Brexit

The Daily Mail calls those who ‘heaped adulation’ on Fidel Castro over the weekend - including the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell - ‘useful idiots’. The paper says after Castro’s death on Saturday, the Cuban leader's supporters are ignoring the 'poverty he inflicted on his people' as well as his torturing of political opponents and the fact that he ‘failed his people abysmally’. So why, the Mail asks, do those like the Labour leader have such a different view of the former Cuban leader? The paper suggests in its editorial that there is a simple answer: ‘Messrs Corbyn, McDonnell and Co have never grown up since their student days’. Meanwhile, the Mail also takes a pop at Mark Carney.

In the autumn statement, Philip Hammond chose to mock Boris’ failed leadership bid. This wasn’t the first time that one of the Foreign Secretary Cabinet’s colleagues had had a laugh at his expense. At our parliamentarian of the year awards, Theresa May joked that Boris would be put down when he was no longer useful. But Boris and his circle are getting rather fed up with him being the butt of the joke, as I say in The Sun today. Those close to Boris feel that these gibes undercut him on the world stage. 'If they want the UK to be taken seriously, they need to back him not mock him’ one close ally of his tells me.

Facebook and Barack Obama have said they both want to tackle ‘fake news’ on the internet. The battle should start with government economic forecasts. Does anyone really believe the figures for economic growth up to 2020 made by the Office for Budgetary Responsibility (OBR) and pumped out by Philip Hammond in his Autumn Statement? Growth for next year, claims the OBR, will be 1.4 per cent, down from 2.2 per cent. In 2018 it will be 1.7 per cent, followed by 2.1 per cent in 2019 and 2020 and two per cent in 2021. How very precise. And how utterly improbable. What is the point in making these forecasts when they have proved so wide of the mark in the past? A year ago, the OBR forecast growth in 2016 at 2.4 per cent.

Theresa May’s decision to row back on her pledge to put workers on company boards receives a mixed reception in the papers today. The Sun and the FT are among those to say it’s good that the PM has opted to change her mind. But the Guardian isn’t happy: calling the PM’s u-turn a ‘betrayal’. Here’s what the newspaper editorials are saying this morning: The Sun heaps praise on Theresa May for her change in thinking about making companies have representatives of workers on their boards - a move it describes as ‘hasty and aggressive’. It says the PM is right to back down from an idea that would have been a ‘godsend only to the unions’.

There were two items on BBC radio this morning which rather summed up the Corporation thinking about the State of the World. One was a brief but telling discussion on the Broadcasting House programme as to whether our political discussion now is getting to the point where we can’t actually air differences at all;  that, after Brexit and the Trump election, we are so utterly divided ideologically that common ground is impossible to find. It was an interesting conversation between Catherine Mayer, the co-founder of the Women’s Equality Party, and Iain Martin, who, while a Brexiteer, is also opposed to Trump.

Normally, the Saturday before an autumn statement would be dominated by speculation about what is in it. But, as I say in The Sun today, both Number 10 and the Treasury are emphasising that while there’ll be important things on productivity, infrastructure and fiscal rules in Wednesday’s statement, there’ll be no rabbits out of hats. Partly, this is because of  Philip Hammond’s personality: he’s not a political showman. But it is also because he’s not got much room for manoeuvre.  As he has emphasised to Cabinet colleagues, the growth forecasts might not be dramatically lower than they were in March, but cumulatively they have a big effect—limiting what the government can spend.

Here are some statistics you're unlikely to hear on Thought for the Day. Churchgoers in America backed Trump by 56 to 42 per cent – while six out of ten British Christians backed Brexit. Now, clearly these aren't identical constituencies: I didn't spot much enthusiasm for the US president-elect among Christian Leave voters. But we can spot one shared trend. Churchgoers on both sides of the Atlantic ignored the earnest but quietly hysterical entreaties of liberal church leaders to spurn Leave and Trump. (You might say: American evangelicals don't have left-leaning bishops – but American Catholics most certainly do, and they still voted for Donald Trump by 52 to 45 per cent.) What a nightmare for liberal clergy!