To think Keir Starmer is looking more ridiculous by the day

What other factors are raising gilt yields now?

I do not know why most of this is struck through. Weird.

Interesting that you mention food production. As I noted in a previous post, farms are closing at record rates under this government. Of the farmland sold in open sales in 2023, only 44% was bought by farmers. That's not the Labour government's fault, they weren't in power then but consider how bad that figure is likely to look now that farmers are disincentivised to invest in their own businesses because of the removal of APR, shorter of cash than ever because of Labour's abrupt cancellation of a range of support and capital grant schemes, and also at risk of being forced to sell their land at below-market prices to councils for housing projects and 'green energy' enterprises. Food production in this country is at real risk of collapse. This is a very, very bad thing. Already we are able to grow barely 60% of what we eat. Already domestic production of some staples, such as oil seed rape, is falling off a cliff because our farmers are placed at a significant disadvantage in relation to foreign farmers by their own government. How? First, most competitor countries do subsidise farming. Secondly, most competitor countries do allow substantial inheritance tax relief on farmland. And thirdly, and at the moment probably most importantly, the regulation of domestic production and imported goods are often asymmetrical. For instance, in the UK farmers are not allowed to use neonicotinoids on oil seed rape, yet there is no ban or even tariff on the import of oil seed rape grown using neonicotinoids elsewhere. Now, you might not really care about farmers, I don't know. But you absolutely should care about food security. Because even if you take the view that we can just import everything and there will never again be a war that mean shipments of food to this island are blockaded, a collapse in our ability to grow staple foods would leave us in a very weak position to control the quality of our food, and vulnerable to serious market shocks. Take wheat. In an average year around 80-85% of wheat consumed in the UK is also grown here. That provides considerable insulation against price shocks. When the Russian invasion of Ukraine wrecked Ukrainian farms and harvests the price of wheat rose around 40% worldwide. If the UK could not grow its own wheat, and was also more dependent on imports for staples such as eggs and meat, the prices of both of which are affected by wheat prices, think about how food prices would have risen. It is absolute insanity to consider reducing our ability to grow food even further yet this is what Labour has set out to do. In the words of an ex adviser: Labour hopes to do to the farmers what Thatcher did to the miners. Even leaving aside the grotesque vindictiveness and tribalism of that statement, I find that an absolutely chilling aim, as well as a staggeringly stupid one.

Sorry was meant to quote @TheNuthatch.

Well quite we all know the Tories ballsed up massively but they have gone
Labour are now in power and doing very badly at the moment, there's no point in saying yeah but Tories, that's over if things don't improve then neither the Conservative, s or Labour are going to be a viable choice and where does that leave us?

No, the failings of the Conservatives led to the Labour landslide win. If Labour continue as they are, and the tories don't improve, Reform will win the next election.
The tories have already been punished, Labour are on course for the same.

And the Housing Minister who evicted tenants and then raised the rent..

He is an excellent politician in that he is excellent at achieving his political aims. Impossible really to think of anyone more effective operating today.

You’re quite right that he’s anything but an excellent public servant though!

Still higher than Truss peak as well as current long term OATs and T/bonds.

I’m also not convinced that predictably high borrowing costs is a big selling point for a Government, no matter how you spin it.

I voted Labour and I feel completely betrayed by him. Reeves is also equally incompetent and destroying the economy.

Starmer has gone against basic Labour values and is going from one scandal to another.

Time for a Labour leadership contest to have someone in charge who is not a complete liar and actually has a vision for the country.

I agree. And therein lies the problem. He's not politically savvy which, clearly, is rather damaging for a PM

Hes also not motivating nor energising

Hes a bit like the last bit of haddock at the fish market

And I say this as an historical labour voter

🥺🥺

We’re still paying a vast amount in debt servicing thanks to Labour’s policies. That’s putting them at risk and cornering them for options at the next budget.

The loophole to not pay tax on children’s education and vocation training? Yes completely different. 👍

You are really only replacing one polemical description of the government's actions with another, and not necessarily a very accurate one. Are you referring to the removal of business rates relief from private schools, or the removal of the 0% rate of VAT on private school fees? If the former then yes, arguably could be said to have 'closed a tax loophole for private schools'. On the other hand, it could also be said that they 'arbitrarily and for political reasons excluded one form of education from a form of tax relief that remains open to other educational providers', which makes it look rather different. It is, after all, very unclear why private schools should pay business rates whilst universities do not. Or are you referring to the removal of the 0% rate of VAT on private school fees? Because that's not 'closing a tax loophole for private schools', since it's not the schools that pay it. Rather, it is the introduction of VAT on a service that has previously never attracted VAT in this country, is not legally eligible to attract VAT in the EU, is by any measure a merit good, and has the additional benefit of saving the DfE a good deal in unspent per-pupil provision.

As I explained previously, the gilt yields under Truss were due to the market panicking because of her unfunded tax cuts. The gilts being high now are due to different factors, and are less of a worry as they are predictable, and in line with other economies.

The Tories didn’t remove the option, leaving the EU did that.

If Reform get in, their uncosted tax cuts will make the Truss gilt panic look like a minor blip. They'll destroy the NHS
Gilt yields are higher now and mass immigration has finished the NHS model, just no one will admit it just yet.

Labour introduced a children’s education and vocation training tax. Labour’s policies and kite flying have almost paralysed the job and housing markets. Labour’s policies will increase inflation. Labours policies have increased the cost of Government borrowing. Labours policies will kill the generational farms in the U.K. Labours net zero policy is slowing economic growth. Labours policing and criminal justice policies have made the U.K. less safe.

Labour are done.

Sounds like most politicians

Indeed!

Surely it’s more likely to be the Conservative lack of talent? They are the people who should be representing right leaning people.

Someone asked about the red wall. I live in one of those areas and they voted blue for Boris to "get Brexit done" and they will vote reform to "end immigration". No, most of them don't have much understanding of how politics and the international stage work but they know what they want and they aren't getting it under Labour.

Most of them are minimum wage workers who have seen a hiring freeze, some layoffs and no annual bonuses because of Labours hike in NI.

They didn’t introduce an education tax. They closed a tax loophole for private schools. A very different thing.

I think the labour party is in a bind. Replace him right before the state visit, or keep him there, a total joke on the world stage.

Not like they have any better candidates either is it.

General Election please..

'Pledged to halve violence against women and girls' doesn't mean a great deal. He also pledged to 'smash the gangs' and pledged to 'boost the economy', not to mention pledging to 'make Brexit work'. Pretty sure he also pledged to reduce chaos and sleaze in government. How's that going for him? I'd note that it is also very difficult to 'have violence against women and girls' when you're so unsure of what a woman or girl actually is that you have to be told by Tony Blair that no, women don't have penises. As PP said, it also doesn't look great for his commitment to women and girls that the moment Blair said that 'men were with penises, women with vaginas' Starmer got the message, but when Rosie Duffield liked a tweet saying only women had cervices he threw her to the TRA wolves without a second thought. I wonder what exactly the difference was between those two interventions? Starmer's heel-dragging on the inquiry into grooming gangs and his tolerance for the frank disrespect shown to victims of that scandal by Lucy Powell and Sadiq Khan also bodes very ill for his government's chances of success in this area.
For the record, I think Nigel Farage would be an appalling prime minister and it will be to all our detriment if Reform win the next election. But the idea that Labour is the party for women and girls is simply laughable.

Whenever Two Tier opens his mouth, a couple more of his brain cells take their last breath.

What an absolute embarrassment.

Well the point being it was fruitless. Johnson did not get a better deal. He got a worse one that was eventually corrected by Rishi Sunak years later in agreeing the Windsor Framework which was not very different from what the May government had been offered.

Now Keir Starmer is probably being offered something similar to what May was initially offered.

It’s interesting to wonder what Reform would do as an alternative to these deals.