Gordon brown

When Alistair Daring admitted last week that there would indeed be job losses arising from the proposed National Insurance hike, it would have struck Gordon Brown and Ed Balls like root canal surgery. This blows wide open the main part of Brown’s election deceit: asking the public to look at the advantages of the borrowing, and not contemplate the flip side to the debt coin. Not to ask where the repayments will come from, or the impact of those repayments on the jobs of the future. No wonder Darling is today being made to claim the opposite. The grim truth is that every job “protected” now, due to debt, will

Oh dear.  Today’s frontpages form the most eclectic set of damaging headlines for Labour for quite some time.  On the front of the Mail and the Times: allegations that the government – specifically, Ed Balls – “interfered” with a report on the Baby P tragedy.  On the Independent: a claim that Brown “misled” the public over waiving VAT on a charity single for Haiti.  And on the Telegraph: news that more business leaders have backed the Tories’ national insurance policy.  Even the Guardian wades in with the headline: “Labour and business fall out”. Of these, the first story is potentially the biggest scandal.  But it’s the latter two which more

It took a while, but I spotted Labour’s April Fool trick: an attack document on the Tory economic agenda. It looks real at first, but when you go through it the con becomes transparent. APRIL FOOL ONE: “The Conservative Party wants to face two ways at this election, promising extra tax cuts and spending commitments while at the same time claiming they would reduce the deficit further and faster than Labour’s plan to halve it in four years.” REALITY: Labour pretends to be unaware of the basic economic concept that if you have a lower tax rate, business grows faster – generating more revenues. There is such a thing as

Michael Scholar: hero. The newish head of the UK statistics authority is finally coming to the aid of the statistics nerds who have been protesting that Gordon Brown makes things up. Normally, the ONS do not censure Mr Brown when he misrepresents their data: that’s not their job. But as head of the Statistics Authority, Sir Michael has – wonderfully, inspirationally – written an open letter to the Prime Minister telling him not to lie. Well, not quite in so few words, but this is the plain implication. What is significant is that Sir Michael is using his job to protect  the integrity of statistics in Britain. One of my

Yep, you guessed right: Tony Blair was doing his bit for the Labour cause this morning, with a speech in his old constituency.  In truth, there was little in it of any note – or that we haven’t heard countless times from his successor.  Thus the Tories were derided as either the “old Tory party,” or as confused about their direction of travel.  Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling were hailed as the men who brought us through the worst of the economic storm.  And even the soundbites (“meeting not just future challenges, but seizing future opportunities”) sounded as if they had come from straight from the Brownite copybook.  Perhaps the

Gordon Brown and David Cameron have just been facing each other in the Commons chamber. Brown was notionally reporting back on the European summit meeting, but in relaity Brown and Cameron were setting the stage for the Chancellor’s debate tonight. Cameron claimed that there was a new dividing line in British politics, the Tories for ‘efficency and aspiration’ and Labour for ‘waste and taxes.’ Brown claimed that the Tories were indulging in panic measures and that their plans announced today would ‘withdraw the support that is necessary for the economy to have a sustained recovery.’ Brown might have some Keynesian economists on his side when he says this. But it

Public sector net borrowing, public sector net debt, total managed expenditure, departmental expenditure limits … zzzzz.  One of the main reasons why Labour has been able to fashion an economic narrative, against all odds, is because they can rely on some pretty esoteric language.  Thus debt becomes interchangeable with deficit, and cuts can be hidden under layers and layers of different spending metrics.  Perhaps more than anything, this almost-casual deception is Brown’s greatest skill. Which is why it’s encouraging that the Tories have tried to demystify some of the fiscal debate, putting it into language that everyone can follow.  They’ve set out their “more for less” argument by referring to

After reading Brown’s claims in the Guardian today, this Kill A Minister mechanism in his speech today rather jumped out at me: “I will set out a clear and public annual contract for each new Cabinet Minister, detailing what I expect them and their department to deliver to the British people, and that their continued appointment is dependent on their delivery just as it would be in a business or any other organisation.” I mean, you can just imagine what Alistair Darling’s first “contract” would look like: You, the Chancellor, will undertake to deliver the following to the British people: i) Economic growth of 5 percent in 2010-11 ii) A