Back in the day when Theresa May was in charge of Brexit and the country, government by soundbite was all the rage. We had the meaningless “Brexit means Brexit” and the fatuous “strong and stable”, but none were so pervasive as the much relied upon “will of the people”.

The will of the people

It was the number one get-out-of-jail-free card for the government. Brexit was not the choice of the government, they said, but the democratic choice of the British voting public. It was defined as the will of the majority, and therefore it was the government’s duty to deliver it. Or at least to try.

Leaving aside the fact that only 17 million people voted for Brexit out of an eligible voting population of around 46 million, the claim that the referendum vote showed a clear majority in favour of leaving the EU was always a stretch. Add to that the fact that Leave won by such a small margin, and the lie that Brexit was the ‘will of the people’ was stretched to breaking point.

The “wrong decision”

Six and a half long years on from the referendum, with the impacts of Brexit being widely felt, the British public’s view of Brexit is rather different. ‘Project fear’ – which warned of the dangers of severing ties with our closest and largest trading partner – has become ‘project reality’. The lies of the Leave campaign have been revealed and the Brexit that was promised has been exposed as an illusion.

The majority of the British public – finally – have opened their eyes to the truth. In a recent YouGov poll, 56% now believe it was the ‘wrong decision to vote to leave the European Union’. Not only is that the highest percentage to date, but the gap between those that believe it was wrong and those that still support Brexit has widened to 24% – another record.

The number of Britons who think it was wrong to vote to leave the EU has reached its highest level to date

Right to vote to leave: 32%
Wrong to vote to leave: 56% https://t.co/RkyseAbrEA pic.twitter.com/qPbhkygEl0

— YouGov (@YouGov) November 17, 2022

It’s not just Remainers saying that Brexit was wrong either. One in five people who voted for Brexit “now think it was the wrong decision” and only 70% – another record – believing they made the right decision in 2016.

Mounting evidence

Despite the government’s bare-faced attempts to hide the truth, or misdirect blame, the evidence of Brexit damage is piling up. Inflation – at 11.1% – is at a 41-year high, the country is in recession and the UK economy is going backwards. Where other countries that suffered economic downturns, due to Covid and the Ukraine war, are now recovering, the UK is not. In fact, the UK is the only G7 country where GDP is now lower that it was before the pandemic.

The Office for Budgetary Responsibility, sponsored by HM Treasury, has predicted a decline of 1.4% in GDP for 2023 – the “sharpest decline in Europe”. But don’t expect the government to accept that any of the UK’s economic problems are down to Brexit, or their own terrible mismanagement. Instead, you’ll hear references to causes outside of their control. Or as Chancellor Jeremy Hunt claimed in his Autumn statement, the blame lies with “unprecedented global headwinds”. The public don’t seem to believe that.

Time for politicians to start listening

It might suit the government to fail to accept the impact of Brexit. What is increasingly hard to justify though, is the Labour Party’s unwillingness to hold the government to account for it. That Labour would prefer to leave a toxic Brexit in the hands of the Conservatives is understandable. Their focus is on winning the next election, and reclaiming lost voters in red wall seats. But with such a demanding lead in the polls, the Tories currently so unpopular and shifting public opinion re Brexit, that Labour policy seems increasingly ill-advised.

With the shift in public opinion away from Brexit and back towards closer ties with Europe, it’s high time the government started listening. Brexit is not the will of the British people. It probably never was. It was, however, the will of an extremist right-wing cult in the Tory party and an attempt by David Cameron to prevent the party tearing itself apart.

As with almost everything else this government has touched since 2016, Brexit has been a very expensive, divisive, damaging and ultimately unsuccessful project. If the last six years have proved anything it’s that the government never cared for anyone’s best interests but their own. Brexit is in no one’s best interests. It’s time the politicians, like the British public, started to say so, out loud and in public.

Chief executive of Next, Lord Simon Wolfson, has been publicly expressing his disappointment with Brexit. The Leave-supporting peer said recently, “it’s definitely not the Brexit that I wanted” and is calling on the government to ease the rules on foreign immigration.

Brexiter Next Boss, Lord Wolfson, "It's definitely not the Brexit I wanted or what many people who voted Brexit wanted – but we're all stuck in this Brexit argument – what post-Brexit Britain looks like is not the preserve of those who voted Brexit, it's for all of us to decide." pic.twitter.com/8GpbwmqR7r

— Brexitshambles (@brexit_sham) November 10, 2022

Labour shortages are being acutely felt across a variety of industries, including retail, hospitality, logistics and farming. Wolfson claims the government is preventing much-needed workers from entering the UK despite the fact that many are “queueing up to come to this country”. Whilst he said it was worth incentivising businesses to recruit workers locally, there was a need to “let people in who can contribute”.

All in the Brexit mess together

Despite the divisiveness of the Brexit debate, we are now, apparently, all in this mess together. According to Wolfson “we’re all stuck in this Brexit argument” and should remember that “what post-Brexit Britain looks like is not the preserve of those that voted for Brexit, it’s for all of us to decide”. That includes, presumably, those of us who voted Remain.

He also claimed his current views on Brexit are shared by most of the Brexit-voting public and that they too didn’t get the Brexit they voted for. Though they did perhaps get the Brexit they were warned about.

Brexit backer Lord Wolfson says on BBC that immigration rules should be relaxed to tackle labour shortages and that "This is not the brexit we wanted". I'm pretty confident that this is the brexit they were warned about.

— Carlos H 🏳️‍🌈🇪🇸🇮🇨🇪🇺❤ (@CarlosTF50) November 10, 2022

The benefit of hindsight

Wolfson’s comments were widely criticised as another example of typical Leaver delusional thinking about Brexit. The expectations of prominent Brexiters were often of the rose-tinted variety where every government promise (lie) was believed, or at least yearned for. In short, the UK would not only flourish but would do so without any cost.

Wolfson had clearly expected to have all his business needs met without any additional barriers or costs. Such expectations of having cake and eating it have since been overtaken by reality. With the benefit of hindsight, that cake is now stale, expensive and hard to source.

"'I didn't think leopards would eat my face', says the man who voted for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party."

James O'Brien reacts to the Brexit-backing Conservative peer and Next boss saying the UK needs more overseas workers. @mrjamesob https://t.co/ZDBCprF0pi

— LBC (@LBC) November 10, 2022

LBC’s James O’Brien was flabbergasted by Wolfson’s comment. In response to the suggestion that the UK “take a different approach to economically productive migration” he replied:

A shift in public opinion

According to the latest polls, anti-Brexit sentiment is rising, and is at its highest level since the referendum. Some 52% of the British public now believe leaving the EU was the wrong decision as opposed to 35% who believe it was the right one.

The increasingly obvious damage that Brexit is causing to the economy, trade, the cost-of-living etc., is a big factor, especially now that damage is no longer hiding behind Covid or the war in Ukraine. But another significant reason for the public change of heart is the exposure of the scale of the lies the public were fed that persuaded so many to vote as they did.

Just a quick check, but is anyone on record saying they have got the Brexit they wanted. https://t.co/HmTf0Rh4xQ

— Ian Dunt (@IanDunt) November 10, 2022

Common ground

Back in 2016, Brexiters and Remainers had very different rationales for their voting choices. Now, however, both sides share some common ground and we are all suffering the same damaging and expensive consequences. And Wolfson is right about one thing. This is not the Brexit that any of us voted for. Not even those who were in charge of delivering it.

It is the Brexit our government negotiated, not the one that it promised. It’s the Brexit deal it lauded, then hated, and is now trying to unravel. Because the government doesn’t have the first clue how to fix it or to admit that Conservative ministers got it so horribly wrong.

That the government can’t be trusted with making Brexit work, in any way, shape or form, should be obvious to even those with the rosiest tinted glasses. That the government can’t be trusted to solve any of the country’s problems should scare the living Brexit out of us all!

Ever since the Brexit referendum in 2016, the UK has become disturbingly familiar with anti-immigration rhetoric. Before the toxic language of UKIP/Brexit Party changed the nature of the conversation, the majority of the British public had no issue with European citizens doing jobs that they didn’t want. Six years on and staff shortages are a major issue, especially in industries such as hospitability or food. Thanks to Brexit.

Home Office – all talk and no action

Not only did Brexit change public attitudes towards migration, it shifted the Conservative Party ever further to the right. With that shift came increasingly alarming language from one home secretary after another.

First, we had Theresa May with her ‘go-home’ vans. Then we had Priti Patel with her disgusting policy – never yet implemented, thankfully – of sending desperate asylum seekers to Rwanda. Finally, just when we thought it couldn’t get any worse, along comes Suella Braverman, not once, but twice. With her far-right language of “stopping the invasion” and “the scourge of illegal immigration” it’s no wonder she earned the nickname Cruella.

I have been studying the far right for 30 years, this is the language of the far right. For all the international panic on Italy, we should sound the alarm bells on Britain a bit more. 🚨 pic.twitter.com/D3pWnZPD7w

— Cas Mudde (@CasMudde) November 1, 2022

If the rhetoric itself – from a government department responsible for the welfare of vulnerable asylum seekers – wasn’t bad enough, the lack of action is unconscionable. And deliberate, very deliberate.

Numbers can lie

Not only is Braverman’s cruel and toxic language offensive, but it is not supported by the facts. While it’s true that the number of desperate migrants crossing the British Channel has increased considerably – to over 40,000 this year alone – the numbers don’t tell the whole story. What they don’t explain is why.

They also fail to evaluate UK immigration against that of other European countries. That comparison shows the UK well down the European league table – in 19th place – when reviewing immigrant numbers as a percentage of the population. A fact that even the reticent BBC News programme is now sharing on prime-time TV.

At last !! 👏👏
First time I've seen on major UK news programme a reminder that the UK receives FAR FEWER asylum claims than most EU countries – it's NINETEENTH in Europe per population !!

You wouldn't think so from most reports on it !
👏👏@BBCMarkEaston @thehuwedwards 👇👇 pic.twitter.com/Cf0Bx7h38I

— Alex Taylor (@AlexTaylorNews) November 1, 2022

Immigration: no solutions, only obstacles

Although migration from the EU has reduced, immigration from the rest of the world has not. In fact, it has increased. Desperate asylum seekers willing to risk life and limb for a chance of a better life have been left with no other options. Safe routes no longer exist – thanks to the Home Office – and earlier arrangements with the EU are now unavailable.

Aspects of the Common European Asylum System no longer apply to the UK, and the loss of the Dublin III Regulation in particular has removed the UK’s ability to return asylum seekers to other European countries. Leaving the EU has also meant that EU funding is no longer available for assistance with asylum and immigration initiatives.

Despite all the promises that Brexit would reduce immigration, it hasn’t. We have, it seems, failed to take back control of our borders. Immigration was, for the purposes of Brexit, a suitable topic to hang a culture war battle on, and still is.

Anti-immigration rhetoric: words matter

The terms ‘refugee’ and ‘asylum seeker’ are rarely used by the government. Instead, they prefer labels that stir up hatred and division. They prefer pejorative terms such as ‘illegal immigrant’, when what they mean is ‘undocumented’ or ‘irregular’. But those terms wouldn’t rile up the far-right, or satisfy those far-right members of the government, such as the European Research Group (ERG), the home secretary included.

Refugees aren't invaders. In fact refugees are fleeing invasions and dirty wars. I sought protection in the UK just before the millennium. I am proud of what this country has given me. We just go about our lives like everyone else and contribute at all levels.

— Sabir Zazai 🧡 (@sabir_zazai) November 1, 2022

The Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM) believes that labelling human being as ‘illegals’ is an example of bias. Not only does it affect public perception, but it also impacts on policy. The term ‘illegal’ implies criminality, is discriminatory, and quite frankly, offensive.

A person cannot be illegal. Migration is not a crime.

Government misreading the room

Regardless of their own personal views on immigration, the Tories have used migrants for their own ends. They successfully persuaded enough of the nation that poor, desperate immigrants were the cause of the UK’s ills (along with the evil EU, of course). They directed public anger at those looking for a better life in Britain, and away from themselves. What worked in 2016, however, is not working now. But the government is seemingly so blinded by its own hatred that is has failed to notice the change in public opinion.

Brexit changed attitudes to immigration with far fewer people worrier about it than in 2016 – even as the number of immigrants coming to the UK has kept rising https://t.co/11qBSIDWNo pic.twitter.com/Zs2YztZp4b

— Matthew Garrahan (@MattGarrahan) May 16, 2022

Despite increased levels of immigration over the intervening period, the British public are now far more tolerant of immigrants. Before the referendum, levels of anxiety were rising in line with overseas arrivals. Those concerns seem now to have evaporated. Except in government circles.

Whether it is the toxicity of the rhetoric, the cruelty of government policies, or the distressing sight of asylum seekers being treated like animals, public opinion does not match government language or actions. The world is watching and the behaviour of the UK – especially towards citizens of other nations – is under a microscope. The view is not a pretty one.

Failing to fulfil commitments

When withdrawing from the Dublin III Regulation, the government made a commitment to the 1951 Refugee Convention, of which the UK is a signatory. It pledged that leaving the EU would “not change the UK’s obligation to offer protection to refugees”. The government also claimed that “the UK’s status as a ‘world leader’ in the field of asylum will not change once it is no longer subject to EU laws”.

No doubt, if asked, the Home Office would say it has fulfilled those obligations, but their treatment of asylum seekers at Manston Asylum Centre in Kent would suggest otherwise. A note from a young detainee was recently thrown over the fence in a desperate plea for help. In it the young girl complained about bad food and said it was “like we’re in prison”. She said there were a lot of children on site who “shouldn’t be here …. they should be in school”.

A young girl detained in Manston threw this letter over the fence to a PA news agency photographer today.

“We are in a difficult life now … we fill like we’re in prison…some of us very sick … ther’s some women’s that are pregnant…We really need your help. Please help us." pic.twitter.com/FX8DShhjpy

— Benny Hunter (@BennnyH) November 2, 2022

Following recent bad press about overcrowding at Manston, the Home Office took action to rapidly remove hundreds of detainees. However, their ill-judged action included the shocking abandonment of 11 Afghan, Syrian and Iraqi asylum seekers at Victoria train station at 11pm on Tuesday evening. The asylum seekers were left without warm clothes, money, accommodation or food, some in flip-flops. Another 50 were abandoned at Victoria coach station. Thankfully charity volunteers stepped in to do the government’s job for them – offering the protection the government claimed to be committed to offering refugees.

Asylum seekers are desperate people escaping desperate circumstances. They would have to be, just to put themselves through the expense, horror and danger of the journey that brings them to our shores. They deserve to be treated with dignity and compassion. To have their applications dealt with in a timely and sensitive fashion and to be housed in decent living conditions in the meantime. They deserve to be offered to opportunity to contribute to British society, as they so desperately wish. They do not deserve the treatment they receive at the hands of a government that is not acting on behalf of anyone but themselves.

The Home Office does not speak for desperate migrants. It does not speak for businesses crying out for staff. And it certainly does not speak for me.

The UK economy is “frankly doomed”. So says billionaire investor and former president of the Oxford University Conservative Association, Guy Hands. Speaking to the BBC’s flagship radio news programme on BBC Radio 4 on Monday, Hands said the reason for the UK’s dire economic state was the “completely hopeless” Brexit deal.

The situation is so serious, claims Hands, that the UK could need a financial bailout from the International Monetary Fund. That’s unless the new prime minister can renegotiate the deal with the European Union. Without a new deal, Hands says, the UK is on a path to being “the sick man of Europe” – a characterisation of Britain from the 70s, at a time of industrial upheaval and poor economic performance.

Extraordinary and brutal from Tory supporter and investment banker Guy Hands: "Mistakes made in the last six years have put this country on a path to be the sick man of Europe." Brexit deal is "completely hopeless", must be renegotiated, or we're headed for "an IMF bailout". ~AA pic.twitter.com/p1F6vE6Fda

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) October 24, 2022

Conservative Party should own their mistake

Hands, chair of private equity firm Terra Firma, made his comments following a tumultuous period of financial instability, brought on by the recent ‘mini-budget’. However, he believes the causes of the UK’s economic problems go back much further.

Hands holds the Conservative government completely responsible and said they must “own up to the mistake they made in how they negotiated Brexit”. He added, the government must move on from their “own internal wars”. Failure to do so would result in “steadily increasing taxes, steadily reducing benefits and social services, higher interest rates” and “increasing levels of poverty in the UK”.

Based on the last 12 years of Tory rule, the chances of the government accepting any responsibility for the state of the nation, or apologising for the harm done, seem extremely remote. More likely, even with a new PM, we’re in for more denial and delusion, especially when it comes to their failed Brexit project. The Tories don’t do sorry. Or reality, it would appear.

Billionaire banker and former president of the Oxford University Conservative association, Guy Hands, tells #r4today that the Conservative Party and Brexit is turning Britain into the "sick man of Europe" with a "doomed" economy that will eventually need bailing out by the IMF.

— Adam Bienkov (@AdamBienkov) October 24, 2022

Another costly failed experiment

Short-lived former PM Liz Truss was an avid advocate of a low-tax, high-growth economy, despite no evidence that a ‘trickledown’ policy works. Professor Nicholas Barr of the London School of Economics said recently “there is a wealth of evidence against tax cuts alone producing growth”.

In his interview today, Hands also commented on the government’s “dream of a low-tax, low-benefit economy” – the whole ethos behind Brexit. In regard to Truss, he said the trickledown policy had been tried but was something that was clearly “not acceptable to the British people”.

In the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, Hands said it was not just those at the bottom that are suffering the consequences of “a disastrous economic state” caused by a “completely hopeless” Brexit deal. Poverty was now “moving up the economic level” and affecting “middle class people who will not be able to pay their mortgages” and are “finding it difficult to make ends meet”

The truth about Brexit cannot be hidden any longer

According to Hands, there is a “possibility of turning around the economy”. It would, however, require leadership from someone with the “intellectual capability to renegotiate Brexit”. Whether or not he believes our new PM fits the bill, or can pay it, is not clear.

What is clear is that, new PM or not, the Brexiters are still in charge. Based on earlier evidence, they do want a new deal, though not necessarily one that Hands would approve of, that the EU would accept, or that would benefit the UK economy.

Until the government – whether this one or the next – starts being honest about Brexit and our relationship with Europe, it is difficult to see how the situation can improve. Brexit has proven to be as damaging and disastrous as pro-Europeans said it would be.

The government will no doubt claim they have a plan, that everything will be fine given time, and that they know what they are doing. They will continue to blame anyone but themselves for the state of the country.

But, the damage wreaked by Brexit cannot be hidden any longer. The rest of the world can see it, and increasingly, so can the British public. It’s high time the government, the opposition and the mainstream media, opened their eyes too.

There is a better deal to be had. As members of the European Union.

Whilst financial markets may have felt some relief at the arrival of Jeremy Hunt, the new chancellor, British pensioners are fearing the worst. It seems that, for the second year running, the triple lock on pensions could be at risk. The chancellor refused on Tuesday, in front of both the media and parliament, to “commit to anything” or to make any promises. His comments were being backed up, at least on the day, by Prime Minister (for now) Liz Truss.

Breaking: Liz Truss threatens to abandon state pension triple lock – hitting 12million with cut in Aprilhttps://t.co/vvSiQZpnVo

— Ashley Cowburn (@ashcowburn) October 18, 2022

Triple lock pensions at risk: another broken manifesto promise?

The triple lock on pensions has been a long-held Conservative Party commitment and manifesto promise. The lock commits the government to upgrading state pensions annually by 2.5%, average earnings, or inflation, whichever is the highest. However, the last annual review – effective from April this year – saw the triple lock downgraded to a double lock.

Boris Johnson’s government claimed that the cost-of-living crisis was to blame – all down to Covid and no mention of Brexit, of course. Despite considerable outrage at having the inflationary element of the lock removed, Johnson rode out the storm with a promise of a return of the triple lock next year. It would now appear that both Truss and Hunt may have other ideas.

Warning to pensioners.

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt refuses to confirm the return of triple-lock on the state pension, which is 21% of average earnings.

Lowest state pension in the industrialised world.

Thousands will die.

— Prem Sikka (@premnsikka) October 17, 2022

On Tuesday, Labour’s Emma Hardy asked the chancellor for confirmation that the state pension would rise with inflation next April. Hunt said he was “very aware of how many vulnerable pensioners there are and the importance of the triple lock” but would not be making “any commitments on any individual policy areas”.

The cost of inflation

When the inflationary element of the triple lock was abandoned this year, state pensioners saw their income rise by just 3.1%. At that time, the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) was recording inflation at 9%. With anticipated rises in fuel and energy costs this winter, inflation is expected to continue to climb. Just this week, the CPI rose to 10.1%, according to the Office for National Statistics. The Bank of England expects inflation to reach 11% by the end of the month.

US financial services firm Citi is predicting that the CPI will reach 18% in the first quarter of 2023, while the retail prices index could climb to 21%. Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund believes the UK will have “the most persistent high inflation in the G7”

British pensions fall short

Over 12 million pensioners receive a British state pension, and the population is ageing. Like other vulnerable groups, whether working or not, any failure to increase income in line with inflation is going to hurt. With the energy and cost-of-living crises, many are already having to make difficult decisions about where to cut back, such as choosing between heating or eating. Without inflationary increases to wages, benefits and pensions, many more will fall into poverty.

The fact that the UK state pension is pitifully low by comparison to other industrialised nations only adds to the problem. The basic state pension in the UK, for those who have made full national insurance contributions, is just £141.85 per week. As a percentage of average wages, the difference between our state pension and that of other countries is stark. According to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), a typical British worker’s pension equates to just 29% of average wages. Compare that to Japan (40%), USA (49.1%), Germany (50.5%), France (74.5%), Spain (81.8%) or the Netherlands (100.6%) and you begin to understand how far Britain lags behind.

🔥🔥🔥 from Baroness Altmann on @LBC on the idea the pensions triple lock could be scrapped.

“It’s something I think pensioners wouldn't forgive the Government for.

“This is for many people the only money they have. It is about the lowest state pension in the developed world."

— Theo Usherwood (@theousherwood) October 19, 2022

Meanwhile, as British state pensions shrink in real terms, MPs are quite happily awarding themselves annual pay rises and, according to the Telegraph, are enjoying pensions “five times more generous than those of private sector workers”. In effect, the average worker would need to contribute 43 years longer than a British politician for the same pay out.

Risking core support

Of course, not all pensioners rely on a state pension alone, and not all pensioners vote Conservative. But many do. If this government’s policies have not already driven away many of their core supporters, the triple lock threat could finish the job.

If all goes to plan – which cannot be taken for granted – the right to vote will be restored to hundreds of thousands of pensioners living abroad, in time for the next scheduled general election. As the vast majority of them were anti-Brexit – even if unable to vote against it – they already hold a major gripe against the Conservative government.

The devaluation of the pound since the referendum in 2016 has already caused the pensions of British emigrants to shrink. Any further reduction of pension values in real terms would go down like a lead balloon. Or the Brexit pound. Despite that, the government seems intent on further undermining its core over-60s support at home and abroad.

Another U-turn or another lie?

When the topic of the triple lock was raised at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, the response from Truss was rather different from the day before. Another U-turn perhaps or just another attempt to mislead?

The SNP’s Ian Blackford asked Truss a direct question about the government’s commitment to the triple lock. Blackford said that the latest broken promise would “put pensioners in the front line of Tory cuts” and asked the PM to commit to “raising the state pension at the rate of inflation?” In response, Truss said the government had “been clear in our manifesto that we will maintain the triple lock” and that she was “completely committed to it”. She added, “so is the chancellor”.

Can anyone explain why it makes sense for No 10 to allow a story to run that the “triple lock” is under threat then allow @JamesCleverly to use the same script this morning & then, finally, for @trussliz to say it will be protected after all ?

— Nick Robinson (@bbcnickrobinson) October 19, 2022

Sadly, most pensioners across the country, or abroad, won’t believe a word of it. We know from past, bitter experience what government platitudes and promises are worth, and who pays the price for their mistakes.

Come the next election, it will be Tories paying the price for those mistakes. Unfortunately, it’s the country that will be saddled with the bill.

One of the most unpopular decisions made by the Liz Truss government has resulted in a screeching U-turn in the middle of the Conservatory Party conference. The decision to abolish the 45% tax rate for the highest paid 1% of the country has been reversed. While Truss, Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng and Treasury Secretary Chris Philp argue about whose daft idea it was in the first place, the spin machine is going into overdrive.

Humility and contrition but no apology

An official statement from the chancellor described the 45p tax rate as a “distraction” from the government’s “overriding mission to tackle the challenges we face”. In a quote re-iterated by Truss herself, Kwarteng said “we get it, and we have listened”. However, who they had listened to wasn’t made clear. It’s unlikely that they listened to the public if, indeed, they ever engage with them on anything. Their recent mad-cap ideas would suggest otherwise.

Perhaps, instead, they had listened to the markets. Or perhaps to their donors, who journalist Robert Peston said had told the party “We don’t need the money, we don’t want the money and you are bringing us into disrepute”.

Why did @KwasiKwarteng and @trussliz drop the abolition of the 45p top tax rate? Because super wealthy donors to the Tory party told them “we don’t need the money, we don’t want the money and you are bringing us into disrepute”. This is the highest political farce

— Robert Peston (@Peston) October 3, 2022

Or, heaven forbid, did the government listen to some genuine economic experts? Or was it just the cries from their own, baffled and worried backbenchers that caused the reversed ferret?

What we do know is that Kwarteng is “happy to own the humiliation” but not willing to say sorry for the worry or the damage. Presumably because, like Truss, he genuinely believes it was the right move in the first place and it’s just that the country doesn’t understand his genius.

We get it and we have listened.

The abolition of the 45pc rate had become a distraction from our mission to get Britain moving.

Our focus now is on building a high growth economy that funds world-class public services, boosts wages, and creates opportunities across the country. https://t.co/ee4ZFc7Aes

— Liz Truss (@trussliz) October 3, 2022

The damage is done

Despite subsequent efforts to downplay the significance of the proposed tax cuts, Kwarteng had saved that particular announcement until last in his mini-budget speech last Friday. The tax cut proposals drew immediate and vehement criticism, not least from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The pound responded so badly that the Bank of England was forced to take the unprecedented step of a £65bn emergency intervention, in an effort to restore order.

Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the abandonment of the policy comes too late for families paying higher mortgages and prices. The Tories, she said, “have destroyed their economic credibility and damaged trust in the British economy”. The whole strategy of trickle-down economics had been “discredited”, she said, with the government “making it up as they go along”.

The PM has been forced to abandon her unfunded tax cut for the richest 1%.

But it comes too late for the families who will pay higher mortgages and higher prices for years.

The Tories have destroyed their economic credibility and damaged trust in the British economy. 1/3

— Rachel Reeves (@RachelReevesMP) October 3, 2022

Labour MP Chris Elmore also expressed concerns about mortgage rates, after lenders withdrew hundreds of mortgage products as a direct result of the chancellor’s actions. Not only were many facing “massive hikes in their mortgages”, Elmore said, but first-time buyers were being “frozen out”. He added, “the damage is done”.

Pressing on regardless

Of course, the abandoned tax cut was not the only issue of concern over the government’s economic policies. If you can call them that. The whole idea that cutting taxes will stimulate growth would be laughable if it wasn’t so scary. Worse still is the prospect that any cuts in tax will be funded either by increasingly expensive borrowing or by public sector cuts. And let’s not forget, borrowing has now become more expensive thanks to rising inflation caused largely by [checks notes] government actions.

But, never fear. Truss and Kwarteng have everything under control. Their energy price guarantee “will support households and businesses with their energy bills”. Better yet, their policy of cutting taxes will “put money back in the pockets of 30 million hard-working people and grow the economy”. Not sure what will happen to all those who don’t ‘work hard’, but then you can’t win them all.

Finally, in his U-turn statement the chancellor said the government was “driving supply side reforms”, whatever that is supposed to mean. Apparently, that includes accelerating major infrastructure projects – “to get Britain moving”

Move along now

The government will be hoping, if not expecting, that this latest U-turn will draw a line under its recent, and catastrophic, misjudgements. Even if some are prepared to give Truss and Kwarteng the benefit of the doubt, for others this latest debacle will just be the straw that finally broke the camel’s back.

The public are waking up, Tory donors included. Multi-millionaire and former Conservative Party donor, Gareth Quarry, has just defected to Labour. He described Truss and Kwarteng as “two zealots” following a policy of “GCSE economics”. Quarry said their proposals were like “a game of roulette where they’re just betting everything on one number coming up in the next spin”.

Former Tory donor, says "the Tories’ behaviour over several years has made the UK a laughing stock," accuses them of being "zealots" pursuing "GCSE Economics" policies – and donates £100k to Labour.

What a scoop. What an interview. No paywall. ~AAhttps://t.co/wtTEPdtrJU

— Best for Britain (@BestForBritain) October 3, 2022

While Truss and Kwarteng may hope for forgiveness, or at least for short memories, they are ignoring what, for most of the country, is the bleeding obvious. Even though the tax cut for the relatively few paying the highest rate of tax has been abandoned, it is what this government wanted. Truss’s government believed in it – and still does.

We have listened. All it took was tanking the pound, wrecking the economy, wiping $500billion of the market and the Bank of England spending £65billion to save pension funds. We get it.

— Parody Prime Minister (@Parody_PM) October 3, 2022

Truss and Kwarteng might now expect credit for doing the right thing, but they were forced into it and it was against their better judgement. The Conservative Party is now seen as the party that tried to cut taxes for the very richest people in our society in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis affecting millions. Not only would they have forced further hardships on those already facing poverty, but they expected us all to pay for it, not just now, for years to come.

So, please, can we just bring on the general election and let’s rid the country of Trussonomics and KamiKwasi thinking. The country gets it, and we have listened. And we don’t want to hear any more.