Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Monday will be the day that defines this government (Guardian)

Those on low incomes, after all the vicious talk dismissing them as cheats and idlers, will be hit by an avalanche of cuts, writes Polly Toynbee.

2. Even now, after all that's happened to Cyprus, they’re queuing up to join the euro (Daily Telegraph)

It defies belief that Poland and others are still keen on joining the economic doomsday machine of the single currency, says Jeremy Warner.

3. Abu Qatada: the law won (Guardian)

The judges who ruled against the Home Office aren't woolly liberals, says Conor Gearty. They're just doing their job.

4. Let schools make money and we will all profit (Times)

Turn teachers into entrepreneurs and we will get the cash for the places we so badly need, says Philip Collins.

5. It’s the cold, not global warming, that we should be worried about (Daily Telegraph)

No one seems upset that in modern Britain, old people are freezing to death as hidden taxes make fuel more expensive, writes Fraser Nelson.

6. Burma in 2013 reminds me of Yugoslavia in 1991 (Independent)

Nobody thought civil war could break out then - and the same view holds strong in Burma now, writes Peter Popham. But violence this week may not be the end of it.

7. Britain can’t afford this level of immigration (Daily Telegraph)

The coalition is making headway in tackling large-scale immigration, but it needs to do far more, argue Frank Field and Nicholas Soames.

8. Cameron must listen to the Tory grassroots to stay on top (Daily Mail)

The Prime Minister's decision to appoint right-winger John Hayes to the Cabinet Office is an encouraging one, says a Daily Mail leader.

9. Europe risks going too far on moral hazard (Financial Times)

Systemic risk now poses a greater threat to lenders, says Nicolas Véron.

10. Another tug at Britain’s unravelling energy plan (Independent)

Three energy ministers in only seven months does not inspire investor confidence, says an Independent editorial.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

David Cameron's starter homes: poor policy, but good politics

David Cameron's electoral coalition of buy-to-let retirees and dual-earner couples remains intact: for now.

The only working age demographic to do better under the Coalition was dual-earner couples – without children. They were the main beneficiaries of the threshold raise – which may “take the poorest out of tax” in theory but in practice hands a sizeable tax cut to peope earning above average. They will reap the fruits of the government’s Help to Buy ISAs. And, not having children, they were insulated from cuts to child tax credits, reductions in public services, and the rising cost of childcare. (Childcare costs now mean a couple on average income, working full-time, find that the extra earnings from both remaining in work are wiped out by the costs of care)

And they were a vital part of the Conservatives’ electoral coalition. Voters who lived in new housing estates on the edges of seats like Amber Valley and throughout the Midlands overwhelmingly backed the Conservatives.

That’s the political backdrop to David Cameron’s announcement later today to change planning to unlock new housing units – what the governmen dubs “Starter Homes”. The government will redefine “affordable housing”  to up t o£250,000 outside of London and £450,000 and under within it. and reduce the ability of councils to insist on certain types of buildings. He’ll describe it as part of the drive to make the next ten years “the turnaround decade”: years in which people will feel more in control of their lives, more affluent, and more successful.

The end result: a proliferation of one and two bedroom flats and homes, available to the highly-paid: and to that vital component of Cameron’s coalition: the dual-earner, childless couple, particularly in the Midlands, where the housing market is not yet in a state of crisis. (And it's not bad for that other pillar of the Conservative majority: well-heeled pensioners using buy-to-let as a pension plan.)

The policy may well be junk-rated but the politics has a triple A rating: along with affluent retirees, if the Conservatives can keep those dual-earner couples in the Tory column, they will remain in office for the forseeable future.

Just one problem, really: what happens if they decide they want room for kids? Cameron’s “turnaround decade” might end up in entirely the wrong sort of turnaround for Conservative prospects.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.