It’s no surprise that the Lib Dems aren’t keen on Adrian Beecroft’s proposals for hiring and firing. This intra-coalition disagreement has been rumbling on for months now, after all. But when Vince Cable spoke out against them yesterday, it wasn’t entirely clear whether this was his party’s line or just Vince being Vince. Other Lib Dems might have taken a more conciliatory approach. Today, however, it’s clear that they’re not going to.
When the IMF published a report into the UK economy last year, I wrote a blog post detailing how it managed to please everyone: George Osborne, Vince Cable, Mervyn King, Ed Balls, everyone. This morning, I’ve been tempted to just publish that post again — because the IMF’s latest report is basically the same. Osborne will be pleased with its emphasis on deficit reduction, including the line that ‘Strong fiscal consolidation is underway and reducing the high structural deficit over the medium term remains essential.
Will Parliament soon decide to clamp down on payday loans? The controversial firms, offering ultra-high interest short-term loans, have proliferated on high streets and across the Web, utilising crafty advertising to make them appear far less dangerous than the 4,000 per cent APR would imply. Our Campaigner of the Year, Stella Creasy MP, has been fighting for legislation to regulate the firms, after witnessing the consequences of the 17 payday loan businesses in her consistency. Ahead of a crucial Commons vote on her proposals to regulate the firms, polling by ComRes has given her a boost, with strong support inside and out of Parliament for action on the matter.
A coalition bust-up was avoided today by Vince Cable’s absence from the Commons for the urgent question on the Beecroft Report. Tory MP after Tory MP got up to make warm noises about a report which Vince Cable has been gleefully trashing, describing one of its proposals as ‘bonkers.’ That Cable couldn’t make it back in time from the north of England to appear at the dispatch box will have been a relief to the Tory whips; one of them was distinctly concerned about how the Tory benches would treat the Business Secretary when he heard about the UQ earlier. Indeed, it was telling that when Chris Heaton-Harris attacked Cable and Lord Oakeshott, Mark Prisk — the Tory minister answering the question — did not rebuke him.
For all the talk about Greece and France and the Eurozone, it’s telling just how much our politicians are focusing on Iran. Indeed, some of the most concrete political settlements of the past few days have concerned that turbulent state. On Friday, the US Congress approved a Bill which included the blunt reminder that, ‘It shall be the policy of the United States to take all necessary measures, including military action if required, to prevent Iran from threatening the United States, its allies or Iran's neighbours with a nuclear weapon.’ And the G8 subsequently put out a statement about oil reserves that clearly had Iran in mind.
As James suggested yesterday, the publication of the Beecroft proposals this week could be a significant moment. If the coalition can carve a constructive agenda from them, then we might have a set of growth policies worthy of the name. But if it degrades into yet another internal squabble, then that chance may be missed. So, what’s it to be? It must be said, the tea leaves aren’t terribly encouraging this morning. Yesterday, we were told that David Cameron and George Osborne are minded to unravel the red tape that surrounds businesses when it comes to hiring and firing. But, today, one of their fellow ministers has spoken out against that sort of thinking. And guess which one it is. Yep, Vince Cable.
The report which Fraser mentioned last week, from the 2020 Tax Commission, has just been published - you can download the summary here and full report here. Allister Heath, chairman of the commission and a contributing editor of The Spectator, says more here:- It is time for Britain to make a vital choice. Our economy is stagnant, crippled by excessively high public spending, high levels of leverage, a mismanaged and inefficient public sector, an extraordinarily complex and punitive tax system and a public mood that has become increasingly anti-capitalist. There are two options. We can either decide to tweak the status quo – try and keep a lid on public spending, reform bits of the public sector and hope for the best.
For all their cosmetic bluster about bonuses, our national politicians have never really stood up to the banks: it takes a bloody minded local politician to do that — and win. So some sort of award is surely due to Nader Fekri, the mayor of Calderdale. He attempted to withdraw cash from a NatWest ATM in Hebden Bridge and the machine swallowed his card. When this happens to me I usually just start crying: I know it will take the bank weeks to send out a new one (or “five working days” as they put it) and then another few weeks for the PIN to arrive. Nader was made of sterner stuff. He did what people would do if this were a normal world — went into the bank, showed his ID, and asked them to give the card back to him.
The publication of the Beecroft report on Thursday is a big moment for the coalition. The Lib Dems have long been dismissive of it but it is now a crucial part of any coalition grand bargain on growth. In recent days, those close to David Cameron and Nick Clegg have been talking about a more cooperative, coalition attitude to growth. There’s been a recognition that the two sides both need to make some concessions to give the coalition a more adequate growth strategy. As one senior figure puts it, the coalition needs to show ‘more radicalism and unity on growth’. This is what makes the publication of Beecroft on Thursday so important.
Have you noticed the weird hold that François Hollande has over our politics? If you haven’t, then let me tell you: his name has been almost inescapable in Westminster over the past couple of weeks. Even in PMQs this week, David Cameron and Ed Miliband couldn’t resist of spot of Hollandery. Behind-the-scenes, too, there is much consideration being given to how the new French President should be treated. Political strategists recognise, as I’ve suggested before, that his election could be a significant moment in the life of the Eurozone and the European Union.
I suspect that ‘Weekend secrets of the “chillaxing” Prime Minister’ (£) is one of the last headlines that Number 10 wanted to see this Saturday. It is acutely sensitive about the idea that Cameron doesn’t work hard enough, a charge that it thinks is as unfair as it is damaging. But perhaps more interesting than the details of the Prime Minister’s Sunday routine — a ‘crap film’ and a few glasses of wine at lunch — is what Francis Elliott and James Hanning reveal about the Cameron-Hilton relationship.
In my Telegraph column yesterday, I quoted a senior adviser to the Prime Minister saying that he ‘spends a crazy, scary amount of time playing Fruit Ninja’ on his iPad. It seems No.10 has been denying it — telling The Times (£) that ‘the real culprit’ is ‘his six-year-old son’. Now, all fathers will immediately recognise this transparent defence. I used to blame my kids for my being into Glee, but it doesn't wash (they're four and two and male). I won't name the official whom I quoted, suffice to say that this was not a half-remembered conversation but a verbatim quote. And the other problem No.10 has is that Cameron has apparently admitted to his Fruit Ninja habit in the past.
Oh dear, seems that the one of the union officials behind that presentation I posted earlier isn't happy that it made its way on to Coffee House. Here's an email exchange — leaked to me by a different Department for Education source — that starts off with one from that union official, Brian Lightman, to various union and departmental types. Names and email addresses have been omitted to protect the innocent: From: Brian Lightman Sent: 18 May 2012 15:40 To: Numerous union officials and Department for Education staff Subject: RE: Education forum Sorry – the first half of this message was sent before it was complete.
Next week, the Institute of Directors and the Taxpayers' Alliance will release what I humbly suggest will be the most powerful summary of the case for radical supply-side reform in a generation. The report of the 2020 Tax Commission runs to 417 pages, choc full of academic literature showing how big government chokes growth, and looking at what the optimal size of the state is. Broadly speaking, government spending is about half the size of economic output now and the optimal size is about a third. The recommendations are not being released until Monday, but it opens a very timely debate, which I preview in my Telegraph column. Here are my main points. 1. There is no recovery in sight.
The 2012 London mayoral election may barely have finished, but already there’s speculation as to who might run — and win — in 2016. The current favourite is Boris — despite suggestions that he’ll be back in Parliament with his sights set on the Tory leadership by then. And the second favourite? It was David Lammy, the Labour MP for Tottenham who was tipped as a potential 2012 candidate and has hinted that he might be interested next time. But today he’s been overtaken — in the eyes of bookies Paddy Power at least — by another Johnson who’s hosted Have I Got News for You: Labour’s Alan Johnson. This has been prompted by an interview with the former Home Secretary in the House magazine.
ATL ASCL Presentation to Edu Forum 16May12 Now here’s a peek behind the Westminster curtain that you’ll find either amusing or dispiriting, depending on your mood. It’s a presentation delivered by a union delegation at the Department for Education this week, which Coffee House has got its hands on. You can read the whole thing above. We’ll get onto why it’s amusing (or dispiriting) shortly, but first a bit of background. Various school unions are invited into the DfE each month to meet with a minister or two, as well as with their advisers and civil servants. The idea is that they’ll talk policy; presenting problems and solutions in a way that ought to be mutually constructive.
The Prime Minister will be jetting off to Camp David today for the G8 summit — and his first meeting with new French President Francois Hollande. But before going, he’s been popping up on the morning show sofas to promote the government’s new initiatives to help parents. A new digital service will allow parents to sign up to receive tips on looking after their baby via emails and text messages. The government will also offer vouchers for £100-worth of parenting classes to all parents of under-fives, although at first this will just be in trial form. Announcing the schemes in Manchester yesterday, David Cameron pre-empted the attack that these are ‘nanny state’ policies.
The Cameroons have long taken comfort in their belief that Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister. They have seen him as a firebreak between them and electoral defeat. Three things have driven their conviction that the Labour leader will never make it to Number 10. First, their belief that he fails the blink test: can you see him standing outside Number 10? Second, the next election will almost certainly be fought on the economy, Labour’s weakest area. Their final reason was a sense that he would never get the full support of those on the Labour side who know how to win elections. But recent events suggest that this confidence that Miliband will lose the next election might be misplaced.
As if Lords reform, communications surveillance powers and same-sex marriage weren’t enough, it looks like there’s another issue that’ll cause a good deal of friction between Liberal Democrat and Conservative MPs: plans for regional public sector pay bargaining. It’s something George Osborne is understandably keen on — James laid out the political and economic reasons behind it just before the Budget — but now the Lib Dems are making clear that they don’t share the Chancellor’s enthusiasm. In the Q&A after his pupil premium speech on Monday, Nick Clegg said: ‘Nothing has been decided.
Writing here on Tuesday, I made two accusations regarding the government’s deficit reduction plan. First, I said that cuts so far had been minimal. Second, I argued that higher taxation, rather than cuts in spending, was being used to reduce the deficit. On this basis, I said, government and opposition alike are being mendacious when they speak of ‘savage cuts’ in public spending. In reply, Matthew Hancock said that I was using the wrong periods for comparison. The government, which took office in May 2010, could not be held responsible for spending in 2010-11, so it was misleading for me to use Labour’s last year in office (2009-10) as my base year.