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
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
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.
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
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
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:
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
The growth figures for the third quarter of the year have just been released, and it’s better than we thought: 0.8 percent, twice the 0.4 percent figure that was expected, but down on the 1.2 percent achieved in the spring. In any case, it should play well for Osborne & Co. We’ve just witnessed the
A luminous streak of self-aggrandisement in Vince Cable’s speech to the CBI this afternoon, which began thus: “I should acknowledge that that the CBI has been remarkably far sighted; Digby Jones first invited me to speak to you eight years ago, the first Lib Dem asked to do so. I recall some members wondering ‘Vince
An opportunity to compare-and-contrast David Cameron and Ed Miliband outside the sweaty heat of PMQs, with both party leaders delivering speeches to the CBI this morning. Given the audience, both majored on business, enterprise, and all that – and it meant there was plenty of overlap on areas such as green technology and broadband. There
Since last week’s Spending Review – and even before – the government has been operating in a toxic news environment. I mean, just consider the three main news stories that have surrounded the cuts. First, the 500,000 public sector job losses. Then, the IFS report and that single, persistent word: “regressive”. And today – on
Plenty of attention for Nick Clegg’s listening, reading and smoking habits this morning, as well as his appearance on the Andrew Marr show. But it is another of Marr’s guests who has made perhaps the most important intervention of the day: the shadow work and pensions secretary, Douglas Alexander. Here’s how the Beeb website reports
As Benedict Brogan observes, the government’s renewed emphasis upon growth is hardly deafening – but it is certainly echoing through this morning’s newspaper coverage. Exhibit A is the Sunday Telegraph, which carries an article by David Cameron and an interview with Vince Cable – both of which sound all the same notes about enterprise, infrastructure,
Without warning, Tomas Alfredson jumps up and starts wading about the room like a water bird treading over lily pads. ‘There’s a famous sketch by a Swedish comedian,’ he explains by way of a voiceover, ‘in which he’s walking through a meadow of tall grass. He’s walking, struggling through this grass that reaches up above
One question swirling through the sea of British politics is this: how will Ed Miliband act towards the Lib Dems? The Labour leader certainly didn’t flinch from attacking the yellow brigade during the leadership contest, at one point calling them a “disgrace to the traditions of liberalism.” But surely he’ll have to soften that rhetoric
File this double shot from the Spectator archives in the folder marked ‘For historical interest’. Our leading article on the creation of the National Health Service in 1948, and an essay by Lord Moran from one week after: Health and security, The Spectator, 2 July, 1948 July 5th, 1948, will be a notable date in
It’s fast becoming a tradition: when the IFS calls the government’s work “regressive,” send for Nick Clegg to take the think tank on. He wrote an article for the FT debunking their analysis back in August. And, today, he does the same via an interview in the Guardian. It’s pretty forceful stuff from the Deputy
The second half of the IFS briefing was all about the distributional effect of the Spending Review. And you know what that means: decile charts – and lots and lots of them. As it happens, there were some areas of agreement between the IFS and the Treasury figures. Both, for instance, say that the welfare
Busy times indeed for the numbercrunchers and policy wonks. I’m at what is, in effect, the Institute for Fiscal Studies’ third post-Budget briefing of the year: one for Darling’s final Budget, one for the Emergency Budget and one, now, for the Spending Review. We’re half-way through, but we’ve already been served a hefty chunk of
Just as they did in the Budget, the coalition have produced a chart showing the impact of the Spending Review’s tax, spend and benefit measures on different income groups (see above). In many respects, this is a noble effort: it’s a good deal more transparency than Gordon Brown could ever manage in his Budgets. But
