George osborne

George Osborne has long been in the City’s crosshairs, and criticism peaked last week when less than a quarter of a City panel believe he has the mettle to be Chancellor. Today, Osborne fights back in the FT, with a piece co-penned by Jeffrey Sachs. The pair set out an argument for immediate ‘frugality’, rather than ‘cuts’, and damn Brown’s economic policy as short-term politicking: ‘We are sceptical that a sustainable economic recovery can be based on either reinflating the sectors that have declined or believing future job creation can come simply from the public sector payroll.

Three weeks ago, James argued that the Tories’ incoherence emanated from their disjointed campaign management. Steve Hilton, Andy Coulson, George Osborne and George Bridges were not communicating and the stark clarity on the economy and ‘Broken Britain’ was obscured. James urged the Cameroon duma to put its house in order. Cameron heeded some of his advice, but this morning brings the most significant change. Tim Montgomerie reports that Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton have at last joined forces and will report direct to George Osborne, who will be replaced by Ken Clarke as the Tory’s economic face. That that this is news reveals the utter chaos  that ruled the campaign; but, as they say, better late than never.

The City’s elopement with New Labour has ended violently. A poll of leading financiers, conducted by City AM, reveals that 73 percent think that a Tory majority would be best for the economy; a mere 10 percent support Labour. But the City has little enthusiasm for George Osborne: 23 percent believe he has the mettle to be Chancellor, 13 percent behind Ken Clarke. So where is it going wrong for Osborne? James Kirkup observes that the Tories recent collapse in the polls coincided with Osborne and Cameron obscuring their economic message. But the City’s antipathy to Osborne is long established. Disquiet reigned even when Osborne and the Tories were storming the polls.

Both James and Tim Montgomerie felt that William Hague must be more prominent during this campaign and Cameron has reached the same conclusion. Hague opened the spring confernece with a stark, bleak message: "And I say it is that most crucial election because I believe the choice for Britain is as stark as this: it is change or ruin." He then detailed the easiest illustration of Brown's appalling economic stweardship: a 13 year statistical progress of regression for which Brown, and Brown alone, is responsible. 'When Gordon Brown took over, this, our great country, was the 4th largest economy in the world. Now it is falling behind and forecast within 5 years to be the 11th, behind not just growing giants like China, but behind our neighbours France and Italy.

At the beginning of this week the key figures in the Tory election campaign gathered together in Notting Hill to try and work out what was going wrong with the Tory campaign, why the Tory lead has halved since December. Our cover this week attempts to answer this question. My take is that the problem is largely caused by the structure of the campaign. Successful campaigns tend to have a chief strategist and a campaign manager. The strategist's job is to work out what the election is about and the campaign manager's role is to implement that vision and take charge of day to day tactics. The Tory problem is that they have no campaign manager and four men - Steve Hilton, George Osborne, Andy Coulson and George Bridges - who appear to be vying to be chief strategist.

The obsession of British politicians - and political journalists - with American politics is often mocked. But there's a clarity to American political messages that is often missing in this country. So it is good to see George Osborne borrowing a line from the Reagan playbook, and pointing out that people are now worse off than they were at the last election. The Tories desperately need to shift the focus of the campaign back onto Labour's failures and this is a start to that process. Osborne is delivering the Mais lecture tonight, one of the prestige dates in the British economic calendar. He's the first shadow Chancellor to deliver it, a sign of how much the markets and everyone else are waiting to see what Osborne does.

With even Michael Portillo predicting a hung parliament, what would Britain’s post-election government actually look like if the Tories did not secure an over-all majority.   The Tories could form a minority government, hoping to persuade enough MPs from other parties, but principally the Liberal Democrats, to vote with them on the key issues. Such a government would be inherently unstable, lurching from vote to vote and dependent on the relationship between a Prime Minister Cameron and Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, as well as between George Osborne, the would-be Chancellor, and Vince Cable, who many think is a more qualified potential occupant of No 11.

There is only one way the Tories can lose the election and that is if it becomes a referendum on them rather than a choice between them and the government. We are in such an anti-politics moment that the electorate is unlikely to give a positive endorsement to any politician or political party. This—not the poor choice of photo—was the real problem with the Tories’ opening ad of the year: it invited voters to judge Cameron in isolation. Cameron is the biggest asset the Tories have but he is their biggest asset when contrasted with Gordon Brown. This is why I think Daniel Finkelstein is wrong to argue that the Tories should eschew negative campaigning. They need to remind voters what the alternative to them is. Danny is critical of the Tory death tax campaign.

Sir Richard Branson may often personify a leering joke, but, as Steve Richards observed this morning, this election is descending into a personality contest. Branson remains a symbol of British entrepreneurial success: his endorsement is crucial and I expect to see this story splashed across the right-wing tabloids tomorrow. The Standard quotes Branson saying: “I believe the UK's record budget deficit does pose a serious risk to our recovery. “It would be damaging if we lost the confidence of the markets through delayed action and saw interest rates have to go up steeply. “We are going to have to cut our spending and I agree with the 20 leading economists who said we need to start this year.

David Cameron will re-launch his election campaign with a personal attack on Gordon Brown. Cameron will embark on the straightforward task of proving that the Road Block is not a moderniser – the Prime Minister’s sudden avowed passion for PR is merely a marriage of electoral convenience. Cameron has led the expenses reform debate and will use Brown’s dithering over the latest furore to condemn him as a ‘shameless defender of the old elite’. According to Francis Elliot, Cameron will say: “There is no chance Gordon Brown will do what is right and put the public interest before his own political interests. He cannot reform the institution because he is the institution: he made it.

Aspiration is Gordon’s middle name. The Observer has an extensive interview with Brown and though the classification has changed class remains his obsession: Brown wants to fight the election on the middle classes. He spoke of little else. Education and family policy will be defined by Sure Start, child tax credits and the school leaving age; the NHS will offer yet more choice and unaffordable luxuries, such as one to one care. It may seem peculiar for a man who is synonymous with stealth taxes, and whose time in government will be remembered for the polarisation of society, to frame his arguments in such terms; but his reason is clear: Brown doesn’t want to debate the economy.