harman made the decision for Labour to abstain, rather than oppose, the Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015. Most Labour MPs, including 3 of the 4 then leadership contenders, supported this position, but 48 more principled Labour MPs defied the party whip, and one of them (Corbyn) deservedly won the leadership election. Unfortunately, while his heart is in the right place, and he appears to be a decent man, his intellectual ability proved to be a weakness. Starmer is the opposite, but doesn't seem to have the skills to deal with Johnson, and I suspect that it will be sometime yet (not until the next but one general election at best) before it all goes wrong for the Tories/Johnson.

The difference is that in 2015, Cameron had a majority of about 15 so voting against made sense. Several Conservatives did not vote so there was a chance of defeating the government or at least reducing the margin to a few votes (no Conservatives voted against). That chance was missed.
Johnson has a majority of 80 odd, the only way he is going to be defeated is either if there are a whole mass of Conservatives who decide politics is 'cruel' and there are stacks of North Shropshire's or if he is defeated by his own side. The CRG/ ERG are not going to ally with Labour (or anyone except the DUP) so the best hope is a big enough rebellion to damage Johnson's credibility. Keep chipping away. There are signs of disquiet (Dorries being kicked out of some social media group for instance, rows over being forced to back Paterson). The question I would like answered from the CRG is 'where would you get the money from?'

 

[DynamicSpirit]

With the latest revelations about the May 2020 Garden Party, we must surely be getting to the point where it's no longer tenable for Boris to remain Prime Minister? I think I would now be very surprised if we don't have a Tory leadership contest within the next 6 months.