Uk politics

A welcome attempt to fix the broken energy market

Back in October, Ofgem produced a report exposing the failure of the UK’s energy market. It showed that the supplier’s profit margin on the average fuel bill had shot up from £15 to £125 in just four months. As I said at the time, ‘This wouldn’t be possible in a market that was working correctly. If customers were shopping around for the best deal, suppliers would have to undercut each other – and there’s plenty of room for them to reduce prices while still turning a profit (£125 of room, in fact). But Ofgem’s figures show this isn’t happening.’ And why isn’t it happening? Because, in Ofgem’s words, ‘Many consumers

James Forsyth

Shapps has ‘deep reservations’ about the ‘conservatory tax’

There is deep unease among Tory ministers about the proposals for a so-called ‘conservatory tax’. The idea, which was pushed hard by Chris Huhne when he was Energy Secretary, is that when anyone does substantial home improvement work they would be made to make other changes to make their house more energy efficient. It is estimated that this would add about 10 percent to the cost of adding a conservatory or an extension to your house. The government is currently consulting on the policy. But I understand that Grant Shapps, the housing minister, has ‘deep reservations’ about it. He fears that the proposals are anti-aspiration and could risk bolstering the

The rise of UKIP

Who represents the biggest obstacle to a Tory majority in 2015? The natural assumption is Labour, but it’s looking more and more likely that the party David Cameron should be most worried about is UKIP. Tim Montgomerie has written in the Times this morning (£) about the reason behind this, the ‘split of the right-wing vote’: ‘Team Cameron has always believed that the Tories’ right-wing voters could pretty much be taken for granted. The theory was that they had nowhere else to go and that Mr Cameron had to devote all his energy to winning swing voters. This gamble worked as long as Tory-inclined voters were primarily motivated by a

What today’s Abu Hamza ruling means

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that five terror suspects, including notorious Islamist cleric Abu Hamza, can be deported to the United States — a decision welcomed by both David Cameron and Theresa May. Last year, Hamza and three of the other men appealed to the ECtHR against extradition to the US on a whole host of grounds — including that they might face the death penalty and that their trials would be prejudiced. The Court found almost of all their grounds inadmissible, but allowed the appeal to proceed on two grounds: that they would be held in the ADX Florence ‘super-max’ prison and would face extremely long

When it comes to personality, Boris will always win 

The fight for London Mayor election has well and truly descended into a clash of personalities. Policies have all but disappeared while candidates trade attacks in the press. The Guardian, duly unimpressed, has written a scathing leader attacking both sides for this strategy: ‘The early days of the London campaign have fallen well short of what the voters are entitled to expect. Almost everything has been focused on the egos, lifestyles and personalities of the two main candidates, Boris Johnson of the Conservatives and Ken Livingstone for Labour. Mr Johnson, arguably a better mayor than some feared but evasive and woolly on the detail as ever, has run a deliberately

Motorman returns

  Guido Fawkes has caused a stir this morning by releasing a section of the Operation Motorman files, naming those News International journalists thought to have paid for private information. But so far, Guido’s splash tells us little that we didn’t already know: he has lots of information, but has only released the names of News International journalists. Back in July, Peter Oborne wrote a cover piece on the extent of all this for The Spectator entitled ‘What the papers won’t say’, in which he said: ‘The truth is that very few newspapers can declare themselves entirely innocent of buying illegal information from private detectives. A 2006 report by the

James Forsyth

The teachers’ unions take on Ofsted, Osborne and Gove

I counted five issues which the NUT conference suggested that teachers might strike over. But in a conference full of the usual bluster, the most noteworthy threat was not to cooperate with Ofsted inspections. Ever since the new chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw — who was hugely successful as the head of Mossbourne academy — announced that a merely satisfactory grade would no longer be regarded as good enough, the teaching unions have taken agin him. But not cooperating with Oftsed would be unlawful. Anyone who tried to block an inspection would be liable to prosecution and a fine. Another issue exercising the unions is George Osborne’s proposals for regional

Osborne’s tax avoidance clampdown

So, George Osborne has taken a look at the tax arrangements of some of the UK’s wealthiest people. And his reaction? ‘Shocked’, apparently — or so he’s told the Telegraph: ‘I was shocked to see that some of the very wealthiest people in the country have organised their tax affairs, and to be fair it’s within the tax laws, so that they were regularly paying virtually no income tax. And I don’t think that’s right. I’m talking about people right at the top. I’m talking about people with incomes of many millions of pounds a year. The general principle is that people should pay income tax and that includes people

The Tory leadership is still fighting John Major’s battles

Bruce Anderson has written a typically trenchant piece today describing the Tory party’s treatment of John Major as ‘the most unworthy, the most shameful, period in Tory history.’ Based on both how close Bruce is to those around David Cameron and my own conversations, I would say that this is a verdict that many in the Tory leadership would agree with. Indeed, the way in which Major was treated by some Tory backbenches has informed — often with calamitous consequences — Cameron’s approach to party management. Take, for instance, Cameron’s effort straight after the election to neuter the 1922 Committee and turn it into the Conservative Parliamentary Party. This move was

Rod Liddle

A few Easter questions

Apologies for my absence from this area: I took my two boys away for an uplifting week of cycling on a windswept and pretty Dutch island. I suppose they might have burned off a few more calories if I’d let them loose in the Rossebuurt for a few hours, but I’m getting respectable and middle class in old age. We flew back into Southend Airport, which was was an absolute joy: four minutes from disembarking we were out of the airport building. This may be the best use yet that anyone has thought of for Essex. A few questions about puzzling news stories which occurred whilst I was away: 1.)

We need a crack down on tax avoidance

After the Budget there was a lot of anger over the pasty tax and the granny tax. Another big rise — in tobacco taxes — didn’t make as many headlines, because it wasn’t much of a surprise. But for someone smoking a pack a day it almost wiped out the entire value of the rise in the Personal Allowance. Given that most smokers earn relatively low incomes, it was probably the most regressive measure in the Budget. The idea is that smokers are supposed to be grateful for this impetus to give up. Many will keep smoking though, and this will just be yet another strain on their household budgets.

The coalition split draws nearer

Why did Nick Clegg change his mind on the snooping bill? Because he can’t afford to back something that his party rejects — like the NHS Bill. Over the next few weeks, we will see Clegg impaled on the horns of yet another policy dillema as the government decides what to put in the surveillance bill. The president of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron, has laid out his position in the Times (£) this morning: ‘I am prepared to recognise that there is obviously a need in modern society with new technology to have a look at what needs to be given to the security services but only if it

Sadly, the 47p tax rate is here to stay

Nothing is more permanent than a ‘temporary’ government tax, as George Osborne is reminding us. When Alistair Darling proposed a 45p rate in 2008, even the Institute of Fiscal Studies said it would lose money – but Darling said it would be ‘temporary’. Brown upped it to 50p, Osborne took it back down to 45p but the ‘temporary’ status has been revoked. The Sunday Times has today splashed on Osborne’s interview with Robert Winnett of The Daily Telegraph, where the Chancellor said ‘I’m very happy with the 45p rate of tax. We’ve got it to a good place where it’s competitive.’ Britain had the highest top rate of tax in the

James Forsyth

Mr Cameron goes to Leveson

One of the media’s vices is to assume that the public are as interested in stories about journalism as journalists are. This always makes me slightly reluctant to write about the Leveson inquiry – more fascinating for my trade than to anybody else. But the Leveson inquiry is about to enter its political phase which, I think, makes it more relevant. Politicians will start appearing before it from towards the end of next month and, as I say in the Mail on Sunday, David Cameron is scheduled to face the inquiry which he created in mid-June. Six other Cabinet ministers are expected to be summoned before the inquiry. For Cameron,

Has Osborne fully considered his transparency promise?

Will Osborne come to regret his new-found transparency zeal? This week’s saga from the London Mayoral candidates highlights how financial disclosures can not be all they seem. For Osborne to fulfil his promise, we need full details of not just income and tax returns, but also assets in which they are stakeholders and companies through which they work. Brian Paddick’s release is an excellent model to follow, as opposed to Ken Livingstone’s decision to release just a few summary figures. If Team Miliband happened to be on the ball, there is also a great opportunity to pip the government with a universal full disclosure. This would be following Osborne’s own

James Forsyth

Osborne’s Easter gift to Boris

George Osborne indicating that he is open to him and other ministers having to publish their tax returns is testament to two things. First, the Tory leadership, who know how crucial a Boris victory in London is to the Cameron project regaining momentum, is keen to keep the pressure on Ken Livingstone over his tax affairs. They have no desire to let a row over whether they’ll publish theirs distract attention from the problems of Labour’s mayoral candidate. As Osborne himself stresses in the Telegraph interview, “The reason we are talking about this now is that this is a smokescreen for Ken Livingstone’s tax affairs. Let’s not take the focus

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Tax Evader

Rather than respond to CoffeeHousers in the comment thread of my blog earlier, I thought I’d do it in a post (and also take in some of the comments from Twitter and my Telegraph piece). I’ve been accused of “starting to sound like a leftie” – and for what it’s worth, I don’t sign up to the David Davis civil liberties agenda. Not all of it, anyway. I’m all for snooping if it helps catch murderers or jihadis. But what I don’t like is this age-old politicians trick of pushing a whole load of powers through in the name of ‘national security’ then, next thing you know, the council is trawling

James Forsyth

The importance of sacking bad teachers

The opposition of the National Union of Teachers to the government’s plans to make it easier to fire bad teachers is entirely predictable. The NUT has long placed the interests of the worst of its members above those of the children being educated in the state system. Given what we know about just how crucial good teaching is to a child’s educational achievement then it is absolutely vital that the coalition does push these changes through. One of the most important parts of these changes is ending the process by which bad teachers are simply shuffled around the system. Academy schools already have the power to vary pay. But, sadly,

Fraser Nelson

What is being done in the name of ‘national security’?

The liberty versus security debate has returned to Westminster, and it’s just like old times. David Davis is having great fun beating up the government, except this time it’s a Tory-led one. And as so often, Davis has a point. Much rot is spoken in the name of ‘national security,’ which can be used by the right as ‘health and safety’ is used by the left: a verbal trump card, to win any debate and justify any policy. So it has proved with this bun fight over the snooping powers about to go through parliament. It has split the coalition, and even the Tory party. In my Telegraph column today,