Morning:
8°c
The Prime Minister's address to both houses of Congress today is an honour that is not lightly granted. He will not be using it, then, to repeat his familiar message back home, that this recession was made in America.
Rather he will make it clear that Britain and Europe want to work with the US, and that this new administration has the advantage of enormous goodwill from both. He will also reinforce the now-familiar theme that the crisis needs a co-ordinated international response - his own new deal, in other words - and that protectionism would compound the problem, not resolve it.
Much of this is worth saying, particularly given the protectionist sentiment expressed in the "buy America" clause in President Obama's rescue package for the US economy, which is only partly offset by the stated commitment to uphold international obligations. Unfortunately, Congress and the President are inevitably concentrated on US concerns. Mr Brown's address, which looms so large in his own scheme of things, will not have anything like the same resonance in Washington, perhaps not even as much as Edward Kennedy's honorary knighthood announced today.
Indeed, the domestic focus right now is on the Prime Minister's own responsibility for the British recession and his reported differences with the Chancellor. Mr Darling admitted this week that mistakes were made by the Government in the run-up to the recession, which merited humility. Mr Brown, by contrast, declared that "there was always a need for humility in government" and then went on to display none of it, by insisting that the present crisis is not a result of his policies but because "the global financial system seized up".
Both propositions are true. Britain's vulnerability to recession was aggravated by government policy. There were serious flaws in the tripartite regulatory system that Mr Brown set up. As his own minister Lord Turner revealed last week, the inadequacy of the regulatory mechanism was partly due to political pressure. Further, the enormous levels of debt in the economy, due partly to huge increases in public spending, as well as to corporate and individual debt, has left Britain far less able to weather this crisis. Mr Brown is right to say that it requires a global response, but it was partly home-made.
The hunt goes on
Five years after the divisive hunting bill was passed, the legislation increasingly looks like a waste of time. As we report today, the Crown Prosecution Service, the CPS, will not be challenging a recent court judgment that established that the burden of proof on whether a hunt is acting illegally lies squarely with the prosecution. It also reinforced the principle that it is perfectly legal to stalk or flush out foxes or other mammals using dogs in order for them then to be shot. At the time the CPS argued that such a ruling would make the act "wholly unworkable". Indeed, 18 cases pending against hunts must now be reconsidered.
The ruling bears out the reality that hunting still flourishes. It is however questionable whether its intended effect, to ensure that foxes are shot rather than killed by dogs, has advanced animal welfare. Rather, it seems clear that it was a waste of political energy which served only to alienate rural communities. David Cameron, the Tory leader, cannot be seen actually to support hunting but he can certainly allow a free vote to repeal the Act if he wins the election. And that is what he should do.
Princely fashion
Prince Charles is an unlikely style icon, generally regarded as being, if anything, dressed rather less with an eye to fashion than the Queen. So Esquire magazine's decision to name him the most fashionable man on earth will raise some mirth. But the Prince, in his double-breasted suits and brogues, plainly has a wardrobe he is perfectly at ease in - and that, surely, is the essence of style.
