Show Hide image The Staggers 18 November 2016 Why Tory Leavers don't fear the Remain rebels The Brexiteers believe that their foes will struggle to emulate their successful revolts. Print HTML The Remain campaign lost in the country. But it won by a landslide in parliament. On 23 June, more than two-thirds of MPs voted for EU membership. Ever since the referendum, the possibility that parliament could prevent withdrawal, or at least set the terms, has loomed. The government's recent court defeat over triggering Article 50 has sharpened the conflict. Though ministers are appealing against the decision, all sides expect them to be defeated. Parliament will have its say. Speculation has surrounded the potential for MPs to use this moment, or the later vote on the Great Repeal Bill, to block or dilute Brexit. Theresa May has a working majority of just 14 but 20-30 Conservative MPs favour remaining in the single market. The Tory Leavers, however, are losing little sleep over their foes. Having led many rebellions against David Cameron, they believe that the new "bastards" will be unable to emulate their triumphs. "Stirring up trouble is a craft," a senior MP told me. "Who has the gravitas, the credibility and the patience required?" In their view, the Remainers lack a figurehead with the organisational nous to lead a successful revolt. The hard graft of parliamentary co-ordination requires greater effort than rhetorical sallies. George Osborne, who infuriated Brexiteers with his "punishment Budget" during the referendum, is regarded as too discredited to fill the void. There is no prospect of Article 50 being blocked if parliament does secure a vote. Most of the Tory rebels (save for Ken Clarke) and Labour intend to vote for withdrawal. Once this process begins, and the government announces its high-level principles (expected before the year's end), the Leavers believe the Remainers will struggle to obstruct Theresa May. Tory MPs expect her to pursue withdrawal from both the single market and the customs union. "May would never have set up Liam Fox's department [International Trade] otherwise," one Brexiteer noted. He added that the Leavers needed to avoid "overreacting to every bump in the road". They believe that No.10's stern response to a leaked Deloitte memo suggesting that it lacked a Brexit plan obscured a raft of positive economic news: record employment figures, sterling's recovery and major Google investment. "We've got to be careful we're not giving oxygen to our opponents," an MP said of the memo. › The Frontline of Israel’s Settlement Regime George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman. More Related articles Diane James quits Ukip seven weeks after quitting the leadership too Theresa May just scrapped her own brilliant pro-business idea Is Francois Fillon Marine Le Pen's dream opponent?
Show Hide image The Staggers 21 November 2016 No, John McDonnell, people earning over £42,000 have not been "hit hard" by the Conservatives The shadow chancellor's decision to support this tax cut is as disappointing as it is innumerate. Print HTML John McDonnell has backed Conservative plans to raise the point at which you start paying the 40p rate (that’s 40p of every pound earned after you hit the threshold) to above £45,000 by April 2017 (part of the Conservative manifesto pledge to raise the 40p rate so that it only covers people earning above £50,000 by 2020). Speaking to the BBC, the shadow chancellor said that those affected “need a tax giveaway at the moment because the mismanagement of the economy by the Conservatives is hitting them hard”. Is he right? Well, let’s crunch some numbers. Let’s say I earn £42,000, my partner doesn’t work and we have two children. That puts our household in the upper 30 per cent of all British earners, and, thanks to changes to tax and benefits, we are 1.6 per cent worse off than an equivalent household in 2010. Have we been “hit hard”? Well, no, actually, in point of fact, we have been the least affected of any household with children of the coalition. The pattern holds for every type of household that will feel the benefit of the 40p rate hike. Those with children have seen smaller decreases (1.0-2.3 per cent) in their living standards that those in the bottom three-quarters of the income distribution. The beneficiaries of this change without children, excluding pensioners, who have done well out of Conservative-led governments but are unaffected by this change, have actually seen increases in their tax-home incomes already under David Cameron. There is no case that they need a bigger one under Theresa May. But, nonetheless, they’re getting one, and it’s the biggest bung to higher earners since Margaret Thatcher was in office. For context: a single parent family earning £42,000 is in the top 15 per cent of earners. A family in which one person is earning above £42,000 and the other is working minimum wage for 16 hours to look after their two children is in the top 13 per cent. A single person earning £42,000 is in the top 6 per cent of earners. That’s before you get into the big winners from this policy, because higher earners tend to marry other higher earners. A couple with one person earning £45,000 and the other earning £35,000 is in the top three per cent of earners. A couple in which both are earning £45,000 with one child are in the top four per cent. (Childless couples earning above average income are, incidentally, the only working age demographic to do better since 2010 than under New Labour.) And these are not cheap tax cuts, either. To meet the Conservative proposal to raise the 40p rate to £50,000 by 2020 will cost £9bn over the course of the parliament, and giving a tax cut to “hard-pressed” earners on £42,000 will cost around £1.7bn. The political argument for giving up on taxing this group is fairly weak, too. Hostilty to tax rises among swing voters extends all the way up to the super-rich, so Labour’s commitment to the top rate of tax has already hurt them among voters. To win support even for that measure, the party is going to have to persuade voters of the merits of tax-and-spend – it makes no sense to eschew the revenue from people in the top five per cent of earners while still taking the political pian. Which isn’t to say that people earning above £42,000 should be tarred and feathered, but it is to say that any claim that this group has been “hit hard” by the government or that they should be the target for further tax relief, rather than clawing back some of the losses to the Exchequer of the threshold raise and the planned hike in the higher rate to £50,000, should be given extremely short shrift. Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics. More Related articles Diane James quits Ukip seven weeks after quitting the leadership too Theresa May just scrapped her own brilliant pro-business idea Is Francois Fillon Marine Le Pen's dream opponent?
