You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
No deal is what Johnsons backers want
Probably, but this is Boris we're talking about here, a man that will lie at the drop of a hat to get what he wants. In this case a 5 year premiership with a v healthy majority, most of whom owe their newly found MP-ships to Boris, not his shadowy cabal of backers. So who exactly is he in thrall to now? They may well have spent money getting him there, but given the shape of the govt he now commands...You can probably add them to the pile of yesterday's men; the ERG and the DUP...
You don’t think Boris will just charge his backers more for his services, now he has a loyal set of MPs who owe their jobs to him, so will be able to push any agenda through without risk of parliament getting in the way?
are all pro-Brexit, anti-Johnson,
If they are pro brexit who are they pro if not Johnson, Farage? Rees Mogg?
That should have read 'pro remain' doh!
JP
^^ that makes more sense!
Employee rights out the window. The screws to be turned on the EU nationals living here. Also, anyone watched the purge lately?
We'll end up with an independent Scotland connected to a united ireland via a bridge between the mull of kintyre and Ballycastle.
There'll be a series of smaller road bridges spanning the sea lochs between Tarbert and Helensburgh.
There'll also be a rail track extending along glen Croe down into the mull of kintyre.
That should keep the surfers happy;)
Boris hair gets even messier.
Dominic Cummings turns slightly green and appears in public on a hoverboard.
Already they're backtracking on promises made about raising the minimum wage (can't do it if the economy falters, which it will with brexit) and social care for the elderly (push it back to LAs to deal with who themselves have been cut to shreds). Aussie politics as I remember it was all about populism, insults, aggression, name-calling and where did Lynton Crosby come from? Oddly, whilst the BBC went out of its way to rubbish Labour, the Tories are now talking of decriminalising not paying your license fee but they are proposing to criminalise local authorities supporting BDS.
My worry is that working people around here (some of whom have sfa, maybe a car and a phone) who voted Tory are unable to articulate why and will end a discussion with 'they're all the same'. Government policy for years has not been evidence based but ideological and this has filtered down into people's thinking. The cohorts that voted Tory in significant numbers were non-graduates and the elderly, both of whom would rely heavily on the mass media and the Tories would love to see a larger role played by Fox News. I am amazed at the disparity between people's preferences and their lived experience, maybe they want someone to 'look up to' (JRM?) or a 'natural born leader' (BJ, just like Churchill?) and maybe they think they deserve to be poor, 'know your place'. How depressing. Progress for the next 5 years will only be made outside of parliament.
This thread should be renamed ‘sore losers’
Good article here about why people vote for liars
https://theconversation.com/why-people-vote-for-politicians-they-know-are-liars-128953?
This thread should be renamed ‘sore losers’
Well at least they know they've lost, it's the utterly deluded who think they've won I find most interesting.
This thread should be renamed ‘sore losers’
What are you looking forward to about your ‘win’ given the previous 9 years performance? I guess brexit, but that will be done in a year (apparently) so then what?
Member
This thread should be renamed ‘sore losers’
Would love to know your thoughts on why Johnson has removed workers rights protections from his bill ?
Exactly as us sore losers predicted
99.999% of us lost...
99.999% of us lost…
Yep. Guessing andypaul is in the 0.001% (or is just a great big troll)
Corbyn's sympathies with the Palestinians was a very big issue for some, bigger than the NHS, student fees, care for the elderly, wages etc. So I guess to that extent they'd feel they'd won.
It is amazing how people like Umunna sacrificed his parliamentary career over AS when he'd already said he'd never witnessed any racism in the LP in 20 years and we're still waiting for the evidence of it. An idiot but a useful idiot. Any job vacancies for useful idiots?
Yep. Guessing andypaul is in the 0.001%
Not a troll, just struggling to comprehend why anybody would think a Corbyn or Swinson governent would have been a viable and sensible alternative...? Please convince me!?
Not a troll, just struggling to comprehend why anybody would think a Corbyn or Swinson governent would have been a viable and sensible alternative…?
A Labour government would actually try and improve life for those in most need, bring about a more equal society, put funding back into public services that require it.
Yes, that cost money but it is money that needs to be spent and the country/people can afford it
The tory government is going to do the opposite of that just as they have during the last 40 years and the only people who do well from it are the people that really don't need any help.
Convinced?
just struggling to comprehend why anybody would think a Corbyn or Swinson governent would have been a viable and sensible alternative
I didn't want any of them to have a majority, I wanted a result where they all failed and got rid of their inept or toxic leaders and actually had to look at each other and realise they would all have to compromise to resolve the mess we are in.
anyone would think Corbyn or Swinson governent would have been a viable and sensible alternative…
Tbh, as much as I don’t like the Tories being in, the depressing fact is that there was no credible alternative. Even if Labour get a stellar leader now, the Tory majority is so large they can do what they like.
My son has cerebral palsy, I dread to think what will happen when he’s 18 and moves onto PIP. They’ll probably judge he’s 100% for to work and entitled to nothing.
I think this is why most people fear the next few years- with the rise in food banks, homeless most voters don’t seem too bothered if it doesn’t effect them
A Labour government would actually try and improve life for those in most need, bring about a more equal society, put funding back into public services that require it.
That is just a re hash of their failed election promise. There is nothing here to convince me or anybody else other than hardcore Corbynites
andypaul
Member
This thread should be renamed ‘sore losers’
And sore "winners", because there's going to be just as many of those over the next 5 years.
I think this is why most people fear the next few years- with the rise in food banks, homeless most voters don’t seem too bothered if it doesn’t effect them
Probably a combination of not being effected and not caring enough to find out. Most people probably wouldn't even know what PIP is let alone know about what a brutal system it is.
I think this is why most people fear the next few years- with the rise in food banks, homeless most voters don’t seem too bothered if it doesn’t effect them
I agree if we had a labour govermemt they would probably rid the need for foodbanks, for at least 5 years, at which point a Tory goverment would have to introduce austerity measures because yet again labour had spent money they just didnt have and nearly bankrupt the country ala 2010.
That is just a re hash of their failed election promise. There is nothing here to convince me or anybody else other than hardcore Corbynites
It is nothing to do with Corbyn. Any labour party under any labour leader would be looking after those in need more than any tory party. If you cannot see that they you really are not looking at the last 40 years very hard or listening to what the MPs are saying or seeing what MPs are in the cabinet.
I agree if we had a labour govermemt they would probably rid the need for foodbanks, for at least 5 years, at which point a Tory goverment would have to introduce austerity measures because yet again labour had spent money they just didnt have and nearly bankrupt the country ala 2010.
Austerity was a tory choice, they could have easily chosen to just take only from those that can afford it as I said.
What would you prefer - no food banks, less homeless, better social care, better equality etc,. and the better off made a bit worse off or just carrying on as currently?
trying to help and actually helping are very different things though. The political bigots are a big part of the problem, it's not star wars kerley.
The Tory party have different answers to the Labour party, try thinking along those lines and you can help move the discussion out of the playground.
The Tory party have different answers
The current Tory party has nothing but lies. It has no answers for the general public, and won’t deliver anything in the public good. Sorry.
Promise to raise the minimum wage before the election has already been moved to behind a caveat (that Brexit doesn’t damage the economy). Expect plenty more of this kind of thing.
nearly bankrupt the country ala 2010.
I don’t think we were that close to bankruptcy. A lot of the late 2000s financial problems stemmed from the sub prime lending (•)collapse in the USA. Who was in president of the US? Oh yes George Bush, the Republican.
• I was working in the UK for a subsidiary of the worst offender.
The Tory party have different answers to the Labour party
Getting the poor to pay for what the rich could afford, generally.
Kelvin don't allow bigotry to taint your visions of the future.
You are just chanting like the empty heads on the football stands. Voter's would say exactly the same about all opposing manifestos/pledges.
nearly bankrupt the country ala 2010.
I don’t think we were that close to bankruptcy. A lot of the late 2000s financial problems stemmed from the sub prime lending (•)collapse in the USA. Who was in president of the US? Oh yes George Bush, the Republican.
• I was working in the UK for a subsidiary of the worst offender.
This time a thousand. Everyone skips over the fact that the world was in unforeseen financial crisis at this time.
One of my best friends voted for Boris - he's sitting pretty on a property worth close to a million quid, has a couple of nice cars, no children, earns a good salary.
When I asked him why he voted Tory he said he wanted tax breaks - there was no way he was going to vote for Corbyn as all he was going to do is tax him more and put it into the NHS and schools - both of which are of no use to him (his words).
I literally couldn't believe what I was hearing - how on earth do you convince someone with that attitude that being taxed a bit more to help those worse off than yourself is a good thing for our society.
. Everyone skips over the fact that the world was in unforeseen financial crisis at this time.
It wasn't entirely unforeseen, the people who saw it coming were drowned out by those who were making money off it.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that austerity was unnecessary, it was a choice based on ideology, not economics, and a poor one. Places that pursued austerity did worse and took longer to recover than places that didn't.
If you are worried about the economy and not wanting to repeat the problems of 2008, why would you vote for a govt that wants to pursue brexit, which is guaranteed to knock several percentage points off the gdp? Who announced making it impossible to extend brexit thus giving back all the currency gains that the election provided?
trying to help and actually helping are very different things though.
Not really. Labour will try and they will succeed in many areas which is a whole lot better than the tories who won't be trying at all, in fact they will be doing the opposite and making things worse rather than helping at all.
The Tory party have different answers to the Labour party, try thinking along those lines and you can help move the discussion out of the playground.
They are not even answering the same questions. I left the playground in the 80's, without my school milk...
Kelvin don’t allow bigotry to taint your visions of the future.
I gave an example of a promise being made in the pre election Queen’s speech, repeated in the Conservative election manifesto, and repeated personally by the PM and the key minister during the campaign … only for it to be rowed back on immediately in the post election Queen’s Speech. So they say one thing to be elected, and another as soon as they have secured a mandate to do what they want. They are only in power due to knowingly lying to get elected. They are not in power to make our lives better “by different means” than Labour… there may have been plenty of past Conservative politicians with that aim… but just read the past writings of current government ministers and the PM to understand what we are in for. Or you could read what Sir John Major has said about them, and their real aims, and why they should not be trusted.
Let's not forget, the OECD costed the Labour manifesto and said it would place the UK in about the middle of average state expenditures across Europe and that Osborne said austerity was never about debt, which tripled under the Tories, but about 'teaching the ****less a lesson'. I wonder if those blue rinse Tories were told of the state pensions in Germany, Spain and Greece? £186 pw at 67 in the UK vs £500 at 60 elsewhere and then disinheriting your kids by having to sell your house to pay for social care.
On the upside all those people eating bleached chicken on their unpaid holidays from their zero hours jobs could bring great benefits to Southend, Blackpool, Clacton and Cleethorpes.
In cities like Manchester balletic skills will be needed to get past all the homeless but at least they won't have to pay off their student loans.
I wonder if those blue rinse Tories were told of the state pensions in Germany, Spain and Greece? £186 pw at 67 in the UK vs £500 at 60 elsewhere
And look at the French, you know the ones who shrug their shoulders and smoke a Gitanes. At least they bother to fight their government, upping their retirement age from 62 to 64.
Over here it's going to 68, the date was set, then moved forward 10 years! Suppose it's best to close your curtains and pretend it's not happening or find something pointless to protest about, Trump or some other distraction. Best not give the French protests too much news coverage in case our plebs get any ideas!
Good to see the snivelling toady British shysters (I'm being polite) leading by example.
Probably, but this is Boris we’re talking about here, a man that will lie at the drop of a hat to get what he wants. In this case a 5 year premiership with a v healthy majority, most of whom owe their newly found MP-ships to Boris, not his shadowy cabal of backers. So who exactly is he in thrall to now? They may well have spent money getting him there, but given the shape of the govt he now commands…You can probably add them to the pile of yesterday’s men; the ERG and the DUP…
I’m currently thinking this , I don’t think Boris is majorly concerned with Brexit unless it suits him.
He’s effectively disowned the previous 9 years,got away with a border in the Irish Sea and squirrelled workers rights somewhere else and blocked parliamentary oversight on trade deals.
Anyway Brexit is done on the 31 Jan and with a free ride for 12 months all he has to do is some crowd pleasers.
‘We’ll get a deal” is now the sound bite but what’s a deal.
‘We’ll get a deal”
I think you’ve missed something. The plan is now for the government to only refer to the Withdrawal Agreement as a “deal” not any agreement on what happens after the transition period. Likewise, only January 31st is to be referred to as Brexit, not when we actually come out from under the protection and institutions proper 11 months later.
“We have a great deal. We have left and, look, nothing has gone majorly wrong. Well done us, we have delivered on our promise.”
My son has cerebral palsy, I dread to think what will happen when he’s 18 and moves onto PIP. They’ll probably judge he’s 100% for to work and entitled to nothing.
Stop worrying. My daughter is 27, and has CP, and has nothing but a pretty decent life. She has no problem proving she is not suitable for the vast majority of work, she would like to do some work, but is severely disabled, so cannot do a great deal.She lives a pretty independent life, albeit with a carer coming to her 5 times a week for a hour.
As for the Tory candidate saying some disabled people should not earn as much as the standard wage, then, yes, I do agree with that. Some people cannot do a full job, but, they would like to try, and know their disability would limit their productivity. It isnt all about the earnings, it is social interaction.
Minimum wage, and you would not get a job, £5/hr then they may be offered a job, and that would help their self esteem no end. As it is now, employers just cannot afford to employ a severely disabled person (obviously apart from the very benevolent employers who do it as an act of charity, but they are very rare).
I wonder if those blue rinse Tories were told of the state pensions in Germany, Spain and Greece? £186 pw at 67 in the UK vs £500 at 60 elsewhere
Ahh that old Chestnut
Comparing apples an aubergines 🙂
Probably did a lot to get us where we are now.
I think you’ve missed something. The plan is now for the government to only refer to the Withdrawal Agreement as a “deal” not any agreement on what happens after the transition period. Likewise, only January 31st is to be referred to as Brexit, not when we actually come out form under the protection and institutions proper 11 months later.
“We have a great deal. We have left and, look, nothing has gone majorly wrong. Well done us, we have delivered on our promise.”
Yep Brexits done so none of that remainer/leaver shite just bow down before your new people’s government proletarian scum.
UK approves £4bn US takeover of defence company Cobham
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50874181
UK4SALE
So the NHS is safe then?
Nah....
Parliament now doesn’t have a say in the trade negotiations
so any US-U.K. deal that happens with the sort of things the big us pharma wants ie price rises and longer times before a drug can be made generic can happen.
The drug prices would go up an that would come out of the NHS budget. It’ll probably end up with certain treatments being withdrawn as they are aren’t cost effective.
There’s better people on here on this subject.
I think a previous ttip negotiators opinion was that without some of this nhs action the US wouldn’t be that interested in us.
Here have your ****ing hospitals you godforsaken plebs!
Parliament now doesn’t have a say in the trade negotiations
so any US-U.K. deal that happens with the sort of things the big us pharma wants ie price rises and longer times before a drug can be made generic can happen.
Will there be any safeguards against prices becoming exorbitant, or should I start saving up for insulin?
New housing scheme announced.
What's this ****ing air con, Margaret have you seen this we're not paying for that for those scrounging bastards.
alanl
Member
As for the Tory candidate saying some disabled people should not earn as much as the standard wage, then, yes, I do agree with that. Some people cannot do a full job, but, they would like to try, and know their disability would limit their productivity. It isnt all about the earnings, it is social interaction.
You know that's not what she was saying, right? She literally said that some disabled people should be paid less because "they don't understand money".
Will there be any safeguards against prices becoming exorbitant, or should I start saving up for insulin?
I’d not bother worrying about it TBH, everything’s conjecture until Boris does stuff, anything could happen.
I’d not bother worrying about it
Not insulin dependent I presume?
Tom, insulin becoming much more expensive for the NHS isn’t that likely, assuming we stick to current European suppliers. We’re not going to swap to USA suppliers. Even if a new USA trade deal did somehow push up prices, and the government “reformed” prescription prices to shift more of the burden of cost for staying alive on those who are insulin dependent, you still are very unlikely to have to bare the true cost of insulin, or be forced to pay premiums and excess to insurance companies, within 10-15 years. There are individuals within this Conservative government that would be happy to see this in the long term… but in any timescale you can reasonably plan for, they wouldn’t get away with implementing such changes politically.
I’d not bother worrying about it
Not insulin dependent I presume?
Nope and I wasn’t being flippant either, no one really knows what Boris wants other than stay PM and as kelvin rightly points out blatant moves would be politically iffy and the timescales.
TBH I wasn’t thinking about them raising the end user prescription costs as that’s obviously bad politically but rather the internal costs to the nhs.
This is why trade deals are er complicated.
anyway, predictions:
- capital spending on projects that will make the Garden Bridge looks sensible.
Sort homelessness out in 5,4,3... no chance
kelvin
Subscriber
Tom, insulin becoming much more expensive for the NHS isn’t that likely, assuming we stick to current European suppliers. We’re not going to swap to USA suppliers.
Our prices are only low because of strong price controls, not because of who we buy from.
In the states, overseas suppliers cost the same as the domestic suppliers, even for products you can buy elsewhere for a few percent of the cost. Reason being, medicine isn't a normal market- it's easy to freeze out both products and supply lines. So it's a near perfect cartel environment, and the drug companies are an enthusiastic part of that. They still sell product to us here, since they can make a profit at these reduced rates, but they'd rather sell for more.
So we don't have to swap suppliers. We just have to reduce the strong market protections that we currently have in place that prevent them from ripping the arse out of us. Not take them away or anything, a minor change in price controls could double the price overnight, and they could still say "it's 500% more expensive in the USA for the same stuff, look at how well we look after you!". And of course call it fair, and pro-business, and common sense, and people'll lap it up.
Insulin is cheaper in every European health market than in the USA. The NHS will not suddenly be paying USA prices, unless it freezes out European supplies. And, importantly, individuals will not suddenly be bearing the cost of it. It’s important to have some perspective on this. Tom does not have to plan to have to pay substantially more for his supplies in the next 10-15 years. Of course, longer term, it depends on how cock sure the right wing anti-NHS players get… if we keep voting Tory, things will continue to move in the wrong direction, so who knows, 25 years from now, costs could be very different indeed.
My concern is one insulin will stay the same price (a bolas one, I reckon), but all the others (basal insulins, probably) will rocket. The NHS will continue to buy that insulin, and dish it out FOC, as normal.
They will then stop offering/funding all the others, so people will have to either get used to using the NHS one, or pay up. The reason it will be a bolas one that cheap, is thats what the pumps use.
(briefly, for those that don't know, different insulins work differently for different people, having differing effect on lowering blood sugars over differing amounts of time, so what works for one, may not work for another) ,
speculation of course, but I've heard of people moving to the states, getting the best insurance they can afford and them saying, 'Nah you don't pay enough for what you had in the UK, you get this one instead, get used to it.' Cue no end of issues.
It has also taken me 4 years of paying £100 a month for the freestyle libre blood testing sensors to be provided by the NHS. I imagine they will be for the chop much sooner than insulin.
This is what I think will happen across the whole 'industry'. One basic medicine will be provided by the NHS, but anything good will have to be self funded or insured against.
If you’re looking at a timescale of 10 years, there is no chance of our health system being transformed into the mess that the USA system is, and every chance that tools for controlling blood sugars will continue to improve in both usefulness and NHS availability.
Well, I’m continuing to hope so anyway.
Longer term, well let’s hope the current lot aren’t given that opportunity.
kelvin
Subscriber
Insulin is cheaper in every European health market than in the USA. The NHS will not suddenly be paying USA prices, unless it freezes out European supplies.
That's the trick- we don't have to freeze out supplies, we already have. Medication is (rightly) very controlled so there's no grey-import market. The US has european suppliers too, it's just that the exact same company that sells the NHS my novorapid, sells it for more in different markets. This isn't a US/EU thing, it's a price-controls-and-selling-things-for-the-maximum-price thing.
"Tom does not have to plan to have to pay substantially more for his supplies in the next 10-15 years."
Correct. But the NHS may well have to. And ramping up prescription costs won't worry this government in the slightest.
Correct. But the NHS may well have to. And ramping up prescription costs won’t worry this government in the slightest.
Nor will it give a second thought to reducing those exempt from said charges
[deleted]
Nor will it give a second thought to reducing those exempt from said charges
Not sure what the number is now but in 2014 the number of people who were exempt from paying for prescriptions was 90.6%
Always seemed very high to me and anecdotally didn't seem like an incorrect figure as I pay for quite a few prescriptions for my wife and I have never seen anyone else pay for a prescription in the queue in the last year (some may well pay in advance though!)
The charge also seems to increase by 20p every time I go. If the exemption was removed it would seriously impact a lot of ill poorer people at £9 each prescription but it may also help stop the stock piling of free repeat prescriptions that a very high number of old people do.
I pay for quite a few prescriptions for my wife and I have never seen anyone else pay for a prescription in the queue in the last year (some may well pay in advance though!
Prescription prepayment certificates Are £104 for a year well worth having if you need a couple of things a month.(30 something for 3 months if you don’t need a year)
Course you could ask why only England peeps actually have to pay for prescriptions 🙂
Anyway we should get back on track with wider predictions.
Freeports :- I think we’ll hear more about em.
Boris photo opportunities:
I think he’ll be blitzed all over the media laying foundation stones for hospitals an prisons and manufacturing and pretty much anything you can think.
In fact I reckon at least 85% of the U.K. will actually have a selfie taken with him.
I'll play along.
The the government will happily do over Scotland now.
I've a phone call today with two Scottish public bodies that fund some of our work, who should have had budget outlines in December. I suspect the outcome will be that they cannot set a budget, so cannot entertain us applying for next year's funding.
That means I'm writing letters of termination of employment by next week.
And Boris will be DILLIGAF.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51019926
Johnson has his first post-election meeting with the EU this afternoon
Word has been put out that he intends to tell them that the negotiations will not be extended beyond December. He is also going to tell them that the UK will be pursuing divergence, not regulatory alignment, from EU rules and standrds.
No surprises there then. That was always the long term plan. To tear up workers rights, environmental and food standards and then deregulate everything in a race to the bottom and alighnment with the US
I'd say that the EU will just tell us that if thats what we want to do then thats up to us, but they won't be ginvg us any trade deals on the back of it. Why on earth would they?
So it looks like they're actively pursuing a no deal/ WTO exit. It was just put on hold for a bit.
That'll hit their new voters in northern working class areas hardest, of course. I'm sure Dom and Dommer won't be losing any sleep over that
[strong]binners[/strong] wrote:
That’ll hit their new voters in northern working class areas hardest, of course.
Quite frankly - Good & I'll not shed a single bit of sorrow. They voted for this, they can take the biggest slice of misery pie.
While I agree that they deserve everything they get. Unfortunately an awful lot of us who didn't vote Tory are going to have to take the same economic hit and have to eat the same misery pie. Saying 'I told you so' isn't going to offer much consolation 🙁
It's not, but it's all we've got, really.
Good & I’ll not shed a single bit of sorrow.
Jesus. Back to this again I see! If it makes you feel any better, I can guarantee you the people who voted for it won't give a flying **** about your concern or lack of it, as long as they take everyone else down with them.
Jesus. Back to this again I see! If it makes you feel any better, I can guarantee you the people who voted for it won’t give a flying **** about your concern or lack of it, as long as they take everyone else down with them.
So now they're pretty minded and stupid, lashing out in jealousy? I thought they were salt of the earth white working class heroes? Or weren't they stupid last time? I am struggling to keep up.
Must be challenging having to constantly bend the rest of the world to fit, I guess.
So it looks like they’re actively pursuing a no deal/ WTO exit. It was just put on hold for a bit
This was obviously always the aim. Hence the atifical deadlines from Johnson. Thats so he can say " we tried but the EU would not play ball."
Bye bye UK - it was a good few hundred years but that is the end of the UK
Rather predictability Johnson is already backtracking on his election promises. How long before we can start saying ' we told you so'?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-social-care-plan-bbc-breakfast-election-latest-a9282611.html
I think we can probably do that already.
There's some chat in the tory press about some kind of mansion tax and getting rid of the upper rate tax relief on pension contributions.
Very interesting on the pension contributions - that would hit a lot of people (I think 14% of people pay tax at the higher rate).
The Tories had a manifesto commitment not to raise the income tax rate, this would seem like a very sneaky way of getting round that. It effectively increases the % of income tax paid by everyone in the 40% tax bracket. Also a kick in the balls for a generations that have lost final salary pensions and had their retirement kicked into the long grass anyway. There could also be some perverse incentives for people to reduce their working hours (this combined with loss of child benefit for those earning over £50k).
Labour got an absolute mauling for suggesting the same thing in the 2017 election. It's not a Marxist smash and grab when BoJo thinks it.
Always the party of stealth taxation. It's very much in keeping with attitude towards the electorate.