Opinionomics | 17 April 2012

Must-read comment and analysis. Featuring minimum taxes and money taxes.

1. Inflation shows why it pays to follow Bank of England actions not words (Telegraph)

Ian Cowie points out that the Bank of England's actions – how it runs its pension fund, for instance – explain its attitudes to inflation far better than its words.

2. The Buffett Rule: Right Goal, Wrong Tool (New York Times)

Leonard E. Burman argues that the "Buffett rule" (and, to a certain extent, Osborne's tycoon tax) is a good policy goal, but would be better achieved by tightening loopholes directly

3. Export-led growth is so damn difficult (ToUChstone)

Richard Exell points out how bad our trade deficit is.

4. The buck shrinks here (Economist | Free Exchange)

Ryan Avent takes issue with Matt Yglesias' plan to, in effect, tax money to prevent depressions. His concern isn't with the political angle of it, but the economic.

5. "The Migration Myth" (Economist's View)

Mark Thoma collates some interesting writing on migration.

Argentine president Kirchner holds a sample of petroleum from the fields of renationalised oil company YPF. Credit: Getty

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Getty
Show Hide image

Could Jeremy Corbyn still be excluded from the leadership race? The High Court will rule today

Labour donor Michael Foster has applied for a judgement. 

If you thought Labour's National Executive Committee's decision to let Jeremy Corbyn automatically run again for leader was the end of it, think again. 

Today, the High Court will decide whether the NEC made the right judgement - or if Corbyn should have been forced to seek nominations from 51 MPs, which would effectively block him from the ballot.

The legal challenge is brought by Michael Foster, a Labour donor and former parliamentary candidate. Corbyn is listed as one of the defendants.

Before the NEC decision, both Corbyn's team and the rebel MPs sought legal advice.

Foster has maintained he is simply seeking the views of experts. 

Nevertheless, he has clashed with Corbyn before. He heckled the Labour leader, whose party has been racked with anti-Semitism scandals, at a Labour Friends of Israel event in September 2015, where he demanded: "Say the word Israel."

But should the judge decide in favour of Foster, would the Labour leadership challenge really be over?

Dr Peter Catterall, a reader in history at Westminster University and a specialist in opposition studies, doesn't think so. He said: "The Labour party is a private institution, so unless they are actually breaking the law, it seems to me it is about how you interpret the rules of the party."

Corbyn's bid to be personally mentioned on the ballot paper was a smart move, he said, and the High Court's decision is unlikely to heal wounds.

 "You have to ask yourself, what is the point of doing this? What does success look like?" he said. "Will it simply reinforce the idea that Mr Corbyn is being made a martyr by people who are out to get him?"