Economy

No Labour bounce, no drop in approval for Cameron or his government. That's the impact that two weeks of front pages dominated by the phone hacking scandal on the opinion polls:  Ed Miliband's numbers have improved, which will come as some relief to the Labour leader who suffered a terrible month of polls in June. But despite a 13 point jump in the last fortnight, his net approval rating has only recovered to where it was six weeks ago, and that was hardly a rosy position. Certainly, Ed's response to the scandal seems to have reflected well on him. 49 per cent of the public think he's handled the affair well, compared to 36 and 33 for Cameron and Clegg respectively. Perhaps most strikingly, even Tory supporters think he's done well, by 44 per cent to 35.

The UK government is becoming increasingly concerned about the situation in the eurozone and the fact that there does not appear to be the political will to address it. One government source complained to me earlier today that "unless they get their act together the eurozone are in danger of fiddling while Rome burns." Tonight, in a major departure from Britain’s previous softly-softly approach to the issue, George Osborne is issuing a statement calling on the eurozone countries to take "decisive action" to "prevent market uncertainty doing real damage to the world economy." The Chancellor calls on eurozone countries to: "...

Chris Huhne was on the Andrew Marr show this morning. As you might expect on a day when the Sunday Telegraph broke the news that fuel bills will boom by 30 per cent as a result of green taxes, the Energy Secretary was asked to ruminate at length on all matters Murdoch. Eventually, though, Huhne had to answer searching questions pertaining to his brief. Confronted with the Sunday Telegraph’s story, Huhne described it as ‘nonsense’ because it did not take potential savings into account. Huhne also pledged to introduce more competition to shatter the grip that the ‘Big Six’ utility companies have on 90 per cent of the UK's energy market. Greater competition should, theoretically, lower bills.

If you strain your ears, and listen very carefully above the din of the phone hacking scandal, then you may just hear Nick Clegg's voice wafting across the Channel from Paris. Our Deputy Prime Minister is on the Continent today, delivering a speech that, in other circumstances, might have made more of a splash. This is, after all, a speech in which he stands up for the eurozone, and chastises those eurospectics — some of them within the coalition parties — who are eagerly anticipating its collapse. Or as he puts it himself: "A successful eurozone is essential for a prosperous UK. So there is no room for Schadenfreude here, no place for wagging fingers.

One of the things about the press that politicians frequently complain about is that papers concentrate more on personalities than policies. But reading the latest extracts from Alastair Campbell’s diaries you see just how much personality matters. Indeed, according to Campbell, Tony Blair excluded Gordon Brown from a discussion about what to do after 9/11 not because of any difference about how to respond but because he had become fed up with how difficult Brown was to deal with on a personal level. Now, there are nowhere near the personal tensions at the top of this government that there were in the last one. But because politicians are humans and not purely rational actors, the individual relationships in the government matter.

This is a strange old recovery. The News of the World has an interesting ICM poll today, showing that 66 per cent think the economy is getting worse. It’s not: GDP is growing and we have the second-highest job creation in the G7. Rather than losing jobs to China, we’re flogging Coventry-made Jaguars to Beijing billionaires (one of the random gems uncovered by our new Twitter feed @LocalInterest). So why is everyone so glum? And why do 52 per cent think that David Cameron and George Osborne are doing “a bad job” with the economy?   In theory, Osborne’s recovery is coming on well. His "cuts" agenda is simply a souped-up version of Alistair Darling’s, but Osborne cuts about 1 per cent a year faster.

In Britain, public sector strikes always bring with them the whiff of national decline. They are a reminder of a time when the country was becoming less and less competitive and the civil service regarded its job as the management of decline, a mindset only broken by the Thatcher government.   But today Britain faces a choice almost as acute as the one it faced in the late 1970s. Is this country content with declining slightly less quickly than the continent of Europe as a whole, or does it want to equip itself for a new world in which economic power is moving east?   It is in this context that the debate about the EU needs to be seen.

The appointment of Christine Lagarde as head of the IMF is a diplomatic victory for George Osborne. The Chancellor was one of her earliest supporters, was the first to nominate her and hit the phones hard on her behalf. She will be a useful ally for Osborne in this position especially given how choppy the global economic waters remain. But the UK government also used the IMF nomination process to do some diplomatic horse-trading. The government made it clear that UK support for Lagarde was contingent on Paris agreeing that Britain should have to play no part in the coming bailout of Greece. There will be those who argue that it is not ideal to have the head of the IMF come from a euro-zone country.