And I think this is where the problem is. You don't have to give intellectual speeches - few people would listen or engage. But you have to be able to think your way through to your positions and policies. Which Blair did.

Doesn't the UK taxpayer do similar things already?...E.g. datacentres as alleged drivers of regional growth; regional airports as alleged drivers for regional growth when they have already been shown not to be profitable (Doncaster)...and the public money does not necessarily stay in the UK.

I did.

Pretty much anything wild boar is amazing.

I think we know what the wrong answer was. The country the UK needs to pay much more attention to is Switzerland - obvs a very different economy in some ways & different issues, but similar challenges on all levels. UK can see there what works and what doesn't.

The UK position seems to have been to offer to pay 50p when the ask is 1000 pounds or more. Whoever is responsible for that UK negotiation strategy should be fired, especially, as you rightly say, agreement should be possible.

Ein sehr großer Verlust für die ARD...aber sehr schön, dass Sie in London bleiben.

Tax take raised to 38% of GDP (normal European levels), mansion tax, one of the highest wage floors in the world, rail nationalised, two child benefit cap reversed, industrial policy, etc etc.

So it's really just a 'best guess', and explains why the OBR thinks the government has about a 60% chance of meeting its fiscal rules. It's all very knife-edge, and it would have been more prudent to be make more reforms, however politically difficult.

obr.uk/briefing-pap...

Sorry...should have read the rest of your thread...you say as much there.

But it wasn't only about modified vehicles. It's basically about using the mobility allowance to lease a car. I am still puzzled by this new policy, though: removing Audis etc does not change the fact that people who need it still get the mobility allowance. So what's the point of the new policy?