
The government’s response to the Heseltine Review is tokenistic
The Heseltine Review implemented quickly and properly could spur on the economic recovery, but sluggish, tokenistic implementation isn’t going to cut it.

The Heseltine Review implemented quickly and properly could spur on the economic recovery, but sluggish, tokenistic implementation isn’t going to cut it.

The media is already occupied with pre-Budget clamour: what will Osborne’s rabbit out the hat trick be this time round? But pasty taxes, bedroom taxes, even a mansion tax (which will raise around £2bn) can only be described as fiscal tinkering. What’s needed is a bolder approach.

George Osborne has been humiliatingly been accused of talking “sheer nonsense” by U.S. business and technology news website Business Insider, after Osborne cited the crisis in the Cypriot banking system as an example of why Britain must continue the “painstaking work” of austerity.

Budget predictions and demands can be boring (read most of those in the Observer if you don’t believe me) but it is an annual requirement to make clear what you want knowing full well that you’ll be disappointed. If that’s to be the case I’ve decided to go for maximum remorse and show no restraint in what I’d hope for.

Left Foot Forward has looked at a few things we already know will be in next week’s Budget as well as at those things which stand half a chance of making it.

If we want to help more young people start and run successful businesses we need to recognise the wide variety of entrepreneurial journeys that they take.

Nigel Farage, generally considered to be to the Right of the Conservative Party, is advocating expansionist Bank of England policies, and “maximum employment”.

Previously describing tax avoidance as “morally repugnant”, Osborne has commendably acknowledged the extent of the problem as a drain on public finances. Unfortunately the key weapon in Osborne’s arsenal to tackle the problem – the General Anti-Abuse Rule (GAAR) – is far too narrow to prevent the major headline-grabbing schemes which have emerged in recent months.

What’s wrong with the Mundell-Fleming model? This question probably doesn’t much pre-occupy the political class, but it should because it provides pretty much the only defence remaining for the coalition’s macroeconomic policies.

Fraser Nelson has a piece in the Spectator this morning in which he claims that the way to ensure the rich pay their way in taxes is to…cut their taxes. There is an elephant in the room, however.