Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Tamas]

Rishi Sunak has claimed that it was a mistake to "empower scientists" during the coronavirus pandemic and that his opposition to closing schools was met with silence during one meeting.

The Conservative leadership candidate believes one of the major errors was allowing the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) to have so much influence on decision making such as closing nurseries, schools and colleges in March 2020.

[Richard Hakluyt]

No need to worry about what the soon-to-be American billionaire thinks 

Truss says she doesn't need an ethics adviser because she has "always acted with integrity"; especially when she was shagging Mark Field no doubt.

Apparently ... "I do think one of the problems we have got in this country in the way we approach things is we have numerous advisers and independent bodies, and rules and regulations."

Darn those independent bodies, always interfering with the will of the Chairman and politburo.

[Tamas]

No need to worry about what the soon-to-be American billionaire thinks 

Truss says she doesn't need an ethics adviser because she has "always acted with integrity"; especially when she was shagging Mark Field no doubt.

Apparently ... "I do think one of the problems we have got in this country in the way we approach things is we have numerous advisers and independent bodies, and rules and regulations."

Darn those independent bodies, always interfering with the will of the Chairman and politburo.

This whole thing isn't going to end well, is it?

[Richard Hakluyt]

We need the Tories to be out of power for a generation (would prefer permanently myself). The next 18 months will hopefully destroy them but the damage to the country and people is going to be bad 

[Josquius]

I don't see anyone foregoing cheap fossil energy; apart from mad Jones McJonesface in his bothy somewhere in Snowdonia 

Half the manmade carbon dioxide increase has happened in the past three decades and the emissions continue to increase; blaming it on "boomers" is a distraction.

People from that generation have been running the world over the past 3 decades.

Boomers deserve to be blamed heavily. Most shit in the world is their fault.

Which to be fair is kind of to be expected from people who have been around so long.

But they've been particularly horrid, potentially dooming civilization.

Then you have to argue they're responsible for all the good as well.

Such as?
Many of the good things of the mid 20th century can be attributed to earlier generations.
Boomers just gave us some good media and modern computing.

.
And do note all this is tongue in cheek in case its not clear.

[Sheilbh]

Not a surprise. All the reporting at the time was that Sunak was constantly pushing back against things and had dreadful instincts. He did the right thing generally, but the reporting was that he normally had to be pushed into it by Johnson because he was very reluctant.

Although as with a lot of Sunak's views I'm not sure how much is him and how much is him just adopting the Treasury view as a relatively inexperienced minister with a very big job.

Apparently ... "I do think one of the problems we have got in this country in the way we approach things is we have numerous advisers and independent bodies, and rules and regulations."

Darn those independent bodies, always interfering with the will of the Chairman and politburo.

I don't disagree with Truss here It's the supply side problems I think we have is in part far too many statutory stakeholders and advisers etc.

I also sympathise with Tories who get annoyed at this because it is often huge headlines of Tories politicising independent bodies, undermining their independents, steps towards incipient fascism when they appoint one (1) Tory onto a board of, say, seven New Labour and Cameroon Spads

[Richard Hakluyt]

The price of moving towards the populist right...you end up being at odds with the establishment.

I suspect that it will all end up with yet more "independent" bodies, just nasty right-wing ones this time around. The free ports for example.

[Sheilbh]

The price of moving towards the populist right...you end up being at odds with the establishment.

I suspect that it will all end up with yet more "independent" bodies, just nasty right-wing ones this time around. The free ports for example.

Yeah. My preference would be that lots of this goes back to ministers who are elected and accountable to parliament. But it will probably end up as you say with sinecures for right-wingers as opposed to Blairites on similarly "independent" bodies.

Agree on the populist right - or indeed left - although I think part of that is because the establishment is political and has politics. I'm not personally overly enamoured of the establishment because I'm not convinced that, say, James Purnell and George Osborne are the answer to the issues we're facing (I think they may, in fact, be a contributing factor). Not sure they deserve any more protection from when it was bishops and judges who don't know who Gazza is

[Richard Hakluyt]

BTW, there are rumours swirling on social media that Boris Johnson might be visiting the UK soon 

[crazy canuck]

I don't see anyone foregoing cheap fossil energy; apart from mad Jones McJonesface in his bothy somewhere in Snowdonia 

Half the manmade carbon dioxide increase has happened in the past three decades and the emissions continue to increase; blaming it on "boomers" is a distraction.

Well let's see, the boomers took control of things in about the 80 and have hung on past their best before date.  That about matches when everything went to shit.

Of course correlation is not causation. 

[Tamas]

I don't see anyone foregoing cheap fossil energy; apart from mad Jones McJonesface in his bothy somewhere in Snowdonia 

Half the manmade carbon dioxide increase has happened in the past three decades and the emissions continue to increase; blaming it on "boomers" is a distraction.

Well let's see, the boomers took control of things in about the 80 and have hung on past their best before date.  That about matches when everything went to shit.

Of course correlation is not causation. 

I mean, sure, but its an arbitrary point of time to dish out blame at. What's with the pre-boomer generation? They have WW2, Vietnam AND siring the boomers to begin with.

And the generation before that? WW1.

The generation before that? Colonialism.

The generation before that? The Napoelonic Wars and forceful attempts to subdue nationalism before embracing it for all the violence that can be based upon it.

etc. etc.

[Sheilbh]

I mean, sure, but its an arbitrary point of time to dish out blame at. What's with the pre-boomer generation? They have WW2, Vietnam AND siring the boomers to begin with.

Yeah it's also not like the 1970s was great. There's a reason it's the decade now is being compared with and is quite literally the closest comparison - we haven't hit 18.6% inflation (and I very much doubt we will) since the oil shock. And there is an underlying echo of the 70s and the first time producers use the energy weapon with now.

Similarly reading about Macron giving a speech about the end of abundance brings back the (at the time well received) 'malaise' speech or Jim Callaghan at Labour Conference on the IMF.

There is a reason the Thatcher/Reagan revolution or the neo-liberal turn or whatever you want to call it happened and I don't think it's just a generational shift. Maybe it's when things went to shit (I'd agree in some ways) but I think part of it was also the world opening, individual choice and eventually liberation, blowing up some old restrictions. As with everything it's rarely purely good or bad.

Personally I think similar forces are at play in the west again but they point in the direction of more state capacity and involvement (so, inevitably, more politics) plus perhaps a move of more re-trenchment and "friend-shoring" etc. Possibly a more constrained, closed and less abundant world than we grew up in post-79. There is no answer and there is no perfect system - whatever makes one social model successful will also contain the seeds of its failure and we will move on to a new one.

Edit: And all of those "independent" institutions just following the law that people here tend to love are also a product of the turn in the 80s - an attempt to remove things from the realm of politics where they may be affected by democratic decision making. To begin with market regulation, central banking/interest rates, then pensions and more and more of the state operated by arms-length bodies. That isn't because it's an intrinsically good way of doing things, but the ideological view that it was better to allow things to be subject expert decision making and operating within a market framework (focus on "what works"/don't care if a cat's black or white only if it catches mice) - than risk them being subject to politics which has consequences because the big political question they can't really ask or solve is distribution.

[Richard Hakluyt]

This winter is going to very significant I think. Free markets and wealth and income inequalities will come under great scrutiny as people freeze...or, I suppose, free-market capitalism will be bailed out by the taxpayer for the third time in 15 years. Either way, surely a majority will realise that the current arrangements are simply inadequate.

Edit : Starmer remains an enigma to me. Will he just faff about with irrelevant quarter-measures or will he seize the moment?

[crazy canuck]

Shielbh, Not sure what you're talking about in your edit. The principle of the Rule of Law was established long before the 70s and the institutions which support it were also established long before the 70s.

[Sheilbh]

I agree. I think it's different in the US or Canada, but in Europe our security, climate, economic and moral interests all point in the same direction which is really intensifying the energy transition. I don't think there's a route to that without big state intervention.

I hope Truss uses her idea for covid (or if not that Labour nick it) and basically ring-fence spending on energy transition similar to war debt that will be paid down over a super-long period. Because I think there is a similarity there and I also thinkin the case of energy a war is a huge part of this situation.


But this winter I think it is one or the other - either we pay bills for people, we ration energy or we bail-out the companies to keep prices down. None of those options are cheap. My fear is they'll go for the scheme worked out by energy companies which would effectively bail them out, they keep prices down (but arguably still too high for many), there's government backed loans and long-term repayment by consumers over the next few decades.