COMPETENCE ANYONE?

For a prime minister who built much of his early credibility on legal rigour, the optics are ugly and politically combustible. (Michael Holden, Reuters, 16^th October 2025.)

Reeves’ fiscal pivot: buffer, not bonanza

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been explicit this week about the need to build a larger fiscal “buffer”,  hinting at a mix of tougher tax choices and spending restraint in next month’s Budget. The line from the Treasury is carefully calibrated: sell responsibility to markets and voters alike, then hope the politics of restraint does not overwhelm the policy. That balancing act will define whether Labour looks prudent, or simply cautious to the point of tedium. (Jim Pickard, Financial Times, 12^th October 2025.)

Ethics housekeeping: reboot or rebrand?

The new structure’s complexity will militate against clarity. Any idiot could tell you that. (Peter Walker, The Guardian, 12^th October 2025.)

As an aside from someone who watches politics and would like to be involved in the cut and thrust and hurly-burly at some point, it astonishes me that people who have reached high office fail to take onboard some really simple principles including: “if you need an answer now, it’s no” and “if there are two ways of doing things and one involves me spending less or saving more than most people would, then that’s probably wrong and it would be safer to pay the higher amount and then ask if there’s an ethical way to reduce it subsequently.” I mean, why can they not just learn this and then stick to it? The fact that some seem unable to (I’m looking at you Ange, but only as the latest in a long series of idiotic behaviours) suggests to me that many current ministers are not capable of fulfilling the requirements of high office.
It is not neuroscience.

Digital IDs go live — cautiously

The government quietly began rolling out its first digital ID service this week (initially for veterans), part of a phased programme intended to be in broader use by 2027. Ministers frame it as modernisation of right-to-work checks and public services; civil liberties groups warn of mission creep and surveillance risk. Expect this to be a durable source of cross-party grumbling and a likely flashpoint for backbenchers who try to pose as the public’s privacy guardians. (Tim Baker, Sky News, 12^th October 2025.)

Smaller parties: momentum and manoeuvre

Greens continue to hum with membership momentum under new leadership (a useful spur in marginal urban seats), while Reform UK is punching above its weight in parts of Wales and the Midlands. The Lib Dems search for a succinct story to cut through the Labour–Reform duopoly without paragliding etc. So far, in vain: keep the helmet by your side, Sir Ed. These movements are less about seats today than the tactical threats to come at the next general election.

Caerphilly: a by-election that suddenly matters

What should have been a routine Senedd by-election (to be held on 23^rd October) is now looking far less routine: recent polling suggests a straight fight between Reform and Plaid that could leave Labour alarmed. A loss in Caerphilly would be more than symbolic: it could strip Cardiff of a slender working majority and sharpen Westminster nerves about Labour’s foothold in its traditional heartlands. (Jim Packard, Financial Times, 19^th October 2025.)

Migration & returns: policy vs delivery

The “one in, one out” returns deal with France remains politically useful, less operationally effective: returns are proceeding incredibly slowly and the gap between the political headline and delivery is a standing vulnerability for ministers. Charities and front-line NGOs continue to warn about a hardening public tone that risks coarsening everyday civic life. Given the French failure to look after their former Crown Jewels, it’s not looking totally certain that they will actually keep the handful of returnees from making further attempts to return to the UK (although the opportunities for experienced jewel thieves in Paris may convince some.)

Process vs Progress – no wins on either side

Labour’s first months continue to be defined by process rather than progress. The collapsed China case and the prospect of tougher fiscal choices are exacting small but meaningful costs to the government’s ambition of projecting managerial calm. So far the result is a painful deficit in the “vision” department and a litany of missteps on “process” and “competence.”

What’s missing here? The CONSERVATIVES

There was a little bit from Badenoch about Aston Villa fans in the wake of the ban of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans at their upcoming Europa League match in November. She spoke about banning rip-off degrees, name-checking English, Anthropology and Psychology, only serving to underline how little a degree from Sussex in Computer Systems Engineering fits you to judge more academically challenging disciplines. There was a piece in the Sunday Times in which she noted, in the context of the Chinese Spy Case, that China only reacts to strength. Good to know.

But mostly, just nothing. If there was something significant I missed it. That is, in itself, something of a point. Badenoch’s “unsaid unsaids” may not catch on as much as Rumsfeld’s “unknown unknowns”, but it exemplifies the Tories’ problem: truly, no-one cares.

HMG Report Card

Attainment: 5/10 at best and very obviously struggling.
Effort: 9/10 which is really just too depressing. Is this really the best you can do?