The Politics Thread

[thebish]

Of course - it could also be political manoeuvring in preparation for a brexit vote and a bid for power...

[KeyserSoze]

Several clawed swipes at Osborne. Cynic in me wonders whether there is more to this than just purely cuts. Will see.

Do love a good government meltdown.

[Worthy4England]

Not sure he thinks it's not fair - he's pointing the finger at the Treasury (well Osborne anyhow) - the Government are trying to say "nowt to do with us it all came from the DWP". The backbenchers (who were all losing their caring Conservative appointment to charity boards) were saying there was a significant rebellion brewing (enough to beat the Govt majority anyhow)....Leopards and spots n'all that.

[thebish]

Several clawed swipes at Osborne. Cynic in me wonders whether there is more to this than just purely cuts. Will see.

Do love a good government meltdown.

It will be more than a little bit about brexit and positioning himself for the possible fallout should we leave...

[thebish]

Either way - meltdown-tastic!

[Worthy4England]

Of course - it could also be political manoeuvring in preparation for a brexit vote and a bid for power...

He's been in power before - pretty unsuccessfully...

[thebish]

Of course - it could also be political manoeuvring in preparation for a brexit vote and a bid for power...

He's been in power before - pretty unsuccessfully...

Maybe the quiet man is turning up the volume!

[thebish]

Not sure he thinks it's not fair - he's pointing the finger at the Treasury (well Osborne anyhow) - the Government are trying to say "nowt to do with us it all came from the DWP". The backbenchers (who were all losing their caring Conservative appointment to charity boards) were saying there was a significant rebellion brewing (enough to beat the Govt majority anyhow)....Leopards and spots n'all that.

He does say the cuts were:

"not defensible" within a Budget that "benefits higher earning taxpayers".

[Worthy4England]

Not sure he thinks it's not fair - he's pointing the finger at the Treasury (well Osborne anyhow) - the Government are trying to say "nowt to do with us it all came from the DWP". The backbenchers (who were all losing their caring Conservative appointment to charity boards) were saying there was a significant rebellion brewing (enough to beat the Govt majority anyhow)....Leopards and spots n'all that.

He does say the cuts were:

"not defensible" within a Budget that "benefits higher earning taxpayers".

That's not the same as an unqualified "not defensible". So they'd have been spot on, if only they'd have been in a budget that didn't give anything back to higher rate taxpayers? Either way, sounds like there's a temporary U-turn at least...which I'm supportive of.

[Prufrock]

Iain Duncan Smith. Moral high ground. This is priceless. Ending ourselves laughing in the pubs of Islington last night, I tell you!

[Worthy4England]

Iain Duncan Smith. Moral high ground. This is priceless. Ending ourselves laughing in the pubs of Islington last night, I tell you!

Quite. Man wakes up on a Friday, discovers conscience, thinks "Oh no, what have I done all these years"...No, really...

[Prufrock]

Mate of mine I was drinking with knows his son, who along with a few others of his family, is a bit of a hard-core leftie (went to SOAS which says it all!) Maybe they've won him round

[thebish]

Not sure he thinks it's not fair - he's pointing the finger at the Treasury (well Osborne anyhow) - the Government are trying to say "nowt to do with us it all came from the DWP". The backbenchers (who were all losing their caring Conservative appointment to charity boards) were saying there was a significant rebellion brewing (enough to beat the Govt majority anyhow)....Leopards and spots n'all that.

He does say the cuts were:

"not defensible" within a Budget that "benefits higher earning taxpayers".

That's not the same as an unqualified "not defensible". So they'd have been spot on, if only they'd have been in a budget that didn't give anything back to higher rate taxpayers? Either way, sounds like there's a temporary U-turn at least...which I'm supportive of.

from what is being said this morning, his decision to resign coincided with a press-release to the papers - or a story written by a treasury stooge - which distanced the treasury from blame for this idea (PIP cuts) and laid it directly at IDS's door - as if to say - the country hates him anyway - so he can soak up a bit more...

IDS - it is said - has never liked the idea that his cabinet position is junior to Osbourne when he (IDS) used to be party leader dontchaknow! - and Osbourne has often made this seniority crystal clear...

basically - an Osbourne (Treasury) vs IDS (DWP) catfight with briefing and counter-briefing - and in the middle of it all, Cameron looks like a lost puppy with no authority or even a bag to hold...

of course - it's no bad thing in IDS's eyes that he suddenly looks like a martyr for the disabled - and suddenly has a huge national profile - while cameron and osbourne look as if they are flailing about putting out fires... what with the in/out referendum coming up on the siderails...

you're right about his language - IDS very much stops short of saying these cuts shouldn't be made - and very much stops short of saying the tax-breaks shouldn't have happened - merely that presenting them together looks bad...

his swipe at "we're in this together" IS significant ammunition that govt. opposition can use, though - and (I think) DOES betray a difference - maybe a nuanced one - between his approach and Osbourne's... Osbourne is pure ideologue with no heart... I think - however misguided - that IDS genuinely believes in benefit reform as a good thing for poor people...

[Hoboh]

Iain Duncan Smith. Moral high ground. This is priceless. Ending ourselves laughing in the pubs of Islington last night, I tell you!

Who cares what happens in la, la, land?

[CrazyHorse]

Iain Duncan Smith. Moral high ground. This is priceless. Ending ourselves laughing in the pubs of Islington last night, I tell you!

Who cares what happens in la, la, land?

The teletubbies?

[Hoboh]

Not sure he thinks it's not fair - he's pointing the finger at the Treasury (well Osborne anyhow) - the Government are trying to say "nowt to do with us it all came from the DWP". The backbenchers (who were all losing their caring Conservative appointment to charity boards) were saying there was a significant rebellion brewing (enough to beat the Govt majority anyhow)....Leopards and spots n'all that.

He does say the cuts were:

"not defensible" within a Budget that "benefits higher earning taxpayers".

That's not the same as an unqualified "not defensible". So they'd have been spot on, if only they'd have been in a budget that didn't give anything back to higher rate taxpayers? Either way, sounds like there's a temporary U-turn at least...which I'm supportive of.

from what is being said this morning, his decision to resign coincided with a press-release to the papers - or a story written by a treasury stooge - which distanced the treasury from blame for this idea (PIP cuts) and laid it directly at IDS's door - as if to say - the country hates him anyway - so he can soak up a bit more...

IDS - it is said - has never liked the idea that his cabinet position is junior to Osbourne when he (IDS) used to be party leader dontchaknow! - and Osbourne has often made this seniority crystal clear...

basically - an Osbourne (Treasury) vs IDS (DWP) catfight with briefing and counter-briefing - and in the middle of it all, Cameron looks like a lost puppy with no authority or even a bag to hold...

of course - it's no bad thing in IDS's eyes that he suddenly looks like a martyr for the disabled - and suddenly has a huge national profile - while cameron and osbourne look as if they are flailing about putting out fires... what with the in/out referendum coming up on the siderails...

you're right about his language - IDS very much stops short of saying these cuts shouldn't be made - and very much stops short of saying the tax-breaks shouldn't have happened - merely that presenting them together looks bad...

his swipe at "we're in this together" IS significant ammunition that govt. opposition can use, though - and (I think) DOES betray a difference - maybe a nuanced one - between his approach and Osbourne's... Osbourne is pure ideologue with no heart... I think - however misguided - that IDS genuinely believes in benefit reform as a good thing for poor people...

Vince Cable, who served alongside Osborne as business secretary in the Liberal-Conservative coalition of 2010-2015, says the arrogance of the Treasury is one factor that helps to explain the chancellor’s current travails.

Cable says time after time as Osborne imposed welfare cuts, Duncan Smith was “dragged kicking and screaming the whole way through: and you had these pubescent Treasury officials saying, a billion from this and a billion from that, without any sense at all of what it meant in human terms”.

Just maybe, IDS is not the devil we thought or he was portrayed to be?

[Hoboh]

Iain Duncan Smith. Moral high ground. This is priceless. Ending ourselves laughing in the pubs of Islington last night, I tell you!

Who cares what happens in la, la, land?

The teletubbies?

Never heard Corbyn or the luvvies called that before Hoss, nice one.

[Bruce Rioja]

fecking hell. Don't hold back, John.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2016/03/c ... s-targets/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Worthy4England]

^^ wow. Does John get PIP payments and they've just been cut? I think his point is valid though.

[Armchair Wanderer]

I should listen to Radio 4 more!