Subscribe

Get the best of Newspaper delivered to your inbox daily

Most Viewed

News from nowhere: all tied up

With regard to the economic destiny of the country and this race for leadership, one thing seems reasonably certain. Before things get better, they’ll get a lot worse.

  • News from nowhere: all tied up
    News from nowhere: all tied up

On the first day of this month, Liz Truss’s campaign for leadership of the British Conservative Party, and indeed the post of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, took its first major wrongdoing.

His team proposed that, in an effort to save billions from the national purse, public sector workers in the poorest parts of the country should be paid lower wages. Boris Johnson’s government had talked a lot about ‘flattening’ those less favored areas, though it never did much about it. Instead, Mrs Truss was now proposing to reduce the flow of cash from the Treasury into sectors that the Labor Party was quick to label as ‘capping down’. It was a strategy that, the opposition said, “would worsen the already existing division.”

Conservative MPs with constituencies in the north and south-west of England also quickly distanced themselves from a scheme in which their own voters paid less for the same jobs as residents of the country’s wealthier south-east.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, a truss supporter and arrogant human stick insect, insisted that these workers “be paid market rate in the area in which they live.” However, within twelve hours of its announcement, Team Truss withdrew the idea, claiming that its opponents had deliberately misrepresented it.

Meanwhile, those same conservative critics have described the whole incident as a “catastrophic error in judgement”. BBC He said supporters of the truss hoped his immediate U-turn would “limit the damage”.

This latest development comes a week after his rival Rishi Sunak was accused of radically reversing his pledge not to cut taxes, with the announcement of a proposed emergency measure to end VAT on energy bills. But Sunak’s change of heart was at least an attempt to make his fiscal conservatism seem like it really had the heart, to bring it more compassionate and in touch with the real experiences of ordinary people facing an unknown cost-income crisis. Had to do , for decades. Instead, Truss’s initial plan had made his platform suddenly unresponsive and removed from the daily struggle affecting millions.

(That week, the BBC also noted another apparent policy change by Mr Sunak, who pointed out that he was “in his own policy to cancel plans to relax restrictions on onshore wind power in England”. seemed to take a U-turn.” Although his team later claimed this was a ‘wrong thing’, the incident received no further coverage, and no one cared much about it. Didn’t know what it really meant.)

Last month, this column suggested that something ‘extremely stupid’ must have happened to derail the momentum of Liz Truss’s campaign. There were others who felt earlier this month that his ‘level down’ might have been the wrong move.

The next morning, however, the front page of the national press decided to ignore the controversy. Tory newspapers already had a massive influence on the competition, and they continued that influence in the distinguished service of Mrs Truss that day.

many times Declared that the race for the truss had a thirty-six point lead. daily Express Reported on his claim that it could generate the economic growth that Britain would need. daily mail formally declared his support for his leadership’s bid: “He has the audacity, the vision and the strength of conviction to build on what Boris started.”

In fact, those whose memories last more than twenty-four hours may have thought that their campaign efforts to blame others for ‘misrepresenting’ their own lack of judgment in the matter certainly led to Johnson’s morality position and his repeated failure to take responsibility for his own mistakes.

However, within days, former leadership rival (and former chancellor, health secretary and home secretary) Sajid Javid had joined a growing number of senior conservatives in support of Truss. The day of the disastrous policy change saw his biggest rival, Penny Mordaunt, whose own bid was thwarted by a team truss running a smear campaign against him in the Tory press, announcing the support of the favorite in the race.

It was clear that deals were made with such important players in the party and the media to secure the Mary Elizabeth Truss’s free passage to Downing Street.

In early August, changes were made to the voting process, on the advice of British intelligence services, to reduce the possibility of outside interference in the election of the Conservative Party leadership through potential cybersecurity breaches. However, no one was particularly concerned about the backroom deals that had already left a vague impact on these proceedings.

In fact, one might assume that the selection of a new prime minister by members of a single political party representing less than half of the country’s voting population could hardly be considered particularly democratic in the first place.

Rishi Sunak must be wondering by now why he is getting upset. Even the announcement of one of the most absurdly bland political proposals (yes, a plan to cut income in the most disadvantaged parts of the country) did not dampen his rival’s popularity.

When one of his answers at a televised debate in late July caused the presenter to lose consciousness, no one bowed. The truss sounded like Trump’s fireproof. Mr. Sunak might be wondering what would harm him. Can she, like Donald Trump, get away with bragging records about multiple sexual assaults? What if he criticizes David Attenborough or punches the Queen?

No, even though he had announced plans to ban beer, fried food, and football, Liz Truss’s rise to power now seemed completely unstoppable.

Days after the truss team toasted the disaster, video footage of Rishi Sunak surfaced, in which he told his supporters in the wealthy home county that he had diverted his share of the country’s funds to what were otherwise ‘deprived urban areas’. Used to go It looked like nothing could go wrong for the Liz Truss campaign.

That same week, Her Majesty’s opposition sought to spark public outrage when she called for an inquiry for failing to reveal that a private London club had offered free hospitality to MPs to host a champagne dinner, whose support was sought. Unfortunately for Labor, it was only hours later that it was revealed that their own leaders had failed to declare similar financial interests on eight separate occasions. This took the force out of its righteous indignation, and the story died silently.

The real story, of course, should not have been about the accounting oversight of the truss. He should have asked why the foreign secretary, loyal to Johnson, had been busy preparing Conservative lawmakers for his leadership bid for more than eight months, before his boss announced his decision to resign. But this curious discrepancy in the media environment gearing up for the coronation of his favorite candidate failed to attract much attention.

The problem, of course, is the preference of daily mail Perhaps the least capable of the entire core sector by a prime minister. But it could in many ways be exactly what the right-wing press wants: another puppet prime minister.

In a televised debate earlier this month, Mrs Truss announced that ‘bold’ action was needed in response to the Bank of England’s latest prediction of 13 per cent inflation and an economic slowdown of at least one year. He later said that economic forecasts “were not luck.” His willingness to ignore the bank’s warnings is reminiscent of the attitude of former Boris Johnson henchman Michael Gove, who argued during the 2016 Brexit campaign that the UK had “enough experts”.

Next morning, daily Telegraph reported that sixty percent of its readers supported Liz Truss.

His stubborn refusal to face accepted facts exemplifies his style of politics, an approach reminiscent of Boris Johnson. It emphasizes risky actions without any evidence-based rational substance. This is the unimaginable optimism of pure populism.

This kind of mind-boggling bang could be the quality viewers might want to see in a 1970s action movie star. Perhaps it is less appropriate for a forward-thinking politician in an increasingly complex and turbulent world. ,

Rishi Sunak has argued that if the government fails to deal with the threat of inflation, conservatives may “goodbye” any hope of winning the next general election. But, as Johnson, Trump and Truss know, their supporters often prefer to embrace the unrealistic hopes of false promises rather than accept the uncomfortable reality of their situations.

There are reasons to suspect that the tax cuts promised by Liz Truss may, in fact, exacerbate the inflationary trend in the economy without doing much to mitigate the effects of the country’s livelihood crisis. His plan to reverse the recent growth in national insurance will benefit the highest paid. His proposal to scrap a set hike in corporate tax won’t help much either. His promise to suspend green taxes on energy bills will once again privilege the highest spenders.

However, the rejection of the culture of ‘handouts’ (which she says her opponent wants) as being ideologically orthodox, goes well below the true blue heart among party members who do not want any kind of welfare. are hostile to. The government that is deployed to support those who need it the most.

Like Margaret Thatcher, he rejects the patriarchal condescension of traditional one-nation conservatism. At the same time, he prefers to ignore the lessons of the painful socio-economic scholarship that Thatcherite’s policies instilled.

A week earlier, Mr Sunak wrote in The Sun newspaper that his rivals were dealing a ‘big blow’ to the rich, while leaving the poor ‘in the open’. It seems hard to disagree with him, at least on this point.

As told by a Tory MP BBC Last week, it was the government’s central responsibility to ensure that the “most economically vulnerable” are adequately protected, and not to provide a bonus of tax cuts for those who are already well provided. have been done.

The future, of course, remains uncertain. However, one thing is for sure about both the economic destiny of the country and this race for leadership. Before things get better, they’ll get a lot worse.


The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of al mayadinBut express the opinion of its author exclusively.


Subscribe

Get the best of Newspaper delivered to your inbox daily

Most Viewed

Related Stories