Uk politics

Some perspective on housing benefit

Depending on who you read, the planned £400 a week cap on housing benefit is either comparable to Nazi concentration camps, death squads in Brazil, or ethnic cleansing in the Balkans Critics have ranged from the Mayor of London to the ultra Left. So it is worth taking a moment to get some perspective. Firstly, the general caps on housing benefit don’t even impact on social tenants because they pay lower, subsidised rents, (though the £26,000 cap on the total amount of benefits per household might hit them). But for housing benefit claimants in the private sector outside London, less than 1% are affected by the cap. And even in

Sarah Palin and the presidency

It’s not the confirmation that her fans are after, but it’s pretty close: in an interview airing on US television this evening, Sarah Palin will say that she would run for the presidency, “if there’s nobody else to do it.” Which brings us neatly to this piece by John Heilemann in New York magazine, highlighted by Gideon Rachman over at the FT. In it Heilemann sets out how, despite the odds, Palin could actually triumph in 2012. It’s a scenario which involves a generous sprinkling of ifs and buts, including Michael Bloomberg running as an independent candidate – but it’s strangely persuasive nonetheless. Worth a read. 

Question: how much do we contribute towards the EU budget?

Answer: it depends on how you look at it. I’ve put together the chart below (click for a larger version), which sets how much money we’ve given the the EU since 1973. There are three lines for each year: i) our gross contribution, ii) our total contribution (which is the gross contribution minus the money we get back from the rebate), and iii) the net contribution (gross contribution minus both the rebate and the money that the Treasury gets to pay for various EU projects across the UK). In terms of how much the EU costs the taxpayer, then, I’d say the second line is the best one to follow:

Labour’s hypocrisy on the EU budget

Labour’s Shadow Europe Minister, Wayne David, has been busy castigating David Cameron for his apparent failure to secure an EU Budget freeze. He says, ‘It is imperative that we do have a freeze on the EU budget’. Quite so, why then did Labour MEPs vote against an amendement to freeze it?    

James Forsyth

Boris v Dave, this time it’s serious

Make no mistake about it, Boris Johnson’s rhetorical assault on the coalition’s housing benefit plan is a direct challenge to David Cameron’s authority. The two best-known Conservatives in the country are now involved in a battle that only one of them can win.   Boris told BBC London this morning: “What we will not see and we will not accept any kind of Kosovo-style social cleansing of London. “On my watch, you are not going to see thousands of families evicted from the place where they have been living and have put down roots.” What is infuriating the Tory machine is not only Boris’s criticisms, but the language that he

Another fine mess | 28 October 2010

You know that child benefit cut for higher-rate taxpayers? Yeah, well, it may not be quite as straightforward as the government have hitherto indicated. In an important post on his Wall Street Journal blog, Iain Martin sets out a problem that is exercising nerves and minds in the Treasury: simply put, there’s no existing method for establishing whether mothers (who receive child benefit) are living in a household which pays tax at the higher rate. In effect, this means that the policy is “unenforceable” – although there are some possible solutions, as Iain points out: “I hear that ministers are considering (and tell me which part of the rest of

The Big Society in action

The Big Society, in so far as it can be defined at all, envisages an empowered people taking responsibility for their local communities. The little platoons’ efforts could determine the atmosphere of a place, by helping to deliver public services, founding employment schemes, running activities that unite the rich and the dispossessed, and exercising more influence over planning authorities. It is, in effect, an assault on adamantine local government, overbearing central government and predominant corporatism. This morning’s Independent has a cockle-warming tale of how the fledgling culture of localism and voluntarism is taking flight: ‘More than 230 separate local campaign groups against wind farms are operating across the UK, from

Cameron takes on Europe

European leaders, we are told, have been charmed by David Cameron since he formed the coalition government – today, we must hope that he can use that charm to good effect. The Prime Minister heads to the EU Summit in Brussels later, following an evening of earnest phone conversations with his French and German counterparts. His plea was simple: reject a planned 6 percent rise in the EU budget  for next year. But the outcome is hazy. While our government wants the budget to be frozen in 2011, the likelihood is that it will alight somewhere between the 2.9 percent sought by the European Council and the 6 percent agreed

Fighting back against Google

The Tory MP for Harlow, Rob Halfon, has secured an historic backbench business debate tomorrow on privacy and the internet. In my opinion, this subject is of vital importance to our public life. I attended the Backbench Business Committee with Rob as a witness to secure the debate, and invasions of privacy online are of growing concern to many of us. One centrally important aspect of this discussion (but not by any means the only issue) is the behaviour of Google with their Street View programme: as the infamous cars trundled down the highways and byways of Britain taking pictures of all and sundry, they had Wi-Fi receptors on board

James Forsyth

The new fairness battleground

The f word, fairness, got another outing today at PMQs as David Cameron attempted to defend the coalition’s proposed housing benefit changes from attack by Ed Miliband. Cameron’s argument was that it isn’t fair for people to be subsiding people on housing benefit to live in houses that they couldn’t afford to live in themselves. On this, I strongly suspect that most people in the country agree with him. If Labour wants to turn housing benefit into a big issue, the wedge will work to the Conservatives’ advantage. However, what should be worrying the coalition is that the changes to housing benefit will have to be implemented by local authorities,

The pros and cons of tweaking the housing benefit cuts

It says a lot about the Lib Dems that a meeting between their party leader and deputy leader can throw up so many policy differences. When Nick Clegg and Simon Hughes chatted behind closed doors yesterday, the latter sought concessions over the coalition’s housing benefit cuts – the cuts that Clegg then had to defend in the House. This morning, it was reported that he might just get some of them, even though Downing St are denying the story. Regardless of the outcome, the situation is reminiscent of the child benefit cut for higher-rate taxpayers. A policy was announced, only for the coalition to start pulling back from it in

PMQs live blog | 27 October 2010

VERDICT: The housing benefit cuts inspired Ed Miliband’s chosen attack – and he deployed it quite effectively, with none of the unclarity that we saw last week. For the most part, though, Cameron stood firm – leaning on his favourite rhetorical stick, What Would Labour Do? – and his final flurry against Ed Miliband was enough, I think, to win him this encounter on points. But don’t expect this housing benefit issue to dissipate quickly. Bob Russell’s question was evidence enough of how tricky this could be for the coalition. 1232: And that’s it. My quick verdict shortly. 1231: Bob Russell, a Lib Dem, says that housing benefit cuts are

Miliband’s stage directions

Labour have sprung a leak, and it’s furnishing the Times with some high-grade copy. Yesterday, the paper got their hands on an internal party memo about economic policy. Today, it’s one on how Ed Miliband should deal with PMQs (£). With this week’s bout only an hour-and-a-half away, here are some of the key snippets: 1. The Big Prize. “The big prize is usually to provoke the PM into appearing evasive by repeatedly failing to answer a simple question, often one that requires a simple Yes or No.” 2. Cheer lines. “It’s important to have a cheer line that goes down well in the chamber and can be clipped easily

When public safety is threatened, strikes should be banned

The Fire Brigade’s Union (FBU) have called for strike action in London during the busiest firefighting night of the year: Bonfire Night.  Attempts to renegotiate work patterns (already changed in several fire brigades but unchanged in London for thirty years) have been hysterically termed ‘sacking’ all London firefighters by the union.  Rather like the threatened British Airways strike during Christmas 2009, this is a clear attempt by a trade union to use its monopoly power to force an employer into accepting its terms by inflicting maximum possible damage on the general public.   This is clearly worse than a normal strike, however.  If, say, all Asda employees went on strike,

Labour tries to prise Osborne and IDS apart

Labour’s spin is less dexterous now that Alistair Campbell and Peter Mandelson have passed into night; but it can still artfully disguise politics as principle. Douglas Alexander is at in the Guardian, fanning the dull embers of George Osborne and IDS’ summer spat. He renews the offer of cross-party dialogue that he made on Andrew Marr last Sunday, before retreating, saying: ‘But beneath the talk of “we’re all in this together” (a phrase specifically recommended for repeated use by Republican pollster Frank Luntz), what the chancellor announced on welfare was largely a laundry list of cuts that penalise the vulnerable and the working poor. And in doing so he undermined

Fraser Nelson

Free schools: good for all schools

Free schools are all well and good – but what about the schools that remain? Some CoffeeHousers raise this question in response to my earlier blog, and it’s important enough to deserve a post in itself. Because introducing new schools to compete with council schools is the best way of raising standards for all – and studies around the world prove this. The ‘free schools’ agenda is not some Govian brainwave, but a simple reform that is being enacted from Chile to Obama’s charter schools. The fullest example of this has been in Sweden, which the Gove system is modelled on, where about 13 percent of upper secondary kids are

Clegg holds no punches

Third time’s the charm? Not when it comes it Deputy Prime Minister’s Questions it’s not. Nick Clegg put in an effective performance this afternoon, but – just like the previous two sessions – there was rather more heat generated than light. So far as Labour are concerned, this monthly Q&A is little more than an opportunity to barrack the Lib Dem leader – and they set about the task with undisguised relish. Unfortunately for them, though, Nick Clegg bites back. Hard. Answering a question from Chris Bryant – in which the Labour MP referred to coalition housing benefit cuts as a “cleansing” of the poor from city centres – he

Freddy Gray

Cameron the ‘Tea Party Tory’

David Cameron’s cuts agenda is winning him some unusual praise from the American hard Right — from the sort of people the British political class considers beyond the pale. For instance, Pat Buchanan, the former presidential candidate and hardliner extraordinaire, is so impressed by Britain’s austerity measures that he has affectionately labelled Cameron the ‘Tea Party Tory’. He writes, ‘Casting aside the guidance of Lord Keynes — government-induced deficits are the right remedy for recessions — Cameron has bet his own and his party’s future on the new austerity. He is making Maggie Thatcher look like Tip O’Neill.’ I wonder how Steve Hilton would feel about this particular bit of