Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Valmy]

Edit: Although despite that description of Dev's Ireland, I think de Valera is desperately underrated nowadays

He has a bad reputation here because of World War II.

[Tonitrus]

All that usage of "non-dom" almost makes it seem like the article is about something else entirely. 

[Sheilbh]

He has a bad reputation here because of World War II.

Signing the book of condolence on the death of Hitler was very definitely a mistake (I can understand how he of all people got there, but still...)

In practice though, short of joining the war, I'm not sure there was much more Ireland could do to help the allies.

Although on that sort of thing I read a piece recently by an Irish commentator noting that Ireland should probably take defence a bit more seriously. Ireland is responsible for 16% of the EU's waters, and three quarters of the northern hemisphere's sub-sea cables run through Irish waters. The Irish Naval Service has six patrol vessels but, due to chronic staff shortages and recruitment issues, only one of them is actually operational. At the minute there's a sort of secret deal with the British which means the RAF can use Irish airspace and, in exchange, they will protect Irish airspace.  I suppose that's what you get when you spend 0.2% of GDP on defence

[Josquius]

Meh.  I can see why Ireland doesn't bother with defence.
Nobody is going to be in invading them and given they're so friendly and intertwined with Britain, their only practical threat, who does have reasons for taking the military seriously....
Ireland is in a perfect and enviable situation of not needing to blow cash on the military.
And unlike Switzerland they actually follow through.
I expect spending money on cyber defence and cable monitoring could be a good idea though given the setup of their economy.

And I'm really not sure you can thank Irelands dodgy tax situation for its economic uptick. Especially when you consider quite how lopsided this is. I've heard lots of indicators, that life out west away from Dublin and Cork is pretty akin to deprived parts of Britain.
Ireland is in quite a lucky place again with all that inertia, being the EUs leading English speaking country, closest EU country to the US, America loving Ireland, etc...
Even tightening up their taxes they have the capacity to do well especially post brekshit

Away from Irish decisions there needs to be more of an international effort on cracking down on international tax dodging. I remember a few years ago this was quite a thing being talked about a lot but that seems to have died a death at some point.

[Richard Hakluyt]

The labour share of GDP in Ireland is terrible, only 30% or so https://www.euronews.com/business/2024/04/19/workers-slice-of-the-gdp-pie-how-do-income-shares-compare-across-europe#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20labour%20income%20shares,Netherlands%20according%20to%20ILO%20estimates.

As a consequence the median salary is only very slightly higher than in the UK despite their GDP per capita being double the UK's. Which is how it felt on the ground when I was there a few days back; there wasn't that feeling of wealth that you get in Norway, Switzerland or Luxembourg.

So who gets all the money? Who benefits? Not even the Irish it seems.

[Admiral Yi]

Meh.  I can see why Ireland doesn't bother with defence.
Nobody is going to be in invading them and given they're so friendly and intertwined with Britain, their only practical threat, who does have reasons for taking the military seriously....
Ireland is in a perfect and enviable situation of not needing to blow cash on the military.
And unlike Switzerland they actually follow through.

Ireland has about the same chance of being invaded as the UK.  Probably a higher risk than the US and Canada.

[Tamas]

Meh.  I can see why Ireland doesn't bother with defence.
Nobody is going to be in invading them and given they're so friendly and intertwined with Britain, their only practical threat, who does have reasons for taking the military seriously....
Ireland is in a perfect and enviable situation of not needing to blow cash on the military.
And unlike Switzerland they actually follow through.

Ireland has about the same chance of being invaded as the UK.  Probably a higher risk than the US and Canada.

What would be the point?

[Richard Hakluyt]

Back in WW2 the USA and UK did contemplate taking over Ireland...the ports would have been very useful in the fight gainst the U-boats. I have no idea on where it fell on the speculation to nearly happened spectrum though.

[HVC]

France always liked the idea of using Ireland as a staging ground to fight England.

Russia would more likely just nuke the uk than invade if it came to it, though. 

[Sheilbh]

Back in WW2 the USA and UK did contemplate taking over Ireland...the ports would have been very useful in the fight gainst the U-boats. I have no idea on where it fell on the speculation to nearly happened spectrum though.

There are two key moments on this.

First is in 1940 when Churchill offers to end partition (after the war) in exchange for use of Ireland's ports and Irish entry into the war. This was rejected by Dev. He didn't trust the Brits, didn't want British troops or forces back in Ireland and also I think fundamentally until the Good Friday Agreement (formally, it started in the 80s) the Irish view was that partition and the status of the north was not something to be negotiated or haggled over.

And then in his Victory in Europe speech Churchill basically praised himself for not invading Ireland:

Then began the blitz, when Hitler said he would rub out our cities. This was borne without a word of complaint or the slightest signs of flinching, while a very large number of people-honor to them all-proved that London could take it and so could the other ravaged centers.

But the dawn of 1941 revealed us still in jeopardy. The hostile aircraft could fly across the approaches to our island, where 46,000,000 people had to import half their daily bread and all the materials they need for peace or war, from Brest to Norway in a single flight or back again, observing all the movements of our shipping in and out of the Clyde and Mersey and directing upon our convoys the large and increasing numbers of U-boats with which the enemy bespattered the Atlantic-the survivors or successors of which are now being collected in British harbors.

The sense of envelopment, which might at any moment turn to strangulation, lay heavy upon us. We had only the northwestern approach between Ulster and Scotland through which to bring in the means of life and to send out the forces of war. Owing to the action of Mr. de Valera, so much at variance with the temper and instinct of thousands of southern Irishmen, who hastened to the battlefront to prove their ancient valor, the approaches which the southern Irish ports and airfields could so easily have guarded were closed by the hostile aircraft and U-boats.

This was indeed a deadly moment in our life, and if it had not been for the loyalty and friendship of Northern Ireland we should have been forced to come to close quarters with Mr. de Valera or perish forever from the earth. However, with a restraint and poise to which, I say, history will find few parallels, we never laid a violent hand upon them, which at times would have been quite easy and quite natural, and left the de Valera Government to frolic with the German and later with the Japanese representatives to their heart's content.

When I think of these days I think also of other episodes and personalities. I do not forget Lieutenant-Commander Esmonde, V.C., D.S.O., Lance-Corporal Keneally, V.C., Captain Fegen, V.C., and other Irish heroes that-I could easily recite, and all bitterness by Britain for the Irish race dies in my heart. I can only pray that in years which I shall not see the shame will be forgotten and the glories will endure, and that the peoples of the British Isles and of the British Commonwealth of Nations will walk together in mutual comprehension and forgiveness.

Dev responded to this with a speech that, in Ireland, is probably considered his greatest moment as leader:
https://www.rte.ie/archives/exhibitions/eamon-de-valera/719137-de-valera-response-to-churchill/

Although there is something to Churchill's point - that during the war there were as many Irishmen serving in British forces from the South as the North. There was and there still is a tradition of signing up for British forces in Ireland. It was actually a point of contention because Irish customs officers would basically not let Irishmen on leave get off the ferry from Liverpool or Holyhead until they'd changed out of their uniform and into civvies because it was seen as a provocation against Ireland's right to be neutral.

France always liked the idea of using Ireland as a staging ground to fight England.

To a large extent, particularly after the Reformation, that was the strategic logic of the Tudor conquest of Ireland, and getting marriage alliances with Scotland.

What would be the point?

I find it really weird that you and Jos are both very pro-European but take this weirdly isolationist stance of Britain (or Ireland, acknowledging Irish neutrality within a European Union context) and defence. The entire point of having alliances is that our policy needs to be more than just what is sufficient to repel an invasion or to die in a nuclear apocalypse - but to meet our wider obligations to our allies across Europe and the rest of the world. Which means defence policy aimed at supporting and defending those allies because those alliances are a better defence against invasion (or nuclear apocalypse) than anything else.

It is slightly different for Ireland I fully acknowledge - it's not (and probably never will be a NATO member). But, as I say, three quarters of the northern hemispheres sub-sea wires - the infrastructure backbone of the modern world - pass through Irish waters. It's not the Suwalki gap but I think that is actually an important European security interest (we have seen attacks on sub-sea cables) and I'm not sure one operational patrol vessel is really enough. It is not the risk of an attack on Ireland but an attack on the north Atlantic connection between Europe and North America - which just so happens to run through Irish territory.

The labour share of GDP in Ireland is terrible, only 30% or so https://www.euronews.com/business/2024/04/19/workers-slice-of-the-gdp-pie-how-do-income-shares-compare-across-europe#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20labour%20income%20shares,Netherlands%20according%20to%20ILO%20estimates.

As a consequence the median salary is only very slightly higher than in the UK despite their GDP per capita being double the UK's. Which is how it felt on the ground when I was there a few days back; there wasn't that feeling of wealth that you get in Norway, Switzerland or Luxembourg.

So who gets all the money? Who benefits? Not even the Irish it seems.

Irish GDP is meaningless

According to GDP the Irish economy has grown by more than a third since 2021. There have been some quarters in recent years when the only thing keeping the Eurozone economy out of recession is Ireland's extraordinary GDP figures. But they're not real. They are a fiction of accounting of where multi-national's income is booked.

In Ireland you need to look at a GNP or GNI - for most countries that basically overlaps with GDP and there's minimal difference. For Ireland GNI is only about 70% of GDP.

From studies Irish standard of living is broadly similar to the Netherlands or Germany which is higher than the UK. Again there's many issues with the Irish model but in historic terms or even in comparison with the twentieth century having living standards at the same level or higher than GB is a huge change. I think wages are basically about 5% higher than in the UK but consumption is lower. I accept it's not Norway, Switzerland etc - but I think it'll probably get there in the next couple of decades.

Obviously tax is only part of that and arguably not the most important bit since the state had a low corporate tax policy long, long before the Celtic Tiger days - I think it is maybe a helpful way to get companies into Ireland but it's the other advantages (English, good timezone, educated workforce, single market - and, relatedly, regulation within the EU by Irish regulators) that keeps companies there and expanding.

[Tonitrus]

It is an interesting question...is it fair to morally judge nations that chose neutrality in a war like WW2?

[HVC]

It is an interesting question...is it fair to morally judge nations that chose neutrality in a war like WW2?

Yes. With slight caveats for different levels of actually staying neutral

[Sheilbh]

It is an interesting question...is it fair to morally judge nations that chose neutrality in a war like WW2?

Yeah. I'm not sure. I can fully understand the Irish reasons for neutrality in particular that it was, to a large extent, a real expression of what they had fought for in achieving independence (and practically there was a lot of support for the allies, plus many tens of thousands of Irishmen literally fighting in the British forces).

But arguably that is less morally justifiable than a continental European country being able to and choosing neutrality when the alternative was almost certainly German conquest.

[Josquius]

I find it really weird that you and Jos are both very pro-European but take this weirdly isolationist stance of Britain (or Ireland, acknowledging Irish neutrality within a European Union context) and defence. The entire point of having alliances is that our policy needs to be more than just what is sufficient to repel an invasion or to die in a nuclear apocalypse - but to meet our wider obligations to our allies across Europe and the rest of the world. Which means defence policy aimed at supporting and defending those allies because those alliances are a better defence against invasion (or nuclear apocalypse) than anything else.

It is slightly different for Ireland I fully acknowledge - it's not (and probably never will be a NATO member). But, as I say, three quarters of the northern hemispheres sub-sea wires - the infrastructure backbone of the modern world - pass through Irish waters. It's not the Suwalki gap but I think that is actually an important European security interest (we have seen attacks on sub-sea cables) and I'm not sure one operational patrol vessel is really enough. It is not the risk of an attack on Ireland but an attack on the north Atlantic connection between Europe and North America - which just so happens to run through Irish territory.

I'm not isolationist on British defence at all.
Ideal world the single European military all the idiots spread scare stories about would be a thing.
But with reality as it is, it makes sense for different countries to concentrate on different things. And mass numbers of shit troops is not Britain's thing.

As for Ireland. Defence isn't really significant part of the EU. Again ideal world maybe this will change and I've no opposition to Ireland being involved.
As things stand Ireland is in a lucky situation of being able to hide behind Britain. I totally get why they take this easy option.

[Sheilbh]

As for Ireland. Defence isn't really significant part of the EU. Again ideal world maybe this will change and I've no opposition to Ireland being involved.
As things stand Ireland is in a lucky situation of being able to hide behind Britain. I totally get why they take this easy option.

The EU issue is slightly to the side here. My point is that it doesn't really matter whether defence is part of the EU or even Irish politics. It's that we know there are powers who have attacked by targeting deep sea cables and pipelines who are hostile to the rest of Europe and supporters of Ukraine, like Ireland. And a huge amount of sub-sea infrastructure passes through Irish territory. So those powers may take an interest in Ireland - and Ireland's in no position to even monitor that. I don't think there's a part of Europe where defence is optional anymore - particularly for a country not in NATO.

Ireland has a semi-secret agreement with the UK in relation to airspace and the RAF basically protecting Irish airspace. There's no equivalent to Irish waters and I think that would be far more visible and perhaps challenging and Ireland is sovereign. It's their territory to defend - it just so happens that huge chunks of the European economy depend on that.

Separately gossipy piece from Tim Shipman on D-Day disaster. Amazing that he went back for an interview and apparently it was a disaster Number 10 are dreading airing

Also I think this generally cuts through fairly easily. But the King attending against the advice of his doctors during his treatment for cancer because of its importance and the PM skipping it feels a lot like a party in Downing Street the night before the Queen attended her husband's socially distanced funeral:

Infighting on the beaches: behind the scenes of the D-Day debacle
The prime minister's early return from the commemorations may be the defining mistake of the election campaign
Tim Shipman, Chief Political Commentator
Saturday June 08 2024, 6.00pm, The Sunday Times

Rishi Sunak's aides realised immediately that his interview with ITV's Paul Brand on Thursday afternoon was going to be a problem hanging over them for the better part of a week. In a 25-minute grilling, to be broadcast on Wednesday, the prime minister endured a torrid time over his personal wealth, leading to "frank exchanges" with his interviewer.

"That was what they were worried about," said a political source. "That he was beaten up over the money and being out of touch." While they focused on the incoming shelling, no one seemed to notice that Sunak had already stepped on a landmine.

By returning home early from the D-Day commemorations that day, the prime minister made what may be the defining mistake of the campaign, a blunder that could detonate any chance of turning around Tory fortunes. It came after a week in which the Tories had been stunned by the entry into the race on Monday of Nigel Farage — but then heartened by a robust performance by Sunak in his first head-to-head debate with Sir Keir Starmer on Tuesday.

The real story of what happened around the D-Day debacle, in which Starmer was able to upstage the prime minister by meeting presidents Zelensky and Macron, reveals a Conservative campaign cracking under extreme pressure and a Labour operation becoming more adept at seizing opportunities.

The decision that Sunak would attend the British parts of the D-Day commemorations but dodge an international event later was made weeks ago.

"The official advice was that the second bit was optional," a senior political source said. "We were told Starmer wouldn't be there." At that point, it seemed like the second half would be little more than a social gathering for world leaders. "It was billed as a lunch and that even Biden wouldn't be there," a second source said. In the event, it was one of the most moving ceremonies of the two-day gathering, with Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, the foreign secretary, substituting for Sunak and standing alongside the American and French presidents.

However, civil servants are clear that it was a political decision to cut things short. One of Cameron's closest allies also let it be known that they had advised Sunak to "do" the full schedule.


Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton stands in for the prime minister at the photo call on Omaha beach alongside President Macron, Olaf Scholz, the German chancellor, and President Biden
PATRICK VAN KATWIJK/GETTY

Another ally pointed out that in his 2014 party conference speech as leader, Cameron talked about how the then 70th anniversary of D-Day had been "the best moment of my year", and that when he was prepping for the speech he told aides: "There's a risk I may start crying here, because it gets me so emotional."

A Whitehall source said Cameron was "apoplectic" about Sunak's decision but, when asked why he had not "picked Sunak up by his lapels", he said: "There is only so much I can do."

There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain.

While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone's hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak's key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.

Sunak, who is due to see most of the same world leaders at the G7 summit in Italy this week, was keen to get home and carry on with the campaign.

The decision to stick to the plan was then confirmed in a 6.30am daily campaign meeting on Thursday. It is untrue that Sunak raced home to do the ITV event. The interview was slotted in because he was already coming back for a 6pm meeting on Thursday to sign off the Conservative election manifesto.


Rishi Sunak had kicked off D-Day events with a speech praising veterans in Ver-sur-Mer, Normandy
TIMES PHOTOGRAPHER RICHARD POHLE

[n]While the Tories were dropping the ball, Labour's foreign affairs team was playing a blinder. David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has spent months developing relations with the Macron administration, tweeting in French and writing essays for intellectual Parisian magazines. He became aware of diplomatic rumblings that the Élysée Palace was upset by Sunak's decision to avoid the French-led part of the commemoration.

A diplomatic source, summarising the French view, said: "Doesn't Sunak realise there is a war on and that Zelensky was attending? President Macron was going to use the occasion to make announcements about support for Ukraine. The idea of skipping something ceremonial like this is so alien to French culture."[/b]

Neither Lammy nor Starmer was originally invited to the international event. But Lammy used his contacts to get them both admitted and his connections with Zelensky's team to ensure there would be a Starmer handshake and photograph with the Ukrainian president.

The French then played a double diplomatic game. One of Macron's aides contacted Labour to say how pleased they were by the Macron-Starmer meeting, saying the French president "really liked" the Labour leader and was "fascinated by men like him who can suddenly achieve stunning results" . Another called a member of Sunak's team to commiserate, telling them: "This is all completely confected nonsense. How can we help?"


Sir Keir Starmer greets Ukraine's President Zelensky at the international ceremony
BENOIT TESSIER/REUTERS

However, the decision for the prime minister to abandon the D-Day commemoration, after the Tories made security and national service cornerstones of their campaign, left MPs incredulous. Cabinet ministers responded with impotent rage, criticising Sunak's political judgment and appetite for the job. The prime minister has repeatedly complained privately that foreign affairs take up too much of his time and he has little interest in the ceremonial aspects of his job.

A Tory who is no fan of Boris Johnson said: "There is absolutely no way that if you presented this to Boris or indeed to Theresa [May], telling them it was a waste of time, that they would not have overruled that advice. This is the worst operation I have ever seen. From the prime minister down there is a combination of arrogance and sheer incompetence."

The irony is that personal diplomacy has been one of the successes of Sunak's premiership. His willingness to get in a room with his EU counterparts paved the way for the Windsor Framework on Brexit in February 2023. He signed the Aukus defence deal with the US and Australia and has kept Britain at the forefront of western support for Ukraine.

In the 6.30am morning meeting on Friday, Levido insisted that Sunak make a public apology, and the now "despondent" prime minister agreed. Aides say he was particularly upset because he and his wife, Akshata Murty, give both time and money to veterans' charities. Murty is a regular at the Royal Hospital Chelsea in London, where she works with veterans.

The D-Day fiasco stopped dead what had been a relatively encouraging 48 hours for the Conservatives, in which Sunak successfully shaped the agenda of the campaign with his combative performance against Starmer in Tuesday's ITV debate in Manchester. The prime minister seemed markedly better prepared than Starmer as he sought to pin on Labour the claim that a black hole in their finances would cost every household £2,000.

In the past few months, Sunak's aides have privately voiced the fear that, just as they lost to Liz Truss in 2022, they are on course to lose to another opponent whom they think has the wrong solutions but has largely escaped media scrutiny.

In a bid to change that, Sunak sharpened his act in a debate camp last Sunday at a studio in Soho led by Brett O'Donnell, an American who prepared Johnson for his debates during the EU referendum campaign in 2016 and the 2019 leadership election. O'Donnell also helped Tom Tugendhat emerge victorious from the first leader's debate in 2022. He was assisted by senior figures including Adam Atashzai, a former Cameron aide and veteran of 15 debates since 2010. Sunak had two more, shorter, sessions in Manchester, honing the tax attack. As he left for the studio, the prime minister said: "Well at least Keir Starmer's got to answer questions now and it's not like PMQs."

Starmer, who had his own debate camp but spent the afternoon before the show alone in his hotel room, took 45 minutes to even rebut the £2,000 claim and left the stage dissatisfied with his performance. Sunak returned to the Tory green room unsure how he had performed. There he was greeted with applause from his aides. They showed him a message from a usually hostile MP telling an aide: "Can you give Rishi a big hug from me, that was excellent."

In Labour HQ the next morning, with the papers running with the £2,000 tax claim, Starmer's chief strategist Morgan McSweeney smelled a trap. He knew that to engage with the tax argument would elevate it further, just as the row over Vote Leave's claim that Brexit would lead to £350 million a week for the NHS put that issue at the top of the agenda. For an hour he thought it best to sit things out. Then he changed his mind, deciding to play into another Labour narrative, that Sunak was peddling "Tory lies".

While the £2,000 claim remains slightly ahead in terms of salience, the pollsters More in Common found that by a margin of 42 per cent to 29 per cent, voters say they believe Labour, not the Tories.

Sunak's team was also left reeling by Farage's decision to take over the leadership of Reform, which is eating into Tory support, and announce that he will stand in Clacton, in Essex, where he is tipped to finally become an MP at the eighth attempt. Farage had previously said he would not run. One of the few rationales that Tory MPs accepted for calling a snap election was that it had caught Reform by surprise.

Farage had been contemplating lucrative offers from US broadcasters and one friend even suggested he would take a job working for Donald Trump if he becomes the president again after November's election.

Farage's entry into the race led to Reform closing to within two points of the Tories, putting them on course to win fewer than 100 seats on July 4 — their worst performance in two centuries. Sunak's team is now resigned to a "crossover poll" which puts Reform ahead, but is hopeful that raising further questions about Labour will persuade voters not to grant Starmer a huge majority.

In a second debate on BBC1 on Friday evening, Tory chiefs urged Penny Mordaunt to take the fight to a subdued Angela Rayner and "not engage" with Farage.

Rayner had been told by Labour's debate prep team under Matthew Doyle, the director of communications, to remain statesmanlike rather than let rip. Mordaunt, who represented a naval seat in Portsmouth, slid the knife into Sunak's ribs, declaring his decision to return early from D-Day "very wrong".

Cabinet ministers are now privately demanding that Sunak takes a step back to allow other senior Tories to become faces of the campaign.

There are other problems, too. On Friday it was announced that the Conservatives were suspending social media campaigning. "There is no money," a senior source said. Tory grandees have been asked to help with fundraising but are struggling. Morale is also at rock bottom. CCHQ was said to be largely deserted on Friday, with senior aides laid low with illness. Half of Tory ministerial aides have refused to join the campaign despite being ordered to do so.

Farage is now the focus of Tory leadership manoeuvring which is already under way. Kemi Badenoch, the business and trade secretary, has told colleagues that if she becomes leader, she will not admit Farage to the party. Badenoch also faced criticism for failing to turn up to a campaign event with Sunak in Henley in Oxfordshire last week because she was attending her son's school sports day.

However, Dame Priti Patel, the former home secretary, has made clear that she would invite Farage to return — a view shared by others on the right such as Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, who predicted that Farage might even become Tory leader. "I'm a huge admirer of Nigel's and I think he should hold high office within the Conservative Party," Rees-Mogg said. "I'm sure that if the ball would come out of the scrum, Nigel would be more than willing to catch it."

He added: "Nigel is a Tory. He's a charismatic politician, and we've seen that charismatic politicians do very well for the Conservative Party. He says things that resonate with voters. I think the Tory party has too often been trying to appeal to the liberal and green vote that isn't coming to us anyway."

Sunak will try to boost support with a manifesto launch on Tuesday at somewhere "symbolic of boldness and speed" — understood to be a Formula One location. The manifesto will not include a plan to scrap inheritance tax or an explicit pledge to leave the European Convention on Human Rights, but there will be language that "goes further" than before in saying a Tory government would ignore the European courts if they try to block expulsions of asylum seekers to Rwanda —unlikely to go far enough for the right.

Labour, which is expected to unveil its plan on Thursday, will have no new tax rises in its manifesto but will focus, at McSweeney's insistence, on reform of the public services. "Labour used to make the argument that the pie ought to be more equitably distributed. But the Tories have eaten all of the pie and burned down the kitchen."

The problem for Sunak is that a large number of Tories now share that view.

Heard a fair bit that Tories are already furious that the main big promise in the manifesto is apparently a stamp duty cut - on the one hand it's a bad idea to just keep juicing demand, but also when you're saying you're going to be "bold" it's pretty tepid.