George osborne

Growth plans are a high growth industry — with every day bringing yet another set of ideas, from one quarter or another, for how the government can fix the economy. And one suggestion pops up quite frequently in all these plans: bring forward spending on infrastructure. This is often presented as a simple thing to do, with few (if any) downsides. But how realistic is this? We know that infrastructure is important for growth. Economic texts generally suggest that the ‘multiplier effect’ (when government spending leads to more private spending later on) from is higher for infrastructure spending than for spending in other areas, such as health and welfare. We

Yesterday, Fraser wrote that ‘reporting of European issues tends to ignore public opinion’. Today, Philip Stephens has neatly illustrated Fraser’s point in his Financial Times column. Musing on Britain’s possible exit from the European Union, Stephens writes: ‘I am not sure this is what the prime minister intends; nor, when it comes to it, that British voters will accept such an outcome.’ Stephens’ conjecture ignores the European Union’s own polling, which, as Fraser says, shows most Britons to be hostile to the EU. That said, Stephens’ article is substantial. He argues that ‘fiscal union carries its own remorseless logic: the progressive exclusion of Britain from Europe’s economic decision-making’. The magnitude of George

The expected triumph of the centre-right Popular Party in today’s Spanish elections promises to have some interesting consequences for British politics. The PP have been in close touch with the Tories here and plan to introduce an emergency budget based on the Osborne model: a clear deficit reduction plan combined with an increase in the retirement age. They hope that this will reduce the ever-upwards pressure on Spanish bond yields. Certainly, if the PP approach does succeed in gaining Spain credibility with the bond markets, it will bolster the coalition’s arguments about the importance of sticking to Plan A. As Matt d’Ancona argues in The Sunday Telegraph, the Tory argument

After the Conservative Party Conference, Fraser described this statement in George Osborne’s speech as the Osborne Doctrine: ‘Let’s at the very least resolve that we’re going to cut our carbon emissions no slower but also no faster than our fellow countries in Europe.’ The Government’s current climate policy clearly fails that test, as I set out for this site at the time, and there is no more egregious violation than the carbon floor price. It is one of those policies that can sound reasonable in theory: the EU Emissions Trading System creates a carbon market. That market produces a carbon price that is supposed to encourage business to invest in

David Cameron summoned all Tory special advisers to Downing Street for a meeting this afternoon. He wanted, I understand, to warn them that too much of the coalition’s internal workings were being briefed out to journalists. He made it clear that he wants an end to process stories appearing in the papers.   Downing Street has been infuriated by recent reports of tensions between Steve Hilton, Cameron’s senior adviser, and George Osborne and is keen to stamp on anything that keeps this — rather misleading — story going. There are also worries about the party being seen as divided again, a return to the old Tory wars stories of the

You know, having read through Douglas Alexander’s Guardian article a couple of times now, and listened to his appearance on the Today programme earlier, I’m still not sure how Labour’s new stance towards Europe is particularly different from the official Tory one. The shadow foreign secretary tries to suggest that Dave and George’s position is reckless — ‘they seem worryingly complacent about the prospect of a two-speed Europe’ — but he goes on to echo much of it himself. And so, he suggests, ‘We should engage now with the fact that Germany is seeking treaty change and seize this opportunity to safeguard the rights of non-euro members.’ And we read elsewhere

Nick Clegg’s interview in The Times today presages a major Lib Dem effort to try and promote policies to reduce youth unemployment. With figures out on Wednesday expected to show youth unemployment going over a million, the Lib Dem leader is keen to show that the government is acting. But as The Times reports, the quad—Cameron, Osborne, Clegg and Alexander—are divided on what to do about the matter. The Tories are keen to do Beecroft for young people, removing some of the employment protections that make firms so reluctant to hire new staff. But given how the Lib Dems have set themselves so firmly against the Beecroft review and its principal

The Bond Bubble is growing even larger over Britain, pushing 10-year yields down to 2.1 per cent. The FT splashes on it this morning, and uses the “safe haven” line, which is also being advocated by the Conservatives. Understandably. If I were George Osborne, I’d spin this as a standing ovation from the markets for my deficit reduction plan. In fact, it’s just a grim reflection of the fact that Britain’s low-growth, high-debt economy is less unattractive than Italy’s. But it does have another side effect, that people won’t quite admit to. Osborne’s cost of borrowing is going down (partly due to expectations of more QE) and since the Budget,

George Osborne’s attack on the European Commission and his fellow finance ministers, for wasting time talking about a financial transactions tax when it is not going to happen, is quite a significant moment. It marks an attempt by Britain to knock this idea, which would hit this country far harder than anywhere else in Europe, off the agenda.   The Treasury, the Foreign Office and Number 10 have become increasingly exasperated about how this issue keeps coming up again and again. This feeling has been intensified by the fact that this issue is being discussed even as the crisis in the Eurozone is worsening by the hour.   Osborne’s remarks