Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 1582)
Conservative WI Justice Prosser attacks Chief Justice as a ‘bitch,’ threatens to ‘destroy’ her

enlarge Credit: Prosser Website Megyn Kelly and FOX News have been trying to paint WI protesters as being violent thugs and Tea Party-like (my analogy) ever since the grassroots resistance to Gov. Scott Walker’s punitive measures began. Maybe Megyn can take a look at how Conservative Judge Prosser has been behaving: As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “bitch” and threatening to “destroy” her. The incident, revealed in interviews as well as e-mails between justices, shows fractures on the court run even deeper than what has been revealed in public sniping in recent years. Problems got so bad that justices on both sides described the court as dysfunctional, and Prosser and others suggested bringing in a third party for help, e-mails show. Prosser acknowledged the incident recently and said he thought it was becoming public now in an attempt to hurt him politically. Prosser faces Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election. He said the outburst came after Abrahamson took steps to undermine him politically and to embarrass him and other court conservatives. “In the context of this, I said, ‘You are a total bitch,’ ” Prosser said. “I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted. . . . They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing.” The Feb. 10, 2010, incident occurred as the court privately discussed a request to remove Justice Michael Gableman from a criminal case. “In a fit of temper, you were screaming at the chief; calling her a ‘bitch,’ threatening her with ‘. . . I will destroy you’; and describing the means of destruction as a war against her ‘and it won’t be a ground war,’ ” Bradley wrote in a Feb. 18, 2010, e-mail to Prosser and others. “In my view, a necessary step to address the dysfunction is to end these abusive temper tantrums. No one brought in from the outside is going to cure this aspect of the dysfunction.” Three days later, Justice Patience Roggensack wrote to Bradley, criticizing her for copying judicial assistants on her e-mail. Don’t you just love how the victims of his foulmouthed bullying are themselves painted as “bullies”? It’s the ‘Bloody Shirt’ principle in action, converting perpetrators into victims and vice versa. On FOX’ America’s Election HQ website, an article appears about Judge Prosser from 03/22 called : Collective Bargaining Appeal Takes Center Stage in Wisconsin Supreme Court Election which omits Prosser’s abusive actions altogether. What a shock. Our pal David Edwards adds some context to Prosser’s resume at Raw Story: The admission that he one called the chief justice a “bitch” follows a spotted history on women’s isssues. In 1990, while serving as a Wisconsin state Representative, Prosser argued that teen women would lie about being raped to get an abortion. As a Supreme Court justice in 2010, he voted to uphold a circuit court decision that said the City of Milwaukee’s Paid Sick Leave Ordinance did not adequately disclose that leave could be used related to domestic and sexual violence. While District Attorney of Outagamie County in 1979, Prosser had also refused to prosecute a priest that had allegedly sexually abused two children. “I was ready to take the stand,” Troy Merryfield, one of the abused children, told the Journal Sentinel years later . “He (Prosser) said it would be too embarrassing for a kid my age and said what jury would believe a kid testifying against a priest?” The conservative Prosser is facing Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in a re-election battle which could change the makeup of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Kloppenburg campaign attacked Prosser after his spokesman admitted the justice would serve as a “complement” to Republican Gov. Scott Walker if re-elected. “This race is about returning independence and impartiality to the court,” Kloppenburg wrote in an op-ed for Madison.com. “It’s about electing justices who haven’t prejudged cases and who see the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government and a check and balance against overreaching by the executive and legislative branches, not as a ‘complement’ to their political agenda.” This Justice is up for reelection on April 5th, so let’s hope he goes down.

Continue reading …
Conservative WI Justice Prosser attacks Chief Justice as a ‘bitch,’ threatens to ‘destroy’ her

enlarge Credit: Prosser Website Megyn Kelly and FOX News have been trying to paint WI protesters as being violent thugs and Tea Party-like (my analogy) ever since the grassroots resistance to Gov. Scott Walker’s punitive measures began. Maybe Megyn can take a look at how Conservative Judge Prosser has been behaving: As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “bitch” and threatening to “destroy” her. The incident, revealed in interviews as well as e-mails between justices, shows fractures on the court run even deeper than what has been revealed in public sniping in recent years. Problems got so bad that justices on both sides described the court as dysfunctional, and Prosser and others suggested bringing in a third party for help, e-mails show. Prosser acknowledged the incident recently and said he thought it was becoming public now in an attempt to hurt him politically. Prosser faces Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election. He said the outburst came after Abrahamson took steps to undermine him politically and to embarrass him and other court conservatives. “In the context of this, I said, ‘You are a total bitch,’ ” Prosser said. “I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted. . . . They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing.” The Feb. 10, 2010, incident occurred as the court privately discussed a request to remove Justice Michael Gableman from a criminal case. “In a fit of temper, you were screaming at the chief; calling her a ‘bitch,’ threatening her with ‘. . . I will destroy you’; and describing the means of destruction as a war against her ‘and it won’t be a ground war,’ ” Bradley wrote in a Feb. 18, 2010, e-mail to Prosser and others. “In my view, a necessary step to address the dysfunction is to end these abusive temper tantrums. No one brought in from the outside is going to cure this aspect of the dysfunction.” Three days later, Justice Patience Roggensack wrote to Bradley, criticizing her for copying judicial assistants on her e-mail. Don’t you just love how the victims of his foulmouthed bullying are themselves painted as “bullies”? It’s the ‘Bloody Shirt’ principle in action, converting perpetrators into victims and vice versa. On FOX’ America’s Election HQ website, an article appears about Judge Prosser from 03/22 called : Collective Bargaining Appeal Takes Center Stage in Wisconsin Supreme Court Election which omits Prosser’s abusive actions altogether. What a shock. Our pal David Edwards adds some context to Prosser’s resume at Raw Story: The admission that he one called the chief justice a “bitch” follows a spotted history on women’s isssues. In 1990, while serving as a Wisconsin state Representative, Prosser argued that teen women would lie about being raped to get an abortion. As a Supreme Court justice in 2010, he voted to uphold a circuit court decision that said the City of Milwaukee’s Paid Sick Leave Ordinance did not adequately disclose that leave could be used related to domestic and sexual violence. While District Attorney of Outagamie County in 1979, Prosser had also refused to prosecute a priest that had allegedly sexually abused two children. “I was ready to take the stand,” Troy Merryfield, one of the abused children, told the Journal Sentinel years later . “He (Prosser) said it would be too embarrassing for a kid my age and said what jury would believe a kid testifying against a priest?” The conservative Prosser is facing Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in a re-election battle which could change the makeup of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Kloppenburg campaign attacked Prosser after his spokesman admitted the justice would serve as a “complement” to Republican Gov. Scott Walker if re-elected. “This race is about returning independence and impartiality to the court,” Kloppenburg wrote in an op-ed for Madison.com. “It’s about electing justices who haven’t prejudged cases and who see the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government and a check and balance against overreaching by the executive and legislative branches, not as a ‘complement’ to their political agenda.” This Justice is up for reelection on April 5th, so let’s hope he goes down.

Continue reading …
Conservative WI Justice Prosser attacks Chief Justice as a ‘bitch,’ threatens to ‘destroy’ her

enlarge Credit: Prosser Website Megyn Kelly and FOX News have been trying to paint WI protesters as being violent thugs and Tea Party-like (my analogy) ever since the grassroots resistance to Gov. Scott Walker’s punitive measures began. Maybe Megyn can take a look at how Conservative Judge Prosser has been behaving: As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “bitch” and threatening to “destroy” her. The incident, revealed in interviews as well as e-mails between justices, shows fractures on the court run even deeper than what has been revealed in public sniping in recent years. Problems got so bad that justices on both sides described the court as dysfunctional, and Prosser and others suggested bringing in a third party for help, e-mails show. Prosser acknowledged the incident recently and said he thought it was becoming public now in an attempt to hurt him politically. Prosser faces Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election. He said the outburst came after Abrahamson took steps to undermine him politically and to embarrass him and other court conservatives. “In the context of this, I said, ‘You are a total bitch,’ ” Prosser said. “I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted. . . . They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing.” The Feb. 10, 2010, incident occurred as the court privately discussed a request to remove Justice Michael Gableman from a criminal case. “In a fit of temper, you were screaming at the chief; calling her a ‘bitch,’ threatening her with ‘. . . I will destroy you’; and describing the means of destruction as a war against her ‘and it won’t be a ground war,’ ” Bradley wrote in a Feb. 18, 2010, e-mail to Prosser and others. “In my view, a necessary step to address the dysfunction is to end these abusive temper tantrums. No one brought in from the outside is going to cure this aspect of the dysfunction.” Three days later, Justice Patience Roggensack wrote to Bradley, criticizing her for copying judicial assistants on her e-mail. Don’t you just love how the victims of his foulmouthed bullying are themselves painted as “bullies”? It’s the ‘Bloody Shirt’ principle in action, converting perpetrators into victims and vice versa. On FOX’ America’s Election HQ website, an article appears about Judge Prosser from 03/22 called : Collective Bargaining Appeal Takes Center Stage in Wisconsin Supreme Court Election which omits Prosser’s abusive actions altogether. What a shock. Our pal David Edwards adds some context to Prosser’s resume at Raw Story: The admission that he one called the chief justice a “bitch” follows a spotted history on women’s isssues. In 1990, while serving as a Wisconsin state Representative, Prosser argued that teen women would lie about being raped to get an abortion. As a Supreme Court justice in 2010, he voted to uphold a circuit court decision that said the City of Milwaukee’s Paid Sick Leave Ordinance did not adequately disclose that leave could be used related to domestic and sexual violence. While District Attorney of Outagamie County in 1979, Prosser had also refused to prosecute a priest that had allegedly sexually abused two children. “I was ready to take the stand,” Troy Merryfield, one of the abused children, told the Journal Sentinel years later . “He (Prosser) said it would be too embarrassing for a kid my age and said what jury would believe a kid testifying against a priest?” The conservative Prosser is facing Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in a re-election battle which could change the makeup of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Kloppenburg campaign attacked Prosser after his spokesman admitted the justice would serve as a “complement” to Republican Gov. Scott Walker if re-elected. “This race is about returning independence and impartiality to the court,” Kloppenburg wrote in an op-ed for Madison.com. “It’s about electing justices who haven’t prejudged cases and who see the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government and a check and balance against overreaching by the executive and legislative branches, not as a ‘complement’ to their political agenda.” This Justice is up for reelection on April 5th, so let’s hope he goes down.

Continue reading …
CNN.com Notes Unpopularity of ObamaCare, Hypes Minority  Who Think It’s Not Liberal Enough

On the one year anniversary of ObamaCare being signed into law, nearly 6 out of every 10 Americans oppose ObamaCare, according to a new CNN poll. Yet in reporting the development, the network's website spun the development by noting the polling is about where it stood last year and that the latest poll could be bad news for Republicans. From a March 23 post at CNN.com's Political Ticker blog (emphasis mine): One year after President Barack Obama signed the health care reform bill into law, a new national poll indicates that attitudes toward the plan have not budged.

Continue reading …
CNN.com Notes Unpopularity of ObamaCare, Hypes Minority  Who Think It’s Not Liberal Enough

On the one year anniversary of ObamaCare being signed into law, nearly 6 out of every 10 Americans oppose ObamaCare, according to a new CNN poll. Yet in reporting the development, the network's website spun the development by noting the polling is about where it stood last year and that the latest poll could be bad news for Republicans. From a March 23 post at CNN.com's Political Ticker blog (emphasis mine): One year after President Barack Obama signed the health care reform bill into law, a new national poll indicates that attitudes toward the plan have not budged.

Continue reading …
CNN.com Notes Unpopularity of ObamaCare, Hypes Minority  Who Think It’s Not Liberal Enough

On the one year anniversary of ObamaCare being signed into law, nearly 6 out of every 10 Americans oppose ObamaCare, according to a new CNN poll. Yet in reporting the development, the network's website spun the development by noting the polling is about where it stood last year and that the latest poll could be bad news for Republicans. From a March 23 post at CNN.com's Political Ticker blog (emphasis mine): One year after President Barack Obama signed the health care reform bill into law, a new national poll indicates that attitudes toward the plan have not budged.

Continue reading …
CNN.com Notes Unpopularity of ObamaCare, Hypes Minority  Who Think It’s Not Liberal Enough

On the one year anniversary of ObamaCare being signed into law, nearly 6 out of every 10 Americans oppose ObamaCare, according to a new CNN poll. Yet in reporting the development, the network's website spun the development by noting the polling is about where it stood last year and that the latest poll could be bad news for Republicans. From a March 23 post at CNN.com's Political Ticker blog (emphasis mine): One year after President Barack Obama signed the health care reform bill into law, a new national poll indicates that attitudes toward the plan have not budged.

Continue reading …

Madeleine Bunting

No Comment
Madeleine Bunting

Will the web and the growth of China, Brazil and India change aid forever? Or will climate change, conflict and corruption bring development fatigue and more celebrity campaigners? Does aid go on forever? Does global inequality carry on deepening? Crystal ball-gazing is never easy, but recently various development experts have been having a go . Next Tuesday, the Overseas Development Institute is hosting a debate on the future of development. I’ve come up with a couple of scenarios. What makes sense? What have I missed out? Post your version of the future of development below. What follows is a hypothetical vision of aid in 20 years time. It’s 2031 and my daughter checks in on her family twinning over breakfast with her children. She has linked up with a family in a village outside Dakka, Bangladesh and another family in Burundi. Her kids chat to their counterparts on a virtual site; they are going to help each other with homework tonight and her son wants to play a game of football with his Burundi friend. She checks the payment for the family’s microloan has gone through smoothly, and then signs a petition demanding reform of the local water-user fees system. These are her adopted communities. Bilateral aid from western countries has been abolished but in its place there are generous tax incentives for families to sign up to schemes whereby they can donate and then follow what happens to their donation over the web. They can get involved in local communities and get to know the people benefiting from their donations. Aid has shifted from a state business to global people power. Millions of people are connected across the globe, exchanging ideas and spending time together on the web, playing and chatting, and the money follows through huge flows of remittance payments and donations. Alongside this, many companies now have engagement schemes in which they transfer expertise and mentor start-up partners; business plays a much bigger role in development and these corporate partnerships are carefully tracked on dedicated websites. Most countries don’t need big inflows of aid such as the west used to provide. Countries such as Ghana, Rwanda and Ethiopia now have their own aid programmes in which they help spread good ideas and best practice in their regions; the emphasis has shifted from the north/south model to one of regional networks. The three really big players in development are now China, Brazil and India. Europe and the US were overtaken a decade ago, their models of development too tangled up in conditionality and heavy-handed control and interference. What the Big Three concentrate on is knowledge transfer and intellectual property; they demonstrate what worked for them. The biggest challenge across the “developed south” (as it is known) is inequality. Huge efforts have been made to engage the growing middle classes across the developing world in ways to tackle poverty. Many people donate “web time”, offering expertise and support to local campaigns on all the accountability issues now tracked online, from school achievement to maternal mortality. There are still some countries that are very poor, and there are ongoing major humanitarian assistance operations in places of conflict, such as the Congo and southern Sudan, still suffering after decades of war; they are usually run by coalitions led by one of the Big Three. European nations, focused on their own economic problems, are now very marginal in Africa. Looking back, the big breakthrough for Africa was the mobile internet, which proved a spectacular boost to business. It also opened a new era of accountability so that the days when governments could squirrel away billions became a thing of the past. How plausible is that rosy scenario? How about another more pessimistic version of what development could look like in 2030? African countries are crippled by the challenge of adapting to climate change; huge resources are channelled through the Green Fund from industrialised nations, but the money has repeatedly gone astray, and on several occasions, corruption has ended up bringing down governments. The politics of many African countries continues to be the single biggest factor determining development. The youth bulge has been responsible for unprecedented instability because of highrates of unemployment for young people. Urbanisation has seen a rapid and unmanaged expansion leading to mega-slums across Africa and Asia; the lack of access to basic resources such as water and healthcare in these slums has built up immense frustration. Several countries have been rocked by coups and subsequent civil war. Most European nations have largely shut down their aid operations, their electorates became cynical that aid achieved little, and they argued that many poor countries were receiving billions in climate finance already, money that came out of their taxpayers’ pockets. What remains is a celebrity-driven “good causes” model, whereby millions can be raised for particular projects through web donations once it gets the backing of stars such as Justin Bieber, who has now inherited the position once held by veteran campaigners such as Bono back in the noughties. Tell us what you think. Aid Development Madeleine Bunting guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

Madeleine Bunting

No Comment
Madeleine Bunting

Will the web and the growth of China, Brazil and India change aid forever? Or will climate change, conflict and corruption bring development fatigue and more celebrity campaigners? Does aid go on forever? Does global inequality carry on deepening? Crystal ball-gazing is never easy, but recently various development experts have been having a go . Next Tuesday, the Overseas Development Institute is hosting a debate on the future of development. I’ve come up with a couple of scenarios. What makes sense? What have I missed out? Post your version of the future of development below. What follows is a hypothetical vision of aid in 20 years time. It’s 2031 and my daughter checks in on her family twinning over breakfast with her children. She has linked up with a family in a village outside Dakka, Bangladesh and another family in Burundi. Her kids chat to their counterparts on a virtual site; they are going to help each other with homework tonight and her son wants to play a game of football with his Burundi friend. She checks the payment for the family’s microloan has gone through smoothly, and then signs a petition demanding reform of the local water-user fees system. These are her adopted communities. Bilateral aid from western countries has been abolished but in its place there are generous tax incentives for families to sign up to schemes whereby they can donate and then follow what happens to their donation over the web. They can get involved in local communities and get to know the people benefiting from their donations. Aid has shifted from a state business to global people power. Millions of people are connected across the globe, exchanging ideas and spending time together on the web, playing and chatting, and the money follows through huge flows of remittance payments and donations. Alongside this, many companies now have engagement schemes in which they transfer expertise and mentor start-up partners; business plays a much bigger role in development and these corporate partnerships are carefully tracked on dedicated websites. Most countries don’t need big inflows of aid such as the west used to provide. Countries such as Ghana, Rwanda and Ethiopia now have their own aid programmes in which they help spread good ideas and best practice in their regions; the emphasis has shifted from the north/south model to one of regional networks. The three really big players in development are now China, Brazil and India. Europe and the US were overtaken a decade ago, their models of development too tangled up in conditionality and heavy-handed control and interference. What the Big Three concentrate on is knowledge transfer and intellectual property; they demonstrate what worked for them. The biggest challenge across the “developed south” (as it is known) is inequality. Huge efforts have been made to engage the growing middle classes across the developing world in ways to tackle poverty. Many people donate “web time”, offering expertise and support to local campaigns on all the accountability issues now tracked online, from school achievement to maternal mortality. There are still some countries that are very poor, and there are ongoing major humanitarian assistance operations in places of conflict, such as the Congo and southern Sudan, still suffering after decades of war; they are usually run by coalitions led by one of the Big Three. European nations, focused on their own economic problems, are now very marginal in Africa. Looking back, the big breakthrough for Africa was the mobile internet, which proved a spectacular boost to business. It also opened a new era of accountability so that the days when governments could squirrel away billions became a thing of the past. How plausible is that rosy scenario? How about another more pessimistic version of what development could look like in 2030? African countries are crippled by the challenge of adapting to climate change; huge resources are channelled through the Green Fund from industrialised nations, but the money has repeatedly gone astray, and on several occasions, corruption has ended up bringing down governments. The politics of many African countries continues to be the single biggest factor determining development. The youth bulge has been responsible for unprecedented instability because of highrates of unemployment for young people. Urbanisation has seen a rapid and unmanaged expansion leading to mega-slums across Africa and Asia; the lack of access to basic resources such as water and healthcare in these slums has built up immense frustration. Several countries have been rocked by coups and subsequent civil war. Most European nations have largely shut down their aid operations, their electorates became cynical that aid achieved little, and they argued that many poor countries were receiving billions in climate finance already, money that came out of their taxpayers’ pockets. What remains is a celebrity-driven “good causes” model, whereby millions can be raised for particular projects through web donations once it gets the backing of stars such as Justin Bieber, who has now inherited the position once held by veteran campaigners such as Bono back in the noughties. Tell us what you think. Aid Development Madeleine Bunting guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Fuel duty cut in Osborne’s ‘Ford Focus budget’

• Fuel duty cut by 1p and fuel duty escalator scrapped • Corporation tax cut by 2p – not 1p as expected • Annual growth forecast revised down from 2.1% to 1.7% • National insurance and income tax may be merged George Osborne has levied a £2bn windfall tax on Britain’s North Sea oil companies to pay for a cut in petrol duties for motorists struggling because of the soaring price of crude oil on global markets. The chancellor said he wanted his budget to “put fuel into the tank of the British economy”. He told the Commons he was scrapping the previous Labour government’s plans for automatic above-inflation increases in fuel duties and would instead be cutting 1p a litre from forecourt prices from tonight. In the sort of flourish that was Gordon Brown’s trademark at the end of his budgets, Osborne announced the fuel duty cut at the climax of a 56-minute speech built around the theme of boosting growth and rebalancing the economy. He said he was cutting corporation tax by 2p in the pound this year rather than the 1p reduction previously planned, and announced a shake-up of planning laws and a bonfire of regulations in an attempt to stimulate enterprise. However, the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, said Osborne’s claim to have delivered a budget for growth was undermined by a cut in the growth forecast for 2011 from 2.1% to 1.7%. Osborne cast his second budget since becoming the chancellor in May as an “urgent call to action” in which the government would move from “rescue to reform and from reform to recovery”, building on the deficit reduction measures of 2010. He said it was a fiscal plan designed to create an economy built on private sector growth and the “march of the makers” rather than using government spending and debt to encourage a recovery. He added that his budget measures would be “fiscally neutral across the period, neither raising tax nor offering giveaways”. The chancellor presented a package of measures to boost business and make Britain more competitive, help consumer confidence and claw revenue back elsewhere. Osborne said Britain had “lost ground” in the world’s economy and needed to catch up. His budget set “four economic ambitions” for Britain: being the most competitive tax system in the G20; being the best place to “start, finance and grow a business”, with a more balanced economy and a more educated and “flexible” workforce. Measures included a further 1% cut in corporation tax to make clear that “Britain is open for business” and an annual £1bn clampdown on tax avoidance. “Today’s budget is about reforming the nation’s economy so that we can have enduring jobs and growth in the future, doing what we can to protect families from the high cost of living,” he said. Presented against a deteriorating economic backdrop of rising oil prices, public sector austerity and low consumer confidence, the budget sought to appeal to Britain’s “squeezed middle” by announcing help for first-time home-buyers, and a boost for 25 million income taxpayers by raising the threshold on the personal tax allowance to £8,075 by April 2012. With household bills and retail prices rising, the chancellor concentrated much of the money he has to play with on cutting fuel prices as the cost of petrol and diesel reached all-time national average highs (£1.33 and £1.40 respectively) to increase consumers’ spending power and help business. The rise in fuel duty planned for next week will be delayed until 2012, and the fuel duty escalator that adds 1p to fuel duty on top of inflation each year to be cancelled for the rest of this parliament. A fair fuel stabiliser to help keep costs down in future is to be funded by an increased levy on oil and gas production. Osborne told MPs that helping families with the cost of living and backing enterprise and introducing “far-reaching reforms” to help the economy grow were “one and the same thing”. He said: “It is the central understanding of this government – and core to our strategy – that these are not two separate tasks. They are one and the same thing. “We are only going to raise the living standards of families if we have an economy that can compete in the modern age. “So this is our plan for growth. We want the words ‘made in Britain’, ‘created in Britain’, ‘designed in Britain’, invented in Britain’ to drive our nation forward. “A Britain carried aloft by the march of the makers. That is how we will create jobs and support families. We have put fuel into the tank of the British economy.” But his package received short shrift from Miliband, who told him his economic strategy for Britain was “hurting, not working”. Miliband challenged Osborne’s claim to have delivered a budget for growth, saying the government’s cuts were damaging the economic recovery. “Every time he comes to this house, growth is downgraded,” he said. “One fact says it all, and he couldn’t bring himself to say it: growth down last year, this year and next year. It’s the same old Tories – it’s hurting, but it isn’t working.” Other measures to protect the money in people’s pockets in Osborne’s budget include: • Raising the income tax personal allowance by £630 next year, which comes on top of the £1,000 rise next month and lifting the threshold at which income tax is payable to just over £8,105 from April next year, a real terms increase of £48 a year (or £126 in cash terms) for those earning up to £115,000 a year. The 550,000 taxpayers who earn more than £115,000 will lose £45 a year because they no longer have a personal allowance. The latter measure will see a further 250,000 people taken out of income tax altogether, in a move that brings the coalition a step closer to its promise of delivering a £10,000 tax threshold by the 2015 general election. • A £250m shared equity scheme for new homes, funded from the bank levy, to help 10,000 families. Those with a household income of less than £60,000 a year who can put down a 5% deposit on a new home will be eligible for an equity loan worth up to 20% of the value of the property jointly funded by the government and housebuilders. The loan will be interest-free for five years and only be repayable when the house is sold. In a budget designed to shift away from spending cuts to reduce the national debt to growth-enhancing measures, Osborne also published his growth strategy for business. His bid to boost the private sector includes: • The removal of £350m worth of regulation on businesses. • A three-year moratorium on new domestic regulation for all businesses employing fewer than 10 people. • New planning rules to require planners to prioritise growth and jobs with a new presumption in favour of sustainable development, while retaining existing controls on green belt land. • Small business relief extended to October 2012, at a cost of £370m. • Funding for 21 new enterprise zones. • Funding for 40,000 new apprenticeships for unemployed young people. The chancellor presented gloomy figures based on data from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) which confirmed that the recovery would move at a slower pace than previously forecast. He said GDP growth estimates for 2011 had been cut from 2.1% to 1.7%, while 2012 was revised down to 2.5% from 2.6%. He stressed that the long-term outlook was more upbeat as estimates for 2013 were held and forecasts for 2014 and 2015 were revised upwards to 2.9% from 2.8% and 2.8% from 2.7% respectively. Osborne also revealed that the rate of inflation, currently at 4.4%, is not expected to drop back to the government’s 2% target until 2013, contrary to the Bank of England’s belief it will fall back by 2012. But the chancellor said the government was on track to deliver a balanced structural budget and falling national debt by the end of parliament. “Our fiscal mandate is to achieve a cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling five-year forecast period – which is currently 2015-16,” he said. “We have supplemented that with a fixed target for debt: so that debt should be falling as a proportion of GDP by the year 2015-16 as well. “I can report to the house that the OBR confirm that on their central forecast we will meet both these objectives – a balanced structural current budget and falling national debt by the end of the parliament. Indeed, the forecast remains that we will meet both these objectives one year earlier.” On tax, Osborne announced plans to make Britain’s tax system more competitive and simpler: • Corporation tax will be reduced by 2% from April 2011 – rather than 1% as previously announced – and to fall by 1% in each of the next three years to reach 23%. In a bid to offset the effect of the reduction on banks, the bank levy rate will adjusted next year. • “No less than 43 complex tax reliefs” would be abolished as part of a simplification of the tax system, Osborne said. As part of the move, he confirmed widely trailed speculation that he would consult on scrapping the divide between income tax and national insurance as part of a drive to simplify taxation for business. He said this would be a way for people to see more clearly how much they are being taxed, rather than to raise them, and make the system “fit for the modern age”. Osborne balanced giveaways with fresh tax-raising measures, which included: • The charge on non-domiciled taxpayers to increase from £30,000 for those here for seven years to £50,000 for those in the country for 12 years, raising more than £200m. • A clampdown on the “injustice” of tax avoidance. Osborne said three forms of stamp duty land tax avoidance would be closed, capital gains rules for companies would be tightened and the practice of disguised remuneration, which sees highly paid employees offered tax-free, lifetime loans that are never repaid, would come to an end. “In total, on the numbers audited by the independent OBR, the tax avoidance measures in this budget raise around £1bn a year – that’s £4bn over the parliament,” he added. “We are doing more today to clamp down on tax avoidance than in any budget in recent years. And that gives us more resources, in a fiscally neutral budget, to help those families who do pay their taxes, but who are struggling with the daily cost of living.” Budget 2011 Budget George Osborne Economic policy Economic growth (GDP) Economics Green shoots Tax and spending Petrol prices Motoring Property Public finance Hélène Mulholland Larry Elliott guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …