Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

1. Now it’s a battle for the soul of David Cameron (Sunday Telegraph)

Forget the issue of who might make a plausible new leader for the Conservative Party - the question is, can the Prime Minister reinvent himself now that the modernisation project is dead, says Janet Daley.

2. Overburdened, overtaxed, over to you, George (Sunday Times) (£)

This week’s budget must remove the obstacles that prevent job creation, writes David Davis.

3. Secret courts: the Lords must prevent this perversion of true justice (Observer)

The justice and security bill, which would allow secret courts, is pernicious and has no place in this country, says this Observer editorial.

4. My Budget will be tough but it will help people who work hard (Sun on Sunday)

Ahead of delivering his Budget Chancellor George Osborne lays out three-point plan.

5. Britain has a responsibility to ensure tough standards are imposed on the sale of our weapons (Independent on Sunday)

The UN will soon meet to agree a global arms trade treaty and as events in Syria show, thousands of lives depend on on the outcome, write Douglas Alexander and Jim Murphy.

6. There's a fresh way on immigration – and it has the public's support (Observer)

A new survey points the way to a balanced and rational approach to immigration that could win widespread consent, writes Andrew Rawnsley.

7. Why this Budget really is the Chancellor's last chance... (Mail on Sunday)

Michael Ashcroft warns George Osborne that he MUST offer the voters more than just endless austerity.

8. Note to all Tories: calm down, dears (Sunday Telegraph)

The Conservatives need to realise they're on the right path, says Andrew Mitchell.

9. Leveson's liberal friends bring shame upon the left (Observer)

MPs who vote to regulate the press tomorrow are siding against the principles they're meant to uphold, says Nick Cohen.

10. Free speech is too important for all this messy politicking (Sunday Telegraph)

A national wave of revulsion at phone hacking is ending in compromise, brinkmanship and Hugh Grant finally getting to play the tough guy, says Matthew D'Ancona.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Why relations between Theresa May and Philip Hammond became tense so quickly

The political imperative of controlling immigration is clashing with the economic imperative of maintaining growth. 

There is no relationship in government more important than that between the prime minister and the chancellor. When Theresa May entered No.10, she chose Philip Hammond, a dependable technocrat and long-standing ally who she had known since Oxford University. 

But relations between the pair have proved far tenser than anticipated. On Wednesday, Hammond suggested that students could be excluded from the net migration target. "We are having conversations within government about the most appropriate way to record and address net migration," he told the Treasury select committee. The Chancellor, in common with many others, has long regarded the inclusion of students as an obstacle to growth. 

The following day Hammond was publicly rebuked by No.10. "Our position on who is included in the figures has not changed, and we are categorically not reviewing whether or not students are included," a spokesman said (as I reported in advance, May believes that the public would see this move as "a fix"). 

This is not the only clash in May's first 100 days. Hammond was aggrieved by the Prime Minister's criticisms of loose monetary policy (which forced No.10 to state that it "respects the independence of the Bank of England") and is resisting tougher controls on foreign takeovers. The Chancellor has also struck a more sceptical tone on the UK's economic prospects. "It is clear to me that the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer," he declared in his conference speech, a signal that national prosperity must come before control of immigration. 

May and Hammond's relationship was never going to match the remarkable bond between David Cameron and George Osborne. But should relations worsen it risks becoming closer to that beween Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Like Hammond, Darling entered the Treasury as a calm technocrat and an ally of the PM. But the extraordinary circumstances of the financial crisis transformed him into a far more assertive figure.

In times of turmoil, there is an inevitable clash between political and economic priorities. As prime minister, Brown resisted talk of cuts for fear of the electoral consequences. But as chancellor, Darling was more concerned with the bottom line (backing a rise in VAT). By analogy, May is focused on the political imperative of controlling immigration, while Hammond is focused on the economic imperative of maintaining growth. If their relationship is to endure far tougher times they will soon need to find a middle way. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.