I know I said I’d prepare a response to the Budget and the politics around it. Two things, probably a little impertinent on my part, and I forgot to say a goodly part of it would be to point to what respected others have said.
My view was that the Budget could have been much worse. It was surprisingly devoid of shocks, if anything it was almost boring. The Budget has introduced a number of small measures, on stamp duty on home sales, and crackdown on tax evasion [e.g Belize], clearly designed to create political dividing line between Labour and the Conservatives. This was a political budget.
As for its value to solving our ballooning debt, and the enormous government budget overspend, this budget was a failure. These problems remain to be solved. Measures to improve our national competitiveness were sadly lacking. Enough of my somewhat shallow analysis. Here’s what the serious commentators are saying:
- Deloitte’s: The accountants view
- Paul Waugh in the Evening Standard: The Polo budget
- Lorna Burke in Citywire: Wealthy bear burden in Darling’s phoney budget
- Jon Craig in Sky’s Boulton & Co: A ‘stuff the Tories’ budget
- Iain Martin in Wall Street Journal: That was barely a budget
- Fraser Nelson in the Spectator’s blog: A reassuringly dull budget
- Stephanie Flanders, BBC’s Economics Editor: The count-yourself-lucky budget
There, that should keep you going for a while.