Labour party

Another voice: Tax transparency is a good idea, but not a game-changer

George Osborne’s plans for more tax transparency have been widely interpreted as a political masterstroke. People will be horrified to learn the cost of servicing Britain’s national debt, or paying our welfare bill, goes the argument. The move will create downward pressure on public spending, driven by the public itself — a classic example of aligning policy with politics. But what if none of this is true? The logic fits, but the evidence suggests something different altogether. Experiments with tax receipts in the United States, where the Third Way Institute has been making the running on this, have show that more transparency tends to reinforce people’s beliefs rather than challenge them.

Why Labour’s 50p tax wobble is dangerous for Ed Miliband

Why did Gordon Brown wait until the last few weeks of Labour's thirteen-year reign to implement a 50p tax rate? Easy. Because it wasn't so much a fiscal policy as a fiendish trap, designed to cut into a Tory government's flesh. But now, it seems, the trap has snared another victim: Labour itself. The Telegraph's Daniel Knowles has already neatly summarised the politics arising from Sam Coates' report (£) that Labour will neither back the scrapping of the 50p rate nor promise to reinstate it either. But the basic point is worth repeating: if that's the approach that Labour chooses, then they'll be left in a complete mess. They can attack the coalition all they like for cutting taxes for high earners, but the answer will come back, ‘well, would you keep it?

Ken launches his negative campaign

A dark, damp and freezing cellar beneath Waterloo station isn't an obvious choice for launching a political campaign — but that's where Team Ken officially kicked off their Mayoral bid last night. Various prominent lefties were brought into the Old Vic Tunnels to warm up for the man himself. Eddie Izzard was also present to fill in the gaps and keep everyone engaged until the bar opened. Most of the policies discussed have already been made public, but there were a few new, colourful additions. Ken pointed out that Transport for London purchases energy at half the normal price, so why don't they buy more and sell it back to ordinary Londoners? An inexperienced, local government-run energy firm is just what Londoners need, after all.

Balls lays into Brown — but why?

Normally, pre-Budget interviews with shadow chancellors are dry and methodical. But the Times's interview with Ed Balls (£) today is the opposite: frenetic, relatively non-fiscal and utterly, utterly strange. Given that CoffeeHousers are probably waking up to brunch, I thought it might be a bit much for you to wade through his thoughts on food and on crying (‘OK. Crying. What do you want to know about crying?’). So I've pulled out some of the main political points from the interview here: 1) Laying into Brown. The quotation that gives the interview its headline is an eye-opener, coming as it does from Ed Balls. ‘Nobody is going to look back at any point in history,’ he says, ‘and say that Gordon Brown was a great Prime Minister.

Labour miss out the details

Labour's launch of its new youth jobs policy has been rather overshadowed by Harriet Harman's inability to explain the costing behind the policy on the Daily Politics earlier: not a good look for a party trying to show that it is fiscally credible. But more interesting than the number behind the policy is how it marks an attempt by Labour to toughen up its position on welfare. Those young workers who have been out of work for a year will have to take one of these minimum wage jobs or have their benefits docked.



 On the Labour front, the interview with Ed Miliband in the Times today is also worthy of comment.

Nick rises to Harriet’s limp challenge

Basketball in America. Netball at PMQs. Harriet Harman, Labour’s venerable form-prefect, took her leader’s place today and lobbed a few rubbery missiles at the PM’s under-study, Nick Clegg.  It came down to arithmetic. Even if Hattie had stormed it at PMQs she had no hope of reviving her extinct career. But Clegg has it all to play for. He was ready for it too. Assured, combative and well-briefed, he filled his replies with fresh, punchy rhetoric. (Mind you, his match-fit performance should be credited to his party activists. Clegg must have spent the last 22 months fielding nasty questions from chippy wonks at Lib Dem constituency meetings.)  Hattie tried to upset him by accusing the coalition of ‘throwing women out of work.

Ken just can’t escape his tax knot

After several months on the back foot, Boris looks ready to sink Ken's campaign for good. The cries of hypocrisy have been growing louder and louder since the revelation that Ken has been filtering his six-figure income through a limited company to avoid thousands in tax. Ken has waited two weeks for the story to build up before making an official response on the Andrew Marr show yesterday: 'I am in exactly the same position as everybody else who has a small business. I mean, I get loads of money, all from different sources, and I give it to an accountant and they manage it.' He's not wrong but it doesn't address why Ken has a small business in the first place. Ken is not a corporation with employees and assets — it's just him and his wife.

Clegg reassures his party about the Health Bill

Lib Dem Spring conference is turning out as the leadership would have wished. The support of Shirley Williams for the Health Bill seems to have been enough to reassure delegates that they should back the bill in its amended form; they’ve already voted to debate the leadership friendly motion tomorrow morning not the ‘Drop the Bill’ one. In a question and answer session with activists just now, Clegg — to huge applause — urged the party to side with Shirley Williams not Andy Burnham. This appeal to Lib Dem tribalism seems to be winning the day on the health issue. Clegg, as he always does at conference, used the Q&A session to take a lot of shots at Labour.

Joyce avoids jail — but will he hang onto his seat?

‘You can’t touch me, I’m an MP!’ said Eric Joyce while being hauled off to the clanger after a drunken brawl in the Palace of Westminster. It seems he was right. Following an appearance in court today, Joyce has evaded jail with a £3,000 fine, community service order and three-month pub ban while retaining his job as MP for Falkirk. Calls for him to stand down now continue to mount, especially following the revelation of his relationship with a 17-year-old schoolgirl. However, he has so far stuck to his plan of stepping down in 2015. Rumours are circulating in Westminster that he will be expelled from the Labour Party after the completion of disciplinary proceedings.

Ed Miliband turns back to Brown (again)

At the end of last year, Ed Balls suggested that Labour would be ‘taking a tougher approach to conditionality [for benefit claimants]. If people can work, they should work.’ Now the party are starting to outline what that means. As the Independent puts it today, summarising a speech that Liam Byrne has given in Birmingham, ‘The unemployed would be guaranteed the offer of a job but could lose their benefits for six months if they turned it down, under a tough new policy on welfare planned by Labour.’ The paper characterises this as an attempt to ‘outflank the Tories on welfare,’ which is surely true. But the whole thing also reminds me of the Brown era.

The Lib Dems are being urged leftwards

If you didn't know that it's the Lib Dem spring conference this weekend, then you will after a quick rustle around the political pages. The yellow bird of liberty is splattered everywhere today — and in some instances it's causing trouble for the coalition. Take Exhibit A, Tim Farron's article for the Guardian. Farron is, of course, not one of the most Tory-friendly Lib Dem MPs out there, and neither is he a member of the government — but he's still rarely been quite so provocative as this. ‘We are in power now, sharing government with a party that unashamedly favours their people, the millionaires,’ he writes, ‘It's a serious business, so it's time we focused on our people — the millions who are not millionaires.

Balls sidles up to the Lib Dems

Oh look, Ed Balls has backed a mansion tax, saying in an interview with Nick Robinson that ‘If the chancellor wants to go down that road then we will support him... let's work together.’ But, never fear, it's not a completely non-partisan offer from the shadow chancellor. He does weave a divide with George Osborne, by adding that ‘The issue is what's the purpose? If the purpose is to help families facing higher tuition fees, higher VAT or higher fuel bills — for example boosting their tax credits — yes.’ In other words, the money should go towards Labour policies, or Balls will withdraw his hand of friendship.

Labour’s PMQs strategy: the Super-Vulnerable Voter ploy

A sombre and muted PMQs this week. Dame Joan Ruddock raised the issue of benefits and asked David Cameron if he was proud of his new reforms. Tory backbenchers cheered on the PM’s behalf. ‘Then would he look me in the eye,’ Dame Joan went on, ‘and tell me he’s proud to have removed all disability payments from a 10-year-old with cerebral palsy.’ This tactic — the Super-Vulnerable Voter ploy — is highly manipulative and highly reliable. But Dame Joan had forgotten something which Mr Cameron is unlikely to forget. Explaining his reform of the Disability Living Allowance he glared angrily at her. ‘As someone who has had a child with cerebral palsy I know how long it takes to fill in that form.

Afghanistan tragedy overshadows PMQs

I have rarely heard the House of Commons as quiet as it was at the start of PMQs today. The sad news from Afghanistan was, rightly, weighing on MPs’ minds. The initial Cameron Miliband exchanges were on the conflict there with the two leaders agreeing with each other. In some ways, though, I wonder whether the country would not benefit more from some forensic debate about the strategic aims of the mission. However the volume level in the House increased when Joan Ruddock asked the PM if he was ‘truly proud’ of taking benefits away from disabled children.

Ed Miliband just doesn’t get globalisation

If you think things couldn’t get worse than Ed Miliband’s Five Live interview, read his speech on patriotism. It seeks to build on his ‘predators’ speech, which suggested a Manichean divide between bad companies and good companies. Labour MPs of Mr Miliband’s political heritage always place manufacturers in the latter camp. He hails the success of many of them. ‘You know better than I that this success has been achieved against the odds.’ I suspect they know better than he the effect that a 25 per cent devaluation has on exports. ‘Economic protectionism is what governments reach for when they don’t believe firms can compete. And we will never return to those days,’ he says – before doing just that.

The child benefit cut risks alienating striving families

Why should someone on the minimum wage subsidise the childcare arrangements of someone on £100,000? So runs the argument for abolishing child benefit for higher-rate taxpayers. You can see why George Osborne went for this: in theory, we are talking about the best-paid 14 per cent. If he was going to cap benefits, he had to be seen to hurt the rich too. The 50 per cent tax was not enough; axing child benefit would be just the tool he needed to say ‘we’re all in this together’. The problem is that the 40p tax band is set far too low in Britain, and now takes in policemen and teachers. People who can not really be described as rich, especially if one earner is supporting a family and paying off a mortgage.