Reform 'Contract' (Manifesto)

[ajohn]

Hasn't this incident been debunked.
It was staged by C4.

According to Farage who is mystified about who did this to him. The BBC lady pointed out that he was being very careful to not blame C4. Given the look on his face I wondered if he was doing a Trump. Hidden people who are out to get at him. Also there were several other comments not just the Rishi one. No denials on those.

A few weeks ago he was interviewed about something on the Reform website. Lost the debate and said give me a few hours and I will remove it. Similar last night. Comments from some of his MP''s that means he needs to get shut of them as he is nothing like them. His reply. He paid some company £140,000 to vet his MP's and they haven't done it. SEP as usual. BBC points out he should know anyway as the comments are around in the news. All of a sudden these candidates wont be running - or it appears they wont be according to BBC lady.

His £20k income tax allowance had a bit of an airing. He says what it will do but pundits have looked at this and looked at what it means relating earnings level. Doesn't sound so good. He says they are wrong, Really? This sort of change could bring on a Trussaster anyway.

His BofE stuff. The technical aspect, only one they are proposing. I have already pointed out that the BofE study linked to didn't back up his claims. Now things have moved on. The study related to BofE and Gov borrowing off them. More concerned about should they borrow directly in some cases rather than from the BofE. Now it relates to banks in general and quantitative easing money. An interest payment figures. 2% to cover inflation. End this. I haven't tried to find out how much this costs but pundits point out that ending it is effectively a taxation on the banks. I wonder who they will pass this on to?

The Greens came over well. Tax increases and how great a carbon tax would be. Tax on stuff made offshore by countries who pollute more than we do. Big numbers come in from that. Will these be passed on to the public?

 

[diy_fun_uk]

His BofE stuff. The technical aspect, only one they are proposing. I have already pointed out that the BofE study linked to didn't back up his claims. Now things have moved on. The study related to BofE and Gov borrowing off them. More concerned about should they borrow directly in some cases rather than from the BofE. Now it relates to banks in general and quantitative easing money. An interest payment figures. 2% to cover inflation. End this. I haven't tried to find out how much this costs but pundits point out that ending it is effectively a taxation on the banks. I wonder who they will pass this on to?

Is this the thing he says Reform will stamp out, saving £30 billion plus a year?

It's yet another thing I wonder about re how would they practically achieve this if in power and what would the ramifications be elsewhere.

 

[ajohn]

Is this the thing he says Reform will stamp out, saving £30 billion plus a year?

Not sure. The BofE study they linked to was really about another factor but showed that the gov made a net gain in the interest area. The amounts concerned were a drop in the ocean, a really tiny one when compared with £1t anyway.

$30b isn't that big on the same basis but the point the pundits make is that the banks wont get it. That if needed will influence interest rates. It's an extra tax on banks. LOL Banks are easily seen as being evil by some but look what happens when they go bust / loose too much money. Banks are an ideal target for Farage - he just says he doesn't like them.

I see the ecconomics that many countries now use as a bit of an applecart. The rules get changed to suite the situation in the entire commercial world. The banks are closely tied in to that which is why we need them. Some sort of economic rules are needed and if not used........... think of Truss. The gov has no control over reactions.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Not sure. The BofE study they linked to was really about another factor but showed that the gov made a net gain in the interest area. The amounts concerned were a drop in the ocean, a really tiny one when compared with £1t anyway.

$30b isn't that big on the same basis but the point the pundits make is that the banks wont get it. That if needed will influence interest rates. It's an extra tax on banks. LOL Banks are easily seen as being evil by some but look what happens when they go bust / loose too much money. Banks are an ideal target for Farage - he just says he doesn't like them.

I see the ecconomics that many countries now use as a bit of an applecart. The rules get changed to suite the situation in the entire commercial world. The banks are closely tied in to that which is why we need them. Some sort of economic rules are needed and if not used........... think of Truss. The gov has no control over reactions.

It's this I was referring to ...

Bank of England Must Stop Paying Interest to Commercial Banks on QE Reserves. This approach would save around £35 billion per year and has been endorsed by senior figures at the Financial Times, New Economics Foundation, and IFS, as well as two former Deputy Governors of the Bank of England.

Found on pg 4 of their 'contract' which as Fiona mentioned on QT last night could mean it's legally binding if they got into power. 'I like taking risks' he said in reply.

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/reformuk/pages/253/attachments/original/1718625371/Reform_UK_Our_Contract_with_You.pdf

 

[ajohn]

Under quantitative easing, the Bank of England created £895 billion of new money in the form of central bank reserves held by commercial banks, of which around £700 billion remains in circulation. The Bank pays interest on those reserves at Bank Rate, currently 5.25%.1 May 2024
£36.75b
The gov article has been updated. Google links it to this

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/158/treasury-committee/news/201204/major-banks-report-135-increase-in-income-from-bank-of-england-reserves/

Interesting comment at the end
Chair of the Treasury Committee, Dame Harriett Baldwin, said:
“These results signal a bit of progress from banks in giving customers with savings a better deal. The Committee has been very vocal about high street banks’ slowness on this issue. I am pleased to see some effort is being made to pass through competitive rates for our constituents and that consumers are shopping around more.
What this data also shows is the staggering scale of unanticipated income high street banks are bringing in, with no work required, as a result of increased interest rates.
Although the Committee raised a number of concerns about the losses now being incurred by quantitative easing and tightening, we concluded that the goalposts should not be moved for lenders now that bond sales are running at a loss.”

Well the interest rate will be falling. I guessed that was to retain qe value against inflation. The above. Banks need to build reserves and there is also a need seen to give savers a better return. The above may well relate to the reason we can currently get them. Seems the FED have dropped the bank reserves idea so things back as they were prior the crash - if the report was correct. Eeek here we go again if they come up with another daft idea such as sub prime mortgages.

Interesting - any party in power could change this but economics is always a terribly complicated area.

​

 

[JohnD]

...t could mean it's legally binding if they got into power.....

politicians promises are worthless and unenforceable.

Remember de Piffle?

 

[ajohn]

IFS, as well as two former Deputy Governors of the Bank of England.

Former. IFS. They did a broadcast. Tory and Labour dishonest as they wont state what tax they will increase if there is a need. Things are running tight so a chance of that for any in power.

It was a very bombastic report. BBC just broadcasted the intro and dropped comments from several specialists on the panel of experts. TBH I wondered if they were niffed about increased use of the OBR and the fiscal rules. One comment was increase debt and that this might not cause the markets to pull out. That one made me wonder what they were at. The fiscal rules are aimed at reducing debt 5 years ahead. That's the metric - it mustn't increase. The margins they allow are low compared with £1t but do run into numbers of billions. Good or bad idea - pass. Some call them the fiscal rules of doom but all in this field are inclined to argue about each others ideas. We experience the results.