Uk politics

Brexit to cut immigration by 80,000 a year – and other OBR observations

Once, journalists trawled the Red Book (ie, the Budget statement) for stories. Now, the Office for Budget Responsibilities does this for us. There will be plenty in it for Brexiteers and Remainers. The former will be delighted that the OBR pretty much trashes the main assumptions made in HM Treasury’s now-notorious dossier on jobs, recession, house prices etc. But then again the OBR estimates a Brexit effect on the deficit: £3bn this year, peaking at £15.4bn in 2018/19. This has delighted Remain campaigners who now, at long last, have ammunition to write about the costs of Brexit – especially if you add the figures together and come up with a £50-odd billion Brexit effect.

Brendan O’Neill

Brexit-bashers like Blair and Branson are the real enemies of the people

Here’s a tip for judges, businessmen, peers, politicians and former PMs who don’t like being called ‘enemies of the people’: stop behaving like enemies of the people. This week it is reported that Tony Blair is polishing his toothy grin to make a comeback into British politics, potentially as thwarter, or just tamer, of the ‘catastrophe’ of Brexit. It’s also reported that Richard Branson, the Brexit-bashing billionaire, has offered ‘tens of thousands’ of pounds to a gang of the great and good who want either to reverse the result of the referendum in which us dumb plebs made such a grave error, or at least insist that a second referendum be

Philip Hammond and John McDonnell go head-to-head – but are we any clearer on Brexit?

This morning’s Marr show was something of a financial matter, with the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, and Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell sharing the sofa. As Andrew Marr pointed out, having the pair of Chancellors share a sofa is a ‘great tradition’, but one that had a stop put to it when George Osborne was in charge. Now the tradition has come back – but it this morning’s performance might be a good example of why Osborne chose to put a stop to it in the first place. The general consensus seems to be that McDonnell came out on top – with commenters saying that he ran rings around Hammond. Naturally, lots

Is patriotism a virtue?

Michael Gove makes a semi-persuasive case for patriotism in The Times this week. Brexit and Trumpism are largely just assertions of the basic, healthy human impulse to love one’s homeland, and to defy the international structures, and liberal sneering, that denigrate this impulse. The reality is that the moral status of patriotism depends on which nation you belong to. It depends whether your nation espouses liberal values. If it does, then your patriotism is linked to a wider-than-national creed. If it does, then your allegiance is also to an international cause: you respect and love your country as a particular expression of this creed. After fascism, the idea of national allegiance

James Forsyth

Tory Brexiteers pressure May to quit EU single market and customs union

Normally, the Saturday before an autumn statement would be dominated by speculation about what is in it. But, as I say in The Sun today, both Number 10 and the Treasury are emphasising that while there’ll be important things on productivity, infrastructure and fiscal rules in Wednesday’s statement, there’ll be no rabbits out of hats. Partly, this is because of  Philip Hammond’s personality: he’s not a political showman. But it is also because he’s not got much room for manoeuvre.  As he has emphasised to Cabinet colleagues, the growth forecasts might not be dramatically lower than they were in March, but cumulatively they have a big effect—limiting what the government

Poor mental health care is a ‘stain’ on our country. But whose fault is that?

Today’s warning from every former Health Secretary from the past 20 years about inadequate mental health provision raises a number of questions. The first is whether the government really is serious about its pledge to make parity of esteem between physical and mental health a priority. Mental health has become more of a political issue in recent years, which is a good thing: parties now worry about their standing on the issue because society has become better at talking about mental illness, and therefore more people are aware of the shockingly inadequate treatment that their friends and family are receiving when they fall ill. The Tories became anxious in 2015

Stop Funding Hate: a nasty, elitist campaign for press censorship

Intolerance wears a progressive mask in the 21st century. Students hound political undesirables off campus in the name of ‘protecting diversity’. Adverts are banned from the London Underground in the name of women’s rights. Rappers and other hotheads are barred from Britain on the basis that their utterances are ‘not conducive’ to our good, progressive way of life. And now assorted leftists and tweeters are seeking to punish tabloid newspapers, to starve them of big revenue, in the name of promoting tolerance. Yes, intolerance – in this case of the redtop press and its right to say what it wants – is tolerance. Stop Funding Hate is a new campaign

Theresa May now has some Trumps in her Brexit negotiating hand

Britain’s position heading into its Brexit talks is far stronger than it was a week ago, I argue in The Sun today. Why, because Donald Trump has changed the dynamics of global politics. Brexit’s critics used to claim that this country would be isolated after it left the EU. But it is hard to make that case when the president-elect of the most powerful country in the world is in favour of it. Indeed, the next US President is more enthusiastic about it than the British Prime Minister. He was for it before June 23rd. Theresa May now has a chance to create a strong relationship with Trump before other

In defence of the Daily Mail

Who’s more hysterical: the Daily Mail for branding three judges ‘enemies of the people’ or the Dailymailphobes who have spent the past three days promiscuously breaking Godwin’s Law and accusing the Mail of being a paper-and-ink reincarnation of Hitler, an aspiring destroyer of judicial independence, and a menace to British civilisation that ought to be boycotted by all decent people and no longer handed out on British Airways flights because it is ‘against democracy and the rule of law’? I’m gonna go out on a limb and say it’s the latter. And that the irony is delicious: the very people accusing the Mail of being unhinged have themselves given new

Government’s high court defeat sparks election chatter

What worries government ministers, as I say in The Sun this morning, is not the actual vote on the Article 50 bill—voting against the bill as whole would be akin to rejecting the referendum result—but attempts to tie Theresa May’s hands ahead of the negotiation through amendments to the bill. One senior Cabinet Minister tells me that peers and MPs ‘won’t be able to resist’ trying to amend the bill. Though, it is worth noting that because of public concern about free movement there probably isn’t a Commons majority for staying in the single market, post referendum. Downing Street is adamant that they don’t want an early election, and that

The unhinged backlash to the High Court’s Brexit ruling

As a general rule, any day the government loses in court is a good day. So yesterday was an especially fine day. A delicious one, too, obviously, in as much as the fist-clenched, foot-stamping, whining of so many Brexiteers was so overblown and ludicrous it toppled into hilarity. People who shouted for months about the urgent need to restore parliamentary sovereignty now reacted in horror to the restoration of parliamentary sovereignty. ‘That’s not what we meant’, they spluttered. We meant governmental supremacy only when it suits us. Well, tough. A certain amount of squealing was only to be expected since, if Nigel Farage has taught us anything, it is that the Brexit-minded

The tough fight for democracy has begun

This week, national treasure David Attenborough joined the post-Brexit pile-on of the plebs. Should the little people really be trusted to make decisions about complicated matters like the EU, he asked? You know the answer: of course we shouldn’t. We’re too dim. We don’t have as many degrees as him. The point of parliamentary democracy, he says, is that ‘we find someone we respect who we think is probably wiser than we are’ and then we trust them to ‘ponder… difficult things’. That’s far preferable to asking people who’d prefer to go to a funfair than the National Gallery — he really says this, in reference to a quote from Ken

Spectator Parliamentarian of the Year 2016: the speeches

The Spectator’s Parliamentarian of the Year awards, sponsored by Benenden, has already made the headlines. What started out in 1983 as a lunch with two dozen people has turned into the British equivalent to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner – where politicians turn up with their best lines, teasing themselves and each other, with results that routinely make the national news. The tone was set brilliantly this year by George Osborne, our guest of honour. His speech was so funny, so searingly sharp, they he set a bar for everyone else. Here it is. Then, the awards kicked off. My own spiel is below – and then that of the winners. George Osborne presented each

Morrissey is right – Brexit really is magnificent

Being an out-and-proud Brexiteer, someone who would go to the barricades for Brexit, someone who might even take a bullet for Brexit, I often get emails from people who feel the same way but feel they can’t express their Brexitphilia in public. This week, in response to my Big Issue column on, yes, the beauty of Brexit, a correspondent tells me that, like me, he voted Leave for liberal, democratic reasons, not Little Englander ones, but such has been the ‘name-calling’ and ‘toxicity’ in response to his decision that he’s had to slink off social media and keep his head down. It’s awful. Loads of Brexiteers feel like this —

In defence of Zac Goldsmith

I’m baffled by the reaction to Zac Goldsmith’s decision to resign as the Conservative MP for Richmond Park. It is being interpreted, even by MPs on his own side, as an act of opportunism, a chance to rehabilitate himself with the metropolitan elite after his bruising defeat in the London mayoral election. Surprisingly few people seem willing to entertain the idea that he might be acting on principle. Exhibit A in the case for Zac’s defence is the fact that he’s the MP for Richmond Park in the first place. Zac could have applied to be the candidate in any number of safe Conservative seats in 2010 and, given his

Fraser Nelson

GDP data shows strong growth in UK economy after Brexit vote. Who’d have thunk it?

After the Brexit vote, the Financial Times summed up the general mood in the City by running a weekly doomometer, which was expected to chart the impending economic collapse in real time. But after a brief wobble, the economy got back to normal fairly quickly. Soon, the weekly data started to rather contradict the mood of panic – which baffled the various experts, many of whom had by then forecast an immediate recession. Pieces of good economic news were dismissed as deceptive snapshots. And when Q2 GDP came in looking very strong – 0.6 per cent (it was revised up to 0.7 per cent today) – that was dismissed as containing

If Zac Goldsmith is standing again, what is the point of his resignation?

Quite a few MPs are driven by a strange need for validation, but Zac Goldsmith might be the first politician in history to ask his constituents to vote for him three times in two years. Once as Mayor (the less said about that tawdry campaign the better) and, it seems, twice as MP for Richmond Park. He always said he’d resign and trigger a by-election if the Government approved Heathrow, as it did this morning. Originally his threat had force because Richmond was a Tory-Lib Dem marginal and his resignation would mean that the Tories would probably lose a seat. It was Richmond’s way of saying to the Tories: ‘Yes,

Sturgeon’s secessionist fantasy has been rejected by Europe. So why does she ask Theresa May?

‘Downing Street says the PM is set to rebuff calls for a flexible Brexit, which would allow parts of the UK to have their own arrangement,’ said the BBC radio news this morning. Not quite. This notion has been rejected in Europe, where the idea of doing some kind of separate deal with Scotland or any constituent part of the UK was never a deal. The ‘options’ that the SNP talk about do not exist as far as the EU is concerned: it is a giant bluff. It’s far from clear why she is asking Theresa May for something that the EU has already rejected.  Even if Theresa May backed

Suzanne Evans and Paul Nuttall announce Ukip leadership bids

Suzanne Evans, former deputy chairman of Ukip, has announced her intention to run for the leadership of the party. ‘I think I’m the right person to lead Ukip into the challenges ahead,’ she told Andrew Marr, adding, ‘first and foremost, I think I’m absolutely the right person to champion the cause of those 17.4 million people who voted to leave the European Union.’ Nigel Farage’s former deputy, Paul Nuttall, also announced his intention to run telling Andrew Neil that he would ‘stand on a platform of the unity candidate – Ukip needs to come together.’ Evans and Nuttall are the latest candidates to join a field that includes Raheem Kassam, Farage’s former spin doctor and

We should be flattered not threatened by France’s bid to take on the City

The French are trying to seduce the British to come and work in Paris. A video hymns the delights of La Defense, the Gallic Canary Wharf. It is a healthy Brexit effect that the French now feel that they can no longer fight the City of London solely by trying to regulate it, and must try persuasion instead. The prospect of British departure reawakens the spirit of competition in a continent which had largely replaced it with bureaucracy. By leaving, Britain ought to win first-mover advantage in this contest, but even if we don’t, we will have done a service to our neighbours which we could never have managed if