Uk politics

Proscribing legalised drugs

‘My wife says these drugs turned me into a zombie, but the truth is I wouldn’t know, as I have hardly any memory of the past 40 odd years.’ The Mail printed Keith Andrew’s testimony, a 74-year-old retired electrician who has guzzled prescribed benzodiazepines for nearly half a century. Andrew is one an estimated 1.5 million British people who have been addicted to valium and other tranquilisers. Whether addiction is voluntary or not is irrelevant. Anti-anxiety treatment remains a laxly regulated area of medicine: more than 8 million prescriptions are made each year and there are an estimated 100,000 illicit addicts currently using. In a fascinating piece in the Telegraph,

A glass of clear, blue water?

One of the most eye-catching stories this morning comes courtesy of ConservativeHome: “As part of the pre-election package, ConservativeHome expects Mr Osborne to announce that a Tory government will cancel Labour’s National Insurance tax rise. The Tories will announce an alternative way of plugging the hole. Earlier this week Policy Exchange argued that the NI rise was a very damaging way of raising extra revenue.” Sure, Cameron has hinted at this before, and there will be questions about how the Tories would fill the fiscal gap.  But that doesn’t make this anything less of a smart move.  Not only does it makes sense economically, but it would give the Tories

Fraser Nelson

Osborne’s weak response

I was all set up to Fisk the post-Budget analysis which Darling normally gives to the Today programme after the Budget – but he wasn’t there. The Treasury refused to have him debate with Osborne which is what Today (unusually) seems to have assumed. Well, we’d best get used to hearing Osborne post-Budget day. At first, I thought it was a coup for the Tories – but as Evan Davis sharpened his claws, it soon appeared to have been a net negative. Osborne just didn’t sound confident. A series of exchanges left him looking unprepared. His line – that he will eliminate ‘the bulk’ of the annual overspend over the

Darling and Brown get away with it

Strange days, indeed.  While most of the frontpages today are unflattering for Labour – particularly, and unsurprisingly, those of the Telegraph and the Sun – I imagine that Brown & Co. will be quite pleased with the general tone of the Budget coverage.  Much of it mirrors the Independent’s view that Darling “played a weak hand well”.  Or, elsewhere, there’s a kind of detached indifference about what is described as a “boring” Budget. Yes, if you like, you can take that as proof that the Darling-and-Mandelson approach to the public finances is less politically toxic, and a good degree more sensible, than the Balls-and-Brown approach.  But, to my mind, it

Darling’s nothing budget puts the ball in the Tories’ court

This year’s Budget was never going to win the election for Labour but it could have lost it. If the markets had reacted really badly to it, warnings about how Britain is in danger of going Greek would have suddenly gained traction. But Darling avoided that fate with a Budget that did little. Listening to it, it was clear that those inside Labour who argued that the strategic imperatives for this Budget had to be appearing credible and not risking an adverse market reaction had prevailed. The mood music was very different from the PBR, with its emphasis on investment versus cuts. Politically, the challenge for the Tories is this:

James Forsyth

Fiscal drag

It is good to see the Tories calling fiscal drag what it is, a tax rise by another name. Fiscal drag is a result of holding income tax thresholds steady while both prices and earnings are increasing. This means that more people have to pay more of their income in tax. Gordon Brown indulging in this ploy so often as Chancellor was one of the main reasons that the number of people paying the 40p rate pretty much doubled between 1997 and 2008. One other good thing about the Tory line on fiscal drag today, is that it will put pressure on them to raise personal allowances and income tax

Fraser Nelson

In defence of Alistair Darling

It’s unusual for Chancellors to stand with their wives on the steps of the Treasury on budget day, and to see the Darlings together this morning gives an indication of what they have been through. Brown doubtless thought him an automaton when he appointed him to the job – but I was wrong to say that he would be “no more a Chancellor than Captain Scarlett was an actor”. He has defied Brown, bringing moderation and much-needed dullness to the worst fiscal crisis in Britain’s peacetime history. In James’s political column last week he suggested that Darling calls his autobiography “the forces of hell” – that he would defy Brown

Darling, what about the deficit?

Alistair Darling was terribly proud of the Government’s record in his Budget speech today.  But he again dodged the question of how he’ll get the deficit under control.  Ruth Lea has called this his “do little” Budget. With the country still facing hundreds of billions in borrowing, the few billion being saved are virtually neglible.  There are huge downside risks for those borrowing forecasts as we get onto the more contentious growth projections from 2011-12 onwards, which are way above City expectations.  And everything will get much worse if borrowing costs rise – Mike Denham has explored the frightening possibilities in a blog for the TPA. We had a proud

James Forsyth

Another dangerous Quango in the offing

This government’s love of quangos reached new heights in today’s Budget when Darling announced the creation of a ‘credit adjudicator service’. This will allow companies who feel they have been unfairly denied credit by their bank to appeal the decision to the credit adjudicator service which will have the legal power to order the bank to lend the money.    The Treasury is quick to stress that businesses will have to have claims referred to the credit adjudicator service by their regional business body. But this quango, which will cost five million pounds a year to run, strikes me as a quite absurd attempt to second guess commercial lending decisions.

Fraser Nelson

A reassuringly dull budget

This was a surprisingly subdued Budget, and for that Alistair Darling is to be commended. He must have resisted all manner of pressure from Brown to put in pre-election pyrotechnics. But the budget was what it should be: a punctuation mark on the sentence of the national economy. That sentence says “our finances are going to hell,” and the Budget’s high point is that we are doing so fractionally slower than we were expecting to last November. Personally, I forgive Darling all the partisan stuff in his speech – this is a pre-election Budget after all. There is no act of wanton vandalism, like the 50p tax. Stamp duty on

Darling’s phoney Budget doesn’t change anything

Was that a Budget sufficient to the fiscal nightmare that we face?  Well, I think we all could have answered that question before Alistair Darling stood up at the dispatch box, but now we can at least be sure: no, it wasn’t.  The government’s overall spending plans remain roughly the same as they were in the PBR, there aren’t many tax increases to raise much money for the Treasury, and we’re meant to be all excited that borrowing is £11bn lower this year than previously forecast – at £167bn.  It’s a shame that Darling increased alcohol duty, or we’d all be be out celebrating that particular success, I’m sure. If

Lloyd Evans

Not the main event

Cameron was scarcely trying at PMQs today. Show up, look a bit cross, slip in a joke or two, then sit down and wait for the Budget. That was his plan. When the PM offered his congratulations on BabyCam, the opposition leader quoted a text he’d received – ‘How do you find time for these things?’ Making this wisecrack seemed more important to him than attacking the PM. His tactics were odd, out of touch, retrospective. He asked about Brown’s attempts to conceal the evidence that, as chancellor, he flogged the nation’s gold too cheaply and blew vast sums in potential profits. Brown’s bungling over the bullion billions should be

Spotting the Budget deceptions

There are, lest you need reminding, two levels of deception on Budget Day.  First, there’s the Chancellor’s Budget statement, which is pretty obviously spun to put the best light on things.  I refer you to when Brown triumphantly announced a 2p cut in the basic rate of income tax in his final Budget statement, while somehow forgetting to mention that the 10p rate has been abolished.  And then there’s a Budget document itself, in which much of the most revealing content is tucked away in appendices and footnotes.  Even straightforward spending figures are hard to come by in the Red Book. In which case, we’ll be doing our best to

Germany to the EU: no more integration

A Conservative Party article of faith has been the belief that other Europeans are innately more pro-EU than the British. In the past, this has undoubtedly been the case. Poll after poll has shown that Britons see the EU differently than most other Europeans. But as I have argued before, times are changing on the continent. In an article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (not a Europhile newspaper by any stretch), Germany’s new politics is explained. Nikolas Busse argues that the Greek crisis and failure of EU leaders to cobble together a plausible bail-out is the first major manifestation of Germany’s new role in Europe – that of a country

All quiet on the Westminster front

If there’s one thing distinguishing this morning, then it’s just how placid everything feels.  The clouds are moving sluggishly across the sky; there’s little excitement about the measures expected in the Budget; and there are no stories about rifts between the Prime Minister and the Chancellor.  Indeed, Downing St insiders tell the FT that relations between Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling have been “pretty good” in the run up to the Budget, because both are “broadly agreed on the strategy of halving the deficit in four years while backing growth initiatives.” Many are taking this as a sign that Darling and Peter Mandelson have won out in their efforts to

Closing the gap between state and independent education

I do hope that Oxford will finally be free from government claims of snobbery soon. We learn today that the proportion of state school pupils it admits has fallen from 55.4 percent to 53.9 percent – but, as the university says, this is in line with the (appallingly low) proportion of state school pupils achieving three As. The problem lies with the schools, not the universities, and it helps no one to pretend otherwise. Here’s one figure that you won’t read in the ongoing “Oxford snobbery” story: in 1969, only 38 per cent of Oxford’s places went to privately-educated children. Why? Because the private schools in those days were not

Darling’s Budget preview emphasises private sector-driven growth

Exactly what you want at the end of the working day: Alistair Darling’s video preview of the Budget.  I’ve watched it so that you don’t have to, and it’s striking just how much emphasis the Chancellor places on “unlocking private sector investment” to “ensure growth”.  There’s probably nothing in it, but it does make you wonder whether Labour have some secret business tax cut ready to spring tomorrow.  And, if so, how that sqaures with increasing the rates of tax on workers.  Anyway, here’s the video: