Uk politics

In 2009, Britain borrowed more, as a share of its national income, than any country that isn't being bailed out by the IMF and the Eurozone (Greece) or already making drastic spending cuts (Ireland).  That huge deficit is the critical challenge to our economic stability that George Osborne needs to tackle with the Budget today.  We have got away with high borrowing so far on the understanding that cuts are coming now the election is out of the way.   If you think tax hikes are the answer, then you're asking the wrong question.  Our present fiscal crisis is built on a decade of bumper rises in spending, not tax cuts.  Over the last decade, spending rose from 36.6 per cent of GDP to 53.4 per cent this year according to OECD data.

There are plenty of details for Budget-spotters to look out for tomorrow, but among the most important is just how far Osborne reaches into the future.  The current expectation in Westminster is that he will offer quite a few glimpses into the long-term.  A possible commitment to reduce the main rate of corporation tax to 20 percent over the next five years, perhaps.  Or similar provisions for making the first £10,000 of income tax-free. There are, of course, economic and political motives behind this.

It's days like this when you realise just how stuck Labour are in a Brownite groove.  Everywhere you turn, there's some leadership candidate or other attacking the government for choosing to cut public spending this year.  Ed Miliband claims that the Lib Dems have been "completely macho … completely cavalier" about cuts.  Andy Burnham says that this year could "damage us in the long run".  And even those who aren't chasing the leadership are getting in on the act: Alistair Darling writes that the coalition has "a fiscal policy that undermines fragile growth". So we already know what Labour's broad response to this week's Budget will look like.  But it got me a-wondering: what will their response to next year's Budget be?

Alastair Campbell is right on two counts.  First, that this snippet from George Parker's Budget preview is pretty fascinating: "Senior Lib Dems whisper that Vince Cable, the Lib Dem business secretary, never really believed his pre-election rhetoric that cuts should be delayed until 2011." And, second, that the claim about Cable is downright unbelievable.  I mean, this is the man who attacked Tory spending plans at every opportunity he could, and more venomously than any of his colleagues.  The man, indeed, who pushed the line that "the economy will be plunged back into prolonged recession" as a result of early cuts.  And the man who, by many behind-the-scenes accounts, encouraged his party to adopt the Not This Year stance in the first place.

I doubt David Cameron will have many better days in government than this. Considering the government cancelled a hospital project yesterday, today has passed as one long photo-op, free of incident. It began with Theresa May banning a radical Islamist cleric, Zakir Naik, displaying a resolve that eluded her immediate predecessors. The papers were full of Cameron’s ‘coup’ in Brussels yesterday; the only major news story that might have unnerved Cameron was the FT’s research into Tory immigration policy, which the FT calculates will hit growth and raise taxes. It was too esoteric to hit the TV screens, so too the cuts in arts funding. It must have been a happy breakfast in No 10 this morning.