Uk politics

Why ministers block cuts

After Michael Fallon’s claim last week that the shadow cabinet hasn’t got “the faintest idea” of the commitment necessary to tackle the debt crisis, this anecdote from Benedict Brogan’s column should act as another warning to David Cameron: “Whitehall is gripped by short-termism, yet in a world dominated by the targets culture introduced by Labour, is this any surprise? When ministers themselves prioritise short-term results that can be ready for the Six O’Clock News or the autumn conference, how can the Civil Service hold out for the long view? Take the permanent secretary I know who was asked by Gordon Brown to deliver a 5 per cent real terms cut

In defence of Hank Paulson, by Hank Paulson

Did Bush or Paulson have a clue what they were doing? It’s an intriguing question. James flagged up the view of Bush’s speechwriter Matt Latimer that Paulson, not Bush, was to blame. But, in this month’s Vanity Fair, Todd.S. Purdum flips the coin. Based on interviews with Paulson, conducted as the bailout unfolded, the article’s a brilliant piece of long-form journalism: describing the chicanery on Capitol Hill as Paulson, Tim Geithner and Ben Bernancke sought desperately for a deal with Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank. Paulson was in no doubt that Congressional Republicans were responsible for the foul up. At the height of the crisis he told Purdum: “Republicans,

Clegg: Are you one of the millions who turned to new Labour in 1997?

Nick Clegg joins the ‘progressive’ debate with a double of salvo in The Times and in a pamphlet, titled ‘The liberal moment’, published by Demos. The philosophically anachronistic Labour party is his target. He writes: ‘The contrast between Labour and liberals is starkest in their different approaches to power. While Labour hoards at the centre, liberals believe that power must be dispersed away from government – downwards to individuals and communities, and upwards to the international institutions needed to tackle our collective problems. State-centered, top-down solutions are wholly out of step with the demands of our age. Devising a fairer tax system, protecting civil liberties, reforming our clapped-out politics, breaking

All political parties must face up to the debt crisis’ severity 

The Independent’s Hamish McRae writes a superb column today on just how far the next government will have to go to tackle Brown’s debt crisis.  His main point is that unless severe action is taken over the coming years, we’ll be stuck in a perilous position by the time the next global downturn hits.  But it’s this passage which stands out: “To what extent will the deficit fix itself, and how much more needs to be done? We don’t have to do the full 13 per cent of GDP and the present government proposed in the Budget that it should cut about half, 6.4 per cent of GDP, of that

James Forsyth

Losing perspective 

At The Spectator, we’ve been so close to the spending debate that one worries about losing perspective. But this post from Faisal Islam gives one a sense of just how important today’s revelations are: “We have never seen this level of detail on a budget situation before. Much of what was implied or left out of the budget is stated in astonishing detail here. It is a total disaster for the treasury and the government, but some will argue the Tories have taken a big risk with financial confidence in publishing it.”

The Tories’ Treasury mole exposes Labour’s cuts deception

On July 2nd, Gordon Brown told the House of Commons: “I have always told the truth and I’ve always told people as it is…we don’t want to have the 10 per cent cuts the Conservatives are talking about.” The Tories’ extremely destructive Treasury mole has leaked documents proving that Labour has been planning substantial cuts in front line services since before the budget. The DEL figures, printed below, are key: suggesting that a cumulative 9.3% cut was planned for 2011-2014, and Paul Waugh is right to point out that these revelations may explain why the government delayed its comprehensive spending review. This leak is such a coup for the Tories

Europe rears its head once again for the Tories

One of David Cameron’s chief successes has been to marginalise Europe as an issue. But the expulsion of Edward McMillan-Scott MEP from the Conservative party, for refusing to withdraw allegations he made against Michal Kaminski, the leader of the controversial Eurosceptic grouping of which the Tories are members, has disinterred the fractious European problem. The Europhile McMillan-Scott launched a pointed attack on the Tory leadership and its European policy on this morning’s Today programme. He said: “I think David Cameron has got most things right on Europe, but this partnership (the grouping) matters…What we will see is the party becoming much more Eurosceptic than it seems now. If all European

Matthew Parris

A woman apart

Anticipate the demise of Gordon Brown. Imagine Labour’s search for a leader with voter-appeal. Picture a younger Shirley Williams, but with the experience and affection she already commands. Wouldn’t she be a powerful contender? Couldn’t a new Shirley Williams, updated for the 21st century and reinserted into the Labour Party, give the rest a run for their money? Lady Williams’s style of politics has weathered better than that of any of her erstwhile Labour contemporaries. She’s just the sort of thing they need. Climbing the Bookshelves is the story of the woman who forsook all that, and what made her. The story of what made her is much the more

A sneak preview of the election campaign

One of the features of the coming general election campaign is going to be the use of video attacks ads by outside groups. The idea is that a sufficiently well-produced or controversial one will be able to drive the news agenda and, rather like Dan Hannan’s European Parliament speech, become a story in and of itself. Conservative Home’s response to Gordon Brown’s use of the word ‘cuts’ today is a preview of the kind of thing we can expect come the spring.

Brown missed a trick by not deploying the ‘c-word’ earlier

Six months after a Politics Home/Spectator poll illustrated that ‘cuts’ was no longer a dirty word, Gordon Brown squared up and let slip the c-word. A new Politics Home ‘insider poll’ reveals that 86% of respondents believe Labour would be in a stronger position now if they had admitted the need for future cuts at the time of the Budget. That is almost certainly true: the obvious contrivance that was ‘Tory cuts versus Labour investment’, together with the invention of 0% rise economics, torpedoed the government’s credibility. That said, the majority of Labour’s spending cuts will be delayed until we start enjoying the ‘proceeds of growth’ once more – a

Cable: no budget should be ring-fenced

Vince Cable has joined the cuts debate, arguing that the “time for generalities is over” and that “politicians must not shy away from explaining in detail how they will tackle the problem of deficits and debt”. He identified 9 areas for specific savings: public sector pay and pensions, centralised education, family tax credits, defence procurement, quangos, asset sales, ID cards and the NHS super computer. Crucially, he stated that no department should be “ring-fenced”, and proposed cutting fees paid to hospitals and scrapping the strategic health authority, a move backed by Michael Fallon in a Telegraph article last week. Indeed, it’s striking how much common ground there is between the

James Forsyth

Osborne: Tories will hold emergency Budget if they win the election

George Osborne has just announced at The Spectator’s inaugural conference, Paths to Prosperity, that there will be an emergency Budget in June or July of 2010 if the Tories win the election. Osborne told Andrew Neil that the aim of this Budget would be to reduce borrowing for fiscal year 2010-11, which will already be under way at that point, and for the years thereafter. Presumably this will be done through a combination of tax rises, spending cuts and asset sales.

James Forsyth

Ouch | 15 September 2009

From the write up in The Times of the latest Populus poll: “Almost half of voters think that anyone would do a better job than Gordon Brown as Labour leader. Nine months at most from a general election, a Populus poll for The Times suggests that 48 per cent of voters believe that “literally anyone” from Labour’s ranks could do better, without naming alternatives.”  

The irrefutable fact about cuts is that they are needed now

I did Lord Myners a disservice by suggesting he’d gone off message by saying that spending would continue until recovery was “firmly rooted”. Peter Mandelson’s cuts speech yesterday supported that line, renewing the cuts versus investment dividing line. Steve Richards argues that the government’s approach is correct and Tory policy is a recipe for disaster. He writes: ‘He (Cameron) is now pledged to a revolutionary shrinking of the state without being able to specify how he will go about making the big changes. His speech last week about cutting the subsidies on meals in parliament was beyond parody. Yesterday Mandelson made use of the space that has opened up in

This’ll be worth watching

The Daily Telegraph reports today that Cherie Blair will campaign for Gordon Brown at the next election. She told Tim Walker that “I will personally get involved in the electoral campaign”. The idea of Cherie campaigning for Gordon is rather comic. Relations between the two were famously tense. At Tony Blair’s last conference as Labour leader, Cherie was heard to say ‘that’s a lie’ when Brown said how much of a privilege he had found it to work with Tony. As Tony Blair quipped in his speech, he never had to worry about Cherie “running off with the bloke next door”. Personally, I’m intrigued by how much campaigning the other

Quote of the day | 14 September 2009

…comes courtesy of one Gordon Brown, in interview with Robert Peston: “Well, I’ve never been someone who myself has been interested in running up personal debts or borrowing huge amounts of money.” Ahem.

On a scale of 0-5, how much does this look like leadership positioning?

Scoopmeister Paul Waugh has a cracking developing story over at his blog.  He revealed earlier that Harriet Harman’s people have been canvassing Labour party members with questions like: “Who do you think is the best person to sell the Labour party?” “On a scale of 0 to 5, how do you rate Harriet Harman?” But, now, it turns out that there was another question on the list: “On a scale of 0 to 5, how do you rate Gordon Brown?” Smells fishy, doesn’t it?  Team Harman are claiming that she’s just trying to keep in touch with the Labour grassroots, but it’s very difficult not to see this as leadership

Blairites and the Left are on an inevitable collision course

I suspect that union leaders have always believed that they ought to drive the Labour party’s agenda. But now, after a year of economic misery and electoral disasters for the centre-left party leadership, the old left’s confidence is back and ought implies can. In a blatant assault on Blairism, rabble-rouser-in-chief Derek Simpson branded Peter Mandelson, David Miliband and James Purnell as “thick” and “Tories”. I can’t imagine Arthur Scargill, even when completely carried away, denouncing Roy Jenkins or David Owen in such terms, and it speaks volumes about the unions’ expectations of an imminent lurch to the left. Alistair Campbell has attempted to pooh-pooh Simpson’s provocation. He wrote on his