Westministenders: The Tory Civil War – The Knives Are Out Again. A Big Battle Looms.

[RedToothBrush]

Today has seen the publication of a story about how Johnson and Gove are holding May hostage in a ‘soft coup’ and have made various demands over what they want for a hard Brexit. The letter which was for May’s and Barwell’s eyes only has some how leaked. Don’t forget how Gove has just joined the Brexit Cabinet.

It comes at a time, when the Observer is also leading with an editorial demanding Johnson goes over his handling of the Nazarin Zagheri-Ratcliffe case as well as his long list of poorly judged comments which have had diplomatic consequences and another newspaper is leading with a story about how 40 Tories are ready to no-confidence May.

It all smacks of a personal battle between May and Johnson to govern the party, which has been playing out publicly for some time, most noticeable in the parallel Tory party conference leadership speeches and Johnson’s freelancing.

Johnson also seems to be potentially caught up, with what happens in the Mueller investigation due to a photo and lying about having met Misfud which could be politically damaging.

Priti Patel’s –sacking-- resignation also fits in neatly with the story. The Foreign Office were not informed and there is the curious side story that May DID know various details but told Patel to keep quiet, so not to embarrass the FCO. Or more to the point, be seen to be undermining Johnson.

Whether this is true or not we don’t know. It does have implications if its true, but it also says something if its not too. Why leak the story at all? Once again its about the Johnson v May dynamic.

As it stands, if Gove and Johnson have been leading May then why would they decide to ditch her and go for power without her?
Notably Gove has the best satisfaction scores of the Cabinet amongst Tories on Conservative Home too. He has had a lot of favourable comments over his statements over pesticides. The pair seem to have put differences aside and are working together. And May has become more and more of a liability. Johnson, also came second favourite to be Tory leader amongst Tories (if you discount don’t knows and none of the aboves). Maybe they fancy their chances…

Or it’s a last ditch attempt to cling on to that power as threats that Johnson might finally get the boot – if Zagheri-Ratcliffe does have her sentence extended and Johnson’s position is no longer tenable for even May’s self-preservation. Whilst much has been framed about it being about May’s political survival, its definitely not just her whose future is in doubt. Who was the ‘dead wood’, that young Tories demanded be ditched in a reshuffle to bring in young blood? Either way, Gove has firmly hitched his wagon to Johnson's effectively repeating Johnson's dismissal of Zagheri-Ratcliffe's case.

Anyway another week and another set of high political drama is a foregone conclusion.

A round up of other developments this week:

Tory Party / Government

1. May announces intention to enshrine Brexit leaving date in law to force rebels to tow the line. This has many implications, not least tax related and putting more pressure on the UK government. It’s generally regarded as a desperate move by anyone sane.
2. The Impact Assessments were a dogs dinner that was done at the last minute, and were not worth the paper they were written on. There was no detail to them.
3. Priti Patel’s –sacking—resignation after having undocumented and unauthorised meetings with a series of Israel ministers. And then lying about it.
4. Penny Mordaunt, who lied about the UK not having a veto to stop Turkey joining the EU, replaced Patel.
5. Damien Green Porn. Another ex-policeman is backing the story that it was found on his computer despite Green’s denials.
6. The ongoing Zagheri-Ratcliffe story with Iran and Johnson’s gaff and none apology
7. Photograph of Johnson with ‘The Professor’ Misfud has been found. This links Johnson to how events in the US might pan out. If there are lots more revelations in the Mueller inquiry about him, then that might reflect on Johnson and make him subject to some difficult questions. Politically this might be problematic for Johnson.
8. Claims that the whips office leaked the name of someone who reported allegations against Nigel Evans which occurred 6 months after Evans had been cleared of rape and the sexual assault of six men
9. Suspended Tory MP Charlie Elphicke has complained that he is yet to be informed of what he has been accused of.
10. Young Tory MPs issue threat to May that she brings in young blood and gets rid of ‘dead wood, who do nothing but screw up’. Give her until the New Year to do so.
11. 40 Tories apparently ready to no confidence May.
12. Lord Ashcroft’s latest poll reveals a very small percentage of people want a no deal situation despite all the noise of it being a good idea.
13. Lord Ashcroft mentioned in the Paradise papers. Reported as domiciled in Belize despite assurances given to parliament that he would give up his non-dom status and pay tax in the UK as a Lord.

Parliament / Opposition both inside and outside parliament
14) May facing a possible revolt over Universal Credit. MPs due to vote on reducing wait times.
15) Talk that there are enough Tory Rebels prepared to back a Dominic Grieve amendment to force a meaningful vote on the Brexit Deal.
16) May under increasing pressure from business leaders to make a deal after a meeting with them at no. 10.
17) Lots of distraction in the Paradise Papers generally which raises the question over the power and influence of the super rich versus the poor. This plays well to Labour’s narrative and against the idea of a low tax post Brexit Britain.
18) Lord Kerr, author of the a50 clause states that May has misled the public and insists that it is reversible.
19) New Money Laundering and Sanctions Bill in the Lords. Government looking to omit 4th EU directive on tax avoidance. Naturally raises questions about whether UK would adopt new rules due to come into force the week after Brexit Day.
20) Money Laundering Bill also has lots of overlap with immigration and home office operations, raising some rather sinister questions over who could be affected and why. Potential for abuse seems to be huge.
21) Leave leaning Cornwall and Grimsby seeking special status in the face of Brexit – in line with remaining to preserve business / economic interests
22) Suicide of Welsh Assembly Labour member who was under investigation for sexual harassment
23) A Labour MP accuses the already suspended fellow Labour MP Kelvin Hopkins of inappropriate behaviour.

EU
24) Ireland demands the UK stays in the customs union.
25) Brexit talks have not progressed at all despite apparently being speeded up. Barnier saying that progress in December only possible if UK makes moves on the settlement deal. Prospect of stage two being delayed until March being raised. This leaves just 7 months to come to a deal, which plays to the No Deal Crowd’s interests.
26) EU believe the UK are not working in the best interests of the UK and there is a failure by May and Davis to understand the process or what No Deal will mean.
27) EU signalling that there is no bespoke transition. Only available options ae EEA or EFTA fudges.
28) Increasing view in Brussels that No Deal likely. EU think May hasn’t got the authority to come to a deal and its easier for her to drag UK off the cliff. Though they have doubts she will survive much longer.

World
29) Trump sides with Putin above the US Intelligence Community over the Russian election interference. On Veterans Day.
30) US’s Wilbur Ross said UK will have to dump European food safety standards and that losing our passporting rights to the EU would harm our interests with the US.
31) Developments in Lebanon, with it being said that Saudi Arabia said to have declared war. Many would consider this to be a proxy war against Iran. Crown Prince has purged political opponents including several with significant Wall Street interests. Eight died in a helicopter crash.
32) Large scale far right march in Poland as part of their Independence Day.

Apparently John Redwood is advising investors to take their money elsewhere

Well I can’t say I disagree with Redwood. He is doing what I and my parents have done already.
The U.K. isn’t stable enough politically and economically to be the right place to invest money.....

And yes it’s really really crap for the U.K. because it will compound all the issues coming form Brexit. But isn’t it a reality and a lot of businesses have already done so anyway? (See the banks etc etc)

Someone on one of the Brexit threads write that they were looking forward to seeing more Jaguars and Minis on the road instead of all this BMWs. I thought of going in and pointing out the obvious but then thought it was pointless wasting my energy. The sad thing was none of the Brexit nodding dogs pointed out the error either. They are so entrenched in their beliefs nothing can shift the mindset. I think when all this is over (as in should sanity finally return) there will need to be some serious deprogramming for the most delusional. If they're real people, that is.

Well I can’t say I disagree with Redwood. He is doing what I and my parents have done already.

Were your parents noisy champions of Leave, telling everyone how wonderful it would be post Brexit?

Why the Wokingham electorate returned Redwood puzzled me, because it voted strongly for Remain.

Melassa that thread is a great example of the cherry picking of “good news” that Driven lists.

For instance, the “good news” about the UK oil and gas sector ignores that (a) job losses over the last 3 years are at the 150,000 mark (b) exploration is almost at a standstill, so no new fields to replace those coming to the end of their productive life (c) companies sitting on investment plans (d) supply chains in jeopardy with Brexit, and (e) trading on WTO terms would increase costs from £600 million to £1.1 billion annually.

All in the Oil and Gas UK economic report.

We will no doubt have a Brexiter crowing about this piece of news
Fewer High Street shops closing down.

Wonderful, what are they being replaced with? Ice cream parlours, tobacconists, beauty parlours and coffee shops. Hardly the sort of shops which would help a person keep body and soul together and decently clad.

The problem is that even if there is a tiny sliver of good news from the High Street, we can only guess how booming things would have been without the impending exit.

Shops saw a 2% fall in consumer spending in October and pre-Christmas trading had a very poor start with clothing and footwear sales slumping by 9%.

^www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/11/13/the-political-crisis-we-face-is-of-gargantuan-scale/^

This is a good commentary. I particularly noted:
"One required option is a clear statement of what hard Brexit actually means and what planning is needed for it, with a timescale and costing attached. I suppose we can hope that this is what the 58 risk assessments on Brexit might provide, but I am ready to be severely disappointed. What I do know is that in the absence of that information no informed decision other than to stay within the EU can be made. After all, rationally in that absence we are quite literally leaping into the unknown. I stress, I am saying this in the absence of any viable alternative in the situation I describe."

As a ray of hope from the States, the weekend FT has this ("Voters opt for diversity"):

During the previous election cycle, just 900 women had told Emily’s List, which finances Democratic female candidates, that they wanted to run for some sort of office. By May of this year, more than 12,000 women had put up their hand. In the months since then that number has risen to more than 20,000. One year after Hillary Clinton lost the White House, the US has seen a spike in female and minority candidates not just running for office but winning, as proven in state and local elections across the country on Tuesday.

Fewer high street shops closing down? Is this because they have all closed already and there isn't many left to close? And the other shops still remain boarded up?

Sam Coates Times‏ @SamCoatesTimes
So here’s a scoop from this morning’s paper on whether No10 thinks EU-UK trade deal will be finished by March 2019

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/9ceb73d8-c7f2-11e7-9ee9-e45ae7e1cdd4
Trade deal may not be signed until after Brexit

Downing Street appears ready to concede that trade deal negotiations will not be complete before Brexit, in a move that could affect the longevity of Theresa May’s premiership.

One of Mrs May’s closest allies suggested at a private meeting that the future trade deal with the EU might not be finalised before Britain left the EU on March 29, 2019.

The senior Downing Street aide said that they expected Britain to be able to strike only the “heads of agreement” of a deal.

Sam Coates Times‏ @SamCoatesTimes
A very senior No10 aide has been saying that they think there will be only “heads of agreement” by Mar 2019
In other words negotiations would have to continue after Brexit
^Whatever happened to “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”
DeXEU response fascinating. They say their aspiration is to complete trade deal by next Oct^
However DExEu add: “While that is what we are working towards the position is that we must know the terms of the future partnership when we leave. DD has previously talked about heads of terms.”
Which many people say is sensible. However it’ appears different to the position set out by Theresa May in the Commons earlier in the month (in answers to IDS and Yvette Cooper)

So May is knowingly setting a date to leave, whilst aware that we won't have a deal in place by that date.

I think Boris and Gove are still where they were on June 24th and teaming up in a desperate attempt to save their own bacon.
They both know Brexit is a disaster, BoJo in particular seems to be trying his absolute utmost to get sacked. I think they want to force May to sack them, snipe from the sidelines while Brexit comes in, move back onto the front bench then take over the party during the next Labour Govt in time to be PM in 2027 once everyone is sick of Corbyn.
That's a few years of being pally and then they can have a row over who gets to be boss round about 2022/2024

No doubt Osborne will be back in the mix then too.

It's just like the very first westmistenders thread

Tom Newton Dunn‏ @tnewtondunn
No10: “The government’s position is clear - Nazanin was in Iran on holiday”. A mild slap down for Gove from the PM this morning.

horse and stable door. they really are like the scorpion on the frogs back. they just can't stop themselves from stinging people.

when you see what the Con's and Brexiteers are willing to do to their own, I'd imagine nothing will be left to trust or goodwill by prospective partners in future trade deals. all dotted, crossed and tied down.

Trade deals always have everything specified in great detail with the im of being watertight

• like any other contracts affecting billions of dollars.

However, if the parties start off wanting the same thing, this is much easier to rattle off quickly

Wasn't Gove tipped as a May replacement? Surely he is retoxifying his brand with his suddenly Boris love in...

BUT if the UK renege on a deal and have to be taken to court, other countries will be very unwilling to make a deal with them.
I can't imaging even a Brexit govt being crazy enough to make the UK a oariah

They may have decided that it's Gove's turn - after Bojo's recent dreadful mistake that he refuses to correct

Marking place. Outstanding work as ever, Red.

retoxifying the brand so they can still carp from the safety of the sidelines. it would be funny if they weren't so nasty.

BUT if the UK renege on a deal and have to be taken to court, other countries will be very unwilling to make a deal with them.

Hence the GFAs importance ...

1. Brexit is compatible with the GFA (how ?)

2. The GFA is renegotiated to accommodate Brexit.

3. The UK unilaterally abandons the GFA.

4. is the "nuclear" option, and will ensure the only country the UK can deal with (well, may be able to deal with) is North Korea.

5. .... I can't see that happening. The UK has pissed away any goodwill it may have had in Ireland. Even if the political will at the top were there. Also, would that be subject to an Irish referendum ?

6. Is the circle-square problem. Again.

Redwoo'd's advice to move money out of the UK has now made the Guardian although not the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation yet.

Redwoo'd's advice to move money out of the UK has now made the Guardian although not the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation yet.

Any chance we can just move Redwood out of the UK ?

Jim Pickard‏*@PickardJE*
The number of homeowners under the age of 45 in England has dropped by 904,000 since the Conservatives entered government in 2010
Number of home-owning households headed by an under-45 year old.
2009/10: 4.46m
2015/16: 3.56m
Today: probably even lower...

Jon Stone‏ @joncstone
In 2015, homeowners voted CON 46 LAB 22, mortgage holders CON 39 LAB 31. But social renters voted CON 18 LAB 50, private renters CON 28 LAB 39. Tories are digging their own graves

www.ft.com/content/2b0843ec-c629-11e7-b2bb-322b2cb39656
Hammond eyes stamp duty cut to help first-time buyers
Move aims to tackle resentment of those locked out of the housing market

This is such flawed thinking. It will only help those in the south - and not by very much and not in a meaningful way.

When we bought our first house in 2007, we did not pay stamp duty as it was below the threshold (as it was shared ownership). When we bought the second half of the house, it wasn't the stamp duty that was the issue. It was the deposit we needed for the mortgage.

Thing is even if you are in a more expensive area, then how is this going to help?

Take a fictional house at the bottom of a market starting at £250,000 then even if you take off stamp duty, its still miles more than most can afford. Stamp Duty on that property would be £2,500.

For reference the latest government house price figures published last month for August put the average house price for the UK at £225,000 - for England its £243,520. (NI £128,650, Scotland £146,354, Wales £150,258, East Midlands £183,762, East of England £288,440, London £484,362, North East £130,731, North West £159,865, South East £324,983, South West £251,984, West Midlands £188,447 and Yorkshire/Humber £158,689).

To get a house of that value, with a mortgage multiplier of x 3.5 you need a household income of over £70k.

The government's median income before tax figures by age are:
Under 20: 13,000, 20 - 24: 15,800, 25 - 29: 20,800, 30 - 34: 24,500, 35 - 39: 26,800, 40 - 44: 27,500

and the mean figures
Under 20: 14,900, 20 - 24: 17,900, 25 - 29: 24,400, 30 - 34: 30,300, 35 - 39: 36,100, 40 - 44: 39,600

You can't just double that either (which would be a combined income of £55,000 for median and £79,200 for mean for the top earning group of 40 - 44 year olds).

The gender pay gap means that it works out that even using the higher mean income figure before tax - for a man aged 40 - 44 it is £46,200 and a woman in the same age group it is £30,500. A total of £76,700. Just over that magic number you'd need to buy without a deposit.

The lower median figure for 40 - 44 by gender is £31,200 for men and just £23,000 for women. That's £54,200. That's a max of a £189,700 mortgage on a x3.5 multiplier. That would be a £60,300 deposit needed.

Say you wanted to buy earlier, at a more realistic age 32 so you could settle down and start a family. The household figures for a couple are median (26,000 for men and 22,600 for women) £48,600 and mean (32,600 for men and 27,100 for women) £59,700. That translates to a max mortgage of £170,100 + £79,900 deposit / £208,950 + £41,050 deposit.

If each couple saved since they were 20, the median couple would need to save 15.6% of their income (before tax) to make that deposit (roughly between £4900 and £7600 annually) and the mean couple would need to save 6.9% of their income (before tax) to make that deposit (roughly between £2400 and £4100 annually).

Big woo at getting £2500 off a house when you look at that!

It shows a total lack of understanding of the problem, and shows up that the treasury probably haven't even bothered to work out the impact such a change would make.

In practice I suspect all it will do, is help people who would eventually buy anyway, be able to do so, maybe a year earlier.

Not only that but mortgage requirements have also been tightened in recent months with the BoE stressing the need and advising mortgage lender not to approve people who are unable to demonstrate their hold income minus expenses can cover double the mortgage. This in effect, is squeezing mortgage multipliers.

This idea for a policy is an utterly pointless idea and will grab headlines but will achieve bugger all, helping a tiny, tiny number of people.

We are now in a position where we can't move to anything bigger - its a two bed. The jump to the second tier is also causing a problem. Perhaps more so than when we initially bought. Our household income is better than most.

I don't think any property is considering the second tier when it comes to housing policy. The issue here is there are lots of people in first time buyer homes who are stuck there, meaning there is also less supply for first time buyers.

Policy is meaning that small houses are built because they have to, and large houses are built for maximum profit. Which squeezes the problem in the small family home bracket. There is no incentive to build anything in this group.

This is where thinking needs to be applied. This would make a much bigger difference. How can you help families stuck move so that people coming up behind them can also move?

So no only are people unable to get on to the property ladder, but those at the bottom are stuck in property which is too small for their needs.

The point is, that even home owners under 45 are more likely to have a very different attitude to homeowners over 45 because of the reality of the gap between wages and house prices.

The mind bogles at why the Chancellor is even bothering with this. Even for the headlines.

If it does happen, look out for the utterly useless reporting of this, which will also not bother to look at any numbers what so ever and will happily nod along saying its doing something for the young.

Is it fuck!

It needs some much more radical thinking. More like this:

www.thesun.co.uk/news/4898072/theresa-may-must-give-councils-power-to-force-buy-green-field-land-in-budget-blitzkrieg-to-solve-britains-housing-crisis-former-minister-declares/amp/
Theresa May must give councils power to force-buy green field land in Budget blitzkrieg to solve Britain’s housing crisis, former minister declares
Senior Tory Nick Boles insists the striking new compulsory purchases are needed to build enough new homes on town edges – not just brownfield sites - where people want to live

Ironically, socialist thinking isn't much help in this area either as the focus is on social housing and the ideal of home ownership isn't really the strong point of the more left leaning where Corbyn sits.