Morning:
8°c
It was always inevitable that this week's Queen's Speech to Parliament would be highly political.
Nevertheless, with probably less than six months to go before the general election and Labour trailing badly, it is today becoming clear just how nakedly this legislative programme will aim to draw political dividing lines.
Thus the proposal to give the Financial Services Authority extra powers to tackle banks is aimed squarely at capitalising on public anger.
Elsewhere these measures will show a concerted push at presenting Labour as the champion of the "enabling" state - for instance, plans to give free care at home for 350,000 of the neediest elderly people.
By contrast, the Prime Minister will attempt to portray the Conservatives as ideologically opposed to big government and eager to cut public services.
To judge from the FSA reforms, this is not a well thought-out programme. The public is rightly angry with bankers.
But it should be obvious that a law allowing the regulator to "tear up" the contracts of bankers who make too much by taking risks is patently unenforceable - and quite possibly illegal.
Any such rules have to be global. Otherwise this would simply send a signal to the financial sector that Britain is an unhealthy place for it to do business, thereby damaging the City's competitiveness.
Liberal-Democrat leader Nick Clegg has condemned the whole Queen's Speech as a waste of time and urged the Government to focus instead on cleaning up Parliament. Many voters might agree.
Yet governments always use their last legislative programme in this way. True, little of it will become law, given that there will be only around 70 sitting days before a likely election. But Parliament exists to thrash out political differences as well as to make laws.
Rapid climbdown
As Ed Balls, the Children's Secretary, observes, it is a good thing for governments to listen. But for the Prime Minister to announce that he will abolish childcare vouchers and then, after a group of Labour women MPs object, to backpedal, looks more like confusion.
Mr Brown had intended to close the voucher scheme to new applicants after 2011 so as to use the money for nursery places for two-year-olds from poor families.
Vouchers are used by around 340,000 people and save them up to £2,390 a year on childcare costs. About a third of the voucher's beneficiaries are high-rate taxpayers. But for the rest, they are a way of addressing one great difficulty for working parents, particularly in London: the high cost of childcare.
Nonetheless, the scheme favours families where two parents work over those where one parent minds the children at home: the latter would benefit from a transferable tax allowance. It is less efficient, in terms of take-up, than the universal child benefit.
But the fallout if the Prime Minister does abandon his plans is political. It makes it look as if the Government makes proposals that are poorly thought through, then collapses if a small and determined group of insiders object. This looks less like flexibility than a perilous loss of direction.
Ultimatum to Burma
Barack Obama has shared a table with representatives of Burma's military junta at a meeting of South East Asian states.
But Mr Obama put this awkward proximity to good use by demanding the junta release the pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
She has already expressed a willingness to work with the regime "in the interests of the nation."
Yet the best hope for her is that Burma's military clique be internationally shamed into doing the right thing.
Reader views (3)
Brown will make this the dirtiest election in history.
He will bleat about issues, while directing Campbell and McBrides to smear opponents with dirt, real or lies, whatever. The civil service never had PR spinners. Labour put them in, first paid by Labour, changed by Labour to be paid by taxpayers, (allegiance to Labour). Guess where the PR is directed?
Brown has no interest in the UK. He is a joke obssessed by taxpayers funds to benefit Labour, and Scots Labour first. 27,000 voters for each Scottish MP, virtually all Labour, 60,000 per English MP. So Brown where is fairness? Scots vote on English laws, and get more tax funds, free university, free homes for OAP's etc... Labour 'fairness' is a myth.
They have run out of our money, and other people's money. They can go now, there is no more to steal.
- Jimmy, birmingham, 16/11/2009 21:33
Report abuse
It has been reported that this General Election campain could be extremely dirty - name calling, insults etc. All meat for the Spin Machine. A possible date for the Election could be Thursday 5th of May 2010.
It will be interesting to follow just what the new Labour 'Minister for Propaganda' Mr Mandelson will do. The Spin Merchants of all the main parties will be gearing up for overdrive soon.
No doubt there will be lots of 'Self Pity' expressed of being 'got at' by the Labour Faithful. But they will all be there 'Insults at the Ready!'
- Uncle Vanya, East Anglia Area UK, 16/11/2009 17:51
Report abuse
Quite right, unless any legislation is global we are out of the picture. Why is such an idiot still the Prime Meddler with such an adept hand at incompetence?
- Macdangler, Wimbledon SW19, 16/11/2009 15:51
Report abuse
