Classic Brown
The real story of today's pre-Budget report will be the dog that didn't bark or, more precisely, the black hole that disappeared. This will be the first statement by the chancellor for some years in which the opposition and commentators will not be able to point gleefully to an embarrassingly large gap between the Treasury's predictions for borrowing and the outturn. If anyone can be gleeful today it will be Gordon "I told you so" Brown. He will have to correct a forecast - the one for economic growth - but, happily for him, it will be upwards.
Now, dogs that don't bark rarely make headlines which is why the chancellor's tried to write his own news coverage this morning by previewing his pledge to rebuild Britain's schools over the next 15 years. This is classic Brown. It is meant to highlight the choice he says will face us at the next election between, you guessed it, investment and tax cuts.
But today's announcement will, I suspect, prove to be more an ambition than a concrete pledge. Remember his promise to increase spending in state schools to the same level as in private schools? The Education Select Committee criticised that for its vagueness and un-measurability. That won't worry him. His objective is to get interviewers and voters alike to ask the Tories "do you want to re-build schools or to bribe us with tax cuts?"
The Conservatives are, I suspect, a key influence behind another of the chancellor's announcements today. Ever since the opposition announced that they supported a hike in "green taxes" it's been irresistible for the Treasury to take them at their word. A politically cost-free tax rise is pretty irresistible and has the added benefit that it limits the shadow chancellor's room for manoeuvre.
Having said all this I will be missing the PBR. I am on my way to the airport to fly to Washington to see the unveiling of the Baker/Hamilton Report into Iraq and watch how the prime minister reacts to it when he arrives in Washington DC tomorrow.
The news there is being made by the new defence secretary's shock announcement that we are losing the war in Iraq. It's a sign of the times that that's considered news. Surely "we are winning the war" should be the more noteworthy and extraordinary statement.
I'm 
Comments
Don't worry Nick, we've all heard it all before:
Taxes rise, public services fail to improve.
The reason it's newsworthy Nick is that while it's clear to everyone else that the war is being lost, it's only just been admitted.
It's been denied so long, it is an extraordinary statement.
Don't worry Nick, we've heard it all before: Taxes rise, public services continue to improve.
As always, these comments depend entirely upon perception rather than fact.
I wonder if the BOE govenor has pencilled in the tax rises on the agenda for the next Interest rate meeting - surely the increase in Fuel duty will push up the rate of inflation and therefore the BOE will raise interest rates to bring inflation down and we all get squeezed from both directions.
I am fed up with pumping taxes into public services that continue to be abyssmal so I will take the bribe and have some tax cuts cheers.
Nick, same old rhetoric. Brown should be an illusionist as he works with smoke and mirrors all the time. Close to sixty and in my own business, I haven't noticed any good times for years and cannot wait to exit this pest hole of a country. Green taxes? Will China,India and the US be following our lead? Education. Had near 10 years on that one and we have 50% of our population semi literate. Iraq, Afghanistan. Monumental blunder that has cost many young lives for what and cost us a fortune. Sorry Nick, let the public at these clowns. Put them on the spot answering un-rehearsed questions rather than picking and choosing what they want to answer. And by the way Did he ask the electorate if it was okay to spend another 600mil on a useless war? That figure might help a few old folks through this winter. Not a happy man.
Nick, the new Defence Secretary said "we are not winning the war". It is just semantics but it isn't necessarily the same as admitting they are losing the war.
I was suprised there was no increase in alcohol taxation today, a case of stopping Brown from being "the man who taxed Christmas cheer"?
I don't see how green taxes which go directly to Gordon Brown are ultimately expected to improve the environment. To me its just another excuse to slap another tax on to the public. Same old story, same old Labour.
Nick, this is an unrelated post, none of the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ reports have picked up the Chancellors change of heart on Pension Term Assurance, which he has effectivly stopped as product with his announcement (p119). This product is exceedingly popular and benefits all sorts of people especially as the life cover keeps the families of the deceased off state benefits. It is a shame to see such a good benefit cast aside.
Paul Wilson, you didn't expect Brown to announce any bad news did you!?! You should know the devil is always in the detail with Gordon!
Unfortunately, the media prefers soundbites to thorough research though.
Nick, can you expalin how Gordon can be so upbeat about economic growth when the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ is also reporting that industrial output in October was declining at it's fastest rate in over a year!?!
A quick look at the figures on page 11 of the report reveals the following -
Total 'Managed' Expenditure - 555 billion
Government Receipts - 518 billion
Now, obviously my maths isn't as good as Gordon and his mathematical wizard sidekicks in the Treasury, but a quick subtraction of one from the other - and abracabra - a shortfall of 37 billion.
Now, this is not the kind of money The Chancellor is going to find underneath the sofa cushions so I think we can all guess what a dreadful state the finances are really in! Yet he still sees fit to give money away in overseas aid, and not tighten his financial belt.
I'm so pleased these financial wizards are in charge of the economy - where is Prudence when you need her...
8. At 03:44 PM on 06 Dec 2006, Neil wrote:
I don't see how green taxes which go directly to Gordon Brown are ultimately expected to improve the environment. To me its just another excuse to slap another tax on to the public. Same old story, same old Labour.
Well Neil it`s like this...
So many wanted Tident and now they are going to have to pay for it and this is just the start much more to come, Oh and cuts to the NHS to help pay for it as well.
Nick
At least with previous Chancellors you could get a general feel of their budget proposals. Not so with Gordon Brown - for most voters he must be a complete turn off. The intellectual arrogance and pomposity he displays - he fires off a never ending series of figures which have little or no meaning to the average tax payer.
It was certainly no suprise to me therefore when the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Economics Editor Ewan Davies quickly identified it was yet another tax raising budget to the tune of £2 billion pounds.
How on earth can this smug Chancellor claim that this country continue to enjoy economic boom when so very many people are struggling to make ends meet or are simply living on credit.
Your visit to Washington ought to be most interesting Nick. Seasoned observers like yourself should have a field day. The stage was set at PM's Questions with some jocularity over Blair's gong.
I am looking forward to your blog reports with gleeful anticipation. As we say over here, "Have a nice day". Indeed.
"Green taxes"? So much for Mr Brown saying a few years back that a tax on aviation/flying was not going to help. Now a classic U-Turn. Who's it really going to hurt? People who fly on cheap budget flights (currently taxed at £5), where the airlines tend to use the most modern aircraft emitting the lowest fumes. These are people who can't afford traditional airlines, and this is a tax on them - a tax on the low cost commuter, the student traveller and similar. Shame on Mr Brown - its hardly a Green Tax.
Same old Gordon - he hasn't got a clue.
The education crisis, and it is a crisis, can't be solved with money for new buildings and computers alone.
Class sizes need to be slashed for 5 to 11 year olds.
Children are leaving school at 16 unable to read, write and do mental arithmetic, they should be able to do that at 11!
Smaller class sizes in the early years will work wonders. Each child's needs can be addressed and children with problems can be properly helped.
0/10 Gordon
Seeing Gordon Brown on the telly yesterday reminded me that his ancestors have played important roles thorughout British history, see:
There is no black hole because GB changed his borrowing figures (again)
In March 2006:
"Net borrowing - which was £90bn just over a decade ago - will be £37bn this year, £36 next year, then 30, falling to 25, 24 and 23 billions in 2010-11"
Yesterday
"Total net borrowing ... will fall from £37bn this year to 31, 27, and then 26, 24 and 22 ... by 2011-12"
Not hard to have no black hole when you change your baseline.
On the subject of Green Taxes, one thing that seems to have been missed out from the analysis everywhere, is that the fuel duty hike applies to ALL fuels, including Biodiesel, and Bioethanol
Surely this denies the possibility of the fuel duty rise being green, and is just a tax hike?
In relation to the pre-budget report, why is no-one in the media including the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ commenting or even reporting on the cost of Tony's wars?
It is all very well talking about decreasing tax venues, but I would love to know how much per annum has gone into Iraq and Afganistan over the last 3-4 years
Same old Gordon - he hasn't got a clue.
You can't solve the crisis, and it is a crisis, in education with money for new buildings and computers alone.
Class sizes for 5 to 11 year olds need slashing.
Children are leaving school at 16 not able to read, write and do simple maths. They should be able to do that 11!
Class sizes of 15 would produce a dramatic improvement.
When the children get to secondary school they can then be taught the knowledge they need to make Britain a Great country again.
Educated kids don't tend to be yobs either. Two birds, one stone.
I must admit I speculated on which dissapearing government black hole you were referring to before reading further
The gap in many of our pension schemes?
The £12 billion of our money totally wasted on cancelled or abandoned IT projects?
The child support agency and heaven knows how many billions?
The void between the required public transport capacity and the current policy of pricing us all off of roads and trains.
The gap between the cost of wars they have started and the resources they provided the military to conduct them?
Or perhaps that chasm between this administrations hubris and its actual ability to deliver on time, on cost to the required quality standards?
No none of these, they haven't disappeared, its just that the Downing Street mafia don’t want to talk about them
Forever the illusionist, can Brown get away with this gross deception for much longer. The secret appears to be that the less numerate the population the less they will comprehend the nature and eventual consequences of the debt mountain.
On the budget statement,
You know I really cant tell the difference between plain old Labour taxes and green taxes these days.
Is Green the new Red ?
24. At 04:22 PM on 07 Dec 2006, Gary Wilkins wrote:
On the budget statement,
You know I really cant tell the difference between plain old Labour taxes and green taxes these days.
Is Green the new Red ?
It`s ALL an Ocean of BLUE and a sky of BLACK these days Gary.
Dear Nick, Despite the fact that I am NOT a Labour voter and have never been one, I still like our dour Scottish chancellor. Every chancellor that ever existed had to suffer being pilloried about his tax agenda being too harsh,unfair and wasteful and his spending being profligate, mis-directed or downright stupid. Gordon has been doing a pretty good job for nigh on ten years and for most of that time we have had low inflation and steady growth - none of the old Tory "Boom and Bust", thank God. Still people complain and the media would love to unearth some indiscretion/s about Gordon Brown but so far their efforts have all been in vain. It's no wonder that there have been "spats" with the next door neighbour in Downing Street, his fellow co-founder of New Labour, and someone who does not consider what is best for his party and selfishly clings to power to satisfy personal egotism.
I disgaree with the first comment about taxes going up and services not improving. The truth is that taxes are not going up enough for us to see a difference in public services. I look at the budget report from a different angle. Brown should lower taxes for them who can't afford to pay and bump up taxes for people like celebrities that have the money to pay. I also think there should be less emphsis on terrorism and security because, let' face it, we haven't been attacked for over a year and funding levels at this moment in time are working.
What Brown should have done was really increase funding on public services like schools and hospitals, encourage us to pollute a lot less, try and renationalise the railways because privatisation hasn't worked one bit. He should do something for the old folks who will be having to suffer hyperthermia this winter because of increasing gas and electricity bills. I guess when the next chancellor takes over we will see whether he has done a good job as chancellor.
It's heartening to see that 95% of the comments on this site tell the truth about Gordon Brown. 10 years of unreconstructed socialism has destroyed the pension system, made state schools far worse, hasn't improved the NHS, made roads/railways grotesquely over crowded and wasted several hundred billion pounds. (yes, add it up) Only a total idiot, complete incompetent or died in the wool 1940's ideologue would vote for this buffoon. Nick, please do continue with your insightful and on the money comments.
There was something about 4.500?posts having been reduced indicating a saving on the civil service wage bill.Has there been such a reduction in staff or have other posts been created to take on all or most of these "reductions"
Nick, Do you really approve the utterly biased selection of complete drivel posted here? It says in the web form that you do. Does this forum accurately represent the spread of opinions that you have received? What is the point?
Dear Nick, (for info)
After 22 years in the Andrew,i can honestly say today Britain is defenceless.
The labour party have castrated our armed forces, Britain is on the brink of going to war with the USA, over Iraq, and North Korea. (This is not guess work, both Bush and Blair have stated there could be a higher degree of readyness)
The United states is inceasing its army by a third, "(marines and army)" and Blair will announce an increase in defence spending shortly.
Tax is a major way of raising funds for an increase in defence spending and that is happening, now.
The West are war mongers, they create wars for thier own end, and as i told you i have sent proof to Brussels, that the USA provided Saddam with Biological Cultures, even given them the liscence numbers on the export dockets, (stuff thier foreign policy)
So at the end of the day, these idoits Blair and Bush, WOULD HAVE MORE OF OUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS DEAD OVER A BUNCH OF LIES, OVER A WAR WHICH THEY HELPED CREATE, IN THE NAME OF NON PROLIFERATION, A WAY TO FLEX YOUR MILITARY POWER LEGALLY ???
Dear Nick,
The ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ is not anti politics it is an extention of the Labour party.!!
Perhaps you will be able to challenge our dear Chancellor on the fact the New Deal isn't working.
There are now 37,000 more unemployed people aged 16 to 24 than in May 1997, with the total rising from 665,000 to 702,000, according to the Office for National Statistics.
The unemployment rate has risen to 14.5 per cent among young people, overtaking the 14.4 per cent rate Labour inherited from the Conservative Government.
Yet another of his pet wealth distributional projects projects that has cost taxpayers a fortune with little bet value!
Tackle him on it!
Dear Nick,
Told you so, about increase in military strength requirements, "BE WARNED IRAQ IS THE NEXT TARGET,"
KINDEST REGARDS
Jim Evans.