Osborne's crazy admission

Slim Jim

Perhaps if Brown spent 40% of his time on economics instead of creating 'dividing lines', smearing and thinking up smart-arsed slogans like 'no more boom & bust', then we'd not be in the mess we're in! I reckon it's just a trap to see if the donkeys in Downing Street will bite. Remember Fondlebum's reaction to wee George's recent statement about being denied access to government figures.

mitch

The more politicians spend on something the worse it gets so this is encouraging.
Gordon claims to spend every minute from when he opens his eyes to going to sleep helping "hard working families" and look how that's working out.

Prodicus

I'd guess that's about par with Brown when he was Chancellor, given that he insisted on running 100 per cent of domestic policy, with Blair's agreement.

Ah. I just spotted the flaw.

As you were.

IH

I wish people would back off Osborne a bit - he isn't Chancellor yet! there does seem to be this 'get Osborne' tack currently, yourself included!

bernard from horsham

I am sure Osborne would be spending 100% of his time on the economy if he could see the books that are being kept under wraps. I don't see this as a big issue at all, though Labour will try to make something of it as you say.

Marbury

Osborne has clearly been studying the John McCain Guide to Winning Elections.

Rhoda Klapp

I'd be shocked if 40% were true. You just can't do it. In the absence of the full figures and the treasury, what could you spend the time on? If it took 40% to be shadow chancellor, how much would it take to be the real chancellor? 200%? More?

This isn't really a story at all, is it?

Denis Cooper

But Osborne is an MP, the elected representative for the parliamentary constituency of Tatton; and according to the Labour party, being an MP is a FULL TIME JOB, and if he's doing his job properly an MP won't have spare time to do anything else; so logically their complaint should be that Osborne is not fully committing himself to his job as an MP, but is spending 40% of his time on a second job, something to do with "economics".

Of course the same argument applies to the 100 plus Labour MPs who've taken on second jobs as ministers, paid members of the executive, on top of their FULL TIME JOBS as MPs, paid members of the legislature; but somehow that's completely different from an MP taking on a paid second job as, say, a non-executive director.

john miller

Well, it's infinitely better than the 0% time the Labour Party spend on governing, so I'm quite reassured.

Tiberius

I'm glad to see most respondents don't see this as a negative. Remember the hand-wringing when Boris reprised his DT column after becoming mayor?

It is well known that Philip Hammond is a major player in day-to-day Treasury matters.

The points above about Brown managing domestic policy during the Blair years is an easy counter to any criticism.

Short the UK

It must have been 10% in 2008. At least he's moving in the correct direction. Still, I'd have fired him for gross incompetence in 2008.

denverthen

Yeah, well, I suppose a politician being honest is still just a laughable open goal for hideously smug mainstream hacks like Rawnsley with an agenda of their own to push.

Sorry, Mr Hoskin, but this is just pathetic.

biggestaspidistra

Take away the second jobs that's probably 40% of 20% of his time, starts to look like half an hour on a Tuesday morning.

Edward

"... meaning that most of his hours are spent on campaigns and tactics".
Tactics ? On behalf of whom ?
The Tories or the Biderbergs ?

Given the state of the economy, the final plan to hammer the last few nails into the nation's financial coffin should not even require 40% of his time.

Jeremy

I am beginning to form the impression that Mr Osbourne is a slightly unwordly man. I mean, what he said was probably true (i.e. he is honest) but politically it was not that astute. He strikes me as being a basically honest - if slightly naive - man who has a habit of unknowingly treading on the teeth of whichever garden rakes happen to have been left lying about on the the lawns of England - and then promply whacking himself on the head with their handles.

Am I right?

There has to be a place for a man like that in British politics. And so long as somebody keeps a benevolent eye on what he is doing, I don't see that he would come to any real harm as Chancellor of The Exchequer...^^

TGF UKIP

Being the loyal chap he is, what Peter chooses not to flag up is the near invisibility of Osborne for weeks, if not months, now.

Economics are dominating the public prints and the broadcast media as never before and the Tories have as their principal economic spokesman a weasel who daren't show his face due to all the embarrassing questions he'd be faced with regarding his flipping and his fancy mortgage footwork.

Not that showing his face would make much difference anyway as Joe Public long ago sized him up as being the snidey, arrogant shit Mandy and THX 1138 can bear witness to his being.

This absence of a credible spokesman is costing the Tories and the country dear. When the French with the enthusiastic assistance of Brussels were ambushing the City, with it would seem little resistance for our own dear government, where was the Tory voice to put pressure on Brown & Co.

And BTW, Tiberius as an ageing whizz kid of a bean counter and SME FD, perhaps you would like to give us your view on the Osborne policy of disallowing interest as a cost against corporation tax.

TrevorsDen

What a pointless useless post. Darling is not chancellor he is shadow chancellor.

His job is to get the Tory party elected. when he DOES become chancellor he will have an entire army of civil servants costing the taxpayer a small fortune to help him.

Until then grow up Mr Hoskin.

Oh and can you see what you have done - give some loon the chance to mention Bildeberg!

Verity

Yes, he's really naive. Just don't let him near any yachts.

Ben Stevenson

Surely George Osbourne cannot be spending most of his time on campaigns and tactics as Andrew Rawsley asserts - unless we assume he spends virtually no time on simply being a constituency MP.

If people want a full time Chancellor (or shadow chancellor), then they should argue for a separation of the legislature from the executive.

john

If you're not Chancellor and managing the country's economy, what are you supposed to be doing all day?
He'll be busy enough when the time comes.

TGF UKIP

Now 11.15 pm and the latest timed post on this piece is 6.20 pm. As it is I posted a comment well before 8 pm with the hope and expectation of a response from my old mate Tiberius.

Silly me expecting to see it posted within four hours. I must have been daft to bother.

Pete Hoskin

Tiberius, TrevorsDen et al: I should stress that I wasn't having a go at the 40 percent figure in and of itself. As many if you have pointed out, it may well be about right when you factor in his constituency commitments and the fact he's in opposition. But I do think it was naive if him to announce a figure: it gives Labour the perfect opportunity to caricature him as a "part-time shadow Chancellor," or some such (an attack which may not stick, but...). Apologies - I should have made this clearer above...

TGF UKIP: I think the comment you're referring to is showing above. I approved it as soon as it came in, and it's been showing on my computer for a few hours.

TGF UKIP

Pete, further to my 11.23 post and yours at 12.11, at 12.20 am my 7.19 pm post was finally then showing on my PC slotted in at its correct time. My comment of 11.23 holds good as does my continued question - when is the Speccie going to invest in properly funtioning software?