Advertisement

Archives for November 2008

A mysterious arrest

Andrew Neil | 10:53 UK time, Friday, 28 November 2008

Comments (50)

As usual on Fridays, I shall leave you in the more than capable hands of my co-presenter Anita Anand. anita.jpg

High drama at Westminster today after last night's revelations that the Tory Shadow Immigration Minister Damien Green was arrested by police and counter terrorism officers. We believe the boys in blue were investigating a series of leaks from the Home Office. Scotland Yard has since issued a statement saying a 52-year-old man had been arrested "on suspicion of conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office and aiding and abetting counselling or procuring misconduct in public office".

Mr Green has been released on unconditional bail but will face further questioning in February and has said "he's astonished to have spent more than nine hours under arrest for doing his job". In a statement at midnight last nght he said "I have many times made public information that the government wanted to keep secret ... information that the public has a right to know". damiengreen.jpg

The Tories argue the Government must have had prior knowledge of the arrest. Downing Street has spent the morning denying this.

So what's going on? And how important is it for politicans to be able to leak things? We'll be talking to former Tory Home Office spokesman David Davis and the Chairman of Labour's Parliamentary Party Tony Lloyd.

Also, did you notice a death at the very heart of British political life this week? I'm talking about the sad demise of New Labour. The Brown/Darling decision to introduce a new 45p top rate of tax for those on incomes of £150,000 in this week's Pre Budget Report ...certainly looked like a return to OLD Labour. It certainly sounded like that old "Tax the Rich" mantra they've tried so heard to relearn.

Lord Mandelson has since argued it's not New Labour that's changed but times. Has the party now trashed its sacred New Labour foundations ? And is the New Labour project dead?

We're joined throughout today's programme by a heady mix of up and coming political minds - Jessica Asato from the left leaning think tank Progress and right winger Douglas Murray from the think tank Social Cohesion. And as ever it's Friday so it's top of the political pops ... we'll have the weekly run down of who's up and who's down and who's in and who's out.

Don't forget we want your views on all the stories that are making the news.
Email us at daily.politics@bbc.co.uk and don't forget to watch at noon.

Mumbai attacks will cause maximum damage

Andrew Neil | 10:03 UK time, Thursday, 27 November 2008

Comments (20)

The terrible terrorist attacks in Mumbai are still unfolding but they have already claimed over 100 lives with at least 250 injured, many seriously, grim figures that will rise as the morning goes on. mumbai.jpg

Anybody who thought al-Qaeda-style terrorism was largely aimed at the West will now have to think again. Some reports say the terrorists were specifically picking on Americans and British, but the death toll is overwhelmingly Indian. Islamic fundamentalist terrorism - of which this seems to be the latest deathly manifestation - clearly does not discriminate, or care. A previously unknown outfit, Deccan Mujahideen, has claimed responsibility

The Times of India has the best summary of events so far: "In one of the most violent terror attacks on Indian soil, Mumbai came under an unprecedented night attack as
terrorists used heavy machine guns including AK-47s and grenades to strike at the city's most high-profile targets - the hyper-busy CST (formerly VT) rail terminus; the landmark Taj Hotel at the Gateway and the luxury Oberoi Trident at Nariman Point; the domestic airport at Santa Cruz; the Cama and GT hospitals near CST; the Metro Adlabs multiplex and Mazgaon Dockyard - killing at least 101 and sending hundreds of injured to hospital."

Of course Islamist terrorist attacks are not new to India. Scores of innocent people have been killed by them in recent years, in attacks that are rarely reported or given much prominence in the Western media. But the assault on Mumbai is different in scale and ambition. mandelson.jpg

The exact motives of those behind this al Qaeda-style attack are not known but previous, smaller-scale attacks suggest it is part of a vicious campaign to hit busy urban targets which are popular with foreigners and the wealthy Indians who mix with them. India's economy is already slowing down because of the global financial meltdown and the atrocities in Mumbai, the country's financial capital, is likely designed to cause maximum damage to India's economy and international reputation.

We'll bring you the latest at Noon when we hope to talk to a British foreign minister.

Also in today's programme, we'll be looking at the work of Peter Mandelson. He's been cracking his whip a lot lately and yesterday it was the turn of credit card companies to feel his wrath. He called in company heads and warned tough action if they "stepped out of line" and failed to pass on interest rate cuts.

Today he's off to meet car manufacturers to see what help he can offer them. So we'll be asking: is the Prince of Darkness coming up trumps. He's been credited with saving the post office, sorting out tips, the 10p tax rate and transforming Brown. We'll try to get to the bottom of what's really happening.

And from one man who's had an amazing political journey to another. Throughout today's programme we'll be talking to Derek Hatton. Remember him? Yes the former hard left Liverpool Deputy Council Leader will be with us for the duration.

That's all on the Daily Politics on BBC2 from Noon.

The Politics of Life on Mars

Andrew Neil | 10:47 UK time, Tuesday, 25 November 2008

Comments (34)

PBRdocument.jpgYesterday's Emergency Budget has changed the political terms of trade.

We now have a Labour government which believes in high public spending, is prepared to borrow to the hilt to sustain it -- then some more to finance a bit of Keynesian pump-priming -- and wants more distribution of wealth through taxing high-earners. And a Conservative opposition which thinks we're borrowing too much, has abandoned Labour's public spending plans, doesn't think pump-priming will work (and even if it might we can't afford it) and is distinctly sniffy about any more redistribution. The battle lines are drawn. Let battle commence. Life on Mars politics begins here!

Of course, it's not quite back to the future. But some of the ideological fault lines of the 1970s have re-emerged -- as has dependence on debt.

The government has decided that, though public spending is now over £650 billion and rising, it cannot cut its costs by any significant amount even though its revenues are collapsing. It also wants a fiscal boost to mitigate the effects of the recession. The cumulative effect of these two positions will add half a trillion pounds to government borrowing, doubling total net borrowing to over £1 trillion by the middle of the next decade. There is no prospect of any of this debt being paid back before then.

darlingonday.jpgThe extent of the government's gamble can be seen in the next financial year (2009/10). Even though the Chancellor claims growth will return to the economy in the third quarter of next year, he still plans to borrow almost £120 billion. So, even though the government forecasts that three out of four quarters in 2009/10 will show growth, annual borrowing will reach a record high, even for wartime.

Of course, if growth does return as strongly as the government predicts then the Chancellor will claim that the borrowing was justified. But if, by next year's Pre-Budget Statement, he has to report that the country is still in recession (which is what many City economists think), then not only will his credibility be knocked sideways -- so will his sums and he will end up having to borrow so much more that the gilt markets might simply go on strike and the government's fiscal strategy will be in ruins.

samanthacameron.jpgThe future course of British politics now depends on the outcome of the government's predictions of a return to growth by the summer of 2009. If it happens, Labour has a good chance of a fourth term; if it doesn't, the Camerons will start measuring the drapes for 10 Downing Street.

This morning we'll be debating the new political landscape with leading lights from the parties including former Cabinet Minister Peter Hain; and, amidst everything else, you may have missed yet another U-turn from the Chancellor - this time over plans to penalise half-empty flights. We'll hear from one politician who says Labour budgets are now written in water not stone.

All that and the former editor of the Sun David Yelland will be here talking about the power of the press. Hope to see you at noon on BBC2.

A big day at Westminster

Andrew Neil | 09:47 UK time, Monday, 24 November 2008

Comments (24)

alistair_darling_pbr.jpgNever has so much been leaked to so few for the consumption of so many!

If the hectic government briefing of the last 48 hours is anyway accurate, we already know the main substance of today's Emergency Budget (which is what the Pre-Budget Report has become): a temporary cut in Vat (to 15%), pressure on banks to keep lending to business and home-owners, deferment of some tax rises (from small-business corporation tax to fuel duty), rollover of this year's £120 income tax cut -- oh yes, and massive tax rises to come after 2010 to reduce the massive budget deficit which will result, including (according to last night's leak) an increase in the top rate of tax to 45% for those earning over £150,000 or £175,000.
This latest leak gets all the newspaper headlines this morning -- which means we should beware. The Chancellor will this afternoon announce he plans to borrow around £70 billion this financial year (08/09) and maybe as much as £120 billion in the next (09/10). The Prime Minister's regular claim that Britain is better placed than most to meet the economic crisis is likely to be challenged by him borrowing more than most -- up to 8 or 9% of GDP.

These are massive sums and to bring the deficit back to anything like normality will require taxes to rise after 2010 and public spending to be squeezed. But a new 45% top rate will bring in merely an extra £1.5 billion (if that), which won't even meet the additional interest payments on the extra borrowing.

So this afternoon we will have to be careful not to be deflected by the headline grabbing stuff -- the immediate cut in Vat, the future rise in the top rate (if Labour is re-elected) -- and look closely instead at what the Chancellor proposes to do to bring the deficit back to around 2% of GDP in the years after 2010 -- which will require tax rises for everybody (not just the 400,000 who would be affected by a 45% top rate) and eye-wateringly tight public spending controls, which in some areas will mean real cuts.

The Chancellor will not be able to fudge these measures or remain suitably vague. If the markets don't see a credible plan to return the budget to balance in the years to come after today's emergency measures, then sterling and the stock market will slump even further. On top of financial meltdown and recession, the government would be faced with a full-blown currency crisis and an inability to raise its borrowings in the credit markets -- something it could most certainly do without. In effect, we will have two budgets this afternoon: one of immediate tax cuts and extra public spending, the other of deferred tax rises and a squeeze on public spending to come.

ruth_kelly.jpgThis is a Big Day at Westminster and we'll bring you live all you need to know, starting with the Daily Politics at Noon on BBC2, when we'll have the latest speculation and analysis with three leading politicians: former Cabinet Minister Ruth Kelly for Labour, Conservative former Cabinet Minister John Redwood and the Lib Dem's quick stepping Treasury spokesman Vince Cable.

We'll also have the results of our exclusive Daily Politics Poll, conducted by ComRes over the weekend, on which of the main parties is most trusted to steer the country through this troubled economic times. Sangita Myska will be live in Leeds with the people that count - you the shoppers! And you can e-mail us your views at daily.politics@bbc.co.uk (don't forget to sign up for our webmail on the latest programme at bbc.co.uk/dailypolitcs).

Then we'll be back at 3pm to give you a ringside seat for the most important Budget in a generation. We'll have 30 minutes of build up with the BBC's Robert Peston and Nick Robinson, then we'll go to Commons at 3.30pm to bring you live and uninterrupted coverage of the Chancellor's statement. He's expected to speak for about an hour and once he's sat down we'll bring you the best analysis and comment from our top journalists, leading politicians and City commentators about what it all means for you.

So stay ahead of the game and join us for the Daily Politics at Noon on BBC2 then again for our Budget Special on BBC2 and the BBC News Channel from 3pm onwards. How could you miss it?

Can the government kick start the economy?

Andrew Neil | 10:37 UK time, Friday, 21 November 2008

Comments (22)

As usual on Fridays, I shall leave you in the more than capable hands of my co-presenter Anita Anand. anita.jpg

Seemingly the world and is wife are aware that the government is planning to try and rescue the economy with a financial stimulus package on Monday.

But just what will this package entail? How much will it cost? And will it actually work? We will have the Daily Politics guide to the Pre-Budget Report and we will be talking to Sally Keeble, a Labour MP and member of the Treasury Select Committee.

And the economic woe continued this morning with figures showing that over 11,000 homes have been repossessed in the last quarter. We have the details.

Also this week the Government's Organ Donation Taskforce announced that it opposed "presumed consent" for organ donation.
gordon.jpg
Gordon Brown immediately made it clear that he still supported presumed consent, which would mean that every UK citizen would be assumed to be willing to donate their organs in the event of sudden death, unless they had specifically opted out by placing their name on a register.

We will be asking one person who has had a transplant why he thinks Gordon Brown is right.

And for his unique take on events this week Al Jean, the executive producer of the Simpsons, will be here to give his views on what's up and down in the political charts.
With us for the whole programme will be journalist, Ann Leslie and satirist, Alistair Beaton.

Grim outlook on the High Street

Andrew Neil | 11:01 UK time, Thursday, 20 November 2008

Comments (6)

Today, it's the economy, stupid, yet again! Last night the Dow closed under 8,000 and the FTSE is currently trading under 4,000 -- both dire indications that all the recent rallies have been only dead cat bounces. I fear this could be the case for the rest of the year into 2009 and the doldrums on stock markets will continue to take their toll in the "real economy". rolls.jpg
 
Rolls Royce has announced they're cutting 2,000 jobs worldwide, the outlook on the high street is grim -- and will no doubt get grimmer when the latest retail sales figures come out this morning. Things are so bad you could buy Woolies for a pound -- though you'd then be lumbered with a ton of debt. So probably best not to do it.
 
Yesterday's PMQs was dominated by frontbench exchanges about the banks and whether or not they are lending enough to businesses and house-buyers. Figures out this morning say mortgage lending went up a bit in October but all three major parties are united in saying the banks are not doing enough. We'll be looking today at the deal they're giving consumers today, from mortgages to savings to credit cards. 
 

lumley.jpgAll this ahead of the Darling v Osborne pre-budget showdown on Monday afternoon, which we'll bring you live on BBC2 and BBC News Channel from 3pm. Today we'll be profiling Gideon George Osborne, who hasn't had the best press recently and party activists are starting to blame his lacklustre performance on the economy for the slump in the Tory lead in the polls. 
 
We're also talking to Joanne Lumley about the Ghurkas and our guest of the day is columnist Simon Jenkins, who's taking over the National Trust.  That's all on the Daily Politics at Noon on BBC2 today.
 

Falling prices are even more scary than rampant inflation

Andrew Neil | 10:44 UK time, Tuesday, 18 November 2008

Comments (20)

The latest economic stats, out this morning, show that inflation is falling on all its measures. They are all still high -- the underlying RPI, for example, is 4.7% -- but inflation is clearly on a downward trajectory (as City and government economists have been predicting) and set to tumble fast in the months ahead.

everythingmustgo.jpgSome folks think rising prices will be replaced by falling prices as a deep recession bites and even the Prime Minister used the D-word yesterday when he reported to the Commons on the G20 economic summit in Washington at the weekend (and the further away we get from that summit the less impressive it looks).

Falling prices - or deflation as economists call it - might seem an attractive proposition because it means that, even without a pay rise, your money will go further. In fact, it is even more scary than rampant inflation. If people think prices are falling and will fall even further in the months ahead then they put off purchasing anything in anticipation of buying things more cheaply later. But if most people postpone their spending this merely tips the economy into a deflationary spiral which destroys economy growth and produces mass unemployment.

The Japanese recently endured just such deflation for over a decade and no matter what they tried -- zero interest rates, tax cuts, massive Keynsian pump-priming -- could not easily escape from it. The truth is economists know better how to handle inflation than they do deflation. Even today the Japanese economy is a shadow of its former miracle-working self. My own sense is that Britain is not on the brink of Japanese-style deflation but the RPI could go negative for a while in 2009, reflecting the continued slashing of interest rates. That could push the recession deeper than the consensus expects.

As well as our regular look at the economy today, we'll ask what more can Ministers do to ensure there's no repeat of the appalling catalogue of events that lead to the death of Baby P, whose tragedy continues to play big in the headlines. Children's Secretary Ed Balls is expected to announce a new multi-agency Children's Trust Boards which will be legally responsible for children. Mr Balls wants earlier intervention for children at risk. But will another layer of management and bureaucracy make a difference?

Also today British law now recognises Muslim Sharia tribunals which can hear family cases in England and Wales. The Government argues the move in no way overrides the courts but what are the dangers when it comes to the rights of women?

And do MPs need to know more about science?...apparently Tory MPs do and there are plans afoot for `compulsory' lessons. We'll be doing some science testing of our own and talk to former Tomorrow's World presenter Gareth Jones.

Don't forget we want your views on Baby P, the price of your shopping basket and whether MPs need to know more about science: email us at daily.politics@bbc.co.uk and join me for the Daily Politics at Noon today on BBC2.

Leader of the pack - or bringing up the rear?

Andrew Neil | 10:20 UK time, Monday, 17 November 2008

Comments (8)

Gordon Brown has returned from the G20 summit in Washington DC with international cover for pump-priming tax cuts in next Monday's Pre-Budget report, which is now shaping up to be a fully-fledged Special Budget. But he still has to convince the Treasury and his Chancellor.

There has been wild talk, surprisingly encouraged by the IMF, about a £30bn stimulus, which would amount to 2% of GDP. The Treasury has quickly hosed down such speculation but Whitehall is abuzz with rumours that Mr Brown wants a much bigger Keynsian boost that either Mr Darling or the Treasury are prepared to contemplate. We'll know in seven days time when the Daily Politics will bring you live coverage of the "Special Budget" from 3pm onwards.

The PM still gets a kick from implying that he's leading world opinion in the banking crisis and it's certainly true that his bank bail out plan has proved rather more robust than Hank Paulson's in America. The US Treasury secretary has junked his original scheme to buy up all the toxic waste on US banks' balance sheets for something more Brownite in approach. Since Mr Paulson is a former boss of Goldman Sachs, it only goes to show that bankers these days aren't just incapable of running banks, they're also not very good at bail outs either.

But when it comes to fiscal stimulus, there is evidence to suggest Mr Brown is bringing up the rear rather than leading the pack. After all, many major economies have already cut tax or increased spending or done a bit of both, while Mr Brown talks about it: President Bush implemented a $150bn stimulus back in February; Japan is in a perpetual state of fiscal stimulus; the Chinese have just pumped up public spending and made Vat reforms worth a combined $600bn; the German and French governments have already approved pump-priming packages of their own, as has Spain; Australia did the same last month.

So I'm puzzled by claims that Mr Brown is leading the way since we'll have to wait until Monday to find out what the British government has in store; not for the first time, journalists are falling for a dollop of Downing Street spin.

The global consensus for tax cuts/extra spending, however, underlines how isolated the Tories and Shadow Chancellor George Osborne are in setting their faces against further fiscal stimulus. They will be vindicated if the Brown boost does little to mitigate economic misery in 2009; but if the economy starts to improve on the back of tax cuts, the Tories will have bet the wrong horse.

At least Labour spin that Mr Osborne was talking down the pound -- a bit rich coming from a government which has presided over a 30% slump in sterling -- are likely to be muted: the pound rose in early trading this morning.

Big business, it seems, has now caught up with the rest of us: the CBI is warning today that Britain will be in recession for the whole of 2009, and that around one million people will lose their jobs as a result.

bob_crow.jpgOn the programme today we're looking at the war of words over the economy and the rival plans being considered by Labour and the Conservatives (do the Tories actually have a plan?). Union leader Bob Crow and the CBI's deputy director-general John Cridland will debate the rival plans for tax cuts.

Also on the show today, is the European Union a capitalists' charter of a socialist's dream?

And as a minister's memo to his staff is leaked - giving precise details of just when he likes his coffee, and how his staff should talk to him - we look at the perils of working for those in high office. All that on the Daily Politics here on BBC2 at noon today.

A taxing week

Andrew Neil | 09:55 UK time, Friday, 14 November 2008

Comments (17)

As usual on Fridays, I shall leave you in the more than capable hands of my co-presenter Anita Anand.

This was the week that all three main political parties offered different types of tax cuts to see us through these tough times.

We'll find out the true extent of the government's plans in the pre-Budget report in ten days' time.

But are tax cuts, speedier spending and deeper debt really going to pull us out of the recession? And which party is striking the right tune?

After a grim week when we discovered the truly horrific details of the death of Baby P and the stabbing of two young children in Manchester, we look at the state of our childcare services.

Also: can Gordon Brown really save the global financial system when he meets other world leaders at the G20 summit in Washington this weekend?

So, on today's programme we'll have:

• leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg;
• Ian Johnson, Chief Executive of the British Association of Social Workers;
• leading Westminster journalist Daniel Finkelstein of the Times and Richard Reeves, director of the think tank, Demos;
• and, as ever, we'll have our Friday run-down of what's up and what's down in the political charts.

See you at noon on BBC Two or this website - and please leave your comments in the box below.

"Crooks, gangsters and people getting rich out of the opium trade"

Andrew Neil | 11:23 UK time, Thursday, 13 November 2008

Comments (7)

More British fatalities in Afghanistan this morning: two Royal Marines were killed in an explosion in southern Afghanistan yesterday, the Ministry of Defence said. Next of kin have been informed.

So this morning, we're going to put the economy on the backburner for the day (though BT's plan to shed 10,000 jobs shows that we'll be coming back to it very soon and that there is now a daily drumbeat of grim economic news) and turn our attention to Afghanistan, where 8,000 British troops make up a key fighting part of the Nato deployment to defeat the Taliban and al-Qaeda and to give the country some semblance of peace and normality.

Unlike the invasion of Iraq, all three major British parties share and support that objective. But the British public is not part of the Westminster consensus. As Afghan President Hamid Karzai holds talks with Gordon Brown, a new BBC poll finds that more than two thirds of us think British troops should leave Afghanistan within a year. The poll shows little appetite for a war that few think that we can win (though nobody should seriously think we could lose: indefinite bloody stalemate is the feared outcome).

Last month, the departing commander of British troops in Afghanistan said that a purely military victory was not possible - though nobody who matters has ever thought it was - and that there would have to be a negotiated end to the conflict. There is a growing view that while Nato keeps up the military pressure, it should begin talks with the supposedly more moderate elements of the Taliban.

Senior Indian sources tell me that no such thing exists; even so, there is not much difference in practice between some of the Taliban and the Afghan warlords we've been dealing with for some time. To that end, we'll be asking: should we be talking to the Taliban? Secret talks are said to have been held, though Britain maintains a public posture of no negotiation (shades of how we handled the IRA there).

While in the USA last week, I was given a gloomy assessment of Afghanistan by a senior US spook. He said that the fundamental problem is that the Karzai government is riven with corruption and incompetence to its very core (which makes for a fertile breeding ground for the Taliban) and that Karzai was a decent enough character himself but that he was surrounded by "crooks, gangsters and people getting rich out of the opium trade."

He said that America and its allies had no Plan B to Karzai, that President-elect Obama's promise to send another 8,000 troops would make very little difference and that until the Taliban/al-Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan were destroyed, there was no chance of progress - but that if Nato attempted that with cross-border raids, the new, shaky government in Pakistan would tumble. He used a well-known Americanism: "we are between a rock and a hard place."

On today's programme, we'll be talking to the Foreign Office Minister, Lord Malloch Brown, about all this.

But we shall not be forgetting the tragedy of Baby P's brutal death, which has shocked the nation and raises some profound questions about the state of our country. We'll be asking to what extent are we indeed "a broken society" with the former Conservative leader and head of the Centre of Social Justice, Iain Duncan Smith, .

Our Guest of the Day is the comedian and GP, Dr Phil Hammond. We'll be looking at all of the above and at health service reform with him as Ross Hawkins looks at the NHS and talks to cancer specialist Prof Karol Sikora.

Join us at noon on BBC Two or this website and do leave your comments using the box below.

The more politicians talk tax cuts, the more sterling slides

Andrew Neil | 10:41 UK time, Wednesday, 12 November 2008

Comments

jobcentre2.jpgAnother day, another grim economic statistic: it's just been announced that unemployment (on the broad, internationally-recognised definition) increased by 140,000 to 1.82m between July and September; the number of people claiming jobseekers' allowance last month increased by 36,500 to 980,900, according to the Office for National Statistics. It is clear to most economists that the jobless total is heading remorselessly north of 2m sometime after Christmas.

Nobody should be surprised by these gloomy figures: simply by aggregating the job losses in yesterday's newspaper headlines it was possible to identify 4,000 lay offs at major companies in one day. Signs of labour market weakness are everywhere: average earnings increased by 3.3% in the year to September, 0.1% down from the previous month. Now that inflation is falling fast again the biggest fear is now recession; so workers seem more concerned about holding on to a job rather than pushing for big pay rises.

Recession is also standing our politics on its head. For years Gordon Brown has taunted the Tories for supposedly proposing "unfunded" tax cuts -- ie not financed by cuts in public spending or offsetting tax rises. Now Mr Brown is an enthusiast for unfunded tax cuts paid for by extra borrowing (indications are we'll get some in the forthcoming pre-Budget report) and he is attacking the Tories for proposing funded tax cuts! How the world turns ...

The Tories' "tax cut" -- the partial holiday in national insurance payments if employers take on extra labour -- is actually a job subsidy and was meant to show the Tories care about rising unemployment. But with the air thick with calls for tax cuts and a seeming consensus in their favour, the Tories turned their labour market subsidy into a tax cut too.

Journalists -- and voters -- should be sceptical when the political elite on the right and left is broadly shouting for the same thing. An interesting corrective to the tax-cutting consensus is provided this morning by the Guardian's economics editor, Larry Elliot who argues that tax cuts will make very little difference to the severity of the recession and that we can't afford them anyway.

They are certainly not a free lunch. Yesterday on the Daily Politics Tony McNulty, the employment minister, admitted that tax cuts financed by extra borrowing now would have to be paid for by higher taxes later. The Times editorial points out this morning that "the government has yet to find between £3-4bn to pay for this year's stamp duty holiday, fuel duty and 10p tax cut packages" before it considers further tax cuts in its pre-Budget Report.

The risk for the government is that it has mishandled expectations about any forthcoming tax cut. To have a real impact on the recession it would likely have to be very large -- perhaps as much as 1% of GDP or £15bn -- but the markets would take fright at such a huge increase in borrowing; so any cut will be much smaller and run the risk of disappointing.

The markets are already taking fright at the government's borrowing plans, despite Mr Brown's claim that there is scope to borrow more. The money-men do not believe the PM's claims of prudence and think the real level of Britain's indebtedness a lot higher than the published figures (43% of GDP at the latest count, NOT the 37% Mr Brown claimed yesterday) because it does not include off-balance sheet borrowing such as the public finance initiative. When off-budget borrowing is including, the national debt rises to around 50% of GDP.

The markets are baulking at the prospect of more borrowing on top of that. This concern is now been taking out on the pound, which tumbled to a 12-year low yesterday against a basket of the currencies of countries with which we do most trade -- and to a new record low against the euro.

Sterling is plummeting because there is new evidence that investors are shunning UK government bonds (or gilts, the means by which HGM borrows) and reluctant to fund much more borrowing. Huge inflows of funds into gilts in recent years have abruptly reversed.

Mr Brown may have ditched prudence for now and the government's self-imposed limits on borrowing are no longer clear. But the markets are imposing a discipline of their own: the more the government tries to borrow, the more sterling will likely slide -- and you cannot rule out a time when the markets simply say: not a penny more! Then the government will be unable to borrow further, except at huge cost.

kennedy.jpgYou will have gathered from all this that the economy is still very much on the agenda today. We'll be looking at the latest snapshots of the sinking economy with former Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy, leading Labour left-winger Jon Cruddas and the Conservative's shadow Business Secretary, Alan Duncan.

We've also got the first of our special reports on how the downturn is affecting the real economy and we'll hear from Dragon's Den businessman James Caan on doing business with the United States.

All that plus a report on Gordon Brown's attempts to instil discipline among his beleaguered backbenchers and, as always, live coverage of the latest Prime Minister's Questions.

It's Wednesday so we start at 11.30 this morning and we're on all the way til 1pm. Hope you can join us on the Daily Politics, here on BBC 2.

Future tax rises on agenda

Andrew Neil | 13:53 UK time, Tuesday, 11 November 2008

Comments

Employment Minister Tony McNulty told me this lunchtime that taxes may have to go up longer term to pay for current borrowing.

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.

Tax cuts are talk of the town

Andrew Neil | 10:10 UK time, Tuesday, 11 November 2008

Comments

It's press conference morning here in Westminster and tax cuts are the talk of the town. David Cameron was first off the block with an 8.30am announcement of his plan to give employers a National Insurance holiday if they take people onto their payrolls. Gordon Brown is now arguing the case for a fiscal stimulus as I write. Nick Clegg claims they're both running to catch up with the Lib Dems.

The Tories, however, are carving out a distinctive line: alone among the major parties in Britain (perhaps in the democratic world) they are setting their face against a fiscal stimulus. They think we're borrowing enough already; so every tax cut they propose is balanced by savings or extra tax elsewhere, which means their plans do not add to extra demand.

Certainly distinctive, perhaps even bold (the Tories did promise us "sound money" at their conference). But is it right? shadow_chancellor.jpg
Governments across the world are resorting to Kenysian pump-priming to mitigate the impact of the recession. So why are the Tories carving out different territory? That's what we'll be asking Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne this morning, along with a few other matters!

So join us at Noon for the Daily Politics on BBC2.

"Tax cuts are the new black"

Andrew Neil | 10:32 UK time, Monday, 10 November 2008

Comments

Suddenly politicians are falling over themselves to offer us tax cuts -- just at the moment when the cupboard is bare!

No matter, say the Keynsians, we need a mixture of tax cuts and extra public spending to mitigate the worst effects of the recession -- and if that means borrowing even more, so be it.

That's the thinking behind reports that the Chancellor is contemplating a £15bn tax cut package to be unveiled in his Pre Budget report expected later this month (though Mr Darling has not yet got round to telling us exactly when) . The Lib Dems are also calling for tax cuts.

The Tories are more chary of borrowing their way out of this recession (see George Osborne's reservations in today's Financial Times*) but are also worried about being left behind in the scramble for tax cuts. So tomorrow they'll unveil a new tax cutting policy to help ward of the symptoms of unemployment. If it's paid for by spending savings, however, it will not add to overall demand, which is the purpose of Keynsian pump-priming.

As Guido Fawkes says on his blog this morning: "tax cuts are the new black".But exactly what scope is there for tax cuts and would they really be a shot in the arm for an ailing economy? frankfield.jpg
I'll be talking to a former Labour Minister who thinks he know's the answers, the independent-minded Frank Field, who has called on the Chancellor to scrap the Pre Budget report in favour of tax cutting Budget this month.

Also today the Prime Minister's visit to the Gulf States last week underlined the growing power and importance of so called `Sovereign Wealth Funds' in investing in western economies that have been hard hit by the credit crisis. Mr Brown called for hundreds of billions to be made available by Gulf States for countries in economic peril but also warned he did not want such states to use it to gain political influence.

It's not just the Gulf States who have multi-billion dollar funds of these kinds: China, Russia and Singapore do too. So, should we be concerned about who buys what when it comes to the sale of British assets?

And Post Offices....which way will the Government jump on the awarding of the new contract to handle benefits and pensions - will it go to the Royal Mail and help save thousands of local post offices currently threatened with closure or will the contract go to a commercial rival? A report by MPs today warns delays in the decision is `destablising' the Post Office network.

janleeming.jpg
All that in today's show -- plus former newscaster Jan Leeming on why she thinks the Government is still not doing enough to help the elderly when it comes to the cold weather. If you're one of those sitting at home feeling the chill, are you getting enough help?

Don't forget we'd like your comments on that story and any other political stories that are making the news...email us at daily.politics@bbc.co.uk. We start at Noon today on BBC2.

*Here's the money quote from Osborne's FT article:
"Today, we must let the automatic stabilisers function. But as Lord Burns, former permanent secretary at the Treasury, warned last week, borrowing beyond that without being clear how the bills would be paid would be 'very dangerous at this point'. 'We begin from a position of a structural deficit. Adding to that structural deficit can only increase the problems subsequently,' he said. I agree. Spending our way out of recession will not work. Targeted tax cuts would help but they must be properly funded. Any tax cuts must not permanently increase the structural deficit and must be combined with a strategy to reduce it over time. If they are not, Britain's international credibility will be further imperilled, future generations will be burdened with even more debt and a recovery would be threatened by the prospect of large tax rises. We would be sowing the seeds of the next crisis."

The work has already started

Andrew Neil | 11:58 UK time, Thursday, 6 November 2008

Comments

Hello from New York - here's a word on today's programme from my co-presenter Jo Coburn.

Day Two and President Elect Obama's transition team is already hard at work in Washington and Chicago.

We're awaiting key announcements on the future make up of his government. With Iraq, Afghanistan and a global financial crisis to contend with, Mr Obama's priorities are dictated by events and so you can expect details on his treasury and security teams to start to emerge.

For today's programme, Andrew is live in New York with leading journalists Harold Evans, former Republican speech writer Lisa Shiffren, American financial expert Alvin Hall and West Wing star Ron Silver.

Laura is in Washington with the latest from there and she's been looking at just how to do a presidential transition - with the help of a Washington comedian.

Also today as we go on air - how far will the Bank of England go on interest rates? We hear from the Director General of the CBI and two members of our newly formed "Daily Politics Wise Council" of economists and businesspeople - Oliver Kamm and Baroness Jo Valentine.

All that, live at midday on BBC Two - you can email us at daily.politcs@bbc.co.uk or leave a comment in the box below.

The morning after the night change came to America

Andrew Neil | 10:51 UK time, Wednesday, 5 November 2008

Comments

anita203152.jpgI'm presenting the show from the US today and will blog after the programme - my colleague Anita Anand is in the London studio. Here's her run down on what to expect.


flags.jpg
So what time did you stay up till last night? Perhaps you are rubbing your eyes this morning along with the United States as they just start to wake up after a historic night.

victory.jpgBarack Obama, a young first-term senator, has been elected the country's first black president. In a stunning night of incredible state-by-state wins, Barack Obama stormed to victory, securing the presidency at just after 4am British time this morning.

The Democrat candidate trounced his Republican rival John McCain in the north, south, east and west of America - giving real substance to his mission to bring the country together.

Our programme today comes live from New York. Andrew will be joined by former Bill Clinton adviser Jamie Rubin, US pollster Frank Luntz, former Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown and journalist Ann Coulter to look back on the night when "change came to America", and look ahead to what the world can expect from President Barack Obama. We'll also hear from civil rights activist Jesse Jackson.

Here in Westminster all eyes are also on America, with political leaders quick to congratulate the president elect. Gordon Brown says Barack Obama has "energised politics", while David Cameron says "America has proved to the world it is eager for change".

We'll have more reaction from the PM and the Conservative leader in Prime Minister's Questions at noon, and in the studio we'll hear from our two political heavyweights ... Former Chancellor Ken Clarke and Government Minister David Lammy.

According to the polls - it's all over

Andrew Neil | 09:57 UK time, Tuesday, 4 November 2008

Comments

presidents.jpgBritish politics is on hold today as the political and media elite becomes more mesmerised than ever with today's presidential election across the pond.

According to the polls, it's all over -- not just the national polls, which give Obama a 7-point lead, but the more significant polls in the crucial battleground states. For example, Obama leads in Ohio and Pennsylvania, two states that McCain has to win if he is to take the White House, by 7 to 10 points respectively.

And yet, and yet ... The polls were equally clear about Obama before the Democrats New Hampshire primary at the start of the year -- but Hillary Clinton lived to fight another day. The pollsters assure us that this week's polls are more accurate (New Hampshire voters were in a particularly volatile and unpredictable mood) but then they would, wouldn't they?

Add to that the McCain camps' claim that the race is tightening in the last days (though hard evidence for that is sparse) and you can see why, though almost the whole US political establishment is assuming an Obama victory, not many are yet ready to shout it openly.

We'll know as this day ends anyway. Just after midnight UK time, the US networks will call Virginia, based on pretty accurate exit polls. If it goes for Obama, then it will effectively be all over; if it goes McCain's way then we could be in for a long night. An hour or so later we'll know who's won Ohio and Pennsylvania: an Obama victory in both means it really will be all over for McCain; but if the Republican holds on to both then he could be in the process of "pulling a Truman" (i.e. winning against all the odds, as Democrat Harry Truman did in 1948).

Today we'll have a last look at the poll and talk to Tony Blair's former Chief of Staff, Jonathan Powell, who knows America well. laura.jpgLaura Kuenssberg will be telling us why, whatever the result, the shape of American politics has changed, and we'll be talking to her live from New York.

whitehouse.jpgWe'll be giving you the result of our own Presidential poll --- yes, today we reveal the winner of your favourite post-war US President. Who can it be?

letts.jpg Throughout the programme we'll be talking to the political sketch-writer, Quentin Letts. His recent book naming 50 people who (he thinks) have messed up Britain names Margaret Thatcher as one. Not because he doesn't like her - he just thinks she stuffed the Tory chances in the North because of the miners strike. We'll be asking if that analysis is fair.

And ahead of that other important poll this week on this side of the Atlantic, the Glenrothes by-election in Fife, we'll be talking to the Liberal Democrat's campaign co-ordinator Danny Alexander. All that on the Daily Politics here on BBC2 at Noon today.

And don't forget tomorrow we will come live from London and New York, starting 11.30am, with all the latest on the morning after the night before!

Thoughts from abroad - with three days to go ...

Andrew Neil | 19:12 UK time, Sunday, 2 November 2008

Comments

Update [Monday 3rd Nov 3.49pm]: These are my thoughts from the US, with three days to go, and assuming an Obama victory. If McCain wins, expect very different thoughts on Wednesday morning!

[NB: Andrew's original blog post contained the paragraph above. Unfortunately, when we subbed it for him, we left out this text. From the comments below, we can see that omitting this paragraph has substantially altered the piece for many of you. Our apologies, and we hope this correction makes it clearer. Vanessa, The Daily Politics.]

(1) That part of the world which does not include the USA is pretty much a one-party state for Obama and if he fails to win, there will be much international wailing and gnashing of teeth at the "stupid, racist Americans".obama.jpg

But the rest of the world should be careful what it wishes for because an Obama victory will make the usual knee-jerk anti-Americanism, now so common in the chancelleries and fashionable drawing-rooms of European and developing countries alike, much more difficult. With someone called Barack Hussein Obama, son of a Kenyan goat-herder sitting in the Oval Office, default anti-Americanism will be harder to sustain, especially in Europe which has no Obamas of its own.

Indeed Europe hasn't even any Colin Powells or Condolezza Rices. France has 6m Muslims plus another 2m immigrant stock of black African origin, all in a country of 60m people. Yet not a single black or brown face is elected by metropolitan France to the French Assembly (a few come from distant colonial dependencies). Germany, with its huge and long-standing Turkish population, can manage only a few brown faces in its parliament. Italy is nowhere in representing racial minorities while Britain, which does better than most big European countries, has more black and brown faces in Parliament but they are still under-represented and none is in the first rank.

Symbolically and practically, an Obama presidency, following hard on Rice and Powell, will place Europeans at a disadvantage when it comes to attacking America. After all, it may still be "stupid and racist" but there is no prospect in the foreseeable future of a British, French, German or Italian Obama (or Powell or Rice for that matter).

Europe's anti-American intellectual snobs will now have to think twice before uniting with the jihadis to claim that whenever something goes wrong somewhere in the world "it is all the fault of American foreign policy, because it is racist and chauvinistic."

An Obama victory would also reinforce the story of the "American Dream", in which millions around the globe still believe, even if their governing elites affect to despise it. What other country would facilitate what Obama calls his "improbable journey?" It should chasten and humble other countries, which can only dream of such mobility.

(2) It's just as well that an Obama presidency should be able to count on international goodwill, at least at the start, because the new president will be greeted by the in-tray from hell when he gets his feet under the Oval Office desk. Two unfinished wars (Iraq and Afghanistan), a key ally in the war on terror on the brink of becoming a failed state (Pakistan) and the unresolved problem of Iran's nuclear ambitions - all to be dealt with against a domestic background of the worst financial meltdown since the Great Crash and what could be a long and deep recession.

He will have some advantages. Anti-Americanism is still virulent but is now past its peak in Europe. Germany's Merkel, France's Sarkozy merkel.jpgand Britain's Brown are naturally pro-American and will want to work closely with the new Administration. In Iraq the new president should be able to declare some sort of victory and begin the disengagement, with the support of everybody from Baghdad to Berlin.

Afghanistan is the more immediate problem but there is a Nato consensus that withdrawal is not an option and that more men and material will probably need to be deployed. Many Europeans who opposed the war in Iraq will likely be on Obama's side when it comes to Afghanistan.

Consensus doesn't make it much easier to solve, however; and the one step that might make a difference (and which Obama has indicated he might do) - hard, relentless hits on the Taliban's bases in Pakistan's North-West frontier with Afghanistan - could tame the Taliban only at the cost of destroying Pakistan. Obama has called for 10,000 more troops in Afghanistan, a pledge he made to show he's not soft on foreign policy. But that alone won't make much of a difference.

While President Obama is grappling with that, he should expect difficulties from an emboldened Iran, which could be keen to test the new president to see on how many fronts he's prepared to fight - militarily or diplomatically - at once. President Amadinijad's star is in the descendent in Tehran for the moment, which is good news for the new incumbent in Washington. But a black man in the Oval Office - even one that wants to talk to Tehran -- won't make the Iranian regime any less anti-American. Iran could become for Obama what Cuba was for JFK.

There is, of course, also China, which could turn nasty and more nationalist in the current global downturn, but let's leave that for another day.

(3) The Democrats should rule the roost in Washington with an Obama presidency, with a bigger majority in the House and possibly a 60-seat filibuster-beating tally in the Senate after Tuesday. But monopoly won't necessarily make for harmony between Capitol Hill and the White House.

Congressional Democrats will be more leftish than at any time since the 1960s and they will put pressure on an Obama presidency to move in their direction. Mr Obama's instincts might be to do so - he has been a very liberal Senator - but he will also have an eye on re-election in 2012 and that will keep dragging him back to the centre. Like New Labour in Britain, Mr Obama has the ability to disguise left-wing policies with right-wing rhetoric (so welfare tax credits are billed as tax cuts) but that will only take him so far with liberal-left Democrats in Congress, who will be pushing Obama to make some an epoch-defining reforms, in the manner of FDR.

That will appeal to Obama but he will not want to go too much against the grain of what is still a pretty conservative country. He is cautious and incrementalist, not given to bold moves. I expect him to govern largely from the centre, whatever his natural instincts, so tensions between the White House and Capitol Hill could emerge quite early in an Obama presidency. A sideshow of this will be deteriorating relations with America's black political establishment, which doesn't like Obama much and which he is bound to disappoint.

(4) If the Republicans end up out in the cold in the legislative and executive branches of government, they will be hoping a Democratic Congress drags an Obama presidency as far left as possible - because they'll see that as the most likely opening for a quick Republican recovery. Some Republicans are already speaking quietly about a Democratic monopoly triggering a Gingrich-style comeback and snapping the GOP out of its current morass.

Maybe. But Republican problems could be more deep-seated than that. For a start, the 9/11 effect in US politics, which was a huge asset for the Republicans, is pretty much gone. It got Mr Bush re-elected in 2004 but has done nothing for Mr McCain in 2008. He was chosen as the national security candidate in an election that turned out to be about economic security. Since the worst financial crisis for 80 years happened on the Republican watch, that has been a huge handicap for him which could haunt the Republicans for years to come. The prominence of economic security issues in 2008 explains why the Republicans are not running as well as they did in states like New Jersey in 2004.

But it's not just a reputation for economic competence that the Republicans have lost: because of Iraq they've also lost their reputation for national security competence. It's potentially a fatal double-whammy, with historic ramifications.

The coalition of fiscal conservatives, social conservatives and neo-con hawks, which has been the dominant political force in recent American history, is coming apart at the seams (for Republicans that could be the most dismal part of the Bush legacy) and it is not easy to see either how it could be sown together again or what would quickly replace it. FDR won in 1932 and 1936 largely by blaming everything on Hoover. The same could be true in 2008 and 2012, with Obama blaming Bush; the Republicans could be too busy trying to rebuild their own house to do much about it.

The GOP primary in 2012 could be a bloodbath because there is increasingly little uniting social, economic and national security conservatives (one of reasons why Senator McCain has struggled in the campaign to find an effective domestic message).

Normally, you'd advise the Republicans to learn from recently successful centre-right renaissances, such as David Cameron's Tories samanthacameron.jpgin Britain or President Sarkozy's neo-Gaullists in France. But the US Republicans are so unlike any other right-wing parties abroad that I'm not sure there are any international lessons to be learned.

(5) The election of 2008 heralds the emergence of a new America we will all have to get to know - and not only if it produces the first black president. If Obama takes Virginia and North Carolina, we will have come to terms with a new New South. Both states can no longer be considered part of the old New South, where the Republicans have dominated since Nixon's Southern strategy in 1968: culturally and politically they have been moving away from the rest of the South for some time, thanks to a combination of migration from the North and the growth of hi-tech jobs. That could prove to be a major boon to the Democrats.

So could the emergence of a new New West. States like Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada are now the fastest growing in the Union, as people flood in from the East and West (from California and even Oregon and Washington state) and Hispanic immigrants push up from the south. In the process they are ceasing to be safe Republican strongholds. It is possible the Republicans will win only Arizona on Tuesday, and that would be because their presidential candidate is its favourite son. The new New West and the new New South are re-writing the electoral map of America.

(6) Finally, let me finish on an optimistic note: America's faith in its ability to renew itself. A two-term presidency widely regarded as disastrous doesn't result in people turning away from politics or to violence on the streets or disillusion but instead leads to an election that breaks viewing records, sees a record number of people donate to a candidate, produces one ticket led by a black American, the other with a woman on it -- and, almost certainly, a record turnout come election day. Other democracies please note!

Explore the BBC

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.