Priti Patel

[ATG]

NWTony said:

ATG said:

The accusations are baseless if you bring your brain to the table. Is £2 billion quid's worth of assets large or small compared to the turnover and liabilities of the C of E? Look at their accounts ...

I had a look at the 2021 accounts out of curiosity, total assets minus liabilities was 10.2 billion pounds and cash flow at the end of the year was plus £683 million.

Yup. They employ something like 20k people, and maintain something like 15k churches, half of which are Grade 1 listed. Average salary about 30k. Not exactly rolling in cash.

[isaldiri]

sugerbear said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

It's slightly off topic, but my view is that Conservatives will get pasted at the next election. Whilst Sunak is extremely clever and competent, and he could probably run any PLC, he isn't a great communicator. And he lacks warmth and empathy. Which as a CEO doesn't often really matter. But as a Prime Minister, it can be essential.

And as a country, we wasted far too much on our covid response, which now acts like a fiscal lead-weight around the neck of any government restricting what can actually be afforded.

So once Boris has made a few more million, and the Tories have ejected Sunak, and Starmer doesn't turn out to be much better, I think we will see Boris having another go at it. And I think he will win too.

Just to bring some reality back.

He wasn't able to beat Liz Truss. In a pool of lightweights he is third choice, behind Johnson who couldn't stand and Liz Truss who actually won.

I don't think he really has what it takes to run a PLC otherwise he would be running a PLC (and making much more moneythan he currently is).

Uh... given the money he's married into plus his own hardly inconsiderable personal wealth, I really doubt that's the case.

[turbobloke]

ATG said:

NWTony said:

ATG said:

The accusations are baseless if you bring your brain to the table. Is £2 billion quid's worth of assets large or small compared to the turnover and liabilities of the C of E? Look at their accounts ...

I had a look at the 2021 accounts out of curiosity, total assets minus liabilities was 10.2 billion pounds and cash flow at the end of the year was plus £683 million.

Yup. They employ something like 20k people, and maintain something like 15k churches, half of which are Grade 1 listed. Average salary about 30k. Not exactly rolling in cash.

Cash wasn't the point.

[cgt2]

sugerbear said:

Just to bring some reality back.

He wasn't able to beat Liz Truss. In a pool of lightweights he is third choice, behind Johnson who couldn't stand and Liz Truss who actually won.

I don't think he really has what it takes to run a PLC otherwise he would be running a PLC (and making much more moneythan he currently is).

Also remember the only reason he became Chancellor in February 2020 is because Javid would not accept Cummings undermining his authority so quit suddenly, Sunak was installed by Cummings having been 1st Secretary to be malleable to do Dom's bidding, not the PMs. This is all quite well documented.

[smn159]

Yes, he's a weak PM and has virtually no authority in the party. He's only there because they can't agree on anyone else.

[MC Bodge]

smn159 said:

Yes, he's a weak PM and has virtually no authority in the party. He's only there because they can't agree on anyone else.

And the Tory party members put Truss there.

[bitchstewie]

I suspect Sunak is fundamentally decent.

Unfortunately if you lie down with dogs don't be surprised if you get up with fleas.

[turbobloke]

bhstewie said:

I suspect Sunak is fundamentally decent.

Unfortunately if you lie down with dogs don't be surprised if you get up with fleas.

[Murph7355]

bhstewie said:

I suspect Sunak is fundamentally decent.

Unfortunately if you lie down with dogs don't be surprised if you get up with fleas.

He should have been on the Frontline much sooner.

There is no place to hide for him. He is massively, massively complicit.

[SpeckledJim]

turbobloke said:

bhstewie said:

I suspect Sunak is fundamentally decent.

Unfortunately if you lie down with dogs don't be surprised if you get up with fleas.

I honestly don't think he's 'the problem'. And if he can find a way, I think that he and the party would benefit at the polls in 15 months time if he can go through the nutters with a huge bloody scythe.

If it's too late in the day for the party to contemplate another leader, and they accept they really do have to back him, then have at it, Rishi. Chop out the mad wood.

[bitchstewie]

Murph7355 said:

He should have been on the Frontline much sooner.

There is no place to hide for him. He is massively, massively complicit.

Agree completely.

When you enable and promote the likes of Braverman you don't get to say "it wasn't me" when your party increasingly look like filth.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Well, for balance, I completely disagree. Whilst Sunak was invisible for the first few months of his premiership, the last thing we need is more press conferences, more photo opportunities, more weaselly interviews. Do we really think that would have made a difference to the rampant inflation, to the level of uncontrolled illegal immigration, to out of control public spending, to the failing NHS (where no-one dare talk about the horrible levels of excess deaths which are currently happening), or the poor standard of public services where many civil servants seem to be either "working from home" or on strike.

The issues are all policy related. Not the PM's visibility.

[hidetheelephants]

smn159 said:

Yes, he's a weak PM and has virtually no authority in the party. He's only there because they can't agree on anyone else.

He's there because the 1922 stitched it up, the MPs were not given another chance to pick a wrong'un.

[turbobloke]

hidetheelephants said:

smn159 said:

Yes, he's a weak PM and has virtually no authority in the party. He's only there because they can't agree on anyone else.

He's there because the 1922 stitched it up, the MPs were not given another chance to pick a wrong'un.

The attacks on him (Sunak) do no good , backfiring on Starmer, except to reveal the fear in Labour and its supporters that Sunak could turn the tide and help Labour to lose the poll lead handed over by Boris.

[smn159]

turbobloke said:

.....Sunak could turn the tide and help Labour to lose the poll lead handed over by Boris.

And how's that going so far?

[turbobloke]

It's totally obvious, attacking Sunak is a sign that Labour HQ people fear him and want to damage his image to mininise the threat, unfortunately as with past Labour class warfare tactics, it doesn't work and backfires. Starmer will need much more, he's steadily losing the Boris poll lead atm.

[ATG]

SpeckledJim said:

turbobloke said:

bhstewie said:

I suspect Sunak is fundamentally decent.

Unfortunately if you lie down with dogs don't be surprised if you get up with fleas.

I honestly don't think he's 'the problem'. And if he can find a way, I think that he and the party would benefit at the polls in 15 months time if he can go through the nutters with a huge bloody scythe.

If it's too late in the day for the party to contemplate another leader, and they accept they really do have to back him, then have at it, Rishi. Chop out the mad wood.

^ this in spades

[Fundoreen]

Boris assembled a gang that thought like him and no doubt they got a big thrill discussing all the wild ideas. Nobody sensible to tell him he's a .They all deserve to be punished.

[ATG]

hidetheelephants said:

smn159 said:

Yes, he's a weak PM and has virtually no authority in the party. He's only there because they can't agree on anyone else.

He's there because the 1922 stitched it up, the MPs were not given another chance to pick a wrong'un.

Strictly the stitch-up wasn't to stop MPs having their say so much as stopping the decision going to the party members.

I have to say that one-member-one-vote "democratisation" of anything other than centrist parties is a bloody disaster. If you are a right-wing loon you're going to join the Conservatives. If you're a left-wing loon, you're going to join Labour. Those parties are inevitably loon magnets. Their grass roots memberships are not representative of their natural voter base; the membership is on average considerably more extreme. When you let the party members choose the leader you end up with Corbyn running Labour, not just crippling the Labour party, but denying the rest of us a functioning official opposition to try to keep the Conservatives honest, and also stopping the Labour Party from turning up to the Brexit debate. Remainers tend to blame the Conservatives for the fiasco, but Labour under Corbyn were every bit as culpable in losing the referendum itself. And when you let the Conservative grass roots pick a leader you end up with Truss. I thought picking Corbyn was the height of folly, but, my god, was I proved wrong last year.

[eharding]

turbobloke said:

Starmer will need much more, he's steadily losing the Boris poll lead atm.

Obviously the figures vary by which polling data is used, but the Politico aggregate data has the Labour lead at 10% on the day Boris resigned on 7th July 2022, and now has the Labour lead at 17%, so it's hard to see how they're steadily losing against their "Boris" poll lead.

Of course, compared to the 30% lead Starmer was enjoying at the absolute nadir of the Truss st-show the gap has obviously narrowed, and did so quite quickly once Truss was defenestrated, but on the face of it Sunak's best efforts brought the lead down to 15% or so in April, and the gap is now widening again - depending on what you deem to be the margin of error to be - but essentially Rishi's gains post Truss are in the noise.