• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

UK politics general discussion

I must admit, there’s one bit of yesterday’s announcement and the ensuing stir that’s confusing me a bit.

Economists are saying that Jeremy Hunt “isn’t even half way” to closing the black hole in the public finances, with there apparently being a £35bn gap left to fill… but my question is; how is there still so much left to claw back even though Hunt has scrapped practically all of the Mini-Budget, as well as a significant part of the Energy Price Guarantee?

I might be viewing it too simplistically, but; surely the reversal of most of the Mini-Budget has clawed back the bulk of the money that needed to be clawed back?

Has inflation and the drama with the markets meant that he has more money to claw back than the amount of money that was committed in the Mini-Budget in the first place? Or is it something else?
 
In another u-turn, Liz Truss has ditched the plan to raise pensions in line with inflation.

The PM said two weeks ago she was "committed" to the triple lock, so payments rise by whatever is higher: prices, average earnings or 2.5%.

But her spokesman has now said she was "not making any commitments" on government spending.

Presumably "her spokesman" is Jeremy Hunt 😂

www.bbc.co.uk

Triple lock: Liz Truss won't commit to raising pensions with inflation

The prime minister's spokesman says she is "not making any commitments" on government spending.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
Matt N said:
I must admit, there’s one bit of yesterday’s announcement and the ensuing stir that’s confusing me a bit.

Economists are saying that Jeremy Hunt “isn’t even half way” to closing the black hole in the public finances, with there apparently being a £35bn gap left to fill… but my question is; how is there still so much left to claw back even though Hunt has scrapped practically all of the Mini-Budget, as well as a significant part of the Energy Price Guarantee?

I might be viewing it too simplistically, but; surely the reversal of most of the Mini-Budget has clawed back the bulk of the money that needed to be clawed back?

Has inflation and the drama with the markets meant that he has more money to claw back than the amount of money that was committed in the Mini-Budget in the first place? Or is it something else?
Click to expand...
There wasn't a single part of the mini budget that was implemented yet, so there wasn't really any money to be clawed back - it was more about the perception that the country was being reckless. So, the markets response was to increase the cost of everything to the UK as they deemed it to be higher risk. Because demand was so low for government bonds as a result, the yield then had to be increased. Although they've settled to an extent it does mean there's a fair bit that was sold at the higher yields that now needs to be paid back. As you'll have probably seen, those higher yields are then reflected throughout pretty much across every bit of the borrowing sector too. Staggeringly higher interest rates on mortgages means people have less disposable income, meaning reduced tax coming into the government. Exchange rates diving even for a relatively short time means businesses have to pay more for their goods, fuel and raw materials.

It's very much a domino effect. Just because that one domino that started it all is stood back up, there's still a hell of a lot of resetting to happen before things are "fixed". There's also the psychological aspect - the reputation of the UK as a stable nation is now quite frankly in the mud. It takes a short time to tank it, but considerably longer to build that reputation back up again.
 
BigT said:
Why is it always a race to the bottom? A lot of students etc. actually want to work the weekend, reducing the hours reduces the amount they can earn, I just think it’s outdated practice now this 6 hours trading only.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. I can tell you from personal experience next to zero students want to do 5 days of education then work both weekend days. We only trade for 6 hours on a Sunday and already struggle to staff it, even with all these students you claim are hungry for the money. In convenience it's even worse, as it actually is the busiest day of the week and requires more labour which has always been a struggle to get.

In the 90's, closing on a Sunday and shutting at 5pm Saturday was common. There was even a Saturday shift premium. When I started out, supermarkets generally traded 8am - 8/9pm for the six days then 6 hours on a Sunday which itself carried a premium payment as did bank holidays.

Now it's more like 6/7am to 10/11pm six days with Sunday and bank holiday premiums mostly long gone and contracts that now make pretty much everything from bank holidays to Sundays mandatory for most. Even Christmas day was being discussed not long back for C stores. That is a race to the bottom.

The country coped perfectly well before the Sunday Trading Act 1994 even came in and it copes perfectly well on 25th December every year without the need to force more low paid workers into work just so that someone who is bored can go and do some shopping.
 
Time and a fifth Saturday.
Time and third 8PM - 6AM.
Double Time Sunday.
Triple Time BH.

...and then Safeway went bankrupt for some reason!

But these are the sorts of things that creap back in when business struggle to recruit, a position a lot of industries are in now. We've seen some good pay enhancements in some industries. It's an employees market.

Even though it doesn't effect me at all working somewhere that has to be 24/7 cover, I'm hugely against relaxing Sunday trading, even more so bank holidays. Pay enhancements for unsociable, Sunday and BH working should be built into minimum wage laws.
 
Inflation up to 10.1% now.

Truss attempting to annoy the last remaining Tory fanbase with the pension stuff.

It's an absolute meltdown going on. Still think the plan is to be so bad we're begging for Boris to come back (Nadine Dorries already on her knees doing so).

Matt.GC said:
The country coped perfectly well before the Sunday Trading Act 1994 even came in and it copes perfectly well on 25th December every year without the need to force more low paid workers into work just so that someone who is bored can go and do some shopping.
Click to expand...

Seeing the state of my local Asda around the days when it's closed I don't think as a country people are well prepared to survive when shops are closed. Absolute anarchy before Easter and Christmas.
 
Matt.GC said:
Nonsense. I can tell you from personal experience next to zero students want to do 5 days of education then work both weekend days. We only trade for 6 hours on a Sunday and already struggle to staff it, even with all these students you claim are hungry for the money. In convenience it's even worse, as it actually is the busiest day of the week and requires more labour which has always been a struggle to get.

In the 90's, closing on a Sunday and shutting at 5pm Saturday was common. There was even a Saturday shift premium. When I started out, supermarkets generally traded 8am - 8/9pm for the six days then 6 hours on a Sunday which itself carried a premium payment as did bank holidays.

Now it's more like 6/7am to 10/11pm six days with Sunday and bank holiday premiums mostly long gone and contracts that now make pretty much everything from bank holidays to Sundays mandatory for most. Even Christmas day was being discussed not long back for C stores. That is a race to the bottom.

The country coped perfectly well before the Sunday Trading Act 1994 even came in and it copes perfectly well on 25th December every year without the need to force more low paid workers into work just so that someone who is bored can go and do some shopping.
Click to expand...
I think you kind of answered why it’s a good reason to scrap the trading hours, it’s the busiest day of the week because everyone is squeezed into 6 hours.
Even Scotland has longer opening hours on a Sunday (kind of ironic as it was Scottish MP’s that voted against in England opening longer)
As Pluk has said above if business are struggling to recruit as most are at the minute, this usually drives wages and benefits up not down.
I work most Sundays as do a lot of people, it’s not about been bored it’s about growing the economy and by abolishing these out of date laws, it would in one very quick and easy move result in more spending in the high street, the exact area that will start to struggle first.
 
BigT said:
I think you kind of answered why it’s a good reason to scrap the trading hours, it’s the busiest day of the week because everyone is squeezed into 6 hours.
Even Scotland has longer opening hours on a Sunday (kind of ironic as it was Scottish MP’s that voted against in England opening longer)
As Pluk has said above if business are struggling to recruit as most are at the minute, this usually drives wages and benefits up not down.
I work most Sundays as do a lot of people, it’s not about been bored it’s about growing the economy and by abolishing these out of date laws, it would in one very quick and easy move result in more spending in the high street, the exact area that will start to struggle first.
Click to expand...

Without wanting to turn this into the Sunday trading laws thread, that's an over simplification and just not the case.

There is more than enough capacity in both food and non-food on Sunday without an extension of the hours (retail provision in this country is actually over capacity in general). In food it's the busiest day of the week for convenience, not superstores. There are plenty of options already available for people to shop.

The slice of the pie is the same. People don't spend more when stores are open longer to the point where the last few years some chains have actually reduced hours. That is a fact. In Scotland most supers trade 9-18 (not all) and it mainly just spreads the same sales over longer hours. One store I know went from 8am - 8pm on a Saturday to 6am - 11pm in the space of 6 years, same result. This happened with Boxing day, it took money from convenience and Dec 27th so most chains are now rolling this back.

We saw this with the carrier bag charge, all considered it and talked about it for years, but were waiting for a competitor to make the first move before the government made it law. Opening hours have been increased (and are actually decreasing slightly at the moment). If a competitor does it, you then have to not loose your slice of the same pie.

To combat the cost of doing so, contracts are getting worse. Premiums for Sunday's, Saturday's and Bank holidays mostly gone. Night premium from 10pm to 6am now rolled back to midnight to 5am in some cases. Sundays and Bank Holidays from optional to mandatory. Hourly rate has gone up, at the expense of shift premiums as people are now forced to work it rather than have the choice. We never used to struggle to cover bank hols or Sundays when they were optional with shift premiums and I've worked in places where we had to devise systems to share them out fairly because demand was so high. Now people just leave because they find themselves always having the thin end of the stick, with no extra pay, working late into the night, all weekend, not seeing their families, friends or being able to do their Uni work.

Pensions have been destroyed, as @pluk said, Safeway used to offer Saturday premium, they also had an excellent pension scheme. Over the last decade and half, Morrisons got rid of the lot. Safeway contracts now gone and those people have seen their pension scheme downgraded 3 times since 2005.

If the events of the last few weeks has tought us anything it should be that this old fashioned trickle down deregulation stuff is a falacy. Millions of unfilled vacancies yet wages are still rising below inflation as businesses just can't afford it. Like yourself, I too have just worked all weekend and although weekends have always been factored in to what I do for a living, I like many do have children who are not at school on the weekend who I am partial to wanting to spend at least some time with. But the reality for most people who work for me is that they are working more unsociable hours than ever before, on less pay with downgraded pension provisions.

If they wanted to deregulate to stimulate growth in our industry, they should be looking at HFSS legislation not Sunday trading laws. But rather than looking at what businesses actually want, we have a government that seem to want to use the politics of the 1980's to solve the problems of the 2020's. The government standing by and doing little hasn't helped the railways, the energy market or housing market has it? To add insult to injury, a number of Tories blamed the very markets they are saying we should all trust implicitly to provide us with prosperity for the consequences of their own homemade economic incompetence. You couldn't make this stuff up.
 
Benzin said:
Seeing the state of my local Asda around the days when it's closed I don't think as a country people are well prepared to survive when shops are closed. Absolute anarchy before Easter and Christmas.
Click to expand...

Asda and a certain other Yorkshire based chain don't fund their stores properly. Around 30% of the stuff bought ends up going in the bin anyway.
 
Even like minded right winger Beaverman couldn't contain herself from taking a dump on the doorstep of Number 10 on her way out. How can anyone defend this government now? It went way beyond politics a few weeks ago. This has to end.
 
For clarity, Braverman’s resignation apparently has nothing to do with Truss, instead relating to her sharing a confidential Home Office document with a colleague.

However, she did talk a lot in her resignation letter about “facing the consequences of your actions” and “not trying to forget mistakes”… which some perceived as a dig at the PM.
EDIT: I’ve read her full resignation letter, and it was a lot more scathing of Truss’ government than I’d expected, citing our current period as a “tumultuous time”, and she said that she “has concerns about the direction of this government” due to it abandoning key manifesto pledges, going back on many of its promises and “pretending that mistakes haven’t been made”.

It also appears that Grant Shapps, a centrist Tory MP who backed Sunak, is to be Braverman’s replacement as Home Secretary. He previously served as Transport Secretary under Boris Johnson, but was relegated to the backbenches by Liz Truss.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top