Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[alfred russel]

Sunak sort of rhymes with snack.
How long till they do something with this?

Hungry for change? It's Sunak time!

In the campaign ad he can be shown bursting out of a candy wrapper.

[crazy canuck]

Sunak sort of rhymes with snack.
How long till they do something with this?

Hungry for change? It's Sunak time!

In the campaign ad he can be shown bursting out of a candy wrapper.

Wearing a smile

[alfred russel]

I would 100% support him if he released a campaign ad where he burst out of a candy wrapper and began to eat a bacon sandwich.

[Admiral Yi]

Dude is built like a stretchy action figure.  Very odd build.

[Sheilbh]

Back to my standard obsession with building/planning. The Greens in London have launched a report and are launching a campaign to change the rules around and maybe move away from "estate votes". Basically these are a vote by residents of an estate on whether redevelopment should happen or not.

They were initially pushed by the Greens as a good form of democratic consultation. They've since become annoyed that actually if you move to a vote of actual working class people living in a community - they quite like the idea of nicer housing and regeneration. Estate votes tend to be in favour of redevelopment. The Greens now want to push back towards consultations that basically structurally favour just a few cranky anti-gentrification/NIMBY voices.

Their main allegation is that estate votes are corrupt because often developers and the council will put on "fun days" or something similar for the estate. They'll put up a bouncy castle for the kids and hand out slices of pizza - these days also have people to talk about the proposal and suggestion boxes etc. The idea is that they get more feedback and a broader range of views through this, though the council will normally be pro-development. I'm not sure this is "treating" for votes as the Greens allege as opposed to trying to reach more people than those who are enthused by spending a weekday evening with council officials - also there's nothing stopping anti-development campaigners doing something similar.

They also allege fraud (with no evidence beyond a few anonymous anecdotes) in favour of development - this is the point where we're starting to drift into a NIMBY Stop the Steal campaign And they complain about "excessive publicity" for one side. They focus on Broadwater Farm redevelopment in Haringey and note, angrily, that developers and the council had lots of comms translated into several languages including Polish, Turkish, Kurdish, Portuguese and Arabic. Of course it is utterly unacceptable for councils to try and engage everyday Londoners in their own language to build support, awareness and engagement with council policy I think it's generally a good thing if councils/government tries to communicate with all residents.

Similarly thought this was from Ferrovial - I feel like fixing this is a huge issue and one that no-one in politics really seems to have an idea about

Ferrovial boss on why high speed rail costs more in UK 
12 Jul, 2022   By Rob Horgan   

Ferrovial's UK construction director has revealed why he thinks constructing high speed railways costs so much more in the UK than it does on mainland Europe.

The cost of building the entire High Speed 2 (HS2) network is estimated to be in the region of £100bn. The funding envelope for phase one alone is up to £44.6bn. It means building HS2 will cost around £200M per kilometre.

By way of comparison, a government assessment of 20 European high speed railway networks (High speed rail international benchmarking study) concludes that "that high speed rail lines can be delivered under certain circumstances at an average cost of £32M per km". A European Court of Auditors benchmarking report from 2018 puts the average cost even lower on the continent at £25M per kilometre.

Speaking at NCE's Future of Rail conference, Ricardo Ferreras said that the process of obtaining permits and conducting environmental studies in the UK was largely behind the increased cost of building high speed railways in the UK.

"It's true the cost per kilometre is way higher in the UK than it is in Europe, for example in France or Spain," Ferreras said.

"It is about the number of resources that we use here in the UK that are linked with planning; the environmental matters, the stakeholder engagement, all the consents that are needed.

"As an example in Spain the government will get all consents, and all environmental permits, and then when they award the contract to a contractor, the contractor can just focus on delivering the project.

"So, here we do it differently. I am not saying it is worse but it is different and it takes much more man power and obviously that increases the cost of the project."

He added: "I think the consenting regime here for these big projects, and getting everything while you are developing the design, creates a lot of issues and that sort of slows down the process. A lot of people, a lot more time and that of course means more cost.

"That said the way things are planned here and delivered is absolutely phenomenal so I'm not saying it is worse but there could be a balance."

Ferrovial has a long history of delivering high speed rail projects. In total, the Spanish firm has built 487km of high speed rail around the world, as well as 80 high speed rail viaducts and six high speed rail stations.

Noteworthy projects worked on by Ferrovial include the Madrid-Seville high speed rail line and the California high speed rail project.

Ferrovial is also working on the construction of HS2. Ferrovial, in a JV with Eiffage, Kier and Bam Nuttal (EKFB), is delivering the civil engineering works across an 80km section of the new high speed rail link between the Chiltern Tunnel and Long Itchington Wood.

The firm was also awarded a £300M contract to deliver 100km of enabling works in Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Warwickshire and Northamptonshire, in a JV with Morgan Sindall and Bam Nuttall.

Edit: Also this should be a separate cabinet role - but very behind this idea from Badenoch

Sebastian Payne
@SebastianEPayne
NEW: @KemiBadenoch announces she will break up the Treasury if PM. Economic growth would be run from No10, with a new Office for Economic Growth.

"As Exchequer Secretary I saw first hand the barriers to economic growth - we need to change the way the Treasury works."
Badenoch's Office for Economic Growth would be reportable to the PM, with all departmental spending would pass through it. She wants to inject "stronger democratic accountability into spending plans"

Hope to see more candidates from all parties adopting "smash the Treasury" policies - hopefully to be followed by "smash the Home Office"

[mongers]

I think I must be a racist, because I find Sunak and his campaign far too American for my tastes. :embarassed:

[garbon]

I think I must be a racist, because I find Sunak and his campaign far too American for my tastes. :embarassed:

Britain prefers campaigns to look like trash, something that just happened to sort of be pulled together and ultimately the candidate is a bit of ashamed about?

[alfred russel]

I can't get past the "start with r" thing.

I still can't. The tories have ruled the UK with an iron fist since 2010. "rebuild the economy" and "reunite the country" implies that there has been significant degradation that needs to be reversed. Especially on the economic front, I'd argue it is actually false--the economy maybe hasn't grown as fast as it should, but the UK economy in terms of GDP per capita is as good as ever.

But they presumably passed on "Build the economy" and "Unite the country" as slogans because they don't start with "r".

[Sheilbh]

Britain prefers campaigns to look like trash, something that just happened to sort of be pulled together and ultimately the candidate is a bit of ashamed about?

It's the authenticity v spin debate that I think has been a big thing in politics everywhere for a while.

My view is that voters can sniff out spin/comms that is not grounded in who a candidate really is/what they really think so there isn't really a dichotomy but no level of spin/comms can hide if there's a gap. Also I think if it's a little too visible then it causes questions.

With Sunak there actually isn't - we may be the first country with a sort of tech bro looking leader. I think this is who he actually is - he's a Stanford MBA who has a house in Santa Monica, met his wife in California etc

I still can't. The tories have ruled the UK with an iron fist since 2010. "rebuild the economy" and "reunite the country" implies that there has been significant degradation that needs to be reversed. Especially on the economic front, I'd argue it is actually false--the economy maybe hasn't grown as fast as it should, but the UK economy in terms of GDP per capita is as good as ever.

I agree. I think "rebuild the economy" works in the context of post-covid, war in Ukraine etc but I'm still not sure it's a great message when you've been chancellor.

But also this is another leadership change where the Tories need to do their Dr Who trick and regenerate in office. They have been in office since 2010 but there are two phases there from Cameron/Osborne in 2010-16 and then May/Johnson in 2016-22. I think the May/Johnson analysis/approach is the right one for the Tories and they need to actually deliver on it which they haven't and requires competence.

Sunak is, I think, basically pitching as a return to 2010-16 (which I think is the wrong direction) but may be more of a distance/break with Johnson which may be what the Tories want/need.

But they presumably passed on "Build the economy" and "Unite the country" as slogans because they don't start with "r".

Probably but they're also a bit vague. It's like the difference between "make America great" and make America great again". The former is vacuous and not very resonant, add the "again" and there's narrative there that you can tie your campaign too.

I think it's similar with those - "rebuild the economy" is basically Sunak continuing how he positioned himself as Chancellor (though I slightly query if it works given he was chancellor); "restore trust" = I'm not Boris Johnson; and "reunite the country" this is the first post-Brexit leadership and we're moving on. I'm not sure "build the economy"/"unite the country" have the same rallying effect - I don't think they work as well (plus the alliteration which makes them more memorable).

YouGov poll of members which is interesting. Striking thing here is that it's two of the outsider candidates at the top. I don't think they are satisfied with this cabinet and government and want a bit of a clean break - which is challenging for, say, Sunak or Truss. But means they basically want the least experienced candidates.

It also matches the Conservative Home panel:


The fact that Mordaunt's a NIMBY and from her speech today she doesn't seem serious to me - it's a vibes-based candidacy which is a little worrying and I don't think the Tory membership have a sense of her beyond those vibes: great hair, Royal Navy reservist etc.

Also striking - I think Zahawi was a dark horse who could have won until last week. Deciding not to resign and instead accepting a promotion from Johnson then, 24 hours later, telling him to stand down have absolutely torched his chances. And I have no idea what Hunt's done with his campaign/position. It's been really baffling.

I think we've got 20 minutes until the first round ballot is closed. Any candidate with less than 30 votes will be eliminated. Next round is tomorrow and, I think, starting tomorrow the broadcastsers will be doing some debates.

I think, if I was a Tory member, I'd probably be the rare Tugendhat-Badenoch swing voter

Edit: Also interesting across a few polls now how poorly Truss does. If I was a "stop Sunak" MP, I'd want Mordaunt or Badenoch to get through. I think if I was a Sunak-backer I'd probably want to face Truss

[The Larch]

we may be the first country with a sort of tech bro looking leader

El Salvador wants a word about that.

[Sheilbh]

Forgot abou him. And similarly Sunak asked Royal Mint to look into NFTs plus Treasury and BofE to look about crypto.

[The Larch]

Forgot abou him. And similarly Sunak asked Royal Mint to look into NFTs plus Treasury and BofE to look about crypto.

But would Sunak boast about handling the country's economy from his phone while taking a bath? 

[crazy canuck]

Forgot abou him. And similarly Sunak asked Royal Mint to look into NFTs plus Treasury and BofE to look about crypto.

You also forgot about Canada's crypto bro, wants to make crypto official Canadian currency - he will likely be the next Conservative leader.

[Sheilbh]

It all depends what we mean by crypto as well.

The UK is about 70% cashless already (I think Canada's the most cashless country in the world) - and I think there's definitely scope there for central banks and treasuries around the world to be looking at that. I think we are relatively close to a fundamentally digital economy in some countries which would and should have implications for central banks and treasuries (and revenue) if actually basically what we all own are largely digital assets on one bank's database that we use to make transactions via payment processors and banks etc. Is a central bank digital currency crypto?

I feel like tax and payments have been areas where I've seen use cases for blockchain too that don't seem absolutely mad or purely to do crime So again there is something to study there.

Similarly - I don't think it's Meta's metaverse - but I think there is going to be, in the long run, space and demand for some form of digital assets. NFTs were maybe a flash in the pan but I think they're gesturing at something that is going to be real.

But Sunak was a bit broader and less about the UK adopting crypto (though interested in a CBDC by the BofE) and more about the UK as a crypto hub - and he is a former hedge fund guy so it fits. He probably sees it as actually an opportunity (especially post-Brexit) to set out a framework and regs etc so the UK can be a first/early mover for crypto/digital asset trading/financial services. And I'm not sure that's a bad idea (especially given that the UK has a fairly decent fintech scene which would support/integrate with it. It is something that leans into our strengths and I think, as with AI and life sciences, if we can be early in adopting a coherent regulatory framework that would be a good thing.

[crazy canuck]

It all depends what we mean by crypto as well.

The UK is about 70% cashless already (I think Canada's the most cashless country in the world) - and I think there's definitely scope there for central banks and treasuries around the world to be looking at that. I think we are relatively close to a fundamentally digital economy in some countries which would and should have implications for central banks and treasuries (and revenue) if actually basically what we all own are largely digital assets on one bank's database that we use to make transactions via payment processors and banks etc. Is a central bank digital currency crypto?

I feel like tax and payments have been areas where I've seen use cases for blockchain too that don't seem absolutely mad or purely to do crime So again there is something to study there.

Similarly - I don't think it's Meta's metaverse - but I think there is going to be, in the long run, space and demand for some form of digital assets. NFTs were maybe a flash in the pan but I think they're gesturing at something that is going to be real.

But Sunak was a bit broader and less about the UK adopting crypto (though interested in a CBDC by the BofE) and more about the UK as a crypto hub - and he is a former hedge fund guy so it fits. He probably sees it as actually an opportunity (especially post-Brexit) to set out a framework and regs etc so the UK can be a first/early mover for crypto/digital asset trading/financial services. And I'm not sure that's a bad idea (especially given that the UK has a fairly decent fintech scene which would support/integrate with it. It is something that leans into our strengths and I think, as with AI and life sciences, if we can be early in adopting a coherent regulatory framework that would be a good thing.

There is a world of difference between a national currency and a crypto currency - both are traded and used through digital technology, but that is where he similarity ends.