The Guardian, Financial Times and Independent devote their front pages on the “backlash” that will follow George Osborne’s first Budget tomorrow. The Guardian says “Osborne said he had designed the budget to ensure that everyone played their part in tackling the deficit, but last night that argument seemed to be failing to convince as he came under attack from industry, civil society groups and unions over the plans.” Tim Nichols of the Child Poverty Action Group said: “Despite promises of fairness from the coalition government, they appear to have no process in place for delivering it. We need to know why people on low incomes are being clobbered with cuts to free school meals and the future jobs fund while many higher up the income scale have barely felt a pinch.”
The Financial Times reports that, “Official forecasts will show George Osborne’s emergency Budget hitting growth and costing jobs in the short term, government sources said last night, but the austerity measures will also create a brighter climate for the economy by the end of the parliament.” The Independent forecasts, “a substantial jump in unemployment over the next few years – closer to 10 per cent or 3 million jobless than the current 2.5 million – figures that recall the dark days of the 1970s.” The Telegraph reports that Mr Osborne risks a rift within the Coalition, “as Liberal Democrat backbenchers said that they could not support cuts to welfare budgets.”
The Daily Telegraph‘s front page focuses on potential changes to public sector pensions. The paper reports that, “Nurses, teachers, council workers, civil servants and police officers will be expected to pay hundreds or even thousands of pounds more each year into their pension pots, as the era of early retirement on generous payments is brought to an end.” Former Labour Work and Pensions Secretary, John Hutton, will lead a new government commission, which “could recommend that public sector staff begin paying more towards their retirement as early as next spring.” The Independent says a “row” has been caused by Mr Hutton’s appointment and quotes remarks made by John Prescott on his blog: “I was surprised to see Lib Dems used by the Thatcherites like Cameron and Osborne to provide cover in the Treasury for their heartless programme of cuts. Watch them bring used again as apologists for that VAT rise on Tuesday. But that pales into insignificance now Labour ministers – Labour ministers – have decided to collaborate with the Tories … Now we have the unedifying spectacle of John Hutton, Labour’s former Work and Pensions minister, chairing a new Independent Pensions Commission with the obvious aim to dismantle state pensions.”
The Times front page appears to leap on a single press release by the CBI business group to produce the headline: “Demand for strike laws to curb union militancy”. The paper reports that “British business leaders are demanding contingency plans from the Government, comprising new union laws, to cope with the surge in industrial action they expect after public sector cuts to be announced in the Budget tomorrow.” But only John Cridland, the CBI’s deputy director-general, is quoted: “The bar needs to be raised, so strike action is not possible unless 40 per cent of the workforce has actively voted to withdraw its labour.” Under the proposals, ballot rules would be changed so that industrial action could go ahead only if 40 per cent of the balloted workforce support it, as well as a simple majority of those voting, which is the current requirement. In the Financial Times, Brendan Barber, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, said the CBI proposals were “a demolition job on the rights at work of their members’ staff – and a charter for exploitation by unscrupulous employers”.
The Guardian covers research by the Sutton Trust showing that “student fees hike ‘may cut applications by half’.” The Ipsos Mori survey of 2,700 11- to 16-year-olds found that four out of five young people in England and Wales currently think they will probably go on into higher education, but that figure would drop to just 45 per cent if fees doubled to £7,000 a year, and to a third among those whose with unemployed parents. At £10,000, just a quarter would set their sights on a degree. The number of young people currently aspiring to go to university is at a record high, up seven percentage points since 2008. Peter Lampl, the Sutton Trust’s chairman, said: “If Lord Browne’s review concludes that higher fees are necessary, there is a significant task ahead in ensuring that all young people – and particularly those from non-privileged homes – are equipped with the information they need to make well-informed decisions.” The president of the NUS, and Left Foot Forward contributor, Aaron Porter, said: “These statistics are further proof that increasing the already crippling debt that faces students when they graduate from university would dramatically impact the number of young people able to enter higher education.” The leaders of seven unions wrote a letter to the Guardian: “We also reject the idea of lifting the cap on student top-up fees which we believe will squeeze out poorer students. Rather, there should be sustained public investment in education to promote widening participation and aid economic recovery.”
The Telegraph reports that Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel is “expected to quit White House”. Washington insiders say he will quit within six to eight months in frustration at their unwillingness to “bang heads together” to get policy pushed through. The paper reports that it is “well known in Washington” that arguments have developed between pragmatic Mr Emanuel, a veteran in Congress where he was known for driving through compromises, and the idealistic inner circle who followed Mr Obama to the White House. Friends are reported saying he is also worried about burnout and losing touch with his young family due to the pressure of one of most high profile jobs in US politics.
16 Responses to “Politics Summary: Monday, June 21st”
Fat Bloke on Tour
I fear all the crocodile tears from the Grauniad and the Indy are 6 months too late. They took Dave the Rave’s shilling with their class based election coverage and now they are getting worried that the cuts will affect nice middle class public sector workers.
If the whole Sniffy and the poisoned Dwarf “fire up the chainsaw, lets slash and burn” comes as a surprise to these papers then they have been living in the North London dinner party alternative universe for too long.
I mean less than three months ago all the talk was that all the parties were hiding the truth from the electorate, a new angle on the timeless refrain of middle class establishment out to lower the turnout at the bottom — “they are all as bad as each other”
Well now we have two parties not telling the truth on the economy, the ConDemNation / Coalition pushing lies about the state of the nations finances. If only the Grauniad / Indy had been a bit more daring during the election campaign and a little less worried about their recruitment advertising led business model.
Oh well better late than never.
If they are cutting the numbers of social workers then the implied threat to cut the job adverts has been nullified. I wonder what Cashcroft’s next question in the Lord’s will be about?
LockPickerNet
Politics Summary: Budget "backlash" begins; higher fees will cut university applications http://bit.ly/bfDM2o via @leftfootfwd
Anon E Mouse
Fat Bloke on Tour – The last chancellor, Alistair Darling, on The Politics show yesterday couldn’t justify spending £25million of our money on a visitors centre at Stonehenge and numerous other silly Labour promises by the unelected Peter Mandelson.
Tell me why you think the G20, who agree with immediate cutting are wrong?
Unlike Alistair Darling, why do you think it is acceptable to waste money on silly projects like that?
It’s not their money it’s ours and you seem to have a total lack of economic understanding ya numpty…
Marcel Duda
<b>Politics</b> Summary: Monday, June 21st | Left Foot Forward http://goo.gl/fb/rVSwD
Fat Bloke on Tour
Mr Mouse
There are two part to your question:
1) £25mill for a visitor’s centre at Stonehenge?
2) If we don’t spend it what do we do with the £25mill?
1) Site of global historical significance, therefore the visitor experience should tie in with the scale of the attraction and the fact that it is located in a major industrialised country.
Consequently we need to improve the situation at Stonehenge.
Visitor centre needs improved along with the roads layout.
The issue for me is managerial competence / agency infighting.
The visitor centre should be built with the Lottery a better bet than general taxation.
2) If we don’t want to spend the money on a non productive asset at this particular moment then what should we do?
a) Use the money somewhere else to improve the stock of productive public assets / generate demand?
b) Use the money to reduce the deficit?
c) Use the money for tax cuts.
For me it has to be Option a.
The biggest issue is not the size of the deficit but lack of demand.
Any tax cut will only lead to increased savings in the current climate, not what we are needing right now.
a) = Improve the public realm, pay wages — public can decide what to do with the extra income.
c) = Cut taxes — public can decide what to do with the extra income.
Ther is no such thing as a free lunch.
However there is the stupidity of self denial as you try and save up for the food only to die of starvation before you have enough.
Similar to the current media / establishment / ConDemNation orthodoxy that the main issue is not that the Fire Brigade saved your house from burning down it is the fact that they used too much water to put out the fire.
The problem is not that they are saying this but that intelligent rational people actually believe them. The paradox of thrift is not exactly a new idea but we seem incapable of taking on-board the lessons of 80 years ago.
Regards the rest, all it shows is that AD is a timid Edinburgh lawyer to trade and that all the tax cuts in the world won’t help if your burd, a social worker by all accounts, gets her jotters as part of Sniffy’s “Fire up the chainsaw — lets slash and burn” exercise tomorrow.
Consequently away and throw shite at yersel ya muppet!