Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
Yesjoin in first party conference As leader of the Conservatives, Kemi Badenoch Had to face two challenges. First, to save his faltering leadership, and second, to start earning the right to be on behalf of himself and his party. heard by the British people,
In both cases, he acquitted himself well. For now he is safe – and his surprise announcement is that his government will abolish stamp duty was daring enough to attract public attention.
Like Sir Keir Starmer last week, he bid farewell nascent leadership challenge and reestablished its authority, even if dependent on few signs of further progress Elections will be held next May In Scotland, Wales, London and local authorities. Whether the country likes it or not, it is still possible that by this time next year it will have a new Prime Minister and a new Leader of the Opposition.
Thorny in media interviewsIncredulous at the Prime Minister’s questions and prone to inexplicable overconfidence, which occasionally makes his mistakes worse, she is a fine stage performer, and certainly no worse than him. Perennial Hunter Robert JenrickWho – stuck a perfect bottom with his hand legal wig – Gave a grotesque impression of a music hall ventriloquist the previous day.
Ms. Badenoch’s audience heard a little more of her backstory and, despite constant murmurings, showed some affection, whether genuine or not, when she asked them to “stand with me.”
As for the Conservatives, a party still reeling from its historic defeat in last year’s general election, followed by another ruthless beating by Nigel Farage and reform ukIt was all that anyone could do. If he had any doubts about the case, Ms Badenoch told him people were “still angry at us”.
He certainly gave the workers what they were looking for, including good jokes. stamp duty In fact – as experts sympathetic to the Tories disagree – there is a “bad tax”, as he put it. This boosted the property market and, during George Osborne’s time as (Conservative) Chancellor, it began to translate into an extremely flawed, almost random wealth tax. it discourages first time buyers So much so that it had to be reduced, at times, dramatically, by Mr. Osborne’s successors; Limits create inequities, and it prevents older people from downsizing and vacating family homes.
In terms of economic impact more broadly, it hinders labor mobility and, thus, a more dynamic economy and social mobility. Although this is not the biggest obstacle to building a “property-owning democracy”, it is still deeply resented. By promising to get rid of it, Ms Badenoch has taken a step that is in line with the “aspirational” nature of the Tories’ traditional constituency, and which reminds her party of one of its great historical missions.
Such as Shadow Chancellor Sir Mel Stride’s plans to subsidize first-time buyers £5,000 National Insurance RebateThe Conservatives are once again banking on the booming youth vote – which, given their badly aging base, shows they have rediscovered their political fascination.
Ms Badenoch revealed her vote-winner with a somewhat playful tease during her speech, which made the announcement even more dramatic. This was probably the best news the Tories had before the pandemic. No wonder it went over well.
Stamp duty was once haphazard, even bizarre, during the era of (relatively) affordable housing; Nowadays, it raises around £15 billion – a huge sum – and it is unaffordable even for the middle class. Ms Badenoch wants to retain it for second and rental homes, which would reduce the cost of dismantling it, and it seems the move will be phased in.
Yet, like the rest of the Conservatives’ proposals – cutting public spending by £47 billion a year by the end of the Parliament, including cutting £23 billion from social security – Ms Badenoch lacks a credible plan for what she wants to do. How will she pay for it? As she often reminds us, she is an engineer, and claims that she would not rush into policy making without creating a “blueprint” – but that is what she is doing now.
Unless it can talk to voters about which sections of society will be affected by its proposals, they will lack a certain feasibility. She risks making the same mistakes for which she criticizes the Labor government – and, indeed, the previous Conservative administration. Ms Badenoch, who caused the downfall of Liz Truss and damaged the Tories’ reputation for economic competence, has not strayed at all into the area of unfunded tax cuts, but she cannot afford to be so poorly prepared for scrutiny as the election approaches. His “golden rule” of putting deficit reduction first sets the right priorities, but it is nothing like a proper fiscal framework for debt and deficit reduction in relation to national income. It doesn’t guarantee anything.
In Manchester Conference RoomMs Badenoch showed herself at her combative best, and she may have “cut in” on voters who are not yet eager to give her party a fair hearing. But, as he said in his previous speech a few days ago, he still has “mountains to climb”. A good speech with a headline-grabbing strategy will not be enough to bridge the gap with reform.
But at least the Conservatives have some political product to woo voters – on the economy, on immigration, on the energy bill, on the “family farm tax”, on VAT, on private school fees, on first-time buyers and home owners. The task of claiming the economy and general capacity as “their” strong contender has been made easier by the missteps taken by the Labor government, as well as Mr Farage’s habitually careless attitude towards facts and reality.
Some of the promises the Conservatives have made are deeply misleading, others are still not fully formed, and they are almost silent on schools and hospitals. They have been making noise on human rights, race etc. multiculturalism Very disturbing.
with his recent article IndependentLater given as a conference speech at a fringe event, Lord Heseltine It was right to bother them with warnings about their effects. Still, this faction of the party can at least begin to answer the most insidious questions at the door: “Why should we give you another chance?”