Coalition

Is Cameron slowly winning the argument on public service reform?

Guido has already highlighted one of the most important graphs from this Ipsos MORI treasure trove, showing that the public have overwhelmingly accepted the need for spending cuts. But this other graph forms a striking companion piece: Sure, the public may be split on whether the coalition will be good for public services. But the main thing to note is that overall optimism is at its highest level since 2001 – and rising. Maybe, contra Brown and Balls, people are realising that you can get more for less.

Osborne emerges from the shadows

George Osborne has been quiet these past few weeks, tussling with ministers desperate to preserve some of their budget from his spending review. Today though, Osborne will emerge from the Treasury’s recesses to launch a political attack on the ‘deficit denying’ opposition. Come on, Osborne will ask Darling et al, where are these £44bn of cuts you planned?   And answer comes there none, not even an incredible one. Labour’s refusal to countenance a spending review in government means it has very little to offer the spending debate in opposition. There is also a suggestion that ‘investment versus cuts’ dividing line that paralysed the Brown premiership has yet to be resolved: Ed

Cable won’t be Coalition candidate for Mayor

The most bizarre story of the day is Michael Crick’s post saying that in Number 10 there’s discussion of Vince Cable running as a Coalition candidate for Mayor of London. Now, I’d be totally shocked if this was to happen and have made some calls it still strikes me as thoroughly unlikely. The three main reasons for this are that Boris Johnson wants to run for re-election, the coalition would be taking a massive risk to test its electoral popularity in this way (imagine if Labour won) and taking Cable out of the Cabinet would unbalance the coalition. On the London mayor front, we’ll know who the Labour candidate is

The university funding debate continued

University funding is beginning to dominate op-ed pages. Yesterday, Matthew d’Ancona put the case for a graduate tax from the conservative perspective; and to which Douglas Carswell has responded. Today, Professor Alison Wolf, a specialist in Public Sector Management at KCL, makes the point that any debate about higher education funding is prejudiced because Britain’s politicians and policy makers are predominantly Oxbridge educated, and the structure of Oxbridge undergraduate degrees is radically different from anywhere else. Writing in the Times (£), she asserts: ‘I’ve sat in many meetings, in Whitehall and Westminster, where people have talked up credit systems (a modular system of assessment) without the faintest idea that we

An important fortnight for Nick Clegg

Another reason to be glad of the Brown government’s downfall is that there seems to be less silliness about the summer holidays. Today, Nick Clegg returns to London to steer government in David Cameron’s absence – but there’s no fanfare, nor energetic pretence that the Lib Dem leader is actually “running the country”. Unlike those times when Harriet used to have a go at it, followed by Peter, followed by Alistair, followed by Jack, the overriding impression is just business as usual. But that doesn’t mean that the next two weeks are insignificant for Clegg. Rather, he can make sweeping advances on a number of fronts. The most important, and

What you need to know ahead of the Spending Review

This is the second of our posts with Reform looking ahead to the Spending Review. The first, on health, can be found here. What is the budget? Education is the biggest area of government spending after welfare and health, totalling £89 billion in 2010-11. This budget increased by 64 percent in real terms between 1999-00 and 2010-11. Total, per-pupil school spending doubled in real terms over the same period. Where does the money go? Expenditure on schools was £46 billion last year. The vast bulk of school spending goes on people: the average school spends 78 percent of its budget on staff. The byzantine arrangements for school funding mean that

Simon Hughes and the deputy leader’s pulpit

My, what a busy character Simon Hughes is at the moment. Seems like hardly a day goes by without some fresh observations from the Lib Dem deputy leader – and he doesn’t even rest on a Sunday. Today, there are two Hughesbites worth noting down, both from an interview with Sky. The first: “We should have no preference at the next election between the Tories and Labour and other parties. We are going to stand on our own.” And the second: “Our party is committed constitutionally to standing in every seat. We will be standing in every seat at the next election. There will be no deals, there will be

James Forsyth

Readying the bombardment

Westminster might be in holiday mode, but behind the scenes the coalition is preparing to take on the new Labour leader. As I say in the Mail on Sunday, the coalition is determined to hit whichever Miliband wins early and hard. The Cameroons believe that Tony Blair’s decision not to attack Cameron straight away in 2005 was crucial in allowing him to present himself to the public on his own terms. By contrast, both Hague and Duncan Smith were made to look like losers by the Labour attack machine within months of becoming leader of the opposition. The result of the Labour leadership election will be announced on the 25th

The return of Alan Milburn

Frank Field, John Hutton and now Alan Milburn – the red tinges to the coalition mix are like a Who’s Who of reforming Labour politicians. Milburn, we learn today, is to return to government as an adviser to David Cameron on social mobility. It’s a role he should be accumstomed to, as he was tasked with writing a report on the issue under Brown. That time, his suggestions were buried by a government which didn’t want to face up to the sorry facts. This time, you hope they meet with a more constructive response. But why wasn’t a Conservative (or conservative) appointed? That’s the question which Iain Dale asks over

IDS wins his battle, now the eyes turn to Fox

Iain Martin reports that IDS has secured a £3bn fund to meet the upfront costs of his benefit reform. ‘To help ensure that IDS can make the cuts which unlock his funds for welfare reform, I am informed that Number 10 and the Treasury now accept that some of the commitments made by David Cameron before polling day to protect specific benefits will have to be revisited and potentially watered down. In return, IDS is being urged by colleagues to accept that he cannot behave like a bull in a china shop. Says one: “He has been immersed in welfare reform for years. But he can’t present his solutions as

James Forsyth

The coalition’s university challenge

The contours of an agreement on how to pay for university education are clearer today after Rachel Sylvester’s interview with David Willetts. Up-front fees look to be on the way out.  Willetts tells Sylvester, ‘It’s very important that it’s signaled very clearly that the money that is paid back comes out of your earnings once you have graduated and are in work.’ It also seems that different courses at different institutions will have different prices. Willetts proclaims that he wants something that ‘links you to your university and the course you did at that university.’   So far, this looks like simply collecting variable fees through the tax system. But the

Pickles axes the Audit Commission

Eric Pickles’ decision to scrap the Audit Commission is further evidence that Pickles is the minister prepared to move quickest on the cuts agenda. It is a bold decision and one that is going to come under heavy attack. The Audit Commission’s supporters will claim that it is self defeating to scrap the watchdog that checks that public services are delivering value for money. Set against that, though, has to be the culture of excessive pay and waste at its hearts. Until Pickles intervened, it wanted to pay its new chairman £240,000. Notably John Denham in his statement tonight opposing the abolition of the Audit Commission, felt obliged to say,

What can Green achieve?

Handbags across Whitehall this morning, as Vince Cable responds to the government’s appointment of Sir Philip Green as an efficiency adviser in a disgruntled, if evasive, manner. He tells City AM: “There’s a lot I could say on this, but I’d better miss this one out … I’m tempted to comment, but I think I’d better not.”   And it’s clear why the Business Secretary, and many others, might be a little peeved. A hard-partying, perma-tanned, rotund and ostentatious figure, with question marks hanging over his tax status, Sir Philip is simply not designed for this age of austerity. He is nothing like the cadaverous technocrats who usually sift through

Officials: Better than 50 percent chance that Israel will strike Iran next year

The Iran issue has dropped down the news agenda in recent months. But that doesn’t mean it has gone away. Even with the difficulties that Iran’s nuclear programme has faced, any decision on whether to try to use force to stop Iran becoming a nuclear-ready power will have to be taken in the next year or so as Jeffrey Goldberg’s brilliantly reported cover piece in the Atlantic reminds us. Goldberg writes, “I have interviewed roughly 40 current and past Israeli decision makers about a military strike, as well as many American and Arab officials. In most of these interviews, I have asked a simple question: what is the percentage chance

Where are the cuts?

John Redwood has entered the debate with a unique argument: spending isn’t being cut. He points to figures in the Budget which show “current” spending rising from around £600 billion now to around £700 billion in 2015. As Alex says, that suggests an increase of 15 percent over five years – hardly what anyone would describe as a cut. And there’s a similar picture for “total” spending, which will rise from around £670 billion to £737.5 billion.   Yet it’s worth pointing out that Redwood isn’t using inflation-adjusted figures (aka, “real terms” figures). If you do that, then there are cuts to be seen in both current and total spending:

James Forsyth

The university funding compromise

One of the issues on the horizon that has the most potential to cause problems for the coalition is how to fund higher education. The Liberal Democrats are opposed to fees and the Tory MPs and press loathe the idea of a straight graduate tax. As Ben Brogan notes in his Telegraph column today, Vince Cable and David Willetts, the two ministers charged with working this out, are having a very civilised discussion about it. Oddly enough, it is — as I say in the magazine this week — the blue on blue rows in government that are most vicious. My understanding is that the compromise the coalition will come

Bravo, Mr Pickles

I think it’s fair to say that Eric Pickles doesn’t look like a pioneer of the Cameroonian “Post-Bureaucratic Age”. But that’s exactly what he is, as his department becomes the first to publish data on all its spending over £500. At the moment, the document provides plenty of ammunition for – rather than against – the coalition, covering as it does the financial year between 6 April 2009 and 5 April 2010. And thus we read of how, under the last administration, £17,000 was spent at a luxury hotel, £635,000 on taxis, £13,000 on Manchester United catering costs, and so on. But this isn’t just a retrospective exercise: the prospect

This is no time for salami slicing

You can often achieve a lot more by doing things a bit at a time rather than attempting one bold and sweeping reform. In the 1970s, for example, the trade unions had extraordinary legal privileges; strike votes were done on a show of hands at works meetings (usually late at night when everyone except the Trotskyists had gone to bed); there weren’t even secret ballots for union elections. Edward Heath took the unions head on with his all-embracing Industrial Relations Act. It was a disaster: there were widespread demonstrations and strikes, and one of these confrontations forced him from office. Margaret Thatcher learnt from this and took things much more

To Labour’s successors…

Following this morning’s coalition press conference, the Tories’ have released this video: Labour’s Legacy. It’s effective, especially in view of Labour’s continued refusal to acknowledge that Gordon Brown did to Britain what Peter Ridsdale did to Leeds United, albeit on a grander scale.

James Forsyth

The coalition gets political

The joint Tory Lib Dem press conference to attack Labour’s legacy was a sign of how comfortable the two parties are becoming together. Chris Huhne and Sayeeda Warsi’s message was that the ‘unavoidable cuts that are coming are Labour’s cuts’ and that Labour is ‘irrelevant’ until it admits its responsibility for the deficit. The message was essentially the one that Chris Huhne and Michael Gove set out at the political Cabinet at Chequers last month. In a move that is bound to generate some headlines, Warsi has written to those Labour leadership contenders who were ministers asking them to forfeit their severance pay and to ask the ex-ministers supporting them