The Spectator

Thursday

The Spectator

The madness of ring-fencing government spending.

From our UK edition

As ministers trooped one by one into George Osborne’s office last week for negotiations over the Spending Review, most looked pretty grim, steeling themselves against news of cuts to come. But three more cheerful figures stood out: the Secretaries of State for Health, Education and International Development. Their budgets, which between them account for more than a third of public spending, have been ring-fenced, with the result that the Chancellor is left scratching around elsewhere to hit his target of reducing spending by £11.5 billion. And although £11.5 billion sounds like a lot of money, in the context of what’s needed, it is a pitifully small gesture. Three years after an ‘austerity budget’, the government is not overspending by just £11.

Wednesday

The Spectator

Don’t privatise justice

From our UK edition

Privatisation has been a hugely successful policy over the past 30 years. Unfortunately, though, the government seems to have learned the wrong lesson from it. The proposal to sell the Courts Service’s buildings, and transfer some of its staff to the private sector, promises to bring out the worst aspects of the policy: it gives a desperate government a chance to raise cash in a hurry, relieving the taxpayer of assets at a knockdown price. Meanwhile, it does nothing to replicate what has been good about privatisation: that it has opened up lazy state monopolies to competition. Claims that the measure will save the public purse £1 billion a year should be taken with a pinch of salt. Similar claims were made when the NHS handed over hospitals to private finance consortia.

Monday

The Spectator

Spectator debate: Assad is a war criminal — the West must intervene in Syria

From our UK edition

With further reports today that Bashar Assad is deploying chemical weapons in Syria, the prospect of intervention looms larger than ever. The EU is talking about lifting its arms embargo (at Britain's insistence) and France's foreign minister talks about "stronger and better substantiated indications of the local use of chemical arms". Barack Obama has indicated that the use of chemical weapons would trigger American military action - but he'll be aware that intervention in Syria is deeply unpopular in America. He'd have not much to gain, and rather a lot to lose. But should the West go ahead anyway? On Monday 24 June, The Spectator will hold a debate at Savoy Place in London to discuss.

Thursday