It seems that some ex-prime ministers have no self-awareness and thus no shame.
One such ex is Liz Truss, who with her mate, a certain Kwasi Kwarteng, caused mayhem with their plans for the UK economy. She had to be removed from her post within days by the very same Conservative MPs who made her prime minister in the first place.
Now she is telling us that the entire economy of the Western world is in peril. Not from countries adopting her bold tax-cutting, uncosted and unfunded plan, but from “socialist economic policies”.
Do other countries not understand that they too could trash their economies in a matter of days, just like she did? What is the matter with this rising “global left”? Engaging with the likes of Greta Thunberg and her message of climate disaster. As if there is any proof that we’re trashing the planet? As if there had been unprecedented wildfires and floods all over the world. Which obviously there hasn’t been!
Liz Truss. That paragon of fiscal conservatism. That creator of The Daily Mail’s celebrated true Conservative budget. She can add the title of deluded, unable to accept she made a disastrous mistake and therefore unable to step away and stop banging that drum to her long list of Tory attributes.
Karen Brittain
York
Fact vs fiction
Anybody who even suggests that it was a “left-wing orthodoxy” that ended the Liz Truss premiership needs to take a hard look at the facts and events as they happened.
Truss wanted to end help for vulnerable people with their energy bills with immediate effect. This would have pushed millions further into poverty.
Thanks to Trussonomics, mortgage payers were facing mortgage misery on a far faster scale.
And thanks to Truss, after just days in power, her mini-budget crashed the economy. As a result, the fight against inflation stalled.
The only thing Truss has in common with Rishi Sunak is the fact that the only winners from Trussonomics, as ever, were the richest one per cent at the expense of the rest of us.
That’s not left-wing orthodoxy. It’s a simple fact!
Geoffrey Brooking
Hampshire
Starmer needs to realise what voters really think
Two points stand out from Archie Mitchell’s article about tactical voting between now and the next general election.
The first is the assertion of polling chief Martin Baxter that tactical voting will be used “to punish the Conservatives”. It won’t. It will be used to get them out – far more importantly – by people who hope that their deliberate running down of every provision for ordinary people will then be excluded from government forever.
The second is professor Curtice’s implication (I think) that Keir Starmer hasn’t realised this yet. He thinks the nation wants Labour for its own sake; but if seriously contesting every seat lets the Tories cling on by splitting the opposition, swathes of the electorate won’t forgive him.
Perhaps Sir Keir needs the shock of not winning the Mid Bedfordshire by-election to help him catch up with what tactical voters are really thinking.
Peter Millen
Huddersfield
Migrants are not just statistics, they’re human beings
I read Archie Mitchell’s recent column with interest. It is certainly good news, that Labour is trying to establish a counter initiative against the often implausible strategies of the current government with their Rwanda policy and ubiquitous “stop the boats” mantra.
I am not entirely convinced by the slogan “bring order to the border”, but I suppose it has a proactive ring to it and will perhaps become an electoral “earworm”.
While Keir Starmer’s focus on going all out to smash criminal gangs who prey so heartlessly on desperate asylum seekers sounds extremely beneficial, I doubt that it will be a walk in the park. These dire enterprises have honed their invidious craft to duplicitous perfection. Where one gang is eviscerated, another will more than likely pop up with alacrity.
Much like Sunak however, Starmer makes no mention of instigating more safe and legal routes, thus negating the smuggler’s business model. This issue affects so many countries it needs a wider strategy that desists from treating refugees as “flotsam and jetsam” washed up on our shores, rather than the actual collateral damage of so many persecutions, wars and climate disasters. They are human beings and not just immigration statistics to be lobbed across the House of Commons chamber.
Judith A Daniels
Norfolk
The NHS is a twisted system
The case of William Mead is a tragedy and it is difficult to imagine the feelings of a parent who has lost a child. The need to get some meaning out of what has occurred is painful in itself. I have been close to something like that and I was shocked at the effect on me.
However, the real issue here is the policy of our government as to how health care is delivered in this country, by what sort of organisations, and at what cost. Unless the population votes for better services and accepts the cost, things cannot possibly get better.
I have sat in a hospital with an elderly relative, knowing that “something should be happening”, and it isn’t. I have sat in hospital corridors where there are no authoritative medical staff – the situation is palpably dangerous and who can you ask to treat you correctly? No one.
Yes, you can make all sorts of demands and fuss. But by doing so you take assessment and care away from someone else. The service cannot provide safe care for anyone and getting a second opinion is a dream. Unless you go private – and then you might see the same doctor more easily. This is a twisted system.
Were we to employ enough doctors, nurses and other staff, provide enough beds, and enable a smooth and efficient flow of patients without extensive delays (no delays!) then we might have a system where we could enact the right to a second opinion. That is at least 10 years off with the right policies, plans, investment, and commitment.
Michael Mann
Shrewsbury
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments