Clearly disqualifying. 
I’m surprised to see it hasn’t already been posted, so far as I can tell. So, better late than never:
Poor Rishi has been catching flak over the fact that schools have had to be closed because they were built using dodgy concrete.
Dozens of schools in England have been fully or partially shut as they contain crumbling concrete.
Education Secretary Gillian Keegan told the House of Commons she will publish a list of affected schools later this week.
Earlier, Ms Keegan admitted hundreds of schools could contain reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) creating further uncertainty at the start of the school year.
The scale of the current crisis is down to the fact that when remedial action could have been taken some years ago, the treasury drastically scaled down the project in an apparent cost-saving exercise. So, you might ask, Isn’t it unfair to blame Prime Minister Rishi for a bad decision taken years ago by the Chancellor of the Exchequer?
Uh, that was Rishi too.
j
IOW he’s trying to draw up what he hopes will be favourable battle lines in advance of
(a) the annual party conference (the first since the Liz Truss debacle), where the party membership tends to bay for red meat
(b) bye-elections in two constituencies that would normally be considered safe Tory seats, but in the light of the opinion polls are looking decidedly marginal - and they believe they held on to Johnson’s former seat because of local opposition to the (Labour) Mayor of London’s extension of the zone where you pay a daily fee to drive an over-polluting car.
How that would play in the general election campaign remains to be seen, though one can guess what it might look like:
The so-called U-turn is merely an acknowledgement that the arbitrary date of 2030, which Boris Johnson pulled out of his arse purely to earn some green Brownie points, is not realistic, as any fool knows. I find it amusing that people who were quite recently piling on to Johnson at any opportunity are now defending his random wheeze as if the future of the planet depends on it.
Strangely, the same people didn’t get so worked up when the EU recently pushed back some similar electric car mandates to 2035.
To some degree, it’s not realistic, because people are not taking it seriously and making the hard choices necessary.
Pushing the date back while stepping up the efforts to meet the goals would get a very different reaction than pushing the date back while doing nothing significant.
Polls consistently show public support for the measures, until:
Electric cars: too expensive unless perhaps you have a nice job where you qualify for a company car with the tax breaks. Or you live in central London and go everywhere by Tube and Uber.
Electric cars: necessary generation and charging capacity will cost hundreds of billions, pylons everywhere, many more power stations including nuclear.
Heat pumps: hugely expensive to install if you want them to actually work as well as existing central heating.
Not flying anywhere: Celebrity activists, why don’t you go first? And people do really enjoy travelling. In the US this would be called the pursuit of happiness, an inalienable right, and we’re glibly asking people to give it up?
You bet these are hard choices. All Sunak said is we need to cut the crap and confront them. In keeping with the title of this thread, I believe this is what’s known as “leadership”. Do the public want this or not, because it’s going to hurt.
You’re giving him way too much credit.
It’s the Uxbridge thing previously mentioned - the Tories managed to barely cling to the seat at the bye-election and are doubling down on “environmental measures are bad” rhetoric because it’s the only thing they remotely have that resonates at all with the public. It’s something that makes for easy outrage-inducting headlines in the Mail and Telegraph. It also distracts from the rampant corruption, cronyism and incompetence the current and previous several Governments have consistently demonstrated.
There’s no “leadership” involved here at all - just the usual malign straw-grabbing.
Suella Braverman‘s been over the pond today ramping up the anti-immigration rhetoric, while also steering dangerously close to the homophonic borderline and having a pop at the UN to boot (now they can’t totally blame the EU for perceived asylum woes). Must be an election brewing. Will all play nicely to the Gammon crowd, of course. And won’t hurt her chances in any future Tory leadership race.
OB
The party’s annual conference is about to open. She’s - not for the first time - grandstanding for the right (or even righter) wing among the membership, and “leaving a marker” for the eventual succession. I doubt if this will in the end make a substantive change in law or administrative practice, though it may well give her more opportunities to have another pop or two at lawyers and judges in the run up to the general election.
Sunak is currently making his big speech to the annual Conservative Party Conference - very much a set piece opportunity to define himself and his government.
Without going into the rights and wrongs of what he’s saying, it’s very noticeable that he’s a terrible public speaker.
Everything comes across really flat - monotonous, low-key, lacking in energy. He’s saying stuff because he has to make a speech, not making speech because he has stuff to say.
And he got his mum to big him up before his speech !
ETA: wow - just found out it was is Wife !!! How embarrasing.
Sorry, I’m not sure what this means?
I hope it doesn’t mean what I think it means. Although if I’m right I’m happier to find out it was his wife than his Mom. Icck!! 
It means this.
to talk a lot about how excellent someone or something is, sometimes praising him, her, or it more than is deserved.
His extremely-wealthy-in-her-own-right, non-dom wife. The Prime Minister’s own wife isn’t a UK resident (from a tax standpoint, anyway). And Sunak had a US Green Card not that long ago. Such commitment to the country.
As a Brit (albeit a colonialist) and a Zimbabwean I am horrified by this.
It is illegal to be gay in Zimbabwe and several other African countries (Kenya…Ghana, Niger, Namibia, are you listening? And a bunch more)
Is this illegality against a simple, fairly common state of affairs amongst people who cannot alter their genes and their lives, not enough for Ms. Braverman to accept that, fucking hell, some people who are gay face the death penalty? Is that not sufficient for asylum? People who have no way to change how their brain and body work?
Given her Mauritian / Indian heritage and commonplace prejudice against non-“whites” in the UK itself, has she learnt the lesson about “not being a complete dickhead”?
Apparently not.
She joined the Tory party. That should be a clue.
You’re not being a dickhead if you’re actually superior. You’re just being appropriately yourself appropriately getting your due.
Better homophonic than homophobic, I suppose! 