Liberal democrats

Labour’s Category Error

Have you been impressed by Labour’s response to their election defeat? Hmmm. Next question: is anyone listening to Labour’s complaints that the Liberal Democrats have “betrayed” themselves and everything that is nice and sweet and wholesome about this pleasant land? Best move on from that one too. Sunny Hundal makes a good argument that, at the very least, it is much too soon for Labour to be taking this line. It’s a good post but it misses one trick, I think: Labour continue to suffer from the category error of believing that liberals are really Labour voters who don’t quite realise this. But this is not the case and it’s

Osborne winning the Budget PR battle – but VAT remains a thorny issue

Well, that’s gone as well as can be expected for the coalition.  Most of today’s newspaper coverage highlights the severity of George Osborne’s Budget – but, crucially, it adds that the Chancellor had few other options.  The Telegraph calls it a “brave Budget”.  The Times says that it delivers “the best of fiscal conservatism combined with no small measure of social justice”.  And even the FT – no friend of the Tories in recent years – suggests that Osborne might be “remembered for doing Britain a great service.” The sourest notes chime around the government’s welfare cuts and the hike in VAT.  Already, it’s clear that the latter will be

Alex Massie

New Politics, Same Old Media

When Jeremy Paxman grilled Danny Alexander on Newsnight yesterday he spent most of his time on politics, not economics. Fair enough. That’s what the media does and one wouldn’t expect it any other way. But it was the type of attack Paxman employed that was both mildly interesting and futile. This was because Paxman decided to tear into Alexander and attack him for all the things in the budget that weren’t in the Liberal Democrat manifesto. Some of them, as Paxo pointed out time and time again, were actively opposed by the Lib Dems. Gotcha! Hypocrites! Why, he sneered, should anyone ever listen to anything you have to say in

Our rising debt burden

Debt may start falling as a share of GDP at the end of this Parliament (see p.2 here), but it’s still going up in cash terms.  Here’s a comparison with Labour’s last Budget:

Unspectacular, but quite effective

Well, that was excitingly unexciting.  There was little in George Osborne’s Budget that we didn’t expect, either in terms of rhetoric or policy.  But it still felt new and different nonetheless.  Here we had a Chancellor setting out exactly how much spending he will cut, and putting plenty of emphasis on both our deficit and debt burdens.  It drew a stark contrast with the Brown years, and was a solidly understated performance in itself. There will be plenty of attention paid to the hike in VAT, and rightly so.  But there were some macroeconomic forecasts which were just as eyecatching.  In his address, Osborne suggested that the deficit on “current

Budget 2010 – live blog

1343, PH: Harman has sat down now, so we’ll draw the live blog to a close.  I’ll write a summary post shortly. 1342, FN: I wish I could trash Harman’s response, but it’s actually quite good.  Many a Tory would be secretly cheering her trashing of the LibDems. “The LibDems denounced early cuts, now they’re backing them – how could they support everything they fought against, how could they let down everyone who voted for them?” Again, a fair point. “The LibDems used to stand up for people’s jobs, now they only stand up for their own.” Her main point – that forecasts for unemployment have risen – is a

Osborne makes the “progressive” case

During the Brown years it was “stability,” but it looks as though the watchword for Chancellor Osborne’s first Budget will be “progressive”.  This is the word that’s being bandied about behind-the-scenes, and the coalition seems confident that it has the policies to match the rhetoric.  As the Guardian reports today, it’s likely that the personal income tax allowance will be raised by £1,000 or so, to help shield the least well-off from tax rises elsewhere.  And the paper quotes a Tory aide saying that the richest will pay more, “both in absolute terms and as a percentage of their income.” Whether he drops the p-word or not, the arguments behind

Osborne looks to the long-term

There are plenty of details for Budget-spotters to look out for tomorrow, but among the most important is just how far Osborne reaches into the future.  The current expectation in Westminster is that he will offer quite a few glimpses into the long-term.  A possible commitment to reduce the main rate of corporation tax to 20 percent over the next five years, perhaps.  Or similar provisions for making the first £10,000 of income tax-free. There are, of course, economic and political motives behind this.  Economically, the plan will be to reassure the markets that the coalition has a deliberate plan which extends beyond the next few months (which was a

The two sides of the VAT question

There are two main aspects to the VAT issue: one distasteful, the other less so.  The distasteful one is the issue of whether the government has a mandate for hiking VAT in tomorrow’s Budget.  Of course, government is often the art of the unexpected, so we shouldn’t be surprised to see measures implemented that weren’t explicitly raised in the election campaign – particularly when it comes to tax rises.  But all the claims that there were “no plans” to raise VAT do jar against reports like: “Osborne insisted the budget measures would be spread fairly across society, suggesting capital gains tax will rise and promising a new banking levy. But

Who is prepared to cut, and who isn’t?

One of the leitmotifs of this Parliament  – and something which, by many inside accounts, is helping the coalition immensely – is the willingness of the civil service to wield the axe within their own departments.  And now, courtesy of Reform and the Institute of Chartered Accountants, a new survey suggests that this mentality may stretch beyond Whitehall.  It quizzes public sector “finance decision makers,” and the headline finding is that: “82 per cent of respondents think further savings can be made within their organisation in the next year without affecting the current level of service they provide.” Far more intriguing, though, is the finding that 84 percent of them

Nick Clegg’s Big Week

With the cuts comes the candy: the sweet-tasting morsels which, it is hoped, will prevent tomorrow’s Budget from being too much of a collective downer for the nation.  We’re already hearing that a council tax freeze will be pencilled in for next year, and you can expect a few more treats besides. National insurance, for instance, is looking like an obvious candidate. From George Osborne’s perspective, these sunnier measures will serve a two-fold purpose.  Like I say, it will be hoped that they keep the public on board with the government’s project: stick with us, the message will run, and you’ll get more of this in future.  But they will

What will the Labour attack be in a year’s time?

It’s days like this when you realise just how stuck Labour are in a Brownite groove.  Everywhere you turn, there’s some leadership candidate or other attacking the government for choosing to cut public spending this year.  Ed Miliband claims that the Lib Dems have been “completely macho … completely cavalier” about cuts.  Andy Burnham says that this year could “damage us in the long run”.  And even those who aren’t chasing the leadership are getting in on the act: Alistair Darling writes that the coalition has “a fiscal policy that undermines fragile growth”. So we already know what Labour’s broad response to this week’s Budget will look like.  But it

John Hutton: a good man for the job

While we’re enjoying a burst of optimism about the coalition, it’s worth highlighting the news that John Hutton has been put in charge of a review into public sector pensions.  As I’ve said before, Hutton was one of the most quietly impressive figures of the New Labour era, and someone who impressed during his time at work and pensions. Even the Tories’ current welfare agenda owes a lot to Hutton: he commission the Freud Review which set the parameters for welfare reform in this country, and he fought on its behalf against a reluctant Gordon Brown. In a wonkish sort of way, it will be exciting to see what happens

Fraser Nelson

Osborne’s massive opportunity

I’m quite optimistic about George Osborne’s budget – in the same sense that one might have been optimistic when Churchill took over from Chamberlain. Not because the situation is good, or because you think the road ahead will be easy or enjoyable, but because the road no longer leads to disaster. Not that Osborne is a Churchill – even though he will have his own fair share of blood, sweat toil and tears for us on Tuesday. I’m pretty confident he’ll head in the right direction, and at the right speed. I discuss this in my News of the World column today, but will say a little more here: 1.

Assorted LibDem-ery

Alastair Campbell is right on two counts.  First, that this snippet from George Parker’s Budget preview is pretty fascinating: “Senior Lib Dems whisper that Vince Cable, the Lib Dem business secretary, never really believed his pre-election rhetoric that cuts should be delayed until 2011.” And, second, that the claim about Cable is downright unbelievable.  I mean, this is the man who attacked Tory spending plans at every opportunity he could, and more venomously than any of his colleagues.  The man, indeed, who pushed the line that “the economy will be plunged back into prolonged recession” as a result of early cuts.  And the man who, by many behind-the-scenes accounts, encouraged

The Budget: compromise and non-compromise

It’s hard to overestimate the significance of Tuesday’s Budget. George Osborne’s statement won’t just determine the course of our economy for the next few years, but also the political life of this government. Spending cuts and tax rises may not inevitably “fracture the coalition,” as Peter Oborne puts it in the Mail today. But they certainly have the potential to. Happily for the coalition, the current political mood is so geared towards fiscal restraint that there will be little immediate opposition to Osborne’s general plans.  That will come once the effects of spending cuts are felt in individual constituencies  – months, even years, down the line. But there are a

The coalition is edging the public spending debate

Danny Alexander acquitted himself effectively this morning. The restructuring of government spending has gone beyond bland clichés about ‘efficiencies’; with care, the government is dismantling Labour’s unfunded spending projects. £8.5bn in unfunded projects signed-off since 1 January 2010 are on a stay of execution until the autumn; £1bn of unfunded projects signed-off before 1 January 2010 are also on their way to the block. £2bn will be saved almost immediately with the cancellation of the 2 year jobseekers’ guarantee, the young person’s guarantee, CLG regional leader board, the local authority business growth incentive and the county sports partnerships. Controversially, the government has also cancelled the Sheffield Forgemasters’ fund and the

Osborne gets upfront about our debt burden

A couple of weeks on holiday, and there’s plenty to catch up on.  First, though, George Osborne’s speech to Mansion House yesterday evening.  In terms of substance, it was fairly radical stuff.  And it’s encouraging that so many of the Tories’ solid plans for reforming the financial regulatory system have survived the coalition process.  But, really, it was one simple, little sentence which jumped out at me.  This: “Debt [is] set to still rise even at the end of this five year Parliament.” “So what?” you may be thinking, “we knew that already.”  Ah, yes, but we’ve rarely heard a politician be quite so upfront about our debt position before

Of Pigs and Cucumbers

Pleased to be back in Blighty and pleased too to see that the Economist has launched Johnson, a blog about language and politics. From the most recent entry: Germany has a cranky coalition government and garrulous politicians, and so conditions are good for political insults. In one intramural fight a health ministry official from the liberal FDP likened the CSU—Bavarian conservatives—to a Wildsau, or wild pig, for its rough handling of the liberals’ health-reform ideas. But the better insult was the riposte by the CSU man, who called the liberals a Gurkentruppe, literally a troop of cucumbers. Anglophone journalists have been puzzling over how to turn this into recognisable English.