Will any government be brave enough to abolish the triple lock on pensions? The cost-saving case has been made by many, but Ed Balls and George Osborne explain why it could be politically calamitous to try and ditch it. They debate William Hague’s theory that, were Rachel Reeves sacked, Keir Starmer would follow and look back at how chancellors and Prime Minister’s fates have been intertwined. Plus - why is Keir Starmer always doodling during PMQs? Is he following the brilliant debate strategy of Obama, or easily bored when being questioned?Finally, in a preview of our upcoming ‘What If’ EMQs, Ed and George imagine how the 2024 election could have gone, had Reeves followed a path like John Smith in 1992. Would she have avoided her budget nightmares? Or, would we still have Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister?Don’t forget to send in questions for our upcoming Christmas and ‘What If’ themed EMQs episodes. You can send those to questions@politicalcurrency, and make sure to include a voice note!Thanks for listening. To get episodes early and ad-free join Political Currency Gold. If you want even more perks including our exclusive newsletter, join our Kitchen Cabinet today:👉 patreon.com/politicalcurrency👉 Apple PodcastsPlease note: Kitchen Cabinet is only available via Patreon.Credits:Research: Sam BurtonProduction: Caillin McDaid & Jack BoswellVideo Editor: Maha Al-BadrawiExecutive Producer: Ellie CliffordPolitical Currency is a Persephonica Production and is part of the Acast Creator Network. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related