I didn't want a radical budget this time. I wanted something along these lines (+ removing the child benefit cap). Boring and stable is good when the media are trying to create panic about Labour's economic credibility. Hence why I'm saying I don't think it was a gamble, and I don't think there's a reason to care about the "pressure" she's supposedly under.
I'd like a radical budget from Labour in the future. The only nationalisation that I want to see them commit to that they haven't is the water companies, and that's basically by saying "if you can't handle the infrastructure while maintaining water cleanliness, we'll reclaim it and screw your shareholders". It's not even more left-wing than Rees-Mogg's attitude to them!
I mean, the fiscal rules were made up self-imposed stuff by Brown's juniors when he was chancellor to try and convince the media that Labour weren't the same party as before and had economic credibility. They largely followed Keynesian theory and were fairly suitable for economic understanding of the late 90s/early 00s. They were due for a change because economics, both in theoretical understanding and in the nature of globalisation and how the world clearly functions have moved on. Hell, allowing higher borrowing for investment only isn't even moving away from Keynesian economic theories.
Yes, my wife is a teacher so always has to go home on Sunday as school is rarely finished by the time of the festival and she's not allowed to take the last day of the year off (it is finished in time this year, mind you!). I've always walked her out to the rank by PGA (it's not that far, just through the hospitality parking) and always book her a cab back to the airport (just in case there aren't any there available for hire, don't want her stressed about missing her flight). It's pretty straightforward to be honest.
There isn't a festival in the world that would pay them more than what they've grossed for their own shows and they aren't playing any other festivals instead, so your point is dead.