In article in the Evening Standard yesterday reviewing Alastair Darling's memoirs the distinguished political commentator Anthony Seldon argued, 'Britain has specialised in bad relationships between prime ministers and chancellors.' If that is the case, the consequences for the conduct of economic policy would be very serious as this relationship is the very fulcrum of government.
Seldon is able to produce a number of examples to support his case: (arguably) Howe and Thatcher; Lawson and Thatcher (although not initially); Lamont and Major; and Brown and Darling.
But one could produce counter examples. Seldon has to concede Clarke and Major. Healey from 1974 to 1979 had an effective working relationship with Wilson and then Callaghan. And the relationship between Osborne and Cameron seems to be harmonious and effective.
But then Cameron allows Osborne to get on with the job. The worst situations arise when the prime minister really wants to be chancellor as well. That was a problem with Macmillan's succession of chancellors and it was with Edward Heath, having seen the untimely death of Iain Macleod in the opening weeks of his administration. Anthony Barber was arguably one of the least impressive of post-war chancellors and lacked the authority and political base to stand up to Heath.
Given the importance of this relationship, it is remarkable how little systematic research there has been on it.
Showing posts with label Alastair Darling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alastair Darling. Show all posts
Tuesday, 6 September 2011
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
Vince wins, but what's the prize?
Vince Cable was the clear winner in last night's debate between would-be chancellors, both according to an online poll of viewers and my own judgement after watching the programme. Saint Vince did remind us that he had been right all long, but was also prepared to think the unthinkable and say we could not ring fence the NHS without leading to devastating cuts elsewhere.
George Osborne was wearing an over tight suit and was in a bit of a tight spot over the promise to reverse the proposed rise in National Insurance contributions. He claims to have discovered even more efficiency savings. We all know that they exist: on Saturday I got six separate letters with an accompanying leaflet about tax codes from Revenue and Customs. Some were for employers I had done a task for once and was unlikely to do again and once was for a pension fund I am not a member of. But as Vince pointed out, many of these efficency savings are 'pure fiction'. And if they can be made, why not use them to pay down the debt?
Darling batted well on a sticky wicket and did himself no harm. Unfortunately, the audience asked straight and clear questions, but rarely got straight and clear answers, although more so from Vince.
As George Osborne pointed out towards the end of the programme, we are either going to have a Conservative or a Labour Government sometime after May 7th, so there is no prize for Vince. One newspaper suggested this morning that we could have a Lib Dem chancellor, but the Lib Dems are not going to tarnish their identity by entering a coalition.
George Osborne was wearing an over tight suit and was in a bit of a tight spot over the promise to reverse the proposed rise in National Insurance contributions. He claims to have discovered even more efficiency savings. We all know that they exist: on Saturday I got six separate letters with an accompanying leaflet about tax codes from Revenue and Customs. Some were for employers I had done a task for once and was unlikely to do again and once was for a pension fund I am not a member of. But as Vince pointed out, many of these efficency savings are 'pure fiction'. And if they can be made, why not use them to pay down the debt?
Darling batted well on a sticky wicket and did himself no harm. Unfortunately, the audience asked straight and clear questions, but rarely got straight and clear answers, although more so from Vince.
As George Osborne pointed out towards the end of the programme, we are either going to have a Conservative or a Labour Government sometime after May 7th, so there is no prize for Vince. One newspaper suggested this morning that we could have a Lib Dem chancellor, but the Lib Dems are not going to tarnish their identity by entering a coalition.
Sunday, 13 December 2009
A failure on three fronts
Alastair Darling's pre-budget report has been something of a disaster. It has failed on three counts:
1. From an official Treasury viewpoint, the main short-term objective was to stabilise the markets. But there has been a flight from gilts.
2. It has not provide a platform for a Labour revival, given that it has managed to upset a range of target voters.
3. It has failed to provide a credible plan for dealing with the structural deficit.
Indeed, the fiscal position has got worse because Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper managed to persuade Gordon Brown that there should be a real increase in capital spending on school buildings. The more programmes are ring fenced, the harsher the axe that has to fall elsewhere to the extent that it is likely to do real and lasting damage. The authoritative Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that public spending will be have to be cut by as much as a fifth in areas such as defence, higher education, housing and transport.
Gordon Brown is also reported to have vetoed a VAT increase, meaning that there had to be a national insurance increase which in terms of the addditional levy on employers is a tax on jobs. The Conservatives are likely to increase VAT and possibly broaden its range, although targets such as children's clothing, books and newspapers would be controversial.
The IFS has also pointed out that the government's calculations do not really take account of the effects of an ageing population which would mean high public sector debt levels for a generation or more unless taxes were raised substantially or public spending was cut further.
Stand by for ten years of 'fiscal consolidation'.
1. From an official Treasury viewpoint, the main short-term objective was to stabilise the markets. But there has been a flight from gilts.
2. It has not provide a platform for a Labour revival, given that it has managed to upset a range of target voters.
3. It has failed to provide a credible plan for dealing with the structural deficit.
Indeed, the fiscal position has got worse because Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper managed to persuade Gordon Brown that there should be a real increase in capital spending on school buildings. The more programmes are ring fenced, the harsher the axe that has to fall elsewhere to the extent that it is likely to do real and lasting damage. The authoritative Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that public spending will be have to be cut by as much as a fifth in areas such as defence, higher education, housing and transport.
Gordon Brown is also reported to have vetoed a VAT increase, meaning that there had to be a national insurance increase which in terms of the addditional levy on employers is a tax on jobs. The Conservatives are likely to increase VAT and possibly broaden its range, although targets such as children's clothing, books and newspapers would be controversial.
The IFS has also pointed out that the government's calculations do not really take account of the effects of an ageing population which would mean high public sector debt levels for a generation or more unless taxes were raised substantially or public spending was cut further.
Stand by for ten years of 'fiscal consolidation'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)