[Politics] Who will be Chancellor on Jan 1st 2026?

[Rdodge30]

Rachel Reeves is to meet this week with the heads of 16 Regulatory Boards to discuss stripping back overly cautious regulations that are stifling economic growth in aspects of trade and industry in order to promote growth under renewed pressure from the CBI and Chamber of Trade.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Rachel Reeves is to meet this week with the heads of 16 Regulatory Boards to discuss stripping back overly cautious regulations that are stifling economic growth in aspects of trade and industry in order to promote growth under renewed pressure from the CBI and Chamber of Trade.

Therein lies such a lot of the problem. Instead of meeting with the people whose job it is to create the regulations, she needs to meet with the business leaders who are suffering from the regulations. Then, when she has a long list of rules that should be repealed and bodies that should be abolished, then she can go to the regulators and see if they can defend themselves.

 

[London Irish]

According to the Times it’s Blairite human skeleton Pat McFadden who is up next after they cart Reeves out

 

[Rdodge30]

Therein lies such a lot of the problem. Instead of meeting with the people whose job it is to create the regulations, she needs to meet with the business leaders who are suffering from the regulations. Then, when she has a long list of rules that should be repealed and bodies that should be abolished, then she can go to the regulators and see if they can defend themselves.

To be fair she met with the chamber alongside Lord Livermore on Wednesday last week and with the CBI previously. I don’t see the regulatory boards being in anyway whatsoever interested in deregulation in any form as their very reason for being is regulation and oversight.

She has a statement to make in 2 weeks but if that is what these meetings this week are about then there can’t possibly be enough time to develop policy

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You really do have quite a nasty streak in you, you often hide it but it comes out in the end. How incredibly spiteful you are. Turns out I just finished night shift cover …as I have just now although not a lot to do tonight so here I am explaining myself to you.

Forgive me for finding your thread f***ing irritating.

The chancellor will be in trouble if it transpires that her party's pre-election promises to not increase taxes are water tight.
Labour were accused of not promising to increase some taxes by the gleeful tory opposition and their backers.
So if they are correct then maybe some taxes will be increased. NI? I don't know.

What I object to is people engaging with a ridiculous gleeful attack on the chancellor herself.
As the previous government might have said, your "Talking this great country down".

The chancellor is merely doing what Labour promised in the election

Yes, of course it was mad.
Of course taxes had to rise
But if Labour had admitted that we'd likely have a Sunak Farage coalition now.

Surely you know that?
Posts #2 and #'3 basically ended the thread.

 

[Rdodge30]

Forgive me for finding your thread f***ing irritating.

The chancellor will be in trouble if it transpires that her party's pre-election promises to not increase taxes are water tight.
Labour were accused of not promising to increase some taxes by the gleeful tory opposition and their backers.
So if they are correct then maybe some taxes will be increased. NI? I don't know.

What I object to is people engaging with a ridiculous gleeful attack on the chancellor herself.
As the previous government might have said, your "Talking this great country down".

The chancellor is merely doing what Labour promised in the election

Yes, of course it was mad.
Of course taxes had to rise
But if Labour had admitted that we'd likely have a Sunak Farage coalition now.

Surely you know that?
Posts #2 and #'3 basically ended the thread.

Well this time I don’t forgive you.

Too often your first instinct is to lash out at people on here and I for one am fed up with it.

You don’t like the thread (the second one I’ve ever started) so you make snide comments about me.

You don’t like the thread so as far as the mighty HWT is concerned it should’ve ended after 3 posts.

Have a word with yourself but preferably not here

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Ruel Fox?

(I've not read through all the thread, but I'd be disappointed if his name hasn't been mentioned. But just on the off-chance, I'm chucking it out there. Man I hate politics and all of the bullshit that goes with it!)

 

[LamieRobertson]

Ruel Fox?

(I've not read through all the thread, but I'd be disappointed if his name hasn't been mentioned. But just on the off-chance, I'm chucking it out there. Man I hate politics and all of the bullshit that goes with it!)

Slight amendment…oh and good call

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Slight amendment…oh and good call

Cunning, Lamie...

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Obviously Rachel Reeves. Your post is just pure hyperbole.

Personally I don't think it's 'obviously' going to be RR.

Mistakes (WFA, NI increases / lowering threshold etc) early on means she's put the Govt. on the back foot, economy wise.

 

[Bozza]

No wonder the private mutterings of some of her cabinet rivals are starting to surface in public. One anonymous cabinet minister told Huffington Post: “She’s trying to get a royal flush with a two, a seven, and an eight.” Labour members are prepared to accept that she has been dealt a difficult hand by the Conservatives, but increasingly say that she is playing it badly.

Hence, some overheated talk about Reeves being moved, usually followed by “but there is no one obvious who could take her place”.

Rachel Reeves is heading for the brick wall of an emergency Budget

The chancellor has only herself to blame for failing to give herself any escape routes from humiliation, writes John Rentoul

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Iggle Piggle]

Sunak was a proper numbers geek and a personal view is that he was probably about the best we could get at the helm from an economic perspective (yeah, yeah I know Hunt was COTE) The fact that public service was broken, shit was being pumped in the rivers and everyone was on strike negates any kind of economic benefit as that can't be the long term solution. He may have had a handle on the numbers but absolutely nothing else.

Reeves has inherited an awful position. We can't borrow much and growth is stagnant so what are we to do? Reality is that the current way of working is unpopular and sold extremely badly to the masses. Labour has to communicate better and.be more innovative in it's thinking.

I for one can't wait to re-mortgage next year.
@Uncle Spielberg

 

[Titanic]

She's just got the dreaded 'Vote of Confidence' from Sir Keir as his AI relaunch Q&A focuses mainly on the state of the economy, the cost of borrowing and government spending cuts. Although, he failed to answer the question on whether Rachel Reeves will be chancellor by the time of the next election.

 

[Is it PotG?]

An AI version of SKS & RR around the corner, will anyone notice the difference?

 

[Chicken Run]

She's just got the dreaded 'Vote of Confidence' from Sir Keir as his AI relaunch Q&A focuses mainly on the state of the economy, the cost of borrowing and government spending cuts. Although, he failed to answer the question on whether Rachel Reeves will be chancellor by the time of the next election.

Starmer avoiding questions? I don’t believe you!

 

[Bry Nylon]

Sir Keir: "I'm assured that one day in the not too distant future, counting out loud and and even performing some basic sums is a real possibility. I've no idea about this robot though."

 

[pb21]

No wonder the private mutterings of some of her cabinet rivals are starting to surface in public. One anonymous cabinet minister told Huffington Post: “She’s trying to get a royal flush with a two, a seven, and an eight.” Labour members are prepared to accept that she has been dealt a difficult hand by the Conservatives, but increasingly say that she is playing it badly.

Hence, some overheated talk about Reeves being moved, usually followed by “but there is no one obvious who could take her place”.

Rachel Reeves is heading for the brick wall of an emergency Budget

The chancellor has only herself to blame for failing to give herself any escape routes from humiliation, writes John Rentoul

www.independent.co.uk

It's not looking good (it's looking quite bad), but I think more than just Labour members should be prepared to accept she's been dealt a very shite hand...

 

[Is it PotG?]

It's not looking good (it's looking quite bad), but I think more than just Labour members should be prepared to accept she's been dealt a very shite hand...

Every incoming Govt since year dot has said this, it's time to move on, accept the mistakes and recover.

 

[superseagull1994]

According to the Times it’s Blairite human skeleton Pat McFadden who is up next after they cart Reeves out

Please let it be rat boy and get him away from healthcare.

 

[pb21]

Every incoming Govt since year dot has said this, it's time to move on, accept the mistakes and recover.

A broken clock is right twice a day. This current situation has been brewing for ~5-years (arguably much longer). Reeves may have exacerbated matters, but she didn't create them.

One of the reasons an early election was called IMO.