This week's column

My Notts column from this week, click to go to full article...

DAVID Cameron once called Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls the most annoying man in British politics. It was a brutal description, but perfectly true.

I imagine it is even a badge Balls is quite proud of, in the same way a trouble-making youth has no qualms telling peers about his asbo.

Indeed, in the scoff-fest of the Commons floor it helps to be highly annoying, it distracts your opponents and knocks them off guard and Balls is a master.

Ripping of the day...

This segment of last night's Jobs and Growth debate got me chuckling when I read it this morning.

Mr Osborne: There was an absolutely staggering second omission from the shadow Chancellor’s speech, which was any reference — I will take an intervention if I have got this wrong — to Labour’s big new economic policy idea, which was unveiled at the Labour conference two weeks ago. I am referring, in case hon. Members have forgotten, to that great plan to divide British businesses into producers and predators — good and bad — and to levy different tax rates on them. Remember the speech from the Labour leader? Did the shadow Chancellor have any part in writing that speech?

Ed Balls: It was a very good speech.

Mr Osborne: At last there is something we agree on. It was absolutely the speech that we wanted to hear from the Labour leader at the Labour conference. I want to know what happened to this great idea, which was the centrepiece of Labour’s growth strategy for the new economy. Two weeks later it is not even referred to in the motion that we are being asked to debate. It is like the Lord Lucan of policy ideas: we do not know whether it is dead already or whether it has just gone missing for ever. I was really disappointed, because we know that the shadow Chancellor likes to cover all the policy areas in the shadow Cabinet and I was hoping for an explanation from him about how the idea was going to work. Are we supposed to grow our economy by levying new taxes and regulations on companies owned by private equity firms such as Boots, T-Mobile, the AA, Saga, Somerfield, Legoland and Chessington World of Adventures, those well known centres of predatory business activity?

Balls capitalises on fuel duty...

So far Labour has managed to use its Opposition Day debates to pretty good effect.

The tuition fees debate capitalised on protests outside Parliament, while debates on cuts to school sports funding and the now-abolished plans to sell-off woodland preceded full on u-turns.

So it's no surprise that the week before Budget day, March 23, the Opposition is targeting fuel duty.

Ed Balls will use his party’s debate this Wednesday to call for fuel to be exempt from the most recent rise in VAT.

The Government has already been hinting that some sort of action on the price of fuel would be taken in the Budget.

But none the less if George Osborne does make any concessions now then Balls will say it's another sign of Government back peddling in the face of Labour pressure.

Treasury officials' bonuses

There we were, wondering whether the Treasury would introduce restrictions on bankers’ bonuses, when all along they were tucking something away for themselves.

Figures from the Treasury show that 736 bonuses of some sort were awarded in 2006/07 – totalling £1.1m.

Amounts then rose to 2008/09 – the year in which the recession kicked in – when 990 bonuses totalling almost £1.4m were handed out.

In 2009/10, a higher number of bonuses, 1,273, were awarded albeit with a lower overall total of around £1.3m.

In total over the four year period up to 2009/10, over £5m was handed to Treasury officials.

You might think that when the overall annual cash figures are divided among the number of bonuses given out, that each bonus doesn’t seem that big.

Take 2008/09 for example… £1.4m / 990 bonuses = £1,414 per bonus.

But the truth is that bonuses varied in size and the top bonuses in each year ranged between £15,000 and £22,000 – not far off the average basic annual salary in the UK.

The amounts are not like the sky-high bonuses bankers get, but some of these officials may well bear responsibility for the regulatory system which contributed to the banking collapse.

Interesting to see whether Osborne has taken out his axe over the issue by the time the 2010/11 figures come out.

Labour needs to land more punches

There seemed to be little bile towards the Government over defence cuts yesterday considering it committed to slashing 25,000 civilian and 17,000 military personnel.

In part it might be because people don’t have enough time to think about it before they are being bombarded with another round of broader cuts today. It may even be simply because everyone accepts the cuts need to happen.

But it’s also because Labour failed to land any punches on the Coalition in the House of Commons during the statement and debate yesterday.

Miliband’s speech hardly registered in the post debate/statement commentary neither he nor any MP really made the case for slower cuts – where was the “credible alternative” that was promised.

I spoke to Labour MPs who said there hadn’t been any organisation of the party through the whips for either yesterday or today’s much more demanding event. There just hadn’t been enough time since the shadow government was put in place, they said.

The opposition’s befuddlement seemed to be symbolised when Eurosceptic Tory MP Edward Leigh stood up and encouraged the Government to work more closely with the French.

If Labour can’t attack the Tories on their Euroscepticism, then on what can they?

The failure to really score yesterday means Johnson must punch chunks out of Osborne today if the opposition wants to have any sort of impact on the debate. Do we think he’s ready?

Anti-climax at Treasury questions...

What a bore Johnson and Osborne were in the House today – not a patch on the scrap between Michael Gove and Andy Burnham yesterday, (see below).

I suppose Johnson didn’t want to get too involved in a ruckus which showed up his lack of detailed knowledge.

And it would have been rather base of Osborne to pound a weaker opponent for it on his first day, may as well stick to policy and seem the bigger man.

Either way, I hope Johnson finds his fight soon because a good face off between the two has an awful lot of potential.

A book in the making?

While Lobbydog was chewing over the Mandelson and Blair books with Ken Clarke the other day, the Justice Secretary said something that should make several generations of politician nervous.

“If I ever leave politics and have absolutely nothing to do and if I persuade myself I still have my marbles, then I may fall into that bad habit of politicians and try to write my memoirs.

“Posterity had better hope that I don’t get round to do it.”

Given that Clarke has been around since 1970 (see pic), has run five Whitehall departments, served in three Tory administrations and contended the party leadership an equal number of times, it’s likely he knows one or two decent yarns.

Older tales about Thatcher’s cabinet would be one thing – but I imagine, once free from the shackles of ministerial position, he might have a few interesting points to make about Cameron and Osborne too.

The Taiwanese take on Osborne's Spending Challenge website...

The week the Commons came back...

There was a heady and unnerving buzz ringing in my head when leaving the Commons chamber after this week’s Budget statement.

Initially I suspected the halibut served up in the Press Gallery canteen may have been a little gammy.

But after consultation with others it emerged that something altogether more surprising had occurred – we had been invigorated by the Budget.

In the old days lobby journalists took bets on which MP would nod off first as Alistair Darling trudged through his colourless dialogue – usually one whom had recently partaken in a robust lunch.

I must admit missing watching the rotund Sir Patrick Cormack MP fighting to stay awake – his battle for sleep used to leave his head amusingly wobbling about like a balloon filled with water.

Indeed Darling’s prowess at being able to bore grown men into sleep was legendary and a powerful tool for hiding bad news when mixed with the opaque prose of Treasury documents.

Whatever your political views on George Osborne’s first budget statement, however, there was no getting round the fact that the event this week was devilishly exciting.

The Commons came alive in a fest of partisan politics – even the new MPs who’ve been loath to seem like the old bunch could not help but heckle.

Newbie MPs have been trying to show they’re not like the harrumphing, shouting members of pre-coalition politics but the heat of a passionate Budget debate broke them.

Despite the Deputy Speaker trying to calm the House down and saying that the public did not appreciate the noise, this was the Commons recapturing some of the drama which it lost towards the end of the last Parliament.

Osborne in the holding role?

The general election next year will share 2010 with the World Cup – getting into the spirit of things the Tories have put out their ‘dream team’ sticker package.

It consists of a sticker book (in the style of those football sticker books you used to try and fill up when you were a kid) complete with stickers of the shadow cabinet which you can collect and swap with other conference delegates.

The formation in the sticker book has Cameron up front, of course, and Osborne in the holding role in midfield – which I’m not sure he is robust enough to perform.

I’ve almost got all the stickers, but unfortunately I have two Justine Greenings – the shadow minister plays on the wing according to the book.

The stickers show the Tories’ heads super imposed on a male football player’s body, which creates a most disturbing spectacle in Greening’s case.

Anyway does someone out there have a Geoffrey Clifton-Brown?

Back for now...

What’s Westminster coming to when you can’t go away for a couple of days without the political battle-lines being totally re-drawn.

Terribly inconsiderate of Osborne not to wait for Lobbydog’s return before revealing that leaked document – anyway back into the fray.

Sounds like the story I would have enjoyed most were I here was Ken Clarke thinking Phillip Hammond’s name was actually “Phillip Holland”.

Cutting a way forward

Throughout the ‘spending row’ the PM has tried to sell the idea that the Tories will cut, while Labour will invest.

Today George Osborne framed the row differently while giving a speech at the think tank Demos.

"We face a choice between progressive reform with the Conservatives and front line cuts under Labour.

"Without fundamentally improving the productivity of public services, the quality of those services will deteriorate as budgets are squeezed.

"Since the current Labour Prime Minister has made himself a roadblock to reform, and refuses even to acknowledge the budget constraints, the only path he offers is one
that will lead to deep cuts in front line services."

It’s the same line the Tories have been getting out all along, but put a little more clearly and with a little more emphasis on the idea that Labour will be the ones making cuts.

Of course the line “progressive reform with the Conservatives” will still spell c-u-t-s for leftish voters.

But it’s the idea that the Tories have a plan based on a brutally honest appraisal of the facts and are aware that cuts are necessary which will win those all important middle-way votes.

Osborne's detractor

Here is the chair of Tatton Labour Party giving his reasons for making a complaint against the shadow chancellor on Sky News.

PMQs: Too little, too late

I think after 50 seconds even Sir Peter Tapsell forgot the start of his sentence.

Cameron and Osborne were practically cracking up on the front bench while he asked his question.

Apart from such light entertainment PMQs was a bruiser for the PM today.

Brown actually appeared quite confident but the times are simply against him now.

Cameron had a dig about the departure of Blears and Smith, but didn't land the killer punch - as can be his habit.

Nick Clegg said Labour was finished and the real choice now was between the Lib Dems and Tories.

He was laughed into his seat, but that he could say it at all is telling.

Far more interesting was watching the cabinet and other ministers as they sat trying to look nonchalant.

The PM twice declined Cameron's invitation to say Darling would be in position next week.

Ed Balls sat down next to Alan Johnson. The Health Secretary refused to even acknowledge his colleague - he didn't look at him once.

Police Minister Vernon Coaker stood by the door biting his finger-nails and walked out half way through.

Labour's storm is breaking.

Tories target counties

Look at where the shadow cabinet is going to launch the Tory local election campaign today and you’ll see some of the authorities at which the party believes it can make the greatest gains.

It’s no secret they’re targeting the midlands counties like Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, where Labour councils are scared the Government’s unpopularity might see them unseated.

Liam Fox is in Devon, Michael Gove is in North Yorkshire, Alan Duncan is in Essex, Chris Grayling is in Lancashire, Francis Maude is in Derbyshire and Theresa May is in Notts.

Meanwhile George Osborne is in Somerset, Eric Pickles is in Warwickshire, Grant Schapps is in East Sussex and Caroline Spelman will go with David Cameron to Tynemouth.

Clarke sits back

Something I noticed yesterday that I forgot about until now.

Ken Clarke is usually the laid back sort anyway, but during the budget statement the Notts MP was noticeably excluded from proceedings.

The Tory front bench was a hive of activity – David Cameron, George Osborne, Philip Hammond and Oliver Letwin all discussed lines of attack during Darling’s speech and passed documents to each other.

Clarke, the shadow business secretary, didn’t say a single word to anyone.

He just sat back and stretched out his hush puppies with a relaxed smile on his face.

Considering he supposedly spends a lot of time discussing the economy with the leadership and was sitting right there, it almost seemed odd that he chose to keep his mouth shut the whole way through.

If it was an attempt to make sure the focus never shifted from Cameron and Osborne it seems to have worked.

Osborne talks post-crash policymaking

George Osborne talks with RSA Chief Exec Matthew Taylor

Clarke Honeymoon

Ken Clarke comes in at sixth in the most recent ConservativeHome shadow cabinet league table.

He rates two places higher than his predecessor Alan Duncan and seven places higher than the shadow chancellor.

It's not bad considering he’s disliked by the right of the party.

Is George stepping up?

“Well, look, y-y-you can look at the detail of these things…”

Was the incoherent answer that Alistair Darling gave to the question of whether there should be a cap on bankers’ bonuses.

Both he and his yet-to-be nemesis George Osborne were interviewed on Marr this morning.

The preview shot of their interviews at the start of the show had an awkward feel to it – they had probably been hitting each other with rolled-up newspapers moments before.

But when the camera fell upon them for three or four seconds both looked to convey some sort of message in their face.

Darling must’ve got his expression wrong because he looked smug, while Osborne was so steely-faced I thought a throbbing vein in his forehead might pop.

This blog has given George a tough time over the appointment of Ken Clarke – which he’ll admit in his heart knocked his confidence – but today he did well.

He came across competent and confident and showed something he has sometimes lacked, maturity.

His plans for Bank of England reform were well put forward and he was comfortable talking about “correcting market failures” – which should be unbecoming of a Tory.

And on a day when news headlines focused on bankers’ bonuses he answered the crucial question properly. Should there be a cap?

“Yes. Is the short answer,” he said.

Moments later Darling gave his stuttering response to the same question and the difference was marked.

The Treasury has apparently told banks that executives associated with big losses “should” not get bonuses.

But the Government also told banks last year that they “should” start lending to small businesses and that hasn’t happened.

George is important, honestly

The Conservatives must get over this need to emphasise George Osborne’s importance at every turn.

It sounds forced and has done since before Ken Clarke came back – plus it’s not doing the shadow chancellor any favours.

The most recent example was one of William Hague’s answers on Marr this morning.

The skeletal presenter had just asked Hague whether he was now deputy leader of the Conservative Party.

“I’m David Cameron’s deputy,” he said.

“We don’t use the title deputy leader. Technically they call me the senior member of the shadow cabinet.”

While Marr, myself and the rest of the country were wondering what the need for all this trifle was, Hague answered without anyone asking.

“And there is George Osborne – indispensible to everything David Cameron has done.”

The other political interview on Marr was Health Secretary Alan Johnson.

Downing Street officials were, earlier this week, encouraging other members of the cabinet to talk about the economy to take the strain off Brown.

They singled out Johnson and accused him of keeping a low profile. I’d say he probably has – not wanting to tie himself, and his ambitions, to the deck of a sinking ship.

Rebuffing accusations Johnson seemed to query how he could be keeping a low profile if he was on the Andrew Marr show.

The question is obviously whether he would have been on the Andrew Marr show had he not been accused of keeping a low profile.