Tom Goodenough

Next week’s Budget could be the government – and Philip Hammond’s – last chance to snatch the political momentum away from Labour. So what should he announce? Today’s newspaper editorials have some advice for the Chancellor: Not too long ago, John McDonnell’s ‘alternative budget’ would have been announced ‘in complete obscurity’, says the Daily Telegraph. Not so now, and the Tories clearly need ‘big ideas’ to see off a resurgent Labour party. This should not mean they resort to borrowing the party’s ‘Left-wing solutions’ – or, indeed, trying to outspend Labour, however. But they cannot rest on their laurels. On housing, for instance, Hammond must ‘do far more’.

The EU withdrawal bill survived its first test at its commons committee stage this week – but there is still a long way to go. And it seems some on the Tory back benches are determined not to make it plain sailing for the government. Theresa May’s ‘mandate for a hard Brexit is weak’, says the FT, which argues that parliament is well within its rights to scrutinise the EU withdrawal bill closely. ‘If ever there was a case for parliament exercising its sovereign powers, this is it,’ says the paper. So why the backlash against those in the Tory ranks who are not happy with certain parts of the bill? ‘Parliament’s admirers’ are likely to be ‘dismayed’ at this reaction to elected politicians doing their job, says the FT.

Brexit means Brexit, but unfortunately the EU withdrawal bill – which actually does the legislative job of taking Britain out of the EU – is somewhat trickier to get to grips with. The original bill is 60 pages long, and there are now 470 amendments – running to some 200 pages – and counting. The House of Commons library predicts the bill will be ‘one of the largest legislative projects ever undertaken in the UK’. All of this will keep MPs – and the government, as it fights off the backbench rebels – very busy indeed over the coming weeks. Two days each week for the next month have been set aside to cover the committee stage of the bill, where MPs are given a chance to scrutinise the bill line-by-line and attempt to make changes.

Priti Patel has resigned from the Cabinet. Patel said that she accepted her decision to hold meetings with Israeli officials during her summer holiday without the prior say so of the government meant that her 'actions fell below the high standards that are expected of a secretary of state'. The secretary of state for international development went on to 'offer a fulsome apology' to the Prime Minister. Theresa May responded by saying 'now that further details have come to light' about exactly what Patel got up to on her summer jaunt, 'it is right that you have decided to resign'. Her resignation tonight is not much of a surprise.

Priti Patel's vacation to Israel certainly has the feeling of a busman’s holiday to it. The international development secretary is now admitting she met several Israel cabinet ministers, as well as the country’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, during the summer trip which she paid for herself. Patel’s big problem doesn’t only stem from these undeclared meetings, however, but her reaction to them, which has turned this story into something toxic which could cost Patel her job in the cabinet. Last week, when it emerged she had held these meetings with Israeli politicians, Patel was adamant that Boris knew all about it. She told the Guardian: ‘Boris Johnson knew about the visit.

The predictions of doom and gloom about Britain’s prospects after Brexit were widespread in the run-up to the referendum. One by one, these warnings have failed to materialise: yesterday, we learned from the ONS that the economy grew by 0.4 per cent in the last quarter in a clear sign it has 'outperformed expectations again’. It's clear that ‘the only thing in recession’ is the ‘reputation’ of the doom-mongering economists, says the Sun. This economic ‘resilience’ should not be taking for granted though, warns the paper, which says that ‘certainty’ is vital for ensuring things don't turn sour. This makes comments by Brexit secretary David Davis in Parliament yesterday hard to fathom.

David Davis’s revelation that Parliament may not get a vote on a Brexit deal until after Britain has actually left the EU has provoked a flurry of criticism. The Government has been accused of railroading Parliament and treating MPs with ‘contempt’. It’s an ‘undemocratic disgrace’, says Open Britain. Yet Davis is only really stating the obvious that there can’t be a vote on a deal that doesn’t exist. It’s also a simple matter of timing that, under the terms of Article 50, Britain will leave the EU in March 2019 – two years after May pulled the trigger. What isn’t guaranteed – especially given the lack of progress so far – is that a deal will materialise before then, if at all.

Ten years on from the crash, the banks have few friends and fewer still who are willing to speak up for them. Now, with the uncertainty of Brexit looming, there are fears banks and their staff could up sticks to the continent. Like them or loathe them, this wouldn’t be good for Britain’s economy: financial services were worth £124.2bn to the UK last year and the sector accounts for three in every 100 jobs in the UK. So what can be done to make Britain a hospitable place for banks to do business after Brexit? And how can we do that without alienating ordinary people? This was the topic of a Spectator dinner discussion sponsored by Barclays at the Labour party conference in Brighton. Guests included MPs, bankers, journalists and policy experts.