With a degree in genetics from Cambridge and as a former science teacher, new Tory MP Miriam Cates is better-placed than most to understand the science behind the pandemic. Earlier this month, the MP for Penistone & Stocksbridge signed a letter expressing concerns about the length of time schools have been kept shut, arguing that they would cause long-term harm to students. In this week’s wide-ranging LockdownTV interview, she elaborates on these concerns:
If we close schools now, we may reduce community transmission, we may reduce the number of people who end up in hospital and die. Now, that’s a good thing to stop that happening. But we know that will cause longterm harm to our children. Where’s the balance in that? There’s no scientific answer to that, that’s a moral answer. I think those are the kinds of questions that we need to be asking, going forward.
And again, in school life, we’ve become obsessed with measuring outcomes in terms of GCSE and A level results. But actually, schools provide way more than that. They prepare our children to build, grow and maintain relationships for the rest of their lives, to be resilient, all those things that you can’t get a job without those skills. You can’t have a successful family life without the skills. And that’s what we should be looking at in terms of how do we rebuild our children’s lives. Not just how do we make sure they pass GCSE maths? But how do we restore their confidence?
- Miriam Cates, LockdownTV
One common phrase throughout the pandemic has been “we are following the science”. But has this dogged pursuit of “science” created a reductionist governmental approach?
Epidemiology is not the only science. Behavioural science, psychology, all those things are mixed in to our understanding of how to tackle Covid. The Prime Minister said, way back last March, that lockdown is a limited measure because people will become frustrated with it. And that will have its own impact. And that’s behavioural science, which is just as important in understanding how we deal with this crisis as epidemiology. And the media, unfortunately, never put the science in context. So they talk about, for example, the number of deaths, but not the number of excess deaths. Or they talk about how many people are making car journeys, but not how many people normally make car journeys. And in science, you never take data out of context. And yet, that’s what’s being done.
- Miriam Cates, LockdownTV
Another important consideration is whether this focus on scientific reasoning has come at the cost of morality:
Over recent years we’ve almost stopped talking about morality in public life. And actually this crisis has exposed that we are very much still a deeply moral nation because the concept of all of us sacrificing to save the lives of others is actually a very moral concept. Where I think the difficulty has arisen is that we have as a society, and this isn’t a political point, but a cultural point, we’ve become very, almost obsessed with what we can measure. So we can measure the length of people’s lives, we can measure the number of people that die. Can we measure people’s sense of fulfilment? No, that’s much more difficult, but is it important? Yes, it is. Why do we live? It’s not just to avoid death. We live for all sorts of reasons.
- Miriam Cates, LockdownTV
Our education system is not the only institution which has come under strain in the past year. The church has historically been known to play a significant role in times of crisis — yet has come under fire for being almost entirely absent during this pandemic:
I think amazing work is being done on the ground. But I’m saddened by the kind of national institutionalised church response which has more often being to criticise government policy than to make the case for a spiritual awakening. And as a committed Christian myself, I find that sad and I think we’ve still got to discover how this will impact religion going forward because I would want to see people start to ask those deep questions again, but I don’t think we’ve got to that point yet. It’s important to say that since the end of the first lockdown, they have been open and haven’t had to close again, this time. Church is not normal, wearing masks, no singing, that kind of thing, but I don’t know, was it a mistake? Had we not had Zoom and those other ways of connecting, then perhaps it would have been, but it was a moment of crisis and I can see why that decision was taken. But I am pleased that they haven’t been shut again. And I think that’s how it should stay.
- Miriam Cates, LockdownTV
Should the UK follow a ZeroCovid approach?
I think it’s dangerous to pursue a Zero Covid strategy. Because as dangerous as Covid is, and as much havoc is wreaked on our lives and economy, it is a virus like many other viruses and we do live with infectious diseases. The government can’t prevent all death. And I think in normal times most people accept that. But there are dangers from variants that could not be suppressed by the vaccine. So I think that’s the biggest worry at the moment, we get to a point where we’ve got it under control in the UK, and then a new variant comes across the border that requires an entirely new vaccination programme and an entirely new lockdown. That would be a disaster.
- Miriam Cates, LockdownTV
Many thanks to Miriam for taking the time to speak with us.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeIt’s a commonly accepted truism that the Conservatives have run out of ideas and enthusiasm after 8 years in Government (13 years if you include the coalition with the Liberal Democrats).
What is less obvious is that Labour have also run out of ideas and enthusiasm after 13 years of Opposition. Apart from a brief flirtation with Corbynism, Labour have found that their ideas and the Conservative ideas are very similar since they both echo a managerial status quo, stuck in place by whatever the Civil Service (and other global organisations) deem appropriate.
Very true. The Labour Government of 2024-29 will however be remembered for how it reacted to a financial crisis that it didn’t foresee. I’m not positive but ‘cometh the hour, cometh the man or woman’.
Sadly I wouldn’t hold your breath. You can argue that Boris was the man who cometh to get Brexit done but he was too unruly to be allowed to continue once Covid was out of the way. Similarly Liz Truss was summarily replaced for not following the approved economics game book. Rishi? Safe enough for now.
Starmer? He has already expended much energy in thinning out anyone too radical from the Labour Party. Where would the man or woman cometh from?
Cometh The Cat?
Sadly I wouldn’t hold your breath. You can argue that Boris was the man who cometh to get Brexit done but he was too unruly to be allowed to continue once Covid was out of the way. Similarly Liz Truss was summarily replaced for not following the approved economics game book. Rishi? Safe enough for now.
Starmer? He has already expended much energy in thinning out anyone too radical from the Labour Party. Where would the man or woman cometh from?
Cometh The Cat?
Very true. The Labour Government of 2024-29 will however be remembered for how it reacted to a financial crisis that it didn’t foresee. I’m not positive but ‘cometh the hour, cometh the man or woman’.
It’s a commonly accepted truism that the Conservatives have run out of ideas and enthusiasm after 8 years in Government (13 years if you include the coalition with the Liberal Democrats).
What is less obvious is that Labour have also run out of ideas and enthusiasm after 13 years of Opposition. Apart from a brief flirtation with Corbynism, Labour have found that their ideas and the Conservative ideas are very similar since they both echo a managerial status quo, stuck in place by whatever the Civil Service (and other global organisations) deem appropriate.
In a country where we can’t build a third runway at Heathrow or start building a railway line a decade after it is first proposed, I have little faith Labour will be able to keep their promise about delivering mountains. Like Alec Guinness’s Charles I in Cromwell berating Prince Rupert, I fear they will only deliver mole hills. Heck, an unholy alliance of Nimby’s and eco-fanatics did their best to stop a nuclear power station being built at Sizewell. This is despite the fact it was impossible to live through 2022 and not understand the importance of energy security.
Not saying Labour will fail, and despite the fact I’d never vote for them in a million years, I hope they succeed because we will need them to assuming they win the next election. However, they will inherit a country where many don’t want anything to change and where many of those changes may involve rowing back on things like Net Zero which they are even more in favour of than the Tories. It’s going to be interesting.
Yeah, “interesting” as in the Chinese curse.
But we’re there already anyway. Due to a deadly combo of windfall and other high taxes, and Labour’s promise to shut the industry down, oil & gas investment has fled, with the consequent job losses already, (unreported down south it seems) while Norway is merrily ramping up drilling and production.
Correct. Labour is now the party of Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion.
What amazed me was that just at the point where the SNP became vulnerable and Labour could gain in Scotland. London Labour goes off and announces anti-North sea oil and gas plans. At least they were honest about it upfront I suppose. That the Labour bubble supports this just shows that Labour really are the Islington and laptop party. Clueless about the rest of the country.
A long-standing Labour councillor in Aberdeen has just quit the party over this.
A long-standing Labour councillor in Aberdeen has just quit the party over this.
What amazed me was that just at the point where the SNP became vulnerable and Labour could gain in Scotland. London Labour goes off and announces anti-North sea oil and gas plans. At least they were honest about it upfront I suppose. That the Labour bubble supports this just shows that Labour really are the Islington and laptop party. Clueless about the rest of the country.
Correct. Labour is now the party of Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion.
Yeah, “interesting” as in the Chinese curse.
But we’re there already anyway. Due to a deadly combo of windfall and other high taxes, and Labour’s promise to shut the industry down, oil & gas investment has fled, with the consequent job losses already, (unreported down south it seems) while Norway is merrily ramping up drilling and production.
In a country where we can’t build a third runway at Heathrow or start building a railway line a decade after it is first proposed, I have little faith Labour will be able to keep their promise about delivering mountains. Like Alec Guinness’s Charles I in Cromwell berating Prince Rupert, I fear they will only deliver mole hills. Heck, an unholy alliance of Nimby’s and eco-fanatics did their best to stop a nuclear power station being built at Sizewell. This is despite the fact it was impossible to live through 2022 and not understand the importance of energy security.
Not saying Labour will fail, and despite the fact I’d never vote for them in a million years, I hope they succeed because we will need them to assuming they win the next election. However, they will inherit a country where many don’t want anything to change and where many of those changes may involve rowing back on things like Net Zero which they are even more in favour of than the Tories. It’s going to be interesting.
The only real-world industrial policy Labour has is their promise to block all future oil & gas development. Investment has fled already and jobs are being lost as I write. The Tories played their part with punitive taxes of course.
Big talk about industrialisation, sure, but Labour has forgotten their roots and doesn’t even know what industrialisation looks like anymore, and with their mates The Greens will block it at every turn.
And thus make us dependent on imported gas. Does that count as “securonomics”?
It is beyond naive of Starmer to think that announcing ‘no more oil and gas exploration’, however far into the future, won’t have an immediate impact on investment decisions. Also, talking up onshore wind, in Scotland is a political mis-step. The stunning landscape in parts of the Highlands is being ruined with too many. There are planning applications queuing up. Mad.
Might I suggest that the efficacy of onshore wind has plummeted since Ian Blackford announced his intention to stand down at the the next GE.
Might I suggest that the efficacy of onshore wind has plummeted since Ian Blackford announced his intention to stand down at the the next GE.
And thus make us dependent on imported gas. Does that count as “securonomics”?
It is beyond naive of Starmer to think that announcing ‘no more oil and gas exploration’, however far into the future, won’t have an immediate impact on investment decisions. Also, talking up onshore wind, in Scotland is a political mis-step. The stunning landscape in parts of the Highlands is being ruined with too many. There are planning applications queuing up. Mad.
The only real-world industrial policy Labour has is their promise to block all future oil & gas development. Investment has fled already and jobs are being lost as I write. The Tories played their part with punitive taxes of course.
Big talk about industrialisation, sure, but Labour has forgotten their roots and doesn’t even know what industrialisation looks like anymore, and with their mates The Greens will block it at every turn.
“If there is anything special about UK-US relations, it is the former’s inability to overcome its inferiority complex
in the face of America’s global decline“.There, fixed it for you.
The UK just cannot stop being America’s poodle, it is ridiculous. The spectacle of Rachel Reeves popping over the pond to basically get her ideas rubber-stamped by the White House before they’re even presented to the British electorate is just so cringeworthy.
No doubt trying to avoid the ignominy of the incumbent POTUS making the same kind of comments that accompanied the Truss-Kwarteng imbroglio…but the more pertinent question in that scenario is: why did Biden feel entitled to make those comments anyway? As far as I can see, Truss and Kwarteng got it monumentally wrong, but the British public are more than capable of judging that for themselves and criticising. It is not up to any POTUS to assume that job.
I don’t like this new concept of feeling entitled to butt into and comment on other countries’ political affairs. What happened to international diplomacy, being discreet and keeping one’s counsel?
A bit more of a robust response to Washington’s meddling (or at least a dollop of good, old-fashioned British passive-aggressive silence and/or tutting) would be better than this grovelling.
It reminds me of when Obama came over to tell us we’d be at the back of the queue – you could almost feel the entire country raising its collective middle finger….
Exactly! I’m not advocating the kind of throw-your-dollies-out-the-pram approach of Macron. Recalling the French ambassadors in the US and Australia and openly insulting Britain (yet again) because he was in a strop about AUKUS was not a good look. But on the other hand, what happened then? He got a state banquet in the White House, with no cost spared.*
A part of the motivation was surely Washington trying desperately to find a new main partner in the EU and, with GB gone and Germany lacking in leadership, France is the only one left on the dancefloor.
HOWEVER: France’s willingness to bite back at Washington gets them a lot more respect from the Americans than British brown-nosing does. Washington is careful about how it handles France – even when Macron was blatantly making a fool of himself by going to talk to Putin at that oh-so-long table, they just stood back and waited, did not make any comment. Americans know that Britain will never ever be as outspoken so there is a whole lot less inhibition about saying stuff which is really quite offensive and undiplomatic.
Exhibit A: Obama and the “back of the queue” comment.
Exhibit B: Biden skipping the coronation (probably because he is too infirm to deal with it, frankly) but the administration seeming surprised that the British felt snubbed. You don’t have to be Einstein to foresee that.
*(Compare that to Liz Truss being gifted A BRICK from the White House that Britain burned down in 1814. Oh, gee – thanks, you guys, how nice of you! 1st place in the passive-aggressive gifts competition! Having bled beside you in your pointless, ill-thought out interventions was so worth it!)
I personally think our politicians are about 20 years behind everybody else. Nobody cared about Biden not being at the coronation. It’s worse than that – no one even noticed.
Which is why Obama went down like a lead balloon. Cameron thought Obama would spread some presidential fairy dust over the remain campaign without realising that horse had already bolted.
Iraq destroyed any illusion we may have had that the US was our friend. The vast majority of the UK’s population was deeply opposed to that disgusting and stupid war and deeply ashamed of the willingness of Blair to ‘assume the position’. Bush also convinced the majority of us that the world was dealing with a dangerous halfwit.
Iraq cost Blair his career but also the US its credibility. Most people now view the US as a volatile nation that could just as readily tread on Britain as shake her hand. Shame really.
I personally think our politicians are about 20 years behind everybody else. Nobody cared about Biden not being at the coronation. It’s worse than that – no one even noticed.
Which is why Obama went down like a lead balloon. Cameron thought Obama would spread some presidential fairy dust over the remain campaign without realising that horse had already bolted.
Iraq destroyed any illusion we may have had that the US was our friend. The vast majority of the UK’s population was deeply opposed to that disgusting and stupid war and deeply ashamed of the willingness of Blair to ‘assume the position’. Bush also convinced the majority of us that the world was dealing with a dangerous halfwit.
Iraq cost Blair his career but also the US its credibility. Most people now view the US as a volatile nation that could just as readily tread on Britain as shake her hand. Shame really.
That’s precisely how a lot of us over here felt about him, because he told us the same thing about ourselves.
The middle finger (giving another person the bird) is the American way of telling someone to foxtrot oscar. Why have we taken this on board? A good vigourous British two fingers would be more appropriate. Just saying.
Exactly! I’m not advocating the kind of throw-your-dollies-out-the-pram approach of Macron. Recalling the French ambassadors in the US and Australia and openly insulting Britain (yet again) because he was in a strop about AUKUS was not a good look. But on the other hand, what happened then? He got a state banquet in the White House, with no cost spared.*
A part of the motivation was surely Washington trying desperately to find a new main partner in the EU and, with GB gone and Germany lacking in leadership, France is the only one left on the dancefloor.
HOWEVER: France’s willingness to bite back at Washington gets them a lot more respect from the Americans than British brown-nosing does. Washington is careful about how it handles France – even when Macron was blatantly making a fool of himself by going to talk to Putin at that oh-so-long table, they just stood back and waited, did not make any comment. Americans know that Britain will never ever be as outspoken so there is a whole lot less inhibition about saying stuff which is really quite offensive and undiplomatic.
Exhibit A: Obama and the “back of the queue” comment.
Exhibit B: Biden skipping the coronation (probably because he is too infirm to deal with it, frankly) but the administration seeming surprised that the British felt snubbed. You don’t have to be Einstein to foresee that.
*(Compare that to Liz Truss being gifted A BRICK from the White House that Britain burned down in 1814. Oh, gee – thanks, you guys, how nice of you! 1st place in the passive-aggressive gifts competition! Having bled beside you in your pointless, ill-thought out interventions was so worth it!)
That’s precisely how a lot of us over here felt about him, because he told us the same thing about ourselves.
The middle finger (giving another person the bird) is the American way of telling someone to foxtrot oscar. Why have we taken this on board? A good vigourous British two fingers would be more appropriate. Just saying.
The UK poodle role is embarrassing for both the UK and the US. The UK political classes have no ideas and no faith in themselves. We got Brexit but they have no idea what to do with it. The role of the UK state is growing but the state itself is growing more incompetent. Macron at least is correct in stating that Europe needs more autonomy.
It reminds me of when Obama came over to tell us we’d be at the back of the queue – you could almost feel the entire country raising its collective middle finger….
The UK poodle role is embarrassing for both the UK and the US. The UK political classes have no ideas and no faith in themselves. We got Brexit but they have no idea what to do with it. The role of the UK state is growing but the state itself is growing more incompetent. Macron at least is correct in stating that Europe needs more autonomy.
“If there is anything special about UK-US relations, it is the former’s inability to overcome its inferiority complex
in the face of America’s global decline“.There, fixed it for you.
The UK just cannot stop being America’s poodle, it is ridiculous. The spectacle of Rachel Reeves popping over the pond to basically get her ideas rubber-stamped by the White House before they’re even presented to the British electorate is just so cringeworthy.
No doubt trying to avoid the ignominy of the incumbent POTUS making the same kind of comments that accompanied the Truss-Kwarteng imbroglio…but the more pertinent question in that scenario is: why did Biden feel entitled to make those comments anyway? As far as I can see, Truss and Kwarteng got it monumentally wrong, but the British public are more than capable of judging that for themselves and criticising. It is not up to any POTUS to assume that job.
I don’t like this new concept of feeling entitled to butt into and comment on other countries’ political affairs. What happened to international diplomacy, being discreet and keeping one’s counsel?
A bit more of a robust response to Washington’s meddling (or at least a dollop of good, old-fashioned British passive-aggressive silence and/or tutting) would be better than this grovelling.
Oh really. I’m sure it will work like a champ.
Except that politicians Literally Know Nothing.
Gubmint administrators and regulators Literally Know Nothing.
And, journalists Literally Know Nothing.
What could go wrong?
This is funny/sad/silly. It has been crystal clear since the fall of Oh Jeremy and the lockdown catastrophe that Labour has a big smoking hellish VOID where new positive policy ideas should be. The Fool Johnson did their job for them, completing our descent into a GDR style quasi socialist failed state. He STOLE all Corbyn’s supposedly extreme leftist manifesto, leaving Labour high & dry. He/the Fake Tories have pursued insane Welfarist policies (5m with anxiety on benefits); it has bowed the knee to the Broken dangerous NHS; ruined state finances with bailout after bailout – the worst being Rishi’s furlough. He went on his knees also to enjoy Net Zero satisfaction and Eco virtue signalling which has further wrecked the economy and torched energy security. The Tories then steal the Brownite high tax policy required to feed our vast inefficient hostile public sector & Blob. Starmer and Reeve cannot top this! So all we get is brief expressions of their pathological hatred of wealth creation (non doms/windfall taxes/Great British Leyland2 Energy BS/attacks on private schools). Covered up is a desire for a heavy dose of the only ideological credo the Fake Labour Party actually believe in – community harmony shredding identitarianism & more race hate laws and cat girls in schools. They will actually campaign – like Tumbling Joe B in America – on a crude ‘We Are Not Them’ platform. The policy box is empty. Empty. We are in real jeopardy.
Hell yes to all the above.
Neither Labour or Conservatives are what they say on the tin.
I’d vote Mad Lord Sutch if I could but he’s sadly passed on. I’ll vote for a random independent in the poll booth next year. It’s a terrible loss to see both parties hollowed out and stand for no one but the Islington bubble.
Hell yes to all the above.
Neither Labour or Conservatives are what they say on the tin.
I’d vote Mad Lord Sutch if I could but he’s sadly passed on. I’ll vote for a random independent in the poll booth next year. It’s a terrible loss to see both parties hollowed out and stand for no one but the Islington bubble.
This is funny/sad/silly. It has been crystal clear since the fall of Oh Jeremy and the lockdown catastrophe that Labour has a big smoking hellish VOID where new positive policy ideas should be. The Fool Johnson did their job for them, completing our descent into a GDR style quasi socialist failed state. He STOLE all Corbyn’s supposedly extreme leftist manifesto, leaving Labour high & dry. He/the Fake Tories have pursued insane Welfarist policies (5m with anxiety on benefits); it has bowed the knee to the Broken dangerous NHS; ruined state finances with bailout after bailout – the worst being Rishi’s furlough. He went on his knees also to enjoy Net Zero satisfaction and Eco virtue signalling which has further wrecked the economy and torched energy security. The Tories then steal the Brownite high tax policy required to feed our vast inefficient hostile public sector & Blob. Starmer and Reeve cannot top this! So all we get is brief expressions of their pathological hatred of wealth creation (non doms/windfall taxes/Great British Leyland2 Energy BS/attacks on private schools). Covered up is a desire for a heavy dose of the only ideological credo the Fake Labour Party actually believe in – community harmony shredding identitarianism & more race hate laws and cat girls in schools. They will actually campaign – like Tumbling Joe B in America – on a crude ‘We Are Not Them’ platform. The policy box is empty. Empty. We are in real jeopardy.
Oh really. I’m sure it will work like a champ.
Except that politicians Literally Know Nothing.
Gubmint administrators and regulators Literally Know Nothing.
And, journalists Literally Know Nothing.
What could go wrong?
Of course Labour is out of ideas, along with everyone else. Thatcher’s deindustrialisation put us in a hole and since then we haven’t stopped digging. It was possibly a good idea to get out of the EU but the way we did it was calamitous. Now we are an isolated failed economy with failed leadership floundering in an increasingly dangerous world. The only political consensus seems to be to impoverish us all still further by a headlong dash to net carbon zero. It will take a greater visionary than Starmer to chart a path to a better future.
Of course Labour is out of ideas, along with everyone else. Thatcher’s deindustrialisation put us in a hole and since then we haven’t stopped digging. It was possibly a good idea to get out of the EU but the way we did it was calamitous. Now we are an isolated failed economy with failed leadership floundering in an increasingly dangerous world. The only political consensus seems to be to impoverish us all still further by a headlong dash to net carbon zero. It will take a greater visionary than Starmer to chart a path to a better future.
Labour’s dilemma is very simple:
The country’s problems cannot be solved without a reform of the housing market.
Unfortunately, so long as we live in a society where politicians effectively tax productive activity and spend the money buying the votes of homeowners, our economy will continue to stagnate.
The housing market cannot be reformed because property owners will not vote for any reform and the Labour Party cannot win without their votes. We saw this clearly when Theresa May somewhat timidly suggested that maybe we should use some of this enormous unearned wealth to pay for social care. The loudest howls of outrage came from the Guardian.
As we’ve seen from his pusillanimity as DPP and during the Corbyn years and the BLM and trans controversies, Starmer has neither the wit nor the courage to challenge this status quo. In the end it will probably be a Conservative in the Thatcher mould who forces us to face up to reality.
I’m not sure the loudest howls of outrage came from the Guardian, although howl they did. I think The Telegraph and it’s readers are most against giving up any of their enormous wealth to support social care – just look at their current campaign to abolish inheritance tax, which they seem to believe is a tax on a hard working dead person, not an incredibly fortunate living one.
Fair point – though most of the most seriously and least deservingly wealthy people I know read the Guardian.
Fair point – though most of the most seriously and least deservingly wealthy people I know read the Guardian.
I’m not sure the loudest howls of outrage came from the Guardian, although howl they did. I think The Telegraph and it’s readers are most against giving up any of their enormous wealth to support social care – just look at their current campaign to abolish inheritance tax, which they seem to believe is a tax on a hard working dead person, not an incredibly fortunate living one.
Labour’s dilemma is very simple:
The country’s problems cannot be solved without a reform of the housing market.
Unfortunately, so long as we live in a society where politicians effectively tax productive activity and spend the money buying the votes of homeowners, our economy will continue to stagnate.
The housing market cannot be reformed because property owners will not vote for any reform and the Labour Party cannot win without their votes. We saw this clearly when Theresa May somewhat timidly suggested that maybe we should use some of this enormous unearned wealth to pay for social care. The loudest howls of outrage came from the Guardian.
As we’ve seen from his pusillanimity as DPP and during the Corbyn years and the BLM and trans controversies, Starmer has neither the wit nor the courage to challenge this status quo. In the end it will probably be a Conservative in the Thatcher mould who forces us to face up to reality.
When governments of all political persuasions have presided over gradual decline, including utterly botching the UK’s energy strategy, for the last 30 years, I have zero faith in Labour telling us what they think we want to hear. If we are going to re-industrialise, one of the essential foundations must be cheap energy that is somewhat insulated from international shocks. Not this blind rush to net zero, with solutions anyone with a modicum of common sense knows, will not work. I have no faith in politicians or the cultural Marxism that pervades our institutions. These times, remind me of Ted Heath’s and Callaghan’s administrations in the late 1970’s. Lord help us.
When governments of all political persuasions have presided over gradual decline, including utterly botching the UK’s energy strategy, for the last 30 years, I have zero faith in Labour telling us what they think we want to hear. If we are going to re-industrialise, one of the essential foundations must be cheap energy that is somewhat insulated from international shocks. Not this blind rush to net zero, with solutions anyone with a modicum of common sense knows, will not work. I have no faith in politicians or the cultural Marxism that pervades our institutions. These times, remind me of Ted Heath’s and Callaghan’s administrations in the late 1970’s. Lord help us.
The search for ‘big ideas’ serve only as a distraction from the lack of ability and competence in our political elite. If only they could just do the basics efficiently…
The search for ‘big ideas’ serve only as a distraction from the lack of ability and competence in our political elite. If only they could just do the basics efficiently…
Haha… everyone realizes this is insane don’t they? It all is…. there is no soft landing….
USA holds the reserve currency – they can get away with almost everything for some years yet, but almost…. UK? no….. It is the Wily Coyote run off the cliff, and soon will look down, and whooshhh
All the world is there too – off the cliff, not yet looked down, but with a worried expression…..
It is all over. They have been living off credit cards for years. The Western people produce less than they consume, they do it by Debt.
China produces more than it consumes, but they do it on a combination of Western and Chinese Debt.
The rest of the world makes a living by selling to China or the West.
The excellent Mr Micawber:
“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.” ~ David Copperfield
Haha… everyone realizes this is insane don’t they? It all is…. there is no soft landing….
USA holds the reserve currency – they can get away with almost everything for some years yet, but almost…. UK? no….. It is the Wily Coyote run off the cliff, and soon will look down, and whooshhh
All the world is there too – off the cliff, not yet looked down, but with a worried expression…..
It is all over. They have been living off credit cards for years. The Western people produce less than they consume, they do it by Debt.
China produces more than it consumes, but they do it on a combination of Western and Chinese Debt.
The rest of the world makes a living by selling to China or the West.
The excellent Mr Micawber:
“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.” ~ David Copperfield
“made the country overdependent on imports for the supply of everything from energy [to food to basic medical supplies]”
I agree completely wrt energy. However Ms Reeves’ Labour Party plans to eliminate our local gas, oil and coal reserves. (Perhaps she will learn from Biden, who has restarted oil exploration?)
“made the country overdependent on imports for the supply of everything from energy [to food to basic medical supplies]”
I agree completely wrt energy. However Ms Reeves’ Labour Party plans to eliminate our local gas, oil and coal reserves. (Perhaps she will learn from Biden, who has restarted oil exploration?)
Good but scary analysis. But not scary enough. There may be some good soundbite ideas from Labour, but no money and no ability to spend what little there is wisely. Who would want to invest in Britain where the maximum speed on potholed roads is 20mph and the grid stops when the wind doesn’t blow?
Good but scary analysis. But not scary enough. There may be some good soundbite ideas from Labour, but no money and no ability to spend what little there is wisely. Who would want to invest in Britain where the maximum speed on potholed roads is 20mph and the grid stops when the wind doesn’t blow?
Some people will put anything in their mouths for £s. Labour should simply pay royalties to GG Allin’s estate and use “Dope Money” as their manifesto. We may need the US rn as we are their vassals like Hoenicker was to USSR, but surely its time we started to wind down what has become if not an abusive relationship then certainly a very unequal one.
Some people will put anything in their mouths for £s. Labour should simply pay royalties to GG Allin’s estate and use “Dope Money” as their manifesto. We may need the US rn as we are their vassals like Hoenicker was to USSR, but surely its time we started to wind down what has become if not an abusive relationship then certainly a very unequal one.
When I look at modern Britain I can only conclude that if it were not for the industrial visionaries and that bit of luck at being the first to industrialise, the people of the country would still be living in huts. It is incapable of getting anything done and its talents and ideas could fit inside a shoe box.
When I look at modern Britain I can only conclude that if it were not for the industrial visionaries and that bit of luck at being the first to industrialise, the people of the country would still be living in huts. It is incapable of getting anything done and its talents and ideas could fit inside a shoe box.
Fazi is clearly not paying attention to the gilts market and the way that yields on gilts are rising. The next government is going to be cutting expenditure just to service existing debt.
Cue a lot of disappointed voters expecting pay rises and saving the NHS.
Cue a lot of disappointed voters expecting pay rises and saving the NHS.
Fazi is clearly not paying attention to the gilts market and the way that yields on gilts are rising. The next government is going to be cutting expenditure just to service existing debt.
Dear Rachel,
The country is bust. The Coalition and then the Tories borrowed all the money and frittered it all away on vanity projects and Covid lockdowns etc. They have also taxed us to the hilt – so there is no more to squeeze out of us.
What British industry needs first and foremost, if if it is to survive let alone thrive, is a secure supply of affordable energy from a range of competing sources. Neither industry nor we overtaxed individuals need expensive, unreliable, heavily subsidised, virtue signalling “renewables” . Most of all we don’t need a set of myopic politicians with an economically senseless five year plan pretending they know the answers ( or any of them). A little more humility and acceptance of of your inability to personally fix anything important would not be a bad start .
Yours sincerely,
Malcolm
Dear Rachel,
The country is bust. The Coalition and then the Tories borrowed all the money and frittered it all away on vanity projects and Covid lockdowns etc. They have also taxed us to the hilt – so there is no more to squeeze out of us.
What British industry needs first and foremost, if if it is to survive let alone thrive, is a secure supply of affordable energy from a range of competing sources. Neither industry nor we overtaxed individuals need expensive, unreliable, heavily subsidised, virtue signalling “renewables” . Most of all we don’t need a set of myopic politicians with an economically senseless five year plan pretending they know the answers ( or any of them). A little more humility and acceptance of of your inability to personally fix anything important would not be a bad start .
Yours sincerely,
Malcolm
That rare thing, a violation of Betteridge’s law of headlines
That rare thing, a violation of Betteridge’s law of headlines
“America’s global decline”!? I assume that Thomas Fazi believe that if he keeps writing articles repeating nonsense like this, it will eventually prove to be true. Has he bothered to actually look at any of the actual data about the strength (economic, social, cultural) of the largest countries? Only India could make a claim to be doing better in the last few years, and , frankly, having personally dealt with their bureaucracy a lot, I can’t see that lasting
“America’s global decline”!? I assume that Thomas Fazi believe that if he keeps writing articles repeating nonsense like this, it will eventually prove to be true. Has he bothered to actually look at any of the actual data about the strength (economic, social, cultural) of the largest countries? Only India could make a claim to be doing better in the last few years, and , frankly, having personally dealt with their bureaucracy a lot, I can’t see that lasting
No different to the masturbatorys
No different to the masturbatorys
The future is only “the failing status quo” if there is no willingness to contemplate cutting spending.
Take 10% off the welfare budget, 50% over 5 years off the NHS budget – let people pay part of the cost, 30% off education – restore the age 16 school leaving age.
Stop the “net zero” madness.
Then radically cut all payments to quangos and interest groups.
Then cut taxes to generate investment in manufacturing.
Not a great fan of Fazi’s usual missives but this one decent and balanced.
Of course Reeves and Labour have some dilemmas to navigate. Good ideas of course will get pinched by the Tories as has been repeatedly evident. Quite what state the economy may be in if/when they gain power remains unclear. Too much detail shared with the right wing media a hostage to fortune too soon etc. Plus of course the short term options for any party in power have narrowed and Article reinforces that.
But you can discern some things. Firstly some basic competency. If they go for IRA type investment the OBR won’t be cut out of it and the markets won’t be surprised. Trussonomics wasn’t just the policy but the cack-handed way they went about it. Secondly a recognition some re-industrialisation necessary, which inevitably will force some further realignment with Single Market (albeit no formal re-joining) which just in itself will provide further certainty for Business and a positive upswing. They’ll keep some distance to retain flexibility on new tech regulation. They’ll be no gifts from the EU to Reeves of course, but the trust so badly shaken the last 7yrs will continue to improve. And a focus on the areas in which the UK remains strong – high tech incl AI, data-led, medical research and of course environmental technologies and research. UK still has the financial centre to provide liquidity for these and excellent Universities to help underpin such directions.
It will be a hideous inheritance of course with the wreckage of Brexit failure (admitted by it’s own leading protagonists) scattered, missing coherence and any semblance of what to now do with it. But they could hardly do worse could they and Reeves/Starmer a match for Sunak/Hunt.
The Labour Party will achieve nothing, except perhaps for accelerating our descent into poverty and social breakdown. Perhaps it is best to get it over with. “If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well It were done quickly’.
Perhaps something will arise from the ashes. If it does it won’t involve the Labour Party.
I agree. And this article is on the money not just in exposing how bereft of ideas Labour are; but how the UK itself – slipping into a dark pit with multiple structural decades old mega crises (broken housing market/broken energy market/broken NHS/broken educational system/broken state finances) – does not possess the TOOLS to escape the doom loop. We are a proto failed state; we just dont quite see it. The powers of the nation state have been demolished since the 90s to make us a compliant Province of the EU Empire. So there are no gears to get us out of this mess for ANY of our appalling political parties.
Perhaps something will arise from the ashes.
Aye, let’s hope Stokesy leads us to victory today, we need cheering up!
I agree. And this article is on the money not just in exposing how bereft of ideas Labour are; but how the UK itself – slipping into a dark pit with multiple structural decades old mega crises (broken housing market/broken energy market/broken NHS/broken educational system/broken state finances) – does not possess the TOOLS to escape the doom loop. We are a proto failed state; we just dont quite see it. The powers of the nation state have been demolished since the 90s to make us a compliant Province of the EU Empire. So there are no gears to get us out of this mess for ANY of our appalling political parties.
Perhaps something will arise from the ashes.
Aye, let’s hope Stokesy leads us to victory today, we need cheering up!
No matter how many good ideas they have, I refuse to vote for a political party that is too stupid or too cowardly to define what a woman is.
This has always seemed such a strange hill to choose to die on.
The implicit message of this criticism is that it is for politicians to define what a woman is or isn’t. Why would you want that?
This has always seemed such a strange hill to choose to die on.
The implicit message of this criticism is that it is for politicians to define what a woman is or isn’t. Why would you want that?
The Labour Party will achieve nothing, except perhaps for accelerating our descent into poverty and social breakdown. Perhaps it is best to get it over with. “If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well It were done quickly’.
Perhaps something will arise from the ashes. If it does it won’t involve the Labour Party.
No matter how many good ideas they have, I refuse to vote for a political party that is too stupid or too cowardly to define what a woman is.
Not a great fan of Fazi’s usual missives but this one decent and balanced.
Of course Reeves and Labour have some dilemmas to navigate. Good ideas of course will get pinched by the Tories as has been repeatedly evident. Quite what state the economy may be in if/when they gain power remains unclear. Too much detail shared with the right wing media a hostage to fortune too soon etc. Plus of course the short term options for any party in power have narrowed and Article reinforces that.
But you can discern some things. Firstly some basic competency. If they go for IRA type investment the OBR won’t be cut out of it and the markets won’t be surprised. Trussonomics wasn’t just the policy but the cack-handed way they went about it. Secondly a recognition some re-industrialisation necessary, which inevitably will force some further realignment with Single Market (albeit no formal re-joining) which just in itself will provide further certainty for Business and a positive upswing. They’ll keep some distance to retain flexibility on new tech regulation. They’ll be no gifts from the EU to Reeves of course, but the trust so badly shaken the last 7yrs will continue to improve. And a focus on the areas in which the UK remains strong – high tech incl AI, data-led, medical research and of course environmental technologies and research. UK still has the financial centre to provide liquidity for these and excellent Universities to help underpin such directions.
It will be a hideous inheritance of course with the wreckage of Brexit failure (admitted by it’s own leading protagonists) scattered, missing coherence and any semblance of what to now do with it. But they could hardly do worse could they and Reeves/Starmer a match for Sunak/Hunt.