Roger Morgan

If you can't see how this will end, then you're not paying attention (not least to what's going on on the other side of the Atlantic).

THE TIMES THUNDERER EXTRACT Fantasy economics mean Nigel Farage is heir to Liz Truss Liam Byrne Our Decoding Populism study shows Reform’s support is not a single army marching in step. It’s a fragile alliance of 5 “tribes” bound more by grievance than values. They feel under pressure, in precarious communities, pessimistic about the future, angry about immigration, and feel politics is broken. But two of these tribes, about 40 per cent of Farage’s base, are very persuadable. They worry about pay, pensions, bills, social security and the NHS. They are open to Labour, the Lib Dems, even the Greens. So what messages work?We found that four cut through most. First: the economy. Farage has tabled billions in unfunded promises. That means higher mortgages, higher bills, higher prices. Second: employment rights. Reform would scrap safeguards on sick pay, safe hours and zero-hours contracts. Third: social security. They want to cut £140 billion of support to pensioners, families and disabled people, leaving the vulnerable out in the cold.Fourth: the NHS. Farage has mused openly about a US-style insurance model, threatening free provision at the point of need. By contrast,attacks painting Reform’s leader as “Britain’s Trump” or focusing on immigration don’t move the dial. Populists thrive when debate rages on their chosen turf of immigration and identity. We must not fight on their battlefield. Populists govern badly but campaign well.And the price is high: international research shows countries under populist rule end up over 10 per cent poorer within 15 years. That’s a pay cut Britain simply cannot afford. So the strategy must be clear. Stop tilting at Farage’s windmills. Expose his offer as Liz Truss 2.0 — a sugar rush of fantasy economics that would leave Britain poorer. And counter his fake nostalgia with a real story of national renewal: a country fairer, stronger and more secure. Farage can be beaten — but only if we fight him where he is weakest, not strongest.

Strong arguments from @liambyrnemp.bsky.social on how best to tackle the threat of Farage..
Do so where he’s weak:
The economy⚠️he’d do a Truss++
Workers’ rights⚠️he’s against them
Welfare⚠️he’d strip it away
NHS⚠️he’d dismantle it.
“Populists govern badly but campaign well”
So blow up their campaign.

So often “NHS” is conflated with “acute hospitals”.

The volume of activity in primary care dwarfs what happens in hospitals.

And for most of the population, their experience of their GP is their experience of the NHS.

On Monday we learnt that 1 in 3 children are living in poverty…

And that deprivation has hit a record high

Given their new found compassion for struggling Brits

Where’s Jeremy Clarkson, Nigel Farage and Andrew Lloyd Webber to fight their corner?

…anywhere?

Oh yes a classic. Here it is from 2021.

Have you ever wondered what the collapse of the NHS would actually look like? It's in the small things - my latest Independent newsletter: link.e.independent.co.uk/view/60e48d536…link.e.independent.co.uk/view/60e48d5...ba

It’s a load of hysterics. 1/3 of farmers are tenant farmers anyway so irrelevant to them. And if the others genuinely want to pass the farm down with no IHT they can do so 7 years before death - in case they can’t predict that - they can take out some life insurance to cover tax - Job done.

What are the changes to agricultural property relief? Reforms announced at the Budget will help raise money to fix the public finances while protecting small family farms from unfairly high inheritance tax.

This is not correct - see examples - www.gov.uk/government/n...

Took me 6 this morning as well!

I agree but the farmers need to pick their fights - farmers will still get preferential IHT support. If we were discussing the need for food prices to go up because the government was changing the subsidies that support cheap food then it’s a much better argument. That’s on the Conservatives.

Well unsurprisingly the politicians who said that they would continue subsidies for producing cheap food after brexit have gone back on their word (yes it was the Tories). Now that is what we should be debating and the farmers have a much better case and would get substantial support -including mine

I have read it and it makes a lot of sense - however the farmers are making a fuss about the wrong thing. The withdrawal of subsidies for producing cheap food post brexit hurts them much more than the IHT changes where they still get favourable treatment. The IHT rules has distorted land values.

The real issue is the withdrawal of farming subsidies post brexit in return for producing cheap food. Now if the farmers had focussed on that they would have had much more support rather than IHT where they still get treated generously.

*food*

The farmers are doing themselves little good by making such a fuss about the IHT where they are still treated very favourably. If they had focused on the withdrawal of subsidies which helps keep good prices down they would have much more support.

In fact, Clarkson & Dyson, by buying farmland themselves, have actually helped push up the price of farmland, which constitutes to higher Inheritance tax (& lower yields). Farmers should be lambasting Clarkson, not buying him a pint!

1/3 farmers are tenant farmers anyway so this is irrelevant to them. With a bit of IHT planning by the others the tax can be avoided anyway as long as they live 7 years if they truly want to pass onto next generation. There is an argument for a transitional allowance for 7 years but that’s it.

No even Bear fans don’t get that personal - they just think they have a better rugby team (they’re wrong! Well at least at the moment!). 😂

Careful - you sound nearly as cynical as I am (sometimes) 😂

Does anyone ever question how they arrive at these ‘costs’? £170m seems an extraordinary amount of money.

This is definitely me! Presumably this makes me a ‘Procaffeinator’ then? 😂

And Wes Streeting is not standing up to the Treasury over the latest employer NI increases which is going to destabilise most GP practices as well as care homes. Who will suffer most? Yes - the good old patient (taxpayer). Practices already looking at reduced teams/services and worse.

There is overwhelming evidence that the policies & funding of NHS England & GMC are set on replacing Doctors with PAs

When stating PAs have been integral to the NHS for 20years they are lying

2015 there were just 15 PAs in General Practice only 109 in hospitals

I don’t understand the reasons

The 2019 Watson report on the problems and solutions of the partnership model provides some good background reading. It’s a shame the Government and NHSE disnt pay a bit more attention assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c3ca2...

Only when it suits the Government and NHSE. The recent NI changes and lack of support from Wes Streeting over this means we are already seeing practices deferring recruitment, cutting services, contemplating redundancies and in the worst cases considering handing back contracts.

Welcome - I am so with you on the sleep point….

Deep breath, light the fire, hug the cats (walk the dog in my case), focus on the family, and think about work on work days and not on rest days. And in my case there might be a glass or two of wine involved….

Pretty wild that, in a system where we say there is a “productivity crisis” in hospitals and we don’t really understand what is causing it, we think we can centrally produce league tables and sack the managers of the organisations at the bottom.

NHSE desire to please govt forcing finance chiefs to agree undeliverable plans One of the NHS's foremost finance figures has joined the chorus of senior healthcare leaders raising serious concerns about the damaging effect of the way the service's annual planning round is conduc...

It seems that NHS England will be drawing up these league tables.

Slight problem: since their years of encouraging NHS organisations and systems to lie about their finances, NHSE’s credibility has been utterly shredded.

www.hsj.co.uk/finance-and-...

NHSE are not fit for purpose. They encourage the managers to play the game and then hang them out to dry. They set unrealistic budgets which means Trusts inevitably overspend and then bail them out so the following year the managers just ignore the budgets. Except they don’t bail out GPs/Pharmacies

YouTube video by Liberal Democrats We need a real plan for social care

"You can't have a ten year plan for the NHS if you don't have a serious plan for social care too."

Ed Davey talks to Laura Kuenssberg about the need for cross-party collaboration on social care.
youtu.be/W8fZqmn83MQ