Economy

In the last few months, there’s been a distinct change in the attitude of the Tories at the heart of government. They are now far more cognisant of just how difficult it is to drive change through the government machine. It is no longer just Steve Hilton and Michael Gove complaining about this, but Osborne and Cameron too. The Chancellor’s particular frustration at the moment is over the pace of planning reform. Osborne and his brains trust believe that simplifying the planning rules is one of the things that they could do to both give the economy a short term stimulus, by encouraging more construction, and improve its long term

In today’s Telegraph, I profile Rupert Harrison, chief economic adviser to George Osborne and the man who’ll do more than anything else (including his boss) to shape next week’s Budget. In the British political system, special advisers are given very little attention — even though the best of them are more influential than the average Cabinet member. The Treasury’s vast power, assembled by Brown, is still there. That can’t be said for Osborne: he spends half his time in Downing St, and is sufficiently detached from the Budget process that he felt able to take a couple of days’ holiday in America last week to jump in the motorcade and

You’d think the American sub-prime crisis would have taught politicians the world over not to try to rig the housing market. But no, David Cameron is back on it today — about how to ‘unblock’ the system so the debt geyser starts to gush again. ‘The problem today is that you have lenders who aren’t lending, so builders can’t build and buyers can’t buy,’ says the Prime Minister. ‘It needs the government to step in, and help unblock the market.’ The idea that lenders may not lend because they feel the housing market may fall, and people may be unable to repay, is instantly dismissed. He speaks as if debt

Have you noticed, CoffeeHousers, that our politicians are talking more and more about what they’d do after the next election? This has been happening, really, since last November, when George Osborne extended the forecasting horizon of his Budget to 2017. That had a hint of chicanery about it, ensuring that Osborne continued to meet his first fiscal rule — but it has still triggered a fashion for future gazing. Since then, both Labour and the Lib Dems have talked, in broad terms, about what they would offer for after 2015. I mention this now because of a story in today’s Sunday Times (£). Osborne, apparently, is going to signal a

At the end of last year, Ed Balls suggested that Labour would be ‘taking a tougher approach to conditionality [for benefit claimants]. If people can work, they should work.’ Now the party are starting to outline what that means. As the Independent puts it today, summarising a speech that Liam Byrne has given in Birmingham, ‘The unemployed would be guaranteed the offer of a job but could lose their benefits for six months if they turned it down, under a tough new policy on welfare planned by Labour.’ The paper characterises this as an attempt to ‘outflank the Tories on welfare,’ which is surely true. But the whole thing also

In a speech tonight, George Osborne calls on businesses to respond en masse to the government’s consultation on whether to exempt small businesses from unfair dismissal claims. The Chancellor will say: ‘And now we’re beginning a call for evidence on the case for a new compensated no-fault dismissal for our smallest businesses. Plenty of trade unions and others will be submitting their evidence for why we shouldn’t do this. If you think we should, and it will increase employment, then don’t wait for someone else to send in the evidence. Send it in yourself.’ The fact that Osborne is personally throwing his weight behind the Beecroft agenda is striking. It