George osborne

Thursday

David Blackburn

The Philpotts – what happened to Labour’s view that we should be tough on the causes of crime?

Several Labour MPs have expressed their disapproval of George Osborne’s comments about the taxpayer funding Mick Philpott’s lifestyle. For example, Andy McDonald, MP for Middlesbrough, said that welfare is a ‘completely separate discussion, it should not be had in the context of the most appalling crime of a father killing his six children. It just demonstrates how out of touch George Osborne is. He may as well make adverse comments about the entire population of a town or a religion, it’s absolute nonsense.’ The obvious problem with this is that Osborne acknowledged that they were separate issues. He said that the Philpotts’ crimes were their own responsibility, but their lifestyle, as

David Blackburn

George Osborne dips Mick Philpott into the welfare debate

The Chancellor of the Exchequer has just made a statement about Mick Philpott; the man convicted of the manslaughter of 6 of his children; the man who also lived off enormous benefit hand outs, banking the equivalent of £100,000 salary in benefits from various sources if reports are to be believed. George Osborne said: ‘There’s a question about the welfare state, and taxpayers who pay, subsidising lifestyles like that’ This is a careful statement. Osborne avoids the mistake of saying that the system created Philpott’s evil. In fact, he says nothing. He merely raises the question about a system that allowed Philpott to live as he did for so long at your expense. Asking

Matthew Parris Matthew Parris

Frontline Tories to Cameron: ‘We don’t want to look nasty and we don’t want to look mad.’

Just before Easter, writing for the Times, I talked to 30 of the 40 Conservative MPs with the most marginal constituencies. My aim was to get a sense of how they think their party should position itself. I explored their opinions on a range of vexed policy areas. Finally I asked whether David Cameron’s leadership was a help or hindrance. The broad conclusion was that most marginal MPs took a decidedly and sometimes passionately ‘softline’ position on most controversial issues, European ‘interference’ in domestic human rights questions offering the nearest thing to a hardline consensus. And all considered Mr Cameron a plus, though more weakly in the Midlands and North.

Wednesday

Tony Devenish

6 steps to out-fox local government’s Sir Humphreys

Shortly after the 2010 general election I attended an event where mandarins complained of ‘swingeing cuts’. Then one NHS boss admitted that he had so much cash sloshing around he was having trouble spending his multi-hundred million budget. Local government, which accounts for one quarter of government spending, has the same mindset. Despite the rhetoric of cuts, little has actually changed. I have watched Sir Humphrey Whitehall and local government (both as a private contractor and as a councillor), and each year we witness a rush before the financial year ends to spend money which, if cuts were actually deep, would not exist. Fraser Nelson spelt out this reality before

Tuesday

David Blackburn

George Osborne’s benefits speech – full text

George Osborne’s speech is below. As you will see, it is a bold defence of the government’s policies on tax and welfare, including the 50p rate cut. There was a clear moral tone to Osborne’s words, which may go some way to challenging the notion that he is an insubstantial political figure. It was, he implied, wrong to delay deficit reduction, wrong to penalise work, wrong to condemn people to poverty. There was bald politics too as he sought the votes of ‘hard-working families’. He attacked the ‘vested interests’ which were on the wrong side of the debate, goading them to carry on complaining and alienate themselves. This simple strategy has already

Jonathan Jones

Two versions of Osborne’s benefits speech

The Times’ Sam Coates picked up on a couple of discrepancies between the text of George Osborne’s Morrisons speech sent out by CCHQ, and the one published by the Treasury. Here’s the CCHQ text: ‘In 2010 alone, payments to working age families cost £75 billion. That means about one in every seven pounds of tax that working people like you pay was going on working age benefits.’ But the Treasury version reads: ‘In 2010 alone, payments to working age families cost £90 billion. That means about one in every six pounds of tax that working people like you pay was going on working age benefits.’ Osborne actually delivered the Treasury

David Blackburn

George Osborne launches welfare counter-attack

The petition to get Iain Duncan Smith to live on £53/week has amassed more than 122,000 signatures. And counting, quickly. The petition was inspired by IDS remarking, on yesterday’s Today programme, that he could live on such a welfare settlement. The secretary of state could not have said anything else; yet these incidents always create media firestorms. The IDS blaze still burns this morning; but that may not unnerve the government: from its perspective, news bulletins devoted to IDS’ gait are preferable to those devoted to the vulnerable. After a gruelling, though not unsuccessful, 24 hours warring over welfare cuts, the government is mounting a flanking counter-attack. A scattering of economic

Monday

David Blackburn

Osborne and IDS promise a ‘better deal’ for working families. But a better deal is not necessarily a good deal

As Fraser says, the welfare changes, cuts to legal aid and so forth, which have come into force today, have got a universal thumbs-down in the left-wing press. I expect that the barrage of negative headlines will please No.10 (you cannot make an omelette etc.). It also has the comfort of knowing that the public is broadly in favour of reform. But the government might be disgruntled at the comparatively muted reaction of the right-wing press. The Telegraph’s coverage is intriguing. It concentrates on the Tories’ clash with the church over benefit cuts, which was mentioned by Christian Guy in a post yesterday. There is also some coverage of Grant Shapps’s attempt

Sunday

James Forsyth

George Osborne won’t be moved

Today’s Sunday Telegraph front page has sparked off a flutter of speculation about whether George Osborne might be moved as Chancellor. I suspect that the short answer to this question is no. Osborne and Cameron are inextricably linked and to move him would be akin to the Prime Minister declaring that both his political and economic strategies have been wrong. He would not long survive such an admission. I also sense that Osborne’s stock in the parliamentary party is recovering from the battering it took with last year’s Budget. The fact that this year’s Budget was doorstep-ready, has survived the Labour and media onslaught and gone down relatively well with

Friday

Jonathan Jones

Budget 2013: The public’s verdict

We’ve got the first post-Budget polling from YouGov, and it brings mixed news for George Osborne. Certainly, this Budget doesn’t seem (so far) to have dented the Chancellor’s reputation the way last year’s did — but nor has it yet enhanced it as his 2011 Budget seemed to. And on the question of which would make the better Chancellor, Osborne maintains the six-point lead over Ed Balls he has held since November 2011. And on the all-important criterion of ‘fairness’, Wednesday’s Budget scores relatively well. 39 per cent think it’s fair, while 31 per cent say it isn’t. That’s a big improvement on last year, when 32 per cent said

Isabel Hardman Isabel Hardman

Why Scary Graphs help the Tory plotters

Without wanting to dwell too much on those Scary Graphs from the IFS yesterday, there’s one political point that’s worth mulling about the ones that charted the future of departmental spending. George Osborne knows that his ‘pain tomorrow’ approach means the years after 2015 are going to see even more cuts to public spending. He’s not the only one: it’s something that those Tory MPs who love a good plot believe is a key selling point for backbenchers who aren’t involved in the Coalition in any way, such as Adam Afriyie. One plotter told me recently that the trick would be for a post-2015 Tory majority or second-term Lib-Con coalition

Thursday

The Spectator

The empty Budget

Dangerous, unfair, verging on kleptomania: the bailout deal proposed by the EU at the weekend and rejected by Cyprus MPs on Tuesday is everything it has been described as over the past few days, and worse. Now it has been established that the EU views bank depositors as a potential piggy bank to be raided at whim, it is hard to see why anyone would keep significant quantities of cash on deposit in European banks. We are back where we started in 2007, with the threat of Northern Rock-style bank runs across the Continent. Yet the proposed raid in Cyprus is really only different in perception from what is being

Isabel Hardman Isabel Hardman

IFS: Osborne’s austerity means more pain, not jam, tomorrow

George Osborne’s critics like to deride him as the ‘jam tomorrow’ Chancellor. But according to the post-Budget briefing the Institute for Fiscal Studies gave this afternoon, he’s the ‘pain tomorrow’ Chancellor instead. It’s not that things really aren’t getting better, but that the bulk of the pain in terms of spending cuts and tax rises isn’t just not over, it’s not even here yet. The IFS team gave a series of presentations (in case you hadn’t sunk into a pit of misery after Fraser’s six scary graphs yesterday) showing that yesterday’s Budget will lead to big tax increases and spending cuts from 2016 onwards. Paul Johnson, IFS director, said there

Rod Liddle Rod Liddle

Just cutting spending isn’t enough. Osborne needs to invest as well

Economic growth for the next year is predicted to be lower than 1.0%. I can’t think, offhand, or a more obvious indication that the Chancellor is gripped by some sort of weird paralysis which will result, for the rest of us, in continually declining standards of living. I have no great objection to many of the cuts he has made; and believe, à la Dr Fox, that he could be still more stringent. However, he should also be investing heavily in stuff which will see our economy grow – science, engineering, what used to be called ‘public works’. Simply cutting spending will not promote growth. Simply investing in the productive parts

James Forsyth James Forsyth

For once, Osborne will be glad not to be the story

A few years ago George Osborne would have bristled at the idea that one of his budgets wouldn’t be the biggest event of the political week. His ability to conjure rabbits out of hats had already prevented electoral defeat for the Tories once (his 2007 inheritance tax pledge, now consigned to history, scared Gordon Brown out of calling an election he would have won). But this week a low-key Budget was just what Osborne wanted — and delivered. One imagines, though, that he can’t be happy with the careless way that Downing Street managed to alienate almost the entire press just 72 hours before he got up to deliver it.

Wednesday

Isabel Hardman

Osborne’s pitch to Sun-reading voters caught up in Leveson row

If this was a Budget for Sun readers, then it hasn’t quite worked out as well as George Osborne might have hoped. The newspaper sounded pretty cheery this morning with its story about the beer duty escalator. But here’s the front page for tomorrow’s edition: Now, this is clearly as much about Leveson and the newspaper’s industry disgust that it wasn’t consulted when the lobbying group Hacked Off was invited to the late night negotiations as it is about the measures announced today. But there’s also the point that Fraser makes tirelessly on this blog that politicians like to be lazy at best when it comes to talking about debt

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The Budget puts petrol in the Tories’ political tank

For the opening half of George Osborne’s Budget speech, the Labour front bench was busy waving around copies of the Evening Standard’s front page. This was visibly putting Osborne off; he wouldn’t be human if the fear that another of his Budgets was going to be dashed on the media rocks hadn’t crossed his mind. But by the time he sat down, the storm over the Standard front had died down thanks to a quick and dignified apology from the paper itself. Osborne will also have been pleased by the cheers of his own side as he returned to his seat. For all the speculation got up by the irreconcilables,

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Budget 2013: Osborne’s empty budget

This was, as I suspected, an empty budget. There was the usual whale spray of policies: a penny off beer duty here, petrol tax reduced there. Nowadays, we don’t have to wonder if the Budget will make a blind bit of difference: the Office for Budget Responsibility sees the figures in advance and does the sums. It concludes that the Budget will have ‘no impact on level of GDP at the end of the forecast horizon’. To Osborne’s credit, he didn’t try to spin this. The recovery has stalled and he has run out of ideas about how to start it again. It’s difficult to put a gloss on this

Isabel Hardman Isabel Hardman

Budget 2013: It’s all about the ‘aspiration nation’

So did he do it? This was a budget with a strong narrative about the ‘aspiration nation’, and the Chancellor certainly did everything he could to nod to two of those three groups that James identified last week. He had two distinct sections on making Britain competitive in the global race and tackling the cost of living, while dismissing ‘those who would want to cut much more than we are planning to – and chase the debt target’. The cost of living section was a careful attempt to please Sun readers who had been so irritated by last year’s Budget. And Osborne also took care to spell out the tangible

The Spectator

Budget 2013: George Osborne’s statement in full

Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a Budget for people who aspire to work hard and get on. It’s a Budget for people who realise there are no easy answers to problems built up over many years. Just the painstaking work of putting right what went so badly wrong. And together with the British people we are, slowly but surely, fixing our country’s economic problems. We’ve now cut the deficit not by a quarter, but by a third. We’ve helped business create not a million new jobs, but one and a quarter million new jobs. We’ve kept interest rates at record lows. But Mr Deputy Speaker, despite the progress we’ve made,