Category: Budget

LABOUR OLDHAM WARNING AS OSBORNE MARCHES ON

OLDHAM WARNING FOR LABOUR.

A Labour contact of mine in the Oldham West by election says on the doorstep traditional Labour voters are raising Corbyn’s leadership all the time. This could be significant as “Westminster bubble” issues don’t always resonate with voters.

The feedback from this northern seat is that Corbyn and his close advisers are all perceived to be from a London clique who haven’t a clue about the North. This impression will be compounded by Corbyn’s decision to cancel his planned Friday visit to the by election as he tries to sort out serious divisions over his party’s policy on bombing Syria.

All this means that we would be unwise to rule out UKIP doing very well next Thursday night in Oldham West and Royton.

OSBORNE FOR PRIME MINISTER?

George Osborne’s shameless U turn on tax credits and police cuts will be long forgotten if his gamble in believing in a continuing world of low inflation and interest rates pays off. In his six years as Chancellor, he has shown himself generally to have a pragmatic and politically sensitive approach. Made a mistake over pasties or tax credits? Make a change and move on. His upbeat approach at all three budget statements this year raises the morale of backbench Tories who think he’s a winner. They also like the ideology which runs underneath the pragmatism. Osborne is determined to create a smaller state. By 2020 it will have shrunk from 50% to 35% of gross Domestic Product.

This is most clearly seen in housing policy. The private sector is to be incentivised to build 400,000 homes with a strong emphasis on making them available to buy not rent. Along with the right to buy for Housing Association tenants, the thrust of government policy is clearly away from social housing to home ownership. First time buyers with incomes of up to £80,000 in the North will be able to benefit from the subsidies offered. The policy will not help the poor who are most in need of housing.

On education George Osborne explicitly said the days of local councils running schools would be a thing of the past. 500 new free schools are to be built.

So ideology to please the Tory backbenches, pragmatism to please the voters, could this be a combination that allows George Osborne to see of Theresa May or Boris Johnson in the leadership election? At the moment he has to be favourite but what if things go wrong.

THE GAMBLE.

The Treasury are spinning that this isn’t the end of austerity. Well a strategic decision has been taken to take advantage of the more optimistic outlook offered by the Office for Budget Responsibility to ease the cuts in the early years of the parliament and breach the welfare cap. There is a heavy reliance on continued low inflation rates and growth of around 2.5%. If “events” happen like a further downturn in the Chinese economy, Osborne’s gamble could unravel just when he’s seeking to become Prime Minister. In that respect it is strange that he has decided to defer more painful cuts till nearer the election rather than getting them over now.

WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE NORTH.

Sir Richard Leese, the leader of Manchester City Council had challenged the Chancellor to put the flesh on the bones of the Northern Powerhouse particularly in relation to transport. Well there is £200m for transport including £150m for an “oyster” card system. This is brilliant news. Anyone who uses London Transport knows that card makes the use of public transport so easy. The M6 between junctions 16-19 is to upgraded. The motorway which enters the north through the important gateway of Cheshire and Warrington is often overlooked when connectivity is discussed. There are major investments in science and nuclear power. New Enterprise Zones are being created in Leeds, York, Greater Manchester Life Science Park, Cheshire Science Corridor and Hillhouse Chemical on the Fylde.

LABOUR VICTORIES.

Labour can claim to have forced the government to retreat over tax credits and police cuts but they still shoot themselves in the foot.

Liam Byrne’s 2010 message left on a Treasury desk saying there was no money left, Ed Miliband’s headstone and Shadow Chancellor John MacDonald’s brandishing of Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book are a woeful series of unnecessary public relations gaffs.

The tragedy is that the issue that MacDonald was trying to raise, the worrying amount of our infrastructure owned by the Chinese is a valid one.

MERSEYSIDE BOWING THE KNEE TO CHANCELLOR?

DEVOLUTION.

If Merseyside councils outside Liverpool are recognising the power of George Osborne, they won’t be alone. The concerns of Wirral, St Helens, Sefton and other councils that an elected sub regional mayor will mean domination by Liverpool are valid and need to be addressed. But the Chancellor restated in the Summer Budget that the only way to substantial devolution for city regions is by accepting the new role.

The Tories and George Osborne are at the zenith of their power. The Chancellor gave a confident performance as he set out his vision for a higher wage, lower welfare economy. It was more than the annual stock keeping on the country’s economy. It was a statement of the Tory vision, the like of which we have not seen since Chancellor Geoffrey Howe began implementing Mrs Thatcher’s economic architecture in the eighties.

Leaderless Labour see their policy of a living wage shamelessly pillaged by a Tory government that now seems to believe it’s the government’s job to meddle in what private firms pay their employees. The Scottish Nationalists are challenged by Osborne to use their powers instead of bellyaching for more and the Lib Dems, who used to have Danny Alexander at Osborne’s side as Chief Secretary to the Treasury have become an irrelevance.

In these circumstances it is unlikely that concerns about the governance of the Mersey City Region are going to get much of a hearing. The chair of the Combined Authority, Phil Davies, says they will be setting out their demands next week. However Treasury Minister Jim O’Neill tells us the councils have agreed on an elected city region mayor in principle and the talks will be about the timetable and powers.

George Osborne also made clear that similar talks are under way in South and West Yorkshire so there is a real prospect that in 2017 elections will be held for powerful city region mayors across the North.

So it is full steam ahead for the Northern Powerhouse? By no means. A government that reneges on a promise to electrify the Leeds- Manchester rail line can’t be trusted. Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson complained that the Budget contained no commitment to HS3 connecting Hull to Liverpool, “we could end up with a house without power.” Indeed we could. By their deeds we will know them.

WAR ON THE YOUNG.

The Chancellor wants to cut drastically the welfare state and abolish tax credits but he was careful to avoid the criticism that his measures were totally unbalanced in favour of the rich. So whilst we had a four year freeze on benefits and a 1% public sector pay rise over the same period we also had measures against Non Doms, tax evaders and wealthy car owners.

But Osborne has not taken a balanced approach to the young. They will be losing housing benefit and tax relief on pensions, not getting the £7.20 living wage, and maintenance grants for the poorest students are being turned into loans. A dangerous gap is opening up between how poor young people and wealthy pensioners are being treated.

WAGE INTERVENTION.

Tax credits were allowing some firms that could afford to pay better wages to get state subsidies but the planned increase of the living wage by 10% next year and up to £9 by 2020 is going to put a strain on some smaller businesses that genuinely can’t afford it.

It is a big increase at a time when inflation is at 1%. Politically it is an extraordinary move by a Tory government. In the seventies Harold Wilson’s government loved its Prices and Incomes Board. The state meddled in companies’ affairs for a pastime. Margaret Thatcher wanted the market to decide these things. But George knows best.

DON’T MENTION THE NORTHERN POWERHOUSE IN BUDGET GEORGE.

RAIL BETRAYAL.

I have rarely been so angered as I was on hearing the government had pulled the rug on major rail plans including the electrification of the Leeds- Manchester line.

It’s difficult to know where to start with this act of betrayal, almost deceit, being perpetrated on the people of the North. So here is a brief list of the things that were wrong with the announcement of the Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin.

Number one, the fundamental principle of the Northern Powerhouse is connectivity, bringing closer together the great cities of Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Hull and Newcastle. This “pause” which is a Whitehall weasel word for cancel, drives a coach and horses through the whole proposition.

Number two, for decades businesses dependent on government contracts have complained about the stop start approach of Ministers. The reason why our infrastructure is so poor is that successive governments have kept turning the investment tap on and off, making long term planning impossible.

Number three, for a year in the run up to the General Election Tory politicians were promising more and more spending on our rail connections. They must have known at least some of the truth. No wonder people are utterly cynical about politicians’ promises.

Number four, the chairman of Network Rail is made the scapegoat when the Transport Secretary should have gone too.

And finally will Crossrail 2 in London be affected by this plan? I don’t expect so. In which case the huge disparity between transport spend in the capital and the North will widen still further.

The only answer is to to devolve most of the transport budget to a Northern devolved government where we can make decisions for ourselves.

So George Osborne, don’t dare to tell us how much you support the Northern Powerhouse when you announce your budget on Wednesday because few will believe you.

BUDGET PREVIEW.

In his first budget this year George Osborne had Lib Dem Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander reminding him he was in a Coalition. Alexander has now gone back to his old job with the Highland Tourist Board for all I know. Anyway Osborne is now free to show us what the first fully Tory budget since 1997 looks like.

Will he implement £12bn of welfare cuts? Will he continue to hammer local council spending? Will he pursue an ideological approach to create a smaller state? The Chancellor has planned a roller-coaster of deep cuts at the beginning of the parliament followed by spending increases on the back of a surplus at the end. Great politics but it has attracted criticism from business that wants a smoother path to aid planning.

The Chancellor will have to fulfil his extraordinary promise to enshrine in law no increases in VAT, Income Tax and National Insurance. Other election promises centre around a rise in the threshold for Inheritance Tax and more measures on tax avoidance.

A growing issue is the UK’s poor productivity. Measures to tackle that would be good…..and that rail investment for the north.

COME DINE WITH ME

So now we know how those millionaires secured their tax break in the recent budget…. dining at Dave’s Dodgy Downing Street diner.

Mind you Labour is in no position to point fingers with the Unite union effectively choosing the next Labour leader and possible Prime Minister.

Nor are the Lib Dems in the clear on the issue of party funding, remember their association with donor Michael Brown who was convicted of fraud?

We’re told politicians hate these fund raising dinners when they have to sit for hours over the rubber chicken listening to some boring, but hopelessly wealthy donor, droning on about the 50p tax rate.

Well let’s put them out of their misery.

I’m a member of the Richard the Third Society. We campaign to correct the wholly distorted image of this fine king by that Tudor spin doctor Will Shakespeare. We can only spend the subscriptions we receive. It is the same for thousands of clubs and organisations all over the country.

So let the political parties survive on what they can get individual members to pay, with a ceiling of £5000.

I can hear the howls of anguish now. The democratic process will grind to a halt! The parties won’t be able to communicate with the voters!

What does this communication amount to? In the years between elections the parties tick over, selecting candidates, fighting local elections and spending modest amounts of money. When the General Election comes all reason is cast to the wind and millions are spent on posters, battle buses and political consultants. The mounting debts can be left for another day.

Most of what that money is spent on irritates the public profoundly. That’s why the concept of state aid (you and I paying for it in our taxes) is a non runner.

There is an argument that the political parties should be able to communicate with us directly on TV without the interference of journalists. So I propose that the BBC be charged with producing the party political broadcasts out of the licence fee money.

Not an appropriate use of the licence fee? Sorry that principle has been breeched already with BBC money being siphoned off to pay for digital switchover.

Most attention has focused on the Tories but Labour has become far too dependent on the unions. Union barons bankroll the party up to 90%. Ed Miliband denounces most strikes, so we can’t say this arrangement buys the barons much effect on policy. But the unions did bring their influence to bear in the leadership election. With rank and file members and MPs backing David Miliband, it was the union vote that secured Ed his victory. After the Bradford West debacle many in the party think the unions made a bad call.

Union members should have to positively opt in to having part of their sub paid to the Labour Party. I think most would and if not, that’s tough.

In any other walk of life if you want someone to give you money, you have to provide a product or service that they want. So it should be in politics. Then we stop this endless cycle of scandal as parties try to raise money either from dodgy characters or people expecting influence.