Bye Bye Rachel Reeves

[GG.]

Filling all these new black holes feels like a Red Dwarf storyline.

Dave!

Either that or a bad adult film. Every time you try and fill the hole it gets larger...

[Jobbo]

Dan Neidle - historically a member of and adviser to the Labour Party - posted this today: https://bsky.app/profile/danneidle.bsky ... fy62bl4j2u - see also the first three posts setting out the reports proposals for reducing state spending:

Key proposals:
1. freeze state pensions for three years and end triple lock
2. freeze benefits for three years
3. £20 fee for seeing a GP
4. abolishing most childcare subsidies
5. ending free school means
6. cut cost of civil service by 25%
7. reducing number of university places
8. reducing environmental subsidies
9. reducing international development spending

Now it's not Dan's report and he's not stated whether he's in favour so don't assume he is. He does at least give it credit for being a serious and credible start to a discussion on the level of state spending.

Unfortunately I think too many of the individual elements would look a bit harsh even to the Tories wanting to get elected. But this could form the basis of a Reform spending review for their manifesto; they have nothing to lose.

[DeskJockey]

They're all bad ideas that will further ruin services, and that will have long-term impacts that, just on cost, far outweigh any short term saving.

[Mito Man]

The future looks about as bright as her black hole.

Dare anyone point out that current levels of state spending can be maintained if income increases but that would require the myopic crabs to actually be welcoming towards business…

[Jobbo]

They're all bad ideas that will further ruin services, and that will have long-term impacts that, just on cost, far outweigh any short term saving.

That is certainly the easy objection. But if the state is too big - and it probably is - then reducing the size of it to reduce tax and stimulate growth is a good approach. If we are going to have a Reform government, they could just do a slash and burn or they could follow an actual plan. I’d rather the latter.

[DeskJockey]

They're all bad ideas that will further ruin services, and that will have long-term impacts that, just on cost, far outweigh any short term saving.

That is certainly the easy objection. But if the state is too big - and it probably is - then reducing the size of it to reduce tax and stimulate growth is a good approach. If we are going to have a Reform government, they could just do a slash and burn or they could follow an actual plan. I’d rather the latter.

Is there anything left to cut without first reassessing statutory duties? I'm not suggesting it is perfect or running like a well oiled machine, but so many things are already near breaking point/broken that further cuts can't achieve anything but a temporary saving (at best).

They should obviously follow a plan, but that's likely to be wishful thinking when it comes to them.

[GG.]

They're all bad ideas that will further ruin services, and that will have long-term impacts that, just on cost, far outweigh any short term saving.

That is certainly the easy objection. But if the state is too big - and it probably is - then reducing the size of it to reduce tax and stimulate growth is a good approach. If we are going to have a Reform government, they could just do a slash and burn or they could follow an actual plan. I’d rather the latter.

Is there anything left to cut without first reassessing statutory duties? I'm not suggesting it is perfect or running like a well oiled machine, but so many things are already near breaking point/broken that further cuts can't achieve anything but a temporary saving (at best).

They should obviously follow a plan, but that's likely to be wishful thinking when it comes to them.

If we're in a situation where the country is in a position of running an unsustainable deficit then its an anomaly that benefits are not means tested across the board. I used to have an argument (more a discussion really) with my late FIL that if I'm not allowed to put money into a pension because there is a taper above certain income because the state can't afford me a pension, then the same has to be applied at the other end for wealthy pensioners that don't need state provision. That would also allow more money to be redirected to the poorest pensioners that really need it.

His argument was always that it was a hypothecated amount paid for by NI but we all know that's nonsense as it just gets swallowed into a cavernous hole. That's before you get into public sector pensions which are still often DB schemes which again run deficits that we top up out of taxation and again the argument that "I paid in" is false as pensioners in DB schemes are often hugely in deficit by the time they die.

There is also rampant benefits abuse, particularly lately in relation to disability benefits so they whole system is ripe for reform. Again that should mean those that need it don't need to suffer cuts. I would, to misquote Pulp Fiction, however, get Victorian on people's ass. You claim unemployment benefit then you will be signing up to assist the council with whatever unskilled tasks need doing for a least a significant portion of the week - picking litter, painting railings, etc. There is no way you'll be sitting on your ass all day and we pay other people to do those jobs (or as the case may be, whilst our local infrastructure rots). Don't like it - the tap gets switched off. If benefits pay better than work for sitting doing nothing then it will be abused.

Many of the other things on that list, such as school meals or childcare assistance are obviously not good targets for cuts. Reform of the system is again the right approach with other aspects rather than just tinkering around the edges with £20 fees to see GPs - the NHS has to move seriously toward a continental system with co-pay insurance as the private sectors runs healthcare much more efficiently. The fact that the NHS is having to heavily rely on private insurance funded capacity to fill its gaps already shows definitively that is the way forward, but the system needs to be funded and expanded properly through centralised taxation.

Civil service and council spending in non-discretionary areas should be cut significantly - the problem there is as councils are effectively devolved, they would still run social clubs whilst letting bins go unemptied in protest so there would need to be a wholesale repatriation of council powers centrally, or a rigid framework of minimum services that need to be provided.

Ultimately Javier Milei shows it can be done but you need someone with real cojones to do it and a system that is so unutterably broken to build support for doing it. Looking at current polling and the fiscal outlook I expect those preconditions are satisfied.

The above list highlights some of the key areas but ultimately just deals with moving figures up and down and not fixing a broken system.

[Rich B]

No government would be brave enough to do anything with triple lock - old people vote.

[Jobbo]

Back to Reeves, her letting agents have apologised for failing to apply for the licence:

https://propertyindustryeye.com/news-up ... statement/

Which pretty much exonerates her. Legally she was responsible but she had an agent who said they would do it and failed, so she has an entirely reasonable excuse as a defence.

[GG.]

Back to Reeves, her letting agents have apologised for failing to apply for the licence:

https://propertyindustryeye.com/news-up ... statement/

Which pretty much exonerates her. Legally she was responsible but she had an agent who said they would do it and failed, so she has an entirely reasonable excuse as a defence.

Well her husband does as seems Reeves wasn't coordinating any of it...

She/they do look very stupid on a couple of counts though - the first was saying she wasn't aware they needed a license when they had been explicitly told and she was fully cognisant of the concept of them as she was tweeting in support of a similar scheme in Leeds the prior week. That either means her original statement was a lie or she didn't even bother to check with her husband first. He would clearly have remembered (don't give me "I needed to trawl through my emails") as he was switched on enough to grill them about what consents were needed at the time, even asking if they needed anything further as they lived on the Dulwich Estate (the reference to the DE is redacted in the disclosures but knowing the context I can work out that's what he asked).

They were also told that there would be a 900 pound charge which they were never billed for so, again, common sense would tell you you should follow up to check that it was done. That part is your duty as a landlord, not just to assume someone that you were emailing but then never heard from again (as they had left), had in fact done the thing you never got charged for. As someone else pointed out - as a landlord they assume that anything they haven't been invoiced for (repairs, etc.) simply has not been done. Agents don't pay for things out of their own pocket and never charge you back.

So not the same ballpark as Rayner but just paints her / them as disorganised / not diligent which isn't a great look for someone running the country.

[Jobbo]

And like Rayner it is the reaction afterwards which was far more of a problem than the initial issue.

Still Kemi Badenoch has been trying to make capital out of it and that has brought up the lack of action taking for her criminal offence of hacking Harriet Harman's website: https://news.sky.com/story/badenoch-say ... w-13460659 - maybe the police should arrest her. They're all inept in such a variety of ways

[Mito Man]

What a fcking idiot. Where do they find these people from
Her though process and justification for it as well…

[jamcg]

Let’s look at a different law surrounding renting and landlords then

You need a landlord gas safety certificate and proof of regular maintenance of your gas appliances as a landlord. You call me up “Jordan can you come do my landlord certificate and service the boiler” yeah sure I says, then I forget and it doesn’t get done, and you don’t pay me anything because no work has been done

Gas safe then call you up and request your documents- It’s the landlord who is at fault because they didn’t do their due diligence and follow up. Same applies here. Simple

[Rich B]

Let’s look at a different law surrounding renting and landlords then

You need a landlord gas safety certificate and proof of regular maintenance of your gas appliances as a landlord. You call me up “Jordan can you come do my landlord certificate and service the boiler” yeah sure I says, then I forget and it doesn’t get done, and you don’t pay me anything because no work has been done

Gas safe then call you up and request your documents- It’s the landlord who is at fault because they didn’t do their due diligence and follow up. Same applies here. Simple

yep, but the landlord doesn’t get sacked from their job as a chartered accountant/brick layer/ferret handler because of it, they get the appropriate fine and everything moves on.

[V8Granite]

Agreed, as much as I think she is awful and purposefully financially ruining what growth we had, this is a silly thing to try and take her down on.

Dave!

[Rich B]

i wonder how long the tory press have been sat on this one - saving it up for budget time…

[Swervin_Mervin]

They're all bad ideas that will further ruin services, and that will have long-term impacts that, just on cost, far outweigh any short term saving.

I don't think they're all bad ideas - most of them I'm not convinced about. Some aren't dissimilar to what the Swedes did in the 90s to turn their economic fortunes around. But as Jobbo says, these are the sorts of things we should be talking about openly to start a sensible discussion on how to tackle state spending.

Tackling the public sector pensions bill should be closer to the top of the agenda imo.

[Carlos]

Tackling the public sector pensions bill should be closer to the top of the agenda imo.

Absolutely. Defined Benefit schemes with almost unlimited unknown liability is madness. They pretty much only exist in the Public Sector now.

Judges, MPs etc also get accelerated schemes so it is liking Turkeys voting for Xmas so don't expect much change

[Swervin_Mervin]

Tackling the public sector pensions bill should be closer to the top of the agenda imo.

Absolutely. Defined Benefit schemes with almost unlimited unknown liability is madness. They pretty much only exist in the Public Sector now.

Judges, MPs etc also get accelerated schemes so it is liking Turkeys voting for Xmas so don't expect much change

Oh I don't expect any change. We'll keep on tinkering around the edges for many years yet. No one really has the appetite for change and what might be needed. We're just not serious enough as a country about genuinely wanting change for the better

[Alex88]

Apparently she's going to increase taxes on anyone earning more than £45,000. Not sure how this is compatible with 'not increasing taxes on working people'.

Absolutely farcical. Is £45k now well off?

It does feel like keeping your ahead above water, and earning enough so that you can create a sort of buffer between yourself and the taxman, where you can pay your (extortionate) bills and still have a fair bit of disposable income, is becoming harder and harder. Every time you get ahead they're running after you for more.

This isn't sustainable.

And a worrying indictment of the low wage, low growth, low productivity society we live in, where we're spending £300b on welfare to top up people's minimum wage income and keep pensioner's sitting happy with the triple lock. You can add another £80b on that by the end of the decade, apparently. And who will be paying for it?

The doom loop spiral continues.