Apologies, dear reader, but I’ve been busy at work rather than watching Prime Minister’s Questions (so that you don’t have to). I will catch up with it later, but I have read the Hansard transcript. And if today’s PMQs is remembered for anything, I suspect it will be for this quite sublime Prime Ministerial line:

… total spending will continue to rise, and it will be a zero per cent. rise in 2013–14.

Yes, you read that right: 0% counts as a rise in total spending in Gordon Brown’s eyes. The Evening Standard’s Paul Waugh (admittedly not a Labour cheerleader) sums up his performance today:

It was worse than that: it was bad in an inept, jaded, so-grey-I-make-John-Major-look-colourful kinda way. This was a man with the stench of decay around him.

Don’t forget that the economy and figures are supposed to be Brown’s strong suit. If he turns in a performance like this, it suggests that the only real reason for keeping him – namely a possible economic recovery for which he will claim credit – is disappearing fast.

If I were a Labour backbencher watching today, I would have my head in my hands.

That’s certainly how it read.

When Nick Clegg’s turn came, he also asked about public spending, linking the issue (in his supplementary) to his newly-adopted policy of scrapping the Trident nuclear weapons system. It was in his first question, though, that I think Nick did best, skewering the tortured efforts of both the Labour and Tory parties to avoid levelling with the British public how they will respond to the economics of recession. Full Hansard transcript of Nick’s exchanges with Gordon follow:

2 Big Stories

British economy in worst state in over half a century

Perhaps it’s the sweltering weather, perhaps recession fatigue has set in, but there is little reaction to yesterday’s startling news that the British economy contracted by 2.4% in the first quarter of 2009 – the worst decline in more than 50 years. It isn’t the main story for even one of the newspapers, though it led all last night’s TV news programmes. Lib Dem deputy leader Vince Cable underscored the seriousness of the data:

The biggest three month fall in GDP in more than half a century is a clear

…

There was a fair amount of mockery of the Government a couple of months ago when it was revealed that Labour’s flagship Mortgage Rescue Scheme, launched last autumn, had helped only one family up to the end of April.^

I said then that these things take time, Rome wasn’t built in a day etc. How prophetic, for today we discover that the figure of families helped by the Mortgage Rescue Scheme has rocketed … to six. Or 6 if you prefer. To be fair, that’s a 600% increase. On the debit side, the original intention was to help 6,000 families facing repossession.

Here’s what Our Vince had to say about it:

Helping just six families is absolutely pitiful and doesn’t even begin to address the scale of the problem. Vast reams of red tape stand in the way of families faced with repossession staying in their own homes. There are enormous time lags and the vast majority of people who think they are eligible find that they are not.

“Repossession is a ticking time bomb. Despite the predictions of a modest fall, the numbers of repossessions are likely to soar in the next two years because of rising unemployment. Temporary Government schemes are deferring the problem, not solving it. If interest rates start to rise next year, the problem will become even more severe.”

Vince was today leading a debate in Westminster Hall on this very issue of mortgage arrears and repossessions – you can read the Hansard transcript HERE. Here’s his conslusion:

Repossession is only really a problem because of the underlying lack of available housing, particularly social housing. If social housing was freely available, repossession would not be the tragedy and disaster it currently is. Are the Government, working with the charitable bodies, doing any research at the moment on what happens to people who become repossessed? I do not think that any of us know where those people actually go, although anecdotal evidence suggests that most of them go into the private rented sector, which of course presents problems of its own. Many people go into the private rented sector because they can then get housing benefit, which they found more difficult to get as owner-occupiers, but many of them are still in considerable difficulty.

There is still an issue about how to ensure greater availability of affordable housing in the long term.

After the intensity of the last few weeks – MPs’ expenses, the Speaker resigning, local and Euro elections, the failed putsch against Gordon Brown, a hurried cabinet reshuffle – there’s a slight sense of anti-climax to political news at the end of the week. So much has happened, but nothing much seems to have changed.

2 Big Stories

Each of the so-called quality newspapers has a different lead story today, but both the Guardian and Financial Times focus on the economy, and specifically the perceived threat of rising inflation:

Guardian: Buyers face hike in mortgage rates as inflation fears mount

Homebuyers are facing their first rise in mortgage rates for a year in a move by banks and building societies that could extinguish the nascent recovery in the housing market. Nationwide was one of several leading mortgage lenders that today hiked the cost of its most popular deals, with others likely to follow suit in the coming days. … The news that mortgage costs are rising came as the Bank of England announced that up to 1.1 million households have been plunged into negative equity by the property crash. With prices down by 20% from their peak in autumn 2007, research by the Bank published tomorrow suggests that between 700,000 and 1.1 million homeowners now owe more on their mortgage than their house is worth.

Meanwhile the FT reports an interview with Alistair Darling, still Chancellor by the skin of his teeth:

Forecasters have said that Britain’s economy may be growing again, although Mr Darling said he was sticking to his Budget forecast and expected the recession to finish towards the end of 2009. But Mr Darling warned that a high and volatile oil price “has the potential to be a huge problem as far as the recovery is concerned”.

Amidst all the sound and fury of the pointless Labour/Tory row over which party intends to cut public spending more, it’s especially worth noting the article’s conclusion:

If a spending review was published on the basis of already announced spending totals, it would show big cuts for most government departments after adjusting for inflation. Robert Chote, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said: “The real choice is between Labour cuts and Tory cuts.” [my emphasis]

Labour remakes Get Carter

The Times reports there may be another ministerial resignation in the offing, with communications minister Lord (Stephen) Carter looking to move back into the private sector having been progressively sidelined by Gordon Brown since his high-profile move 18 months ago – Lord Carter was elbowed out by Damian McBride, the prime minister’s media pitbull, who was forced to quit in April in the wake of the so-called ‘Smeargate’ emails. Speaking of which, Paul Staines’ Guido Fawkes blog reports that Carter may be considering defecting from Labour to the Tories.

2 must-read blog-posts

I paraphrase, of course, but only very slightly… Here’s what the Pink ‘Un’s editorial has to say about the Tories’ response to the current financial crisis:

It is a cliché to say that Britain’s Conservative party has no policies. It is also untrue; the Tories have views on issues as diverse as why a bottlenose whale starved to death in the Thames and the rate at which British museums buy new pieces for their collections. They have a complex foreign policy of alternately hissing at the work of the European Union and forlornly reaching for the hem of Barack

…