Rishi Sunak: his policies left a carer in darkness because she could not afford a lightbulb for her kitchen; meanwhile he has had the National Grid upgraded in his local area so he can heat his private swimming pool.
After a carer was left without enough money to buy a lightbulb for her kitchen, Rishi Sunak – prime minister and richest man in the UK – tried to say he was putting more money into social care, as if that was going to help her:
In our Panorama on the UK economy, we heard from a woman in Cornwall called Nicky – who couldn't afford to replace a broken lightbulb until the next pay day. @jonkay01 asked the Prime Minister about Nicky's situation on @BBCBreakfast this morning. This is the exchange. pic.twitter.com/gUwYrU16Np
His claim – that the best thing he can do for Nicky and others like her is to reduce inflation – is pure bunkum bafflegab.
Cutting inflation isn’t cutting prices! They’ll keep climbing but at a slower rate. And he’s absolutely, dig-his-heels-in-the-ground adamant that he isn’t giving carers any more in wages. That money is for billionaires!
Oh – and the amount he’s putting into social care?
He’s halved it (allegedly) before even starting to hand it out:
It’s clear that we can’t trust these politicians to give us the facts.
Every interview like this should be followed by a fact check report, explaining whether the claims made by the politician concerned are correct – or if that person is lying through their teeth.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Care: the head of NHS England once said he wanted change but now it seems clear it will be for the worse.
The Tory government promised to revitalise social care in the UK – but seems set to renege on that vow.
Is this the next big Tory scandal?
Ministers are poised to cut £250m from investment in the social care workforce in England, it has been reported, in a move that providers say could set back care “for years to come”.
With more than 165,000 care worker jobs vacant, and low pay driving staff to quit for better wages in retail and hospitality, care providers and councils have been clamouring for investment in recruitment and retention. Inadequate staffing levels are frequently noted as a cause of neglect and poor care by the Care Quality Commission.
However, according to the Health Service Journal (subscription), the government is poised to water down a promise it made in the December 2021 social care white paper to dedicate £500m to “investment in knowledge, skills, health and wellbeing, and recruitment policies [that] will improve social care as a long-term career choice”. This amount could be cut to £250m.
This is not a good look for a government that is desperately trying to recover its reputation for financial responsibility.
On the BBC’s Any Questions, Steve Baker claimed that the harm done to the UK’s economy by Kwasi Kwarteng’s ‘fiscal event’ has been reversed.
But Kate Andrews, of the shady right-wing think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, put him straight, pointing out that the cost of borrowing has skyrocketed, making it much harder to achieve some of the government’s stated aims.
The big question is, was this result part of Kwarteng and Truss’s strategy?
We all believe – don’t we? – that they want to pursue a “Starve the Beast” policy that demands the ending of public services because “we can’t afford it”. If the cost of investment has increased hugely, then this excuse becomes much more plausible.
So it seems the Truss government is deliberately engineering an end to public services while trying to lay the blame elsewhere. Don’t be fooled.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Remember the fuss over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)? No?
Let me tell you a story.
Back when the UK was part of the European Union, there was a move to create a trading partnership with the United States, allowing goods to flow between the two power blocs, practically tax free.
But problems arose over a so-called ‘Investor-State Dispute Settlement’ system that would have allowed corporations to prosecute individual nations if they passed laws that – for example – protected citizens from having to buy inferior goods that put their health at risk.
This would have interfered with the corporations’ profits, you see.
The possibility of entering an agreement that gave ultimate power to greedy shareholders rather than national governments that – at least nominally – exist to protect citizens killed the TTIP stone dead.
Now we have evidence of what a good idea this was:
Countries could soon face a ‘wave’ of multi-million dollar lawsuits from multinational corporations claiming compensation for measures introduced to protect people from COVID-19 and its economic fallout, according to a new report.
Researchers have identified more than twenty corporate law firms offering services to mount such cases, which would seek compensation from states for measures that have negatively impacted company profits – including lost future profits.
Measures that could face legal challenges include the state acquisition of private hospitals; steps introduced to ensure that drugs, tests and vaccines are affordable; and relief on rent, debt and utility payments.
Under controversial ‘Investor-State Dispute Settlement’ (ISDS) mechanisms, foreign investors, companies and shareholders are able to sue states directly at obscure international tribunals over a wide range of government actions… in what the researchers describe as “a parallel justice system for the rich”.
This Writer is not aware of the UK being a part of any ISDS procedure, and it is clear that any agreement to take part in one would be an offence against democracy.
Note very carefully that the UK’s Conservative government was very keen to take us into such an agreement with the United States, as part of the EU.
I can only agree with Labour’s John McDonnell…
Just when you thought the pandemic was bringing out the best in most people, some others crawl out from under their stones to exploit the tragedy. This is why we need to challenge the investor/state dispute settlement procedure in any proposed trade agreements. https://t.co/Iv4godCGE5
— John McDonnell MP (@johnmcdonnellMP) May 19, 2020
… and urge that anyone hearing of such lawsuits taking place here in the UK let me know immediately.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Plaid lies: the claim is only out by £68 billion, using the same methodology as Scottish Labour used.
The so-called ‘party of Wales’ has reduced itself to lying about the election, it has been revealed.
The claim that Labour is planning to invest no extra money in Wales is clearly nonsense, as the country will obviously gain more as part of national funding increases.
But here’s Dinah Mulholland, Labour’s candidate in Ceredigion, to explain why Plaid’s representatives are lying [boldings mine]:
“Plaid and some media outlets are claiming that Wales will not get any uplift in funding from Labour, and are making negative comparisons with Labour’s apparent uplift of funding in Scotland.
“However, Labour has committed to an additional £3.4bn of annual funding for Wales. This figure is the Barnett consequential of the devolved areas of the UK manifesto and would have an annual uplift.”
(For those who don’t know, the Barnett formula is the method by which the amount of funding applied to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland changes to reflect changes in spending levels allocated to public services in England, England and Wales, or Great Britain, as appropriate.)
“In Scotland the equivalent is £5bn, in Northern Ireland it is £1.9bn.
“Scottish Labour are talking about £100bn over ten years. To get to this figure, they have taken the £5bn Barnett consequential, estimated the additional infrastructure investment through the Transformational Fund and National Investment Bank at another £5bn. They have then added the two and multiplied by 10 (ten years of a UK Labour Govt) to get £100bn. We would expect to receive substantial investment in Wales through the £400bn Transformation Fund and the £250bn National Investment Bank,
“I have been advised to not commit to a 10 year headline figure in Wales. But if we were to take the same formula as Scottish Labour WALES WOULD GET £68BN.
“Plaid’s mendacity never fails to astound me.”
The person who shared this with This Writer added:
Tip for Plaid Cymru – if you want to quote figures with any credibility, you have to measure like with like.
Fair point. I think Plaid can kiss its credibility goodbye. But then, here in Brecon and Radnorshire, Plaid did that by throwing in its lot with the Liberal Democrats.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Jeremy Corbyn has launched a campaign for Labour to win back the confidence of Scottish voters with a promise of “massive” investment.
In a clear challenge to the SNP, which has dominated Scottish politics since the Conservatives came back into office in 2010, he said:
“We will build the homes people need and end homelessness, tackle the climate emergency, provide a social care system that gives dignity to our older people and the carers who look after them, end child poverty and end fuel poverty.
“The SNP and the Tories have neither the ideas or the will to transform Scotland for the better, so are hiding from their records in government.
“This is a once-in-a-generation chance to transform Scotland and the whole UK. When Labour wins, Scotland wins.”
Mr Corbyn was set to reveal details of his plan while visiting Scotland today (Wednesday).
Boris Johnson has already reverted to the scaremongering tactics of the 2015 and 2017 elections, claiming that an alliance between Mr Corbyn and SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon would be bad for the UK (with no evidence to support his words, as usual).
But Mr Corbyn’s aggressive stance suggests he is trying to win back large numbers of Scotland’s Westminster Parliamentary seats for Labour.
His aim appears to be to ensure that the anti-Tory vote is not divided, as it was in 2017, allowing Conservatives to win Scottish seats.
And his support for another Scottish independence referendum is also likely to charm voters who have supported Scottish nationalists.
The SNP has had little to say after Mr Corbyn laid down his gauntlet – but that may change once the details become clear.
That party’s lukewarm offer on childcare is unlikely to win voters over, in the face of the promises to young people that Labour as already revealed.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Philip Hammond with John McDonnell. Both know that governments do not go bust, which means they can borrow more cheaply than companies. Mr Hammond’s problem is he is ideologically opposed to that kind of borrowing [Image: Jeff Overs/BBC/PA].
We should all be grateful to Larry Elliott at The Guardian – and also to Philip Hammond – for making it easier to discuss the economy in terms everybody can understand.
That is, everybody except Conservatives, it seems.
Tory policy for the last several decades has been to sell off publicly-owned industries and services and cut the welfare state, in order to reduce taxes and provide higher returns to people who run the businesses that make the most money. The rest of us can go hang, in their opinion.
Trouble is, they arrogantly failed to understand that their well-being depends on the prosperity of the rest of the population; if the majority of people don’t have the wherewithal to buy the products produced by the rich, they won’t stay rich for very long.
The financial crash happened because people who weren’t earning enough were being offered loans they couldn’t pay off – by financiers who were betting on them being unable to service the debt.
When the prediction came true, the Conservatives managed to slither into office on the back of a lie that Labour had spent too much. This narrative clearly indicated the choice they took – to cut public spending massively.
This ‘starve the beast’ policy meant the poorest in society – unemployed and working-class people – were starved of money. As the Tories cut public spending in order to reduce the national deficit, the debt burden on these already-poor people rose, hugely increasing poverty. The statistics hide this fact because they are based on average earnings and average earnings have fallen.
The Tories thought their reduction in public investment would be balanced by an increase in private investment – but the boardroom bosses knew there was no point because their products would be bought by too few people to make the investment worthwhile.
That is the reason businesses have taken the easy way out – employing more people on the lower rates of pay and worse in-work benefits supported by the Tories’ cruel policies in order to increase their profits by minimising their outlay.
It is also the reason that public spending on infrastructure is the only realistic way of boosting the economy and reducing the national debt. John McDonnell has it exactly right:
Extra borrowing certainly means an increase in the national debt and higher debt interest payments in the short term, but that is not the real issue.
Imagine the chief executive of a FTSE 100 company going on TV to announce that the company was planning to go to the City to finance a new plant. The interview would not centre on what the investment meant for the company’s debt interest payments. The chief executive would be asked about what it meant for jobs, earnings and profits.
In the event that the chief executive was asked about the cost of the investment, they would give the same answer as McDonnell did, that at current rates of interest the investment would more than pay for itself, because otherwise we would not be doing it. Our debt interest payments will depend on what happens to interest rates and inflation, but our best judgment is that the investment will wash itself.
The Tories cannot support this plan because it conflicts with their neoliberal ideology, which demands that government’s must not spend money and must not interfere in industry.
This proves that their neoliberalism is fatally flawed:
Instead of obsessing about the red herring of debt interest payments, more attention should be paid to the things that do matter. Labour is planning to borrow to invest, not to cover day-to-day government spending, and that makes sense if the return on the investment is higher than the cost of financing the extra debt.
Governments do not go bust, which means that they can borrow more cheaply than companies. Since the financial crisis of a decade ago, interest rates have been historically low and if he chose to do so, Hammond could borrow money at a cost of little more than 2%, below the current rate of inflation.
That’s right – debt is a red herring. It only becomes important when government policy deliberately increases it in order to pressurise poor and working-class people.
Investment in the right places will bring a return of around six times the cost of debt interest payments – a flood of new money that could revitalise a UK economy that has been withering under Tory mismanagement for many years.
And pay special attention to the point that governments do not go bust – at least, UK governments don’t. This is because we have our own sovereign currency and can manipulate it, if needed, to ease our debt burden. That’s what quantitative easing was all about.
Proof of this point is the fact that, even when the UK’s credit rating was slashed after George Osborne missed all his deficit and debt targets, the cost of borrowing – for the government – stayed at rock-bottom.
But both Mr Osborne and his successor, Mr Hammond, have ignored this opportunity. It is against their beliefs as Tories.
So the evidence is clear:
Tory policies don’t work.
Labour policies will.
No wonder the Conservatives are trying to distract you with other things.
What a shame for them that the examples in the Guardian article – Brexit and the implied improprieties of Damian Green – are just as damaging to a government that can only survive if we are stupid enough to believe the stupid things they do.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
It is balance of payments data – the difference between the amount we pay to foreign countries for goods and services and the amount we receive – that shows the loss.
Also, direct investment in the UK by foreign firms has nose-dived.
It is exactly as This Writer warned, only a few days ago.
The really galling aspect of this is that the minority Conservative government will still claim to be the party of sensible financial management, even though it is its own division over Brexit that has created the uncertainty in which the money has disappeared.
Remember: Brexit is happening because David Cameron thought a referendum on EU membership would unify the Tories. It didn’t.
Remember: The vote to leave the European Union was based very strongly on lies and wild speculation by people who knew better but were trying to trick the public. There was never any chance of the NHS seeing £350 million of investment per week, for example.
Remember: The Conservatives have botched negotiations on the terms of our departure so badly that businesses are fleeing the UK. They can’t get away fast enough.
The longer this farce continues, the worse it will be for the UK as a whole.
And it will be the poor who bear the brunt of the harm.
Global banks and international bond strategists have been left stunned by revised ONS figures showing that Britain is £490bn poorer than had been assumed and no longer has any reserve of net foreign assets, depriving the country of its safety margin as Brexit talks reach a crucial juncture.
A massive write-down in the UK balance of payments data shows that Britain’s stock of wealth – the net international investment position – has collapsed from a surplus of £469bn to a net deficit of £22bn. This transforms the outlook for sterling and the gilts markets.
“Half a trillion pounds has gone missing. This is equivalent to 25pc of GDP,” said Mark Capleton, UK rates strategist at Bank of America.
Making matters worse, foreign direct investment (FDI) by companies is plummeting. It fell from a £120bn surplus in the first half 2016 to a £25bn deficit over the same period of this year.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Perhaps a better name, now that it has been taken over by Australian money-grubbers Macquarie, would be ‘Bank of Asset-Stripping, Turpitude* And Recondite** Debt’.
Unfortunately the acronym spells out ‘Bastard’. Some may think that’s about right.
There certainly seems to be a certain lack of moral rectitude about the sale.
The minority Tory government’s press release states that “new owner Macquarie has committed to the GIB’s target of leading £3 billion of investment in green energy projects over next 3 years”.
Only £3 billion? The GIB ploughed more than £5 billion worth of investment into green projects in its first two years of existence. Isn’t it supposed to be increasing investment, rather than cutting it?
The press release continues: “The Climate Change and Industry Minister, Claire Perry, confirmed [on 18 August 2017] that the sale of the Green Investment Bank (GIB) to Macquarie Group Limited has now been completed”.
And how nice it is to see Macquarie confirmed as the buyer. Back in January, the Tories refused to admit that Macquarie was the preferred bidder, citing “commercial sensitivity”.
This was at a time when Green Party MP Caroline Lucas said that “Macquarie not only has a dismal and terrible environmental record, it also has an appalling track record of asset-stripping… This selling off could lead to the bank being fatally undermined as an enduring institution”.
We were told at the time that the Green Investment Bank was set up with £3.8 billion of government (meaning our) money, but the Tory press release states: “The £2.3 billion deal ensures that all the taxpayer funding invested in GIBsince its creation, including set-up costs, has been returned with a gain of approximately £186 million.”
It continues: “The sale proceeds of £1.75 billion, which has [sic] now been received, sees all taxpayer funding invested in GIG returned with a gain of around £186 million. This, together with over £500 million of current outstanding commitments which will now be met by Macquarie and its partners rather than taxpayers, means that the transaction value is around £2.3 billion.”
Something can’t be right because the total is £1.5 billion short of the original investment.
The Tories seem to want us to believe that only £1.565 billion of our money was put into the Green Investment Bank. What about the rest of it?
And, even if the claim of £186 million profit is to be believed, that would account for less than half of the £447 million debt the UK racks up every day under Conservative economic mismanagement. That money has already gone.
It seems likely that the bank will be stripped of at least some of its assets by Macquarie – and the Tories knew about this. In January, former Energy minister Nick Hurd (son of Douglas; it must be nice to have your entry into Parliament ensured by your parentage) said he was unopposed to the sale of assets: “Let’s not get into a position where we say holding on to assets is good in itself.”
But selling them for the sake of selling them is just as bad, isn’t it?
These are probably just some of the reasons the Tories were keen to distract us all from the sale – by crying about the fact that Big Ben, the famous bell in the clock tower of the Palace of Westminster, has been taken out of action for four years, while restoration work takes place.
So what? It won’t be gone forever – which is more than can be said for the Conservative Party’s commitment to the environment.
*It means ‘corruption’.
**It means ‘concealed’.
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
The Tories promised they would take back control after Brexit. They meant they would take it AWAY – from US [Image: PA].
If you were wondering why the Tories have quietly dropped their dodgy ‘Bill of Rights’, it’s because they don’t need it any more – they can achieve the same aims, with far less fuss, in their so-called ‘Repeal Bill’.
The Bill will be the most dishonest piece of legislation to go through Parliament in decades – starting with its title. It will repeal nothing. The stated aim is to enshrine European laws that the UK observes (without having passed them as our own) into UK law, to ensure a smoother transition when Brexit happens.
But this is not true. The Tories intend to pick and choose which EU laws get to go on the UK statute book – and the plan is to ensure that the people lose out to corporations on every line.
So the ‘Bill of Rights’ – which was intended primarily to remove rights that had been conferred on UK citizens by the EU – will no longer be necessary; the Tories will simply cut those rights out of the Repeal Bill and hide it from the public.
Similarly, the Tories won’t have to face public scrutiny over their plans to ensure that corporations can sue the UK government if any future administration tries to put the good of the citizens before private profit.
The so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) system was a principle reason the US-EU Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement foundered last year. Soon after, it was rumoured that the whole project may have been demanded by the UK government, with the intention of putting corporations in control.
Now, with our departure from the EU imminent, the Tories don’t need anybody else’s permission to impose the worst of all possible worlds on the people of the United Kingdom.
They are planning a new hierarchy, with working people at the bottom, enjoying no rights other than what their overprivileged toff masters hand down to them.
Next will be the apparatus of the state, as embodied in the elected government.
But the government will be a slave to the will of the corporations.
And who will be at the top of this system?
Why, shareholders in corporations, of course. And wouldn’t it be a strange coincidence if these boardrooms turned out to be stuffed with people who are currently Conservative government ministers?
Perhaps you should ask your Tory-voting neighbour why they support this kind of corruption.
Fundamental rights and powers that ordinary citizens currently enjoy will be scrapped.
Currently, a European ruling means an individual can seek damages if the government has failed to properly implement the law. But the government says that no similar domestic law exists, so there will be no legal mechanism to get such redress in future.
There will be plenty more where this comes from. The Great Repeal Bill, after all, awards our government powers that no modern government has enjoyed in peacetime. And far from simply changing the words “European Union” into “United Kingdom”, ministers will gain the ability to make radical changes to fundamental human rights and environmental protections that simply don’t make sense when taken out of an EU context.
As if this weren’t bad enough, Trade Secretary Liam Fox is touring the planet looking for unsavoury regimes we can sign deregulatory trade deals with. And at the heart of those trade deals, in all likelihood, will be special “corporate courts” that allow foreign businesses the power to sue governments for regulations they judge to be “unfair”.
That’s right – as British citizens lose their ability to hold the government to account in court, foreign multinationals will gain rights to sue the government in secret arbitration panels for passing a regulation or standard that those corporations believe will damage their profits.
We know this because these “courts”, formally known as Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), already exist in hundreds of investment deals in which countries all over the world have been secretly sued for such radical actions as putting cigarettes in plain packaging, placing a moratorium on fracking, removing toxic chemicals from petrol. No appeal is allowed. And we know that the British government has been one of the most vociferous in the world in putting the case for such courts.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
