[Tubby Isaacs]

No doubt financial experts are searching for a less-impressive figure to call the REAL measure of the economy.

The deficit is high and expensive. I'd rather they'd raised taxes more to reduce it. But there are comparatively good indicators too, like this today.

Everybody was looking for the worst spin on the performance of Rachel Reeves, for some reason. Some of the tax rises were sub-optimal, but at least she did them and we might therefore see the public realm stop deteriorating.

The left (especially at The Guardian) were the worst for it. eg Aditya Chakraborty:

the days of relying on a growth miracle are over. Two years ago, Starmer won an election promising “the highest sustained growth in the G7”. A few days ago, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development thinktank predicted that the UK would have the lowest growth in the G7, with the exception of Italy.

Month and a half later, when the first quarter figures came in, the UK had the highest growth in the G7. 2 weeks later the OECD had moved the UK up to equal second in projected growth for 2026. None of which is a miracle, but it's better than the impression everyone wants to give, for some unknown reason.

[Watchman]

Not sure if this should be here or in "jokes"

The last time King Charles uttered the words "Andy Burnham", he was telling his brother to get rid of some photos.

[Oboogie]

Anas Sarwar apparently joining the Cabinet. This really does look like a bunch of plotters laughing at Starmer.

Is he being made a Lord, as how can he be in the cabinet if he isn't a lord or an MP? I am slightly surprised they didn't take advantage of Khan being made a Lord.

Surely Khan's too close to Starmer to be considered?

[mattomac]

I'm not that sure, Remember the briefing after Uxbridge after the sensible carbon reduction plan that has lowered emissions levels around the capital was implemented.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Mayors and devolved party leaders should be in the House of Lords, within reason. One of Miliband's ideas before was to shift representation to people from what was called "the regions". But people from the devolved assemblies should have the chance to speak/vote too.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I actually like the VAT coming off electricity only, and not gas. We need to make heat pumps and electric cars cheaper. I don't care if we fund that by selling oil to people who'd otherwise buy oil off someone else.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The Lexiter is on hand with advice for Andy Burnham.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ohn-healey

The Treasury will check Andy Burnham’s ambitions – unless old orthodoxies are challenged
Larry Elliott

What's the thing that Larry's spotted and the Treasury and the orthodox squares have missed?

Some things have changed since the long hot summer of 1976. One of the abiding legacies of Britain’s shift to the right in the 1970s was the idea that there was no difference between the government and a household when it comes to spending, with the implication that either can go bust if it lives beyond its means. That notion lives on today, with even the most modest of ministerial spending pledges met with the challenge: how are you going to pay for it? If Burnham is serious about rolling back neoliberalism, he needs to start by challenging this entirely wrong-headed idea.

I haven't heard anyone say this "going bust" stuff for about a decade. Nor the household budget stuff. I agree with him that with something like £2 bus tickets, you just do them, don't worry too much about funding it instantly. But the bigger stuff, like care reform, the sort of big idea the public seems to want, will cost. You have to be credible on things like that. Larry knows that, seeing he said (quite rightly) earlier in the piece that taxes will probably have to rise.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Streeting says Burnham government will prioritise military over other spending

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... dy-burnham

Crikey, that's a bit strong. Well it would be if he'd said that. He didn't.

Spending more on defence would come at “an opportunity cost across government”, Streeting said in a subsequent briefing, meaning the Ministry of Defence had to show “we are spending existing resources wisely”.

Is it too much for a national newspaper to know what opportunity cost means? It means that any money you do get could be spent somewhere else, and you have to show you're spending it wisely. Health spending has an opportunity cost too. So does all spending.

I've never warmed to Streeting, and have said so many times. While he had a point about junior doctors, I think he said too much and made it harder to settle the strike. But I'm also struck by the way so many people on the left have an outsized hatred of him and are happy to misrepresent him. A good example of this was the "private health donors", who turned out to be people with investments in lots of areas, including private health, often small shares. What did any of this buy them exactly? Perhaps the same people will now become "defence lobby donors".

[Tubby Isaacs]

Scrapped digital ID was to cost £1.8bn over 3 years. Let's assume that goes over budget, say £3.6bn, double the original estimate? Once it's done, it costs nothing and likely saves a lot of time and money. While I support reducing VAT on electricity, can we not do that by cutting investment? How is this a new non neoliberal economic paradigm?