A STOPPED clock is right twice a day. And a clock with a malfunctioning mechanism sending the hands whirring round wildly is right … once in a blue moon.

Thus, the manic Liz Truss is correct in her polemic with present Tory shadow chancellor Mel Stride, when she says that with him in charge, nothing much would change.

Her jibe was provoked by Stride’s belated public repentance for Truss’s disastrous crashing of the economy during her stint, of record-breaking brevity, as prime minister in 2022.

This was what Stride said: “Mistakes were recognised and stability restored within weeks, with the full backing of our party. But the damage to our credibility is not so easily undone.

“That will take time. And it also requires contrition. So let me be clear: never again will the Conservative Party undermine fiscal credibility by making promises we cannot afford.”

And this is what Stride meant: the bond markets, the Treasury and the Bank of England were right. Their orthodoxy is the only economic policy that can be followed by any responsible government.

That is indeed the outlook of Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer. Their whole economic strategy has pivoted on doing nothing to upset international capital and risk the reaction from the speculators, which sank Truss.

Operating within those parameters, it is true that nothing will change. Stride at the Treasury — a highly unlikely scenario on present polling evidence — would be able to take over from Reeves without the essentials of economic management missing a beat.

Truss has reinvented herself since her eviction from Downing Street, and subsequent loss of her previously rock-solid Tory constituency at the general election, as an even more crazed right-wing figure than she was when premier.

Then, the focus was on her economic libertarianism. Subsequently, perhaps somewhat unhinged by her unenviable place in the political record books, or perhaps driven by the exigencies of earning a crust on the US far-right lecture circuit, she had added all manner of other strings to her addled bow in relation to culture war authoritarianism in particular.

That is a reflection of an important contemporary political truth. The base of support for pure Hayekian economics is so small that it can only prosper if demagogically hitched to other causes with greater resonance — those broadly defined as cultural above all.

Nigel Farage realises this, attempting to mask his Thatcherism behind all sorts of populist promises. Stride, however, takes the more classical Tory position of sticking close to the demands of finance capital.

Doubtless, Kemi Badenoch will try to supply the illusion of change for the Conservatives, since anti-woke rhetoric appears to be the only aspect of politics she is really interested in. But her shadow chancellor’s audience is different.

It is aimed at the City, and he tells it: you are in charge, we have learned our lesson. If you like Reeves, then you will really love me.

Truss certainly deserved her fate — her priority was serving the rich, and her mistake for the elite was her recklessness.

But be in no doubt that a socialist government would face the same pressure from the same sources, only much more so.

If the complaint is Truss, Stride and Badenoch are not the cure. Breaking the power of capital is.

Can two play the travel ban game?

TRUMP has signed an order banning citizens of a dozen countries from entering the US.

Can the targeted countries reciprocate? Afghanistan, to take just one on the list, would surely be a better place if there was a perpetual ban on US citizens entering their country, particularly those who arrive without invitation and in full military kit.