Labour party

Wednesday

James Forsyth

The Tories should attack the national insurance increase

After a tricky few weeks for the Tories, the PBR has come of a bit of a relief for them. It is generating far more bad headlines for the government than good ones.  The Standard’s splash on the national insurance hike is a taste of what the coverage is going to be like for Labour tomorrow. One point the Tories should be hammering home is that the national insurance hike is a far more significant tax rise than the tax on bank bonuses. The one-off tax on banks that pay sizable bonuses will only raise £550 million while in 2010-11 the various national insurance changes will cost taxpayers more than

Peter Hoskin

Bad news for the country, bad news for Labour

Abandon hope all ye who enter here.  While we mostly knew what to expect from Darling’s PBR, it’s still surprising just how uninspiring, how thin and how insufficient it is in the flesh.  It’s pretty much a bad news budget for anyone you could mention.  Bad news, of course, for the bankers who will be hit by the hazily outlined bonus tax.  Bad news for public sector workers, who are already smarting at the frozen pay rise they’ll have to accept in a few years time.  Bad news for anyone who cares about the state of the public finances, which look just as grim, if not worse, as they did

Peter Hoskin

One thing to remember today

As you can probably imagine, plenty of Labour folk are getting excited about the PBR today.  They regard it as a chance for their party to harden their rise in the polls, and hasten the Tories’ descent.  But Danny Finkelstein strikes a necessary note of calm over at Comment Central.  As he puts it, a Budget in which the government has to ‘fess up to the horrible state of the public finances is hardly going to do much good for them.   To Danny’s analysis I’d add one supporting fact: that rarely, if ever, in recent times, has the government received a significant poll bounce on the back of a

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Brown’s bonus smokescreen

If today ends up with the government in a row with the City over plans to tax bank bonus pots with bankers threatening to take the government to court, then it will be mission accomplished for the Labour party. The same goes if we end up in a debate over the merits of a Tobin-style tax. For obvious reasons, Labour would rather talk about anything other than the state of the public finances so anything that distracts attention from that central question is, to use the word of the morning, a bonus for Brown. The Tories know this and will try and turn the debate back to the public finances

Tuesday

Fraser Nelson

Darling carves up the spending pie

It’s the eve of the Pre-Budget Report, and the lunacy has already begun. Tomorrow’s FT says that Darling will copy the Tories’ plans to protect the NHS budget – and throw police and schools in to the protected status as well. This is introduced as “the biggest squeeze in pubic spending for a generation,” with the headline figure of 14 percent cuts. How to make sense of that? My guide: 1. Any sentence that starts “A Labour government would…” can be ignored. Darling can promise to fund free beer for everyone after 2011 – he won’t be in office. These are decoys for the media: the wilder his claims, the

Peter Hoskin

Ringfence-a-rama

Just watching Newsnight, and the show’s economics editor, Paul Mason, has said we can expect several budgets to be ringfenced from spending cuts in tomorrow’s PBR – hospitals, schools and perhaps even the social security budget.  If so, it’s another sign of how political the document is set to be.  Ringfenced budgets are the other side of the soak-the-rich coin: sending out the twin message that Labour will batter the “City fat cats,” while also “investing” in public services “for the many”.  Just a shame that it’s all insufficient to the scale of the debt crisis.

Peter Hoskin

Clocking on

As publicity stunts go, the debt clock the Tories beamed onto Battersea Power Station this evening is quite a decent idea.  Their thinking’s pretty clear – get some coverage in tomorrow’s papers, and increase the likelihood that the horrendous state of the public finances becomes the story of the PBR – but it’s probably no less effective for it.  Anyway, here are some pictures so you can judge for yourself: P.S. Yes, I know it’s out of sync with the Coffee House debt counter. We’re going to update our numbers on the back of tomorrow’s PBR.

David Blackburn

How long until the plug is pulled?<br />

Moody’s AAA sovereign monitor was published today, and whilst the UK’s AAA status remains ‘resilient’ the situation is far from rosy. The report states: ‘The UK economy entered the crisis in a vulnerable position, owing to the (overly) large size of its banking sector and the high level of household indebtedness. Both continue to weigh on economic performance. Net bank lending to the UK business sector has continued to contract through Q3 2009, and repairs to household balance sheets (i.e. the rising savings ratio) may weigh on demand for some time to come. The depth of the crisis has been mirrored by the ongoing deterioration of public finances (with gross

Peter Hoskin

Darling contra Brown, Part 573

Ok, so tomorrow’s Pre-Budget Report is shaping up to be a horrendously political affair.  But, rest assured, it could have been so much worse.  In what is, by now, a familiar Budget-time story, Alistair Darling is fighting the good fight against some of Brown’s most inharmonious fiscal brainwaves.  According to Rachel Sylvester’s column today, here are just some of the measures that the Chancellor has resisted: — A long-term windfall tax on bankers’ bonuses (Darling favours a temporary, one-year tax). — A call to lower the 50p tax threshold from £150,000 to £100,000. — A reversal of the plan to make it easier for couples to pool their inheritance tax

Monday

Peter Hoskin

The Lib Dems’ hunt for an issue may lead them to an Afghan pull-out

As Anthony Wells says over at his UK Polling Report, there are plenty of reasons to doubt whether Labour could convert a third of Lib Dem voters over to their cause.  But the article in today’s Times on Labour’s new strategy will still give Team Clegg pause for thought. The problem for the Lib Dems is that they haven’t yet managed to hit on an attention-grabbing issue to make their own – their favourite, perhaps only, election strategy.  The cause of Parliamentary reform could have done the trick, but – beyond Nick Clegg’s call to prevent MPs from taking their summer holiday – very few of the Lib Dem proposals

Peter Hoskin

This week’s PBR looks set to be Brown’s most political Budget yet

Ok, so all Brown Budgets are political – but signs are that this week’s PBR could be his most blatantly partisan yet.  I mean, just look at his speech this morning on improving efficiency in the public sector.  Some of its measures are welcome – for instance, pledging to cut the pay of senior servants, and the general idea of using technology more effectively in government.  But, as other folk have pointed out (see Guido and Iain Dale), the measures are insufficient to the scale of the debt crisis, and many are old news.  All in all, the signs are as we expected: Brown is paying only lip service to

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The politics of distraction

If everyone concentrates on the actual numbers in the PBR then it will be a disaster for Labour. So, instead Labour will try and distract us all with small but eye-catching measures — a new rate of inheritance tax for estates worth more than £5 million, that kind of thing. The aim will be to move the debate from the grim reality of the country’s fiscal situation to Labour’s dividing lines. There will be a lot of pressure on Cameron and Osborne to denounce Labour’s soak the rich measures. But the most important thing for them to do is to get the debate back to the state of the public

David Blackburn

Cameron and Ashcroft should come clean

David Cameron’s ‘nothing to do with me guv’ response to the Ashcroft tax question on yesterday’s Politics Show has not put the issue to bed. In fact, his obfuscation has the reverse effect. The Independent runs an article today describing how little is known about individuals and authorities. ‘The House of Lords Appointments Commission says that it does not know whether Lord Ashcroft is UK resident. The Cabinet Office and HM Customs and Revenue have declined to answer questions about his status, on grounds of privacy.’ The reality need not be as dodgy as rumour and perception suggest – the reason that there is no official record of Ashcroft’s main residence is that

Sunday

David Blackburn

A tax Blitz that reveals Labour’s mistakes in full

The rumour mill is pulling 24/7 shifts. In recent days, newspapers and newswires have turned into gossip columns devoted exclusively to Alistair Darling’s Pre-Budget Report. If the rumours are true, which is a huge assumption, Darling will not offer the taxpayer a pre-election lolly-pop besides deferring the Age of Austerity until 2011, by which time he will probably be out of office. If Labour’s 1992 manifesto was a tax bombshell, then by all accounts this PBR will be like Dresden. Everyone, both rich and poor, is in the firing line, and there is no space here to analyse every alleged proposal.   Darling looks likely to prolong the VAT cut until at least February,

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Brown waits to strike

Things are shaping up nicely for Gordon Brown ahead of the Pre-Budget Report next week. The Tories were 17 points ahead on ICM in October – now it’s 11. Cameron would have a narrow majority on this basis but, given the margin of error, we’re back into hung parliament territory. And this has a self-reinforcing effect on the Tories. A shrinking opinion poll means they tend to get paralysed, avoid arguments, play it safe, wait for Labour to screw up again. As I say in my News of the World column today, the voters who are looking for leadership then don’t really see it. This, of course, softens the Tory

Saturday

David Blackburn

The correct decision but a tactical blunder

The Telegraph reports that Alistair Darling will allow married couples to continue to pool their inheritance tax allowances. Downing Street has pressed the Treasury to abolish pooled allowances in order to demarcate between Labour, the party that promotes fairness, and the Tories, the party that entrenches privilege.   For all the recent polls and bravado, the near-bankrupt Labour party is still fighting an intensive rearguard. If it is avoid annihilation, the party has to hold on in Scotland, Wales and urban Northern England. Darling’s pledge illustrates that there is more than one way to fight a defensive battle. Theoretically, tax free pooled allowances worth up to £600,000 help middle income

Friday

James Forsyth

Balls: ‘I have resisted moving’

Ed Balls has given an interview to The Times Educational Supplement which contains a comically audacious attempt to rewrite history. When asked about whether he really wants to be in his current job, Balls tells the interviewer, “I have resisted moving”. Now, I suspect this will come as a bit of a shock to Alistair Darling who fought off an effort by Balls to take his job. 

Thursday

James Forsyth

Could Brown go for a March 25th election?

The conventional wisdom in Westminster is that the election will be on May 6th. But a few shadow Cabinet members have told me that they think Brown will actually go in March, an idea that they have been pushing for a while. Their argument is that this quarter’s GDP figures will be quite good, boosted by the Christmas rush, and Brown would want to go to the country before, another more disappointing set of numbers came out. Second, Brown will want to avoid people seeing the effects of the new tax arranegements which will come into force in April. Finally, if the election was on May 6th, the first week

David Blackburn

The Tories, money and inheritance tax

Key to Labour’s emerging strategy is promulgating the myth that raising the inheritance tax threshold is designed to protect the Tories’ rich friends from the great unwashed. Despite its sojourn in the wilderness, the politics of envy remains crude at best. Raising IHT thresholds favours hardworking, modest Middle England. The super rich can protect their fortunes without the help of threshold raises, which are negligible by their standards in any event. James Macintyre proves as much in his latest New Statesman column. When detailing Tory donor Lord Harris’s IHT avoidance, Macintyre writes: ‘The Tory peer, whose wealth is estimated at roughly £285m, donated £90,000 to Cameron’s campaign. In 1997, he

Peter Hoskin

How will Labour try to soak the rich?

Brace yourselves.  According to today’s Daily Express, Alistair Darling is under pressure to introduce a new 70 percent tax rate for high-earners in next week’s Pre-Budget Report.  I repeat: s-e-v-e-n-t-y percent. To be honest, I can’t see the Chancellor doing it.  Leaping from 50p to 70p would be regarded as far too incendiary, not to mention fiscally insane, even for this government.  But I can still see them introducing a fair handful of soak-the-rich measures, if only to strengthen their reinvigorated attack line against the Tories. In which case, I refer you to Polly Toynbee’s column from a few months ago, in which she recommended that the 50p rate start