The Tories get tough

Scotland Questions was especially rumbustious today. The benches were largely full and becoming more so, as was the gallery above, crammed with schoolchildren, staring mournfully through the glass that encloses the visitors' section. The Secretary of State for Scotland, Michael Moore (Lib Dem, Roxburgh and Selkirk), answered questions well and in good voice, without notes, or at least none that were visible on the dispatch box.

Throughout these exchanges the House seemed to bubble. Andrew Tyrie (Cons, Chichester) took his seat on the back benches, looking a man well contented. He smiled and talked genially to the member beside him. What could be behind his good humour? A recently-won award, perhaps? But then the hubbub reached levels that caused the Speaker to intervene, demanding quiet, which was duly granted. Though not for long—exchanges between Moore and Angus Robertson (SNP, Moray) reached a crescendo of bellowing, which was only narrowly won by Moore, advantaged in the shouting match by having a microphone.

Prime Minister’s Questions

Then there came questions to the Prime Minister, the first of which came from Gordon Henderson (Cons, Sittingbourne and Sheppey) who asked whether the government would continue to ensure that mortgages would remain affordable. The suggestion that the British government could control long term interest rate expectations, especially in light of recent announcements by the US Federal Reserve Bank, seemed from a lost time—an era when Sterling was the dominant international reserve currency. Which it isn't any more. The PM replied that of course his government would do all it could to keep rates down, unlike the party opposite.

Ed Miliband then asked his first question, standing to a chorus of cheers (or were they jeers?). What, he asked, had happened to the 261 schools projects that the government promised to undertake? To this, the Prime Minister harkened back, horrified, to the mess that his government inherited from the last Labour administration. Ed then answered his own question, revealing that of the 261, only one school project had so far been started. Why? Again the PM delved into the nightmarish history of Labour's legacy, before rising to the surface to say that this government was providing half a million new school places.

Question: Of the 576 promised infrastructure projects promised, how many have been completed?

Answer: We are spending £4bn more on infrastructure than Labour ever did.

At that point the farmyard noises became too much for the Speaker, who again interjected, demanding calm. The PM continued, pointing out that it was impossible to build a nuclear power station overnight, and that the Labour government had 13 years in which to build more power plants. They built none. Furthermore, in that time, said Cameron, Labour only electrified nine miles of rail track. His government, he said, would go much further.

Miliband then played a rather strong hand. The government's day was to be all about infrastructure, this much has been understood for some time now. Miliband tried at this point to steal the PM's lunch, reminding the House that Labour had built over 100 hospitals during its time in power. The Labour benches boomed their approval. It was a strong moment for Miliband, who until then had been perhaps a little too patronising towards Cameron—"Let's see if he can answer this one Mr Speaker," and so on. But this line came off strongly, and was further bolstered by the claim that 80 per cent of the government's planned infrastructure projects had not even been started. His question—the PM promised to help 100,000 young people to buy homes. How many of them have actually bought homes with government help?

Cameron reminded the House that the PFI programme, which allowed for the funding of these projects, has left Britain servicing huge debts. Ed then stood to answer his own question, saying that only 2,000 young people had been helped to buy houses, which although short of the government's target seems a substantial number. But his own benches loved it. They were in vigorous form and approved loudly when he asked, rhetorically, why the people should believe anything the PM said. "The British public is paying the price," for this Spending Review, shouted Miliband. More cheers.

Cameron replied angrily by listing what he suggested were Ed's economic mistakes, concluding that he was "never trusted by the British people." He added, with theatrical incredulity, that Labour "wanted to borrow less by borrowing more." And then his laugh line: "No wonder it's not just people at Wimbledon saying 'new Balls please.'" The government benches collapsed in gasping laughter at the reference to the Shadow Chancellor. But Miliband won this exchange. Sometimes Cameron can lack punch in his performance and today he was made to look angry and hectoring.

David Winnick then asked the PM about the inquiry into police activity during the investigation of the Steven Lawrence murder, to which Cameron replied that "nothing is off the table," as regards the investigations now planned. There then followed questions about the redevelopment of Battersea, from Jane Ellison. "Forget Battersea, what about Bassetlaw?" asked the MP for that constituency, John Mann, to which Cameron repeated his claim that this government was spending more on infrastructure than Labour.

John Cryer (Lab, Leyton and Wanstead) asked whether the PM had ever been lobbied by Lynton Crosby, his new spin-meister, on the subject of booze and fags. To this, Cameron replied that he had never been lobbied by Crosby on anything, unlike the Labour Party which was constantly being lobbied by a stream of Union toadies. William Bain (Lab, Glasgow NE) then asked, or rather told, the PM that he had failed to balance the books, "haven't you Prime Minister," to which a rather un-Parliamentary chorus of "oooooh!" came from the Government benches. Yes, said Cameron, but your lot want to borrow more.

Question: Has the PM seen the OECD report on youth unemployment?

Answer: Yes. It's worrying.

Then some questions on HS2. The atmosphere became calm. Then the subject turned to rail links between Shrewsbury and London. Calmer still. Very calm.

Proceedings were enlivened somewhat by a theatrical question from Stephen Pound (Lab, Ealing N) on the subject of party donations, at which the PM took the opportunity—he is clear in his intention to do this at every PMQs—to remind the House that the Labour Party still owes the Revenue £700,000, due to a donation it received in the form of shares. A further question from Mark Spencer (Cons, Sherwood), whose constituency has something of a long history connected with wealth re-distribution, asked about new powers being granted to HMRC to clamp down on tax avoidance. Cameron once more brought up Labour's debt to the revenue—as he sees it—and rounded off by accusing the Opposition of "hypocrisy," a charge to which neither of the front bench Eds reacted.

The Spending Round

Osborne stood. "Biggest economic crisis of the post-war period." "Taken our economy back from the brink of bankruptcy." Britain is now moving "from rescue to recovery."

His tone was instantly rather sour. This is Osborne’s principle problem, and when explaining to the country how government is going to constrict the services that it provides—a tough sell at the best of times—tough headmaster disciplining a rowdy and disgraced classroom is not the tone to strike. When he repeats the line that "we are all in it together," it comes across oddly. He cannot appear to admonish but then lump himself with the miscreants.

He then went on to set out the overall claim that his government was borrowing less than Labour. They borrowed £157bn per year, but this government only £118bn. The deficit is down by a third to 7 per cent of GDP, but it has to come even lower. "It's wrong to go on adding debts to our children's shoulders," he said, in a metaphor that made sense in a somewhat wonky way.

The core message of the speech was that borrowing was coming down and it would continue to fall. Government departments would be squeezed, with some exceptions, these being the ring-fenced areas of health and schools, and the Intelligence Agencies, recently disgraced though they may be, will get a pay rise of 3.4 per cent. More of the detail of the precise budgetary alterations to departments will come tomorrow.

But in the thick of the numbers, assertions and claims, the announcements of more than 180 new free schools, the trimming of departmental budgets, there was a big one. A big, mood-changing boulder. It was on welfare.

Welfare must satisfy two groups, said the Chancellor: those who receive it and those whose taxes pay for it. The benefits of individuals have already been capped. But today the Chancellor announced that the entire welfare system was to be capped. This cap will apply from April 2015, and means that in future, when the government looks like it will breach this cap, a warning will be issued by the Office for Budget Responsibility, at which point the government will have to cut welfare spending, or make the case in public for its being so high. Significantly, the state pension would be excluded form the cap. "Today, we are introducing a limit on the nation's credit card," said the Chancellor.

The second announcement was a curtailing of the winter fuel allowance to British citizens who live abroad. In future, there will be a temperature test. "People in hot countries will no longer get it." This suggestion seemed simultaneously a stroke of brilliance and a policy of outright lunacy. The Labour benches broke into confused chatter at this head-shaker of an announcement.

Then came the unveiling of the Upfront Work Search programme. "We are going to make sure people turn up with a CV, register for online job search, and start looking for work—and only then will they get their benefits." There will also be a new seven day wait before people can claim.

"And here's a further change," said the Chancellor. He was drawing to the end of his speech. "If claimants don't speak English, they will have to attend language courses until they do." "If you're not prepared to learn English, your benefits will be cut." At this point, the tone had become hard as iron. The Chancellor scowled the words into the air, and there was an intake of breath in the press gallery. The word "blimey," was exclaimed loudly at this policy, which will please an element among the Chancellor's party that is noted for its toughness. "The decisions we take today are not easy," he said. "But with this statement we make more progress towards... a Britain on the rise."

The Balls riposte was short and sharp. The Shadow Chancellor portrayed the Chancellor as an abject failure on all fronts. Prices and welfare spending are up. The recovery is the slowest in 100 years. An "out of touch Chancellor has failed... families and businesses are paying." His friends call him George, said Balls, President Obama calls him Jeffrey. "To everyone else, he's just Bungle. Even Zippy on the front bench can't stop smiling," said Balls, in so doing making the most out of date cultural reference of the Parliament so far. He continued in this manner for 11 minutes.

But the story of the day was the adjustment to welfare. The cap, the seven day wait, encouragement to look for work, and compulsory English. A government spokesman said that the insistence that claimants learn English will affect 100,000 people and that the cost of teaching them will easily be offset by the new savings announced. The document published along with the Spending Round sets out the government's sums, although there was some disquiet about the complexity of their presentation. Whether they add up is a moot point. The most significant thing to have happened today is not arithmetical, or economic, but tonal. The Government has signalled that migrants coming to Britain looking for work will need to learn English. That people not looking for work get no benefits. That benefits payments take at least a week to kick in. This is a substantial change in tone by the government. The nature of the debate that will run from here to the next election has, for the first time, shown itself. It will be a tough one.