Mike Robb2013-05-26T05:43:44-04:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=mike-robbCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Mike RobbGood old fashioned elbow grease.Ski Holidays: My Eyes Have Been Openedtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.29949192013-04-01T18:31:16-04:002013-04-02T09:07:40-04:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
Well, often not much. But having just come back from my first annual spree in the snow where I un-packaged myself and stayed at an independent chalet, I can see this was the wrong way of looking at it. Far from settling for packages just because they are easy, and accepting the (relatively long) list of irritations 'just because', I have discovered a whole new world; and I will never look back.
It was without doubt the most relaxing, pain-free and all-round enjoyable ski experience I have ever had. From the beginning I was dealing with the business owners - Mary and Jamie of Jack & Jill Holidays in Morzine, France - from the point of enquiry through to the trip itself. And this is precisely why everything was so easy. If I had a question or something I was unsure about, I got an answer from the person who actually runs the operation within a matter of hours, without any long waits on hold to call centres.
With bigger companies you simply do not get the same level of service that small independent hosts can provide. This is not necessarily a criticism of larger providers of package holidays per se, but more a statement of fact: with scale comes a different, and unavoidable, way of working.
And the most horrible part of the package holiday is eliminated by definition: transport. Previous experiences being treated like cattle were a distant memory, as you can choose to spend that little bit extra if you want all the mod cons that come with the better airlines. And, in actual fact, the choice between British Airways and easyJet, as was the toss-up in my case, was marginal - the former only £30 more expensive - and it really did make all the difference. The first stress-free getting to-and-from skiing I can remember.
But it was during our stay itself that the benefits of going direct really shone through. I have never stayed anywhere like Jack & Jill where it genuinely feels like a home-from-home, and this is undoubtedly down to the quality and passion of the hosts themselves. I have been on a number of similar holidays, but none where the hosts are also the owners of the actual business, and it is this that takes customer service and a desire to ensure the best possible experience to new levels. After all, when running a small business of just two chalets, as was the case here, return custom year-on-year must be absolutely crucial.
So what were the tangible differences and benefits when there? The best food; the cleanest and best-maintained chalet; the nicest atmosphere - hosts who actually want to get to know you, rather than just secure the biggest tip; and a number of smaller things - ski rental coming to you rather than having to head out and lug them back yourself, quicker transfers, and all-round service with a smile - that all added-up to a brilliant week.
Our parting question for Mary and Jamie is perhaps the strongest sign of all that you should consider going independent for your next trip: "when do you start taking bookings for next year?"
I have certainly never asked that question before, but will be back to Jack & Jill at the drop of a hat.]]>George Osborne Delivers a Bold Budget for His Aspiration Nationtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.29161872013-03-20T12:16:45-04:002013-05-20T05:12:02-04:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
The Chancellor announced a range of bold policy measures. Bringing forward the increase in the personal tax-free allowance to £10k; cutting National Insurance bills for businesses and charities by £2k; cancelling the fuel duty increase; an additional £3bn/year of infrastructure investment; a swathe of measures to promote new start-up businesses, including extending the Capital Gains Tax holiday for investments in Seed Enterprise Investment Schemes; and a number of big announcements on housing, including government guarantees for £130bn of mortgages and extending the 'Right to Buy' scheme up to £100k in London.
And the core narrative around these specifics centred on an 'Aspiration Nation', a tag that beautifully compliments the 'strivers', so often put at the centre of Conservative discourse over the last six months.
Ultimately, and why that tag works so well, these policy announcements were as much for the whole as they were for the individual; a fight back against One Nation, perhaps.
Put simply, the Chancellor articulated that we are a collection of individual strivers (see tax-free allowance, housing and mortgage reforms, fuel and beer duty scrapping) in an aspiration nation (see infrastructure investment, support for business and preserving the education budget).
These are all big, bold measures, many of which will have little practical impact between now and the next General Election. It's now about more than that. The Conservatives know time is running out, and today they have continued their 2015 campaign by putting the wheels in motion on a range of popular policies that will bear fruit in the next Parliament, if only the electorate kindly puts Messieurs Cameron and Osborne back into Downing Street.
Ed Miliband's response today was one of the more disappointing of recent times. His 15 minute tirade mentioned not one single policy contained within the budget itself, instead focusing on personal attacks against the Conservative front-bench. Lowest common denominator politics are very much alive and kicking in Labour HQ.
And it was a particular shame given the range of announcements the Labour Leader had to get his teeth into.
On infrastructure investment, for example, he has completely missed an opportunity to ask the question why 'government to announce more infrastructure spend to drive growth' has been an ever-present pre-budget leak since the coalition came to power, yet seemingly little has actually been achieved.
On corporation tax, he could have attacked - rightly or wrongly - a stereotypically business-friendly Conservative government.
Or in the widest possible sense, he could have gone after the apparent lack of overtly pro-growth initiatives.
But maybe the reason for Mr Miliband's response is obvious: he agrees with the vast majority of the Chancellor's speech. From maintaining the NHS budget, scrapping the fuel duty, investing in housing, and helping the poorest through the early adoption of the tax-free allowance, in many respects this could have been a Labour Chancellor at the dispatch box.
But it wasn't. And it is his inability to articulate a clear alternative - particularly in light of the increased capital expenditure announced today - that should be real cause for concern for the Labour Leader.
What a difference a year makes. From #grannytax and #omnishambles to #AspirationNation and widespread support from the commentariat, George Osborne should give himself a pat on the back before the elephant in the room that is the eurozone recaptures his attention in the morning.]]>An Unhappy Marriage of Convenience?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.24254322013-01-07T12:07:21-05:002013-03-09T05:12:01-05:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
Back in May 2010 we had the happy-clappy session in the Downing Street Rose Garden. Two years on, in May last year, the wider economic backdrop was one of lingering growth and missed targets, so the stage was set at a working factory in Basildon. And now, bang on the mid-point of this Parliament, the dark and damp weather outside rendered the Rose Garden a distant memory, with the inner-sanctum of Downing Street providing the set for Act Three.
The prime minister painted a picture of Britain in a global race and an "hour of reckoning", saying that if we wanted to succeed the government must make the tough calls and fix the nation's finances. Nick Clegg, too, reiterated the fact that the damage done to the economy before the Coalition came to power was far deeper than anyone expected, but said that the economy was healing.
David Cameron's wider list of achievements was long and, on the face of it, impressive. The deficit cut by a quarter; economic rebalancing; a million new private sector jobs; exports up, and by more than 25 percent to the BRICS; Britain becoming a net exporter of cars for the first time since 1976; a cap on benefits; and 5,000 more doctors with, conversely, 6,500 fewer NHS managers.
The PM even pointed to tuition fees as a major achievement that has "enabled anyone to go to university, irrespective of their background". Sadly, the cameras didn't show the Deputy Prime Minister's face as he said it.
Yet despite all this progress enthusiastically outlined by the prime minister, his Lib Dem deputy, Nick Clegg, seemed resigned, tired and frustrated. Particularly with the Labour Party - "time for the Opposition to stop being in Opposition for Opposition's sake", he snapped - but equally with some of the progress, or lack thereof, with the Liberal Democrat priorities within the Coalition.
Yes, he was happy with some headline issues - taking millions of people out of tax altogether, the pupil premium and a stronger state pension, but he was widely defensive throughout. His response on the Boundary Review was perhaps the most telling in that regard, where he went eye-for-an-eye, saying he wanted it scrapped, owing to the scuppering of Lords reform - a core plank of the Lib Dem's platform in Coalition - by rebellious Conservative backbenchers.
Looking forward, today's re-launch didn't tell us a huge amount. We were promised action on childcare support, support for first-time buyers and, yet again, greater investment in infrastructure - notably the reconfirming of the Government's commitment to HS2, as well as the drive to increase private sector investment in the road network. But detail remains largely absent, with more to be dripped out between now and the Budget in April.
Today was very much a show to re-emphasise that the Coalition will last the course to 2015 despite obvious differences within it. Fracture is a clear market concern, and one identified by a Cicero report as the major political risk in the UK during 2013. That report pointed at "irreconcilable differences on the economy and Europe" as major concerns for the 12 months ahead, less prevalent during the Coalition's time in Government thus far.
And today's resignation of Lord Strathclyde, reportedly owing to the unworkable relationship between the Coalition parties in the second chamber, paints a clear picture that all is not well.
Ultimately, without positive economic growth (and quickly) we could see real tension within both the Coalition leadership and its backbench foot soldiers. The ever-increasing prominence of Europe, UKIP, a referendum and next year's European elections will leave little cheer for Nick Clegg, and other political bones will need to be thrown if the unhappy marriage of convenience is to go the distance.]]>Autumn Statement: Osborne Plays to the Gallery But What Will be Remembered Come 2015?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.22441722012-12-05T19:00:00-05:002013-02-04T05:12:01-05:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
Not the opening gambit most had expected from the Chancellor. In fact he was booed loudly in the Commons. This was meant to be a bleak and sobering Autumn Statement that would be easy pickings for Ed Balls, but this opening - and much of the rest of the speech - put Labour on the back foot.
It is an extremely risky strategy from George Osborne. I can shut my eyes and hear Eds Balls and Miliband repeating those words time-and-again over the next two-and-a-half years as we approach the next General Election should anything less than the OBR's forecasts, now 1.9 percent growth in 2013, be met.
Ultimately, this was a re-endorsement of Plan A. "Britain is on the right track, we would be mad to turn back now", the Chancellor told the Commons with rapturous support from his backbenches and the customary shaking of heads across the aisle.
This speech focused on the strivers - those the Conservative Party needs to win over between now and the next General Election if it is to win re-election. The 3p rise in fuel duty planned for January has not only been delayed but scrapped altogether; the annual ISA allowance is increased to £11,520; the personal tax allowance creeps ever-closer to the holy grail of £10,000, up by a further £235 per year; and some specific infrastructure announcements - notably on the A1 in the North East, A30 in the South West, the Northern Line extension in South London, and spending in that tightest marginal Thurrock - will be extremely welcome in key seats.
In a less cosy Coalition moment but, again, one that will play to aspirational Middle England, the Chancellor announced that there will be no mansion tax, which left Nick Clegg animatedly shaking his head.
And it wasn't all about the marginal seats. Macro measures to promote growth were clear - a further £600m investment in science; increasing UKTI funding by 25 percent; and increasing funding of the British Business Bank by £1 billion to support small and new businesses just three such announcements.
There will be much positive talk about George Osborne's micro proposals today. Millions of people will be thanking the Chancellor in the short-term as these are policies that will ultimately put more money in their pockets. This is the Chancellor's biggest gamble of all - will the electorate remember this come May 2015, or the fact that the deficit reduction plan has fundamentally failed?
It's a gamble that rests on one thing: growth. This time next year we will as good as know whether this all-or-nothing Autumn Statement was a positive turning point in the Government's fortunes, or just a hefty dose of misplaced optimism.]]>Time for Less Talk and More Action on Infrastructuretag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.15398012012-05-23T13:01:02-04:002012-07-23T05:12:05-04:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/spoke of the government's "failure of nerve" over infrastructure by pledging to hold a consultation on 'Boris Island' and reform bureaucratic planning laws.
George Osborne, too, made it a key priority in November last year when he unveiled the National Infrastructure Plan, in which he outlined 500 priority projects across the UK.
And this week, nearly six months after that announcement, the final member of the trio at the top of government, Nick Clegg, told the FT it is an "absolute priority" to increase spending on infrastructure to stimulate growth. There has been no detail on this as yet, but the Deputy Prime Minister said the Government has agreed a "massive" increase in state-backed infrastructure projects.
'Clegg sounds new economic tone' probably wasn't the headline he was looking for - no 'plan B' here - but the point remains the same: this isn't the first time we have heard this. When are we going to see action?
The announcement comes just a day after Christine Lagarde, IMF Managing Director, called for Britain to refocus on growth, citing a notable increase in infrastructure investment as one key measure.
And yet this all comes under the backdrop of a hot debate around the reform of PFI. It is extremely inconvenient that at a time when there are hugely ambitious infrastructure investment targets being set, one of government's primary financing vehicles is being derided by policymakers and the media alike.
This piece by Conservative MP Jesse Norman earlier this month outlines the strength of feeling, but leaves the question hanging: where is the cash for this huge infrastructure investment coming from? We certainly need to reform some aspects of PFI - to increase flexibility and transparency, for instance - but we must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
People need to understand that infrastructure - and by this we mean roads, rail, hospitals, schools, airports, sewers, harbours, power, broadband, and beyond - doesn't come free. There is too often a misunderstanding between funding and financing. PFI is about financing a project in the long-term so we can have it built now and effectively maintained over 30-40 years, but the taxpayer ultimately still has to provide the funds for these projects.
The politics of this are undoubtedly going to be tough. The Government's challenge is to avoid the 'plan B' tag sticking, despite the inevitable calls from Labour MPs to the contrary. Whether or not you view it as such, the UK needs this investment now in order to remain competitive on the international stage.
The fact that air routes to key export targets including China, Russia and Brazil are going to Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam over London due to limited air capacity is scandalous.
It has been reported this week that China's biggest aerospace firm has plumped for Paris over London as a location for its EU HQ because of these better air links back to the mothership. If it isn't already doing so, this sort of thing should be keeping the Prime Minister awake at night.
Whilst the Government's consultation on Boris Island is welcome, the creation of a third runway at Heathrow should be an immediate action. Alas, I fear the Government has made one too many U-turns recently to make this a possibility in the foreseeable future.
Ultimately, we must invest in our infrastructure and make the UK the most attractive place in the world to do business. It's time to stop the talk and get spending. If this is the course of action the Government has decided to take - rightly, in my view - let's get on with it.]]>An Opportunity We Cannot Refuse: Infrastructuretag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12519282012-02-05T19:00:00-05:002012-04-06T05:12:02-04:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/outlined a huge £30bn investment over the next four years.
At Davos last week, too, infrastructure was high on the agenda. Boris Johnson, now in full election flow, came back from the slopes revealing that investors are queuing-up to invest in London, with its 'amazing and improving' infrastructure a major draw. One investor in Davos reportedly told the Mayor he wanted to invest £10bn in London.
Clearly that mysterious investor hasn't paid £2.70 for a rush hour trip into town from Clapham Common on the Northern Line anytime lately, but that's neither here nor there.
What that conversation does exemplify, however, is the huge importance of infrastructure not only in improving the efficiency of domestic business but in growing the inclination for foreign inward investment.
A recent list of the world's top 100 global projects for 2012 includes four in the UK. The possible value of the entire list is a huge $800bn and, interestingly, the four UK projects comprise a sizeable $93bn of that total.
That suggests one of two things: game-changing infrastructure projects are increasingly expensive on a global scale, or it is something specific to the UK, where large projects are either incredibly ambitious or prohibitively expensive. Whatever the answer, it is clear that infrastructure investment is a big bet - to move the needle on the UK's competitiveness in an increasingly globalised economy you have to be bold, and you have to take risk.
The UK is seen as the global centre for infrastructure expertise, largely due to our strong engineering industry added to financial and professional services expertise. This is why a gathering of the world's movers-and-shakers in this sector is taking place in London later this month, with an incredibly impressive list of organisations taking part.
I would assume the focus at that conference will not be investment in the UK - the prime minister's National Infrastructure Plan has shown the world how serious this area is taken here - but about concerns with the huge funding gap in developing countries around the world.
At a point in which the global economy is balancing between growth and a return to recession, the hosts of that gathering - CG/LA Infrastructure - estimate that investment is falling short of targets by 10-20%, or a huge $500bn.
That's 54 Olympic Games, 31 Crossrails, 29 HS2s or 625 Wembley Stadiums. In other words, a whole lot of infrastructure.
This represents a huge opportunity for a number of different sectors in the UK and a real chance to deliver on the Coalition Government's aim to export its way to growth. Britain is not only a world-leader in investing in itself, but also a leader in advising on global projects.
At a time when we are soul-searching about what future economic specialisms will look like, this is an area of expertise we would be mad not to grab with both hands.]]>A Big Year for Big Cotag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.12083342012-01-16T05:07:04-05:002012-03-16T05:12:02-04:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
Much has been written about the impact of the cuts on consumers. I do not intend to regurgitate the fact that it's going to be bleak for millions across the country in 2012 - but it is going to be an equally difficult year for big businesses in the engine room of the UK economy. Drastically reduced sales at some of the country's biggest retailers last week were an early warning of what to expect.
Squeezed personal incomes and the full force of government cuts in the year ahead will inevitably result in increased negativity towards the UK's big high street names. High levels of inflation only compound the misery, with eight of eleven City forecasters predicting the current Bank of England base rate still to be in place come 31 December 2012, a third of whom also believe it will be the same a full year later.
Add that to the soaring prices being faced by businesses themselves and we have a perfect storm for anti-corporatism, with the cost of consumer goods inevitably rising in a time when the man on the street has less in his pocket. So we can expect more UK Uncut style activity against the likes of Next, Boots, Vodafone and Tesco, four organisations who between them employ more than 450,000 people in the UK alone.
These large organisations are vital to the UK economy. It would be a crying shame if long-term corporate resentment set in in this country, as has been the case with the UK's financial services sector, which still faces a huge job in restoring its beleaguered reputation post-crisis.
More needs to be done to communicate the good these companies do for the UK as a whole, and not just in economic terms. The charitable giving they undertake, the CSR programmes they run, the communities they support right across the country, all in addition to the significant - and it really is significant - economic contribution they make.
The jobs they provide - and I'm not talking about the big money jobs, rather the bank cashiers and checkout assistants to parking attendants and cleaners; the wider spending they undertake - on infrastructure, SME suppliers, and logistics; and exports - so vital to the UK's economic recovery. These are just a few of the economic contributions these big companies make, though I probably underplay the true extent of their far-reaching impact.
The financial services sector is a test case in how reputations can be further damaged if acute attention is not paid to communicating effectively. The sector is gradually improving the way it communicates with customers but public trust is still at a record low. Communications need to be more effective, more focused, more agile and more positive than they have been in recent years.
Ultimately, however, it is by thy deeds thy shall be known - communications are only as effective as the underlying activity on which they are based. The UK's biggest companies across all sectors face a tough balancing act in 2012 between protecting their own fragile bottom lines and ensuring they come out of the other end of this long downturn with reputations intact.
A big (and tough) year for Big Co lies ahead. It is in all our interests that they rise to the challenge.
Mike Robb is Head of Media Relations at Cicero Group, a financial sector communications consultancy.]]>Sacrebleu! French Go Negative in Economic War of Wordstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.11534592011-12-16T09:52:17-05:002012-02-15T05:12:01-05:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
Mind you, when have we ever been?
Britain has long been accused by our continental brethren of being a Member State that wants all the benefits of the EU at none of the cost, a view compounded in the most dramatic of fashions with David Cameron's veto last week. The metaphorical rubbing of salt into the wounds of the eurozone economy.
And now we have a further round of mud-slinging from Paris. The "my dad's better than your dad" strategy of a primary school child has been written into the books of international diplomacy, with France Central Bank chief Christian Noyer declaring "my economy's better than yours."
I can almost hear the slow, eerie hand claps in the corridors of Whitehall from here.
Noyer said, "They [the credit ratings agencies] should start by degrading the United Kingdom, which has greater deficits, as much debt, more inflation and less growth than us."
French Finance Minister Francois Baroin echoed this view, but with even more pointed language. "The economic situation in Britain today is very worrying, and you'd rather be French than British in economic terms...We don't want to be given any lessons and we don't give any."
Somewhat against that grain, he went on to say that if the ratings agencies considered the economic facts on merit, then Britain should be downgraded before France.
Yet the truth is that it's France's credit rating that faces the more immediate downgrade.
Perhaps Monsieurs Noyer and Baroin have forgotten one key fact in their Anglo-Franco comparison: the Euro. And the UK has a credible plan in place for dealing with the deficit, whilst the Eurozone is still in the mire.
But there's little point in me laying out the economics, far more qualified people than I have done so. Whatever the truth of the matter is, what is more interesting is what Noyer and Baroin are actually trying to achieve in this war of words.
It seems immediately outrageous that the governor of another country's central bank should be calling for the downgrade of another sovereign state.
Perhaps the only rational explanation is the French thinking their pointing at Britain will have any impact on the ratings agencies. This seems a desperate last throw of the dice, knowing they are economically imprisoned by the Eurozone crisis and economic woes of other Member States hundreds or thousands of miles away.
And, lest we forget, when times are tough nothing motivates the British more than a good spat with the French.]]>Does Northern Rock's Sale Herald the Coming of a New 'Challenger Bank'?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.10989672011-11-17T06:35:56-05:002012-01-17T05:12:01-05:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
There aren't many people out there who would disagree with this, one of the few issues about these days in which politicians from all parties and the majority of the public are in cordial agreement.
Increasing competition in the banking sector is essential for consumers and businesses alike and it is vital that we all have access to a competitive range of financial products.
The calls for greater competition are understandably less vocal from the existing players. Lloyds have been particularly hard hit, with the Independent Commission on Banking (ICB) recommending in September that a new challenger bank should be created out of the Lloyds divestiture (the forced sale of at least 600 branches), with the aim that the new organisation should have a 5-12% share of the UK current account market.
George Osborne today heralded the Northern Rock sale as a move that "will increase choice on the high street for customers", and one that will increase competition in the banking sector.
So will it? Perhaps not initially. Perhaps not ever. Some people will no doubt think it is daft to even consider the possibility that Virgin could now grow into a top 10 challenger.
Whilst Northern Rock is a sizeable operation it is a relatively small fish. It is not even in the top 10 UK banks, with the usual suspects dominating seven of the top 10 spots. Even Tesco Bank comes in at number 10, so clearly there is a lot of ground to make up.
But then the UK banking sector has never met Richard Branson. How many times has that man been laughed at for moving into a completely new and unrelated sector? A CD seller who started with one store on Oxford Street in 1971 and now runs airlines, gyms, bookshops, trains, music festivals, TV networks, air balloons and, yes, trips into space should never be discounted.
For how long did the suits at British Airways chuckle when his first 747 soared from Heathrow (the Northern Rock deal is not worth £747m up front by accident), and is James Murdoch still holding a wry smile at the idea of Virgin Media as a genuine competitor now that it holds a 30% market share?
Two other key aims listed by the ICB in regards to competition in banking, are making it easier for consumers to move to a new bank and introducing greater transparency in this switching process. Both of which will have Branson rubbing his hands - these moves will clearly play into the strength of the Virgin offering.
It already has an unrivalled brand reputation in the UK and will be an instant appeal to retail customers, so removing the technical barriers to rapid expansion - namely the stranglehold banks have on their customers due to the complexity of the switching process - will provide a real opportunity for Virgin to aggressively pursue market share. Carpe Diem.
The statement from Virgin today outlined that the new combined business of Virgin Money and Northern Rock will "compete strongly in the UK retail savings and mortgage markets - launching current accounts in 2013 and, in due course, lending to small businesses." So it will be a slow burn approach.
But as Branson himself said this morning: "Virgin has a history of entering new sectors to improve service and provide value for customers. We plan to do the same in banking."
Virgin to be in the UK's top 10 high street banks in 10 years? I wouldn't bet against it.]]>Tory Conference - Moving Away From Banker Bashing - it's all About growthtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.9874022011-10-02T19:00:00-04:002011-12-02T05:12:04-05:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/
Whilst the Liberal Democrats clearly signified a move away from the 'banker bashing' that has been so evident in recent years, no such move was evident in the Labour Party with grassroots party members at many fringe events speaking out against the sector with as loaded a dialogue as ever.
Even party officials continued to adopt accusatory tones when speaking about the financial services sector. Ministers at various fringe events were notably cautious in their rhetoric, if not outright negative. The 'financial services will play a vital role in economic recovery, but...' line was heard in abundance, and we saw that very approach in Ed Miliband's Leader's speech:
"Britain's future will be built not on credit default swaps but on creative industries. Not low wages and high finance, but low carbon and high tech. Not financial engineering, but real engineering. Of course, the banks and financial services are important to Britain... But..."
Hardly the resounding move away from banker bashing we had expected as part of a post-Vickers settlement. And the Miliband speech is now regarded by the commentariat as 'anti-business', to which the Labour Leader was quick to qualify his remarks as 'not anti-business, but anti-business-as-usual'. Nice line.
We will largely see widespread acceptance of the Independent Commission on Banking's recommendations in Manchester this week, though perhaps with added attention being paid to the protection of Britain's competitiveness in a global context.
That said, the financial services sector has its detractors in the Conservative Party, most of whom are as angry as Labour MPs when it comes to the irresponsibility of the banks during the financial crisis. It will be interesting to see if this penetrates through the wider dialogue in Manchester, or whether the Tories will follow their Lib Dem partners in a united Coalition move away from banker bashing.
Whilst the Report of Sir John Vickers and the Independent Commission on Banking will no doubt be keenly discussed in Manchester's fringe rooms and bars alike, the focus at conference will still remain where the growth is coming from. This is by no means a discussion contained within party conference season - it is a question that will continue to monopolise the political debate over the course of this Parliament and is overlayed by the ongoing crisis in the Eurozone.
It is against this backdrop that David Cameron and George Osborne will be under pressure to demonstrate to the party faithful that the deficit reduction plan is working. Failure to do so will raise further questions as to whether or not the UK needs a Plan B (or, rather, 'plan A*') to stimulate demand.
Osborne knows that with the economic data likely to remain flat in the coming months the most testing challenge for the Coalition and his stewardship of the economy lie ahead. He will want to come out of conference on the right footing and with the full support of the Conservative Party behind him.
And with the grassroots of the Conservative Party in bullish mood, no doubt he will.]]>Will Labour Say Anything Substantial in Liverpool?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.9790952011-09-24T12:22:37-04:002011-11-24T05:12:02-05:00Mike Robbhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-robb/attempt at stand-up comedy aside, and so we move 100 miles north to Liverpool for the annual Labour gathering.
Much talk in Birmingham predictably centred on growth and particularly what role the Liberal Democrats can play in this regard. There is a clear feeling that come 2015 Nick Clegg's party needs to have made its mark with a set of policies to call its own genuine contribution to economic recovery.
This is a theme sure to re-emerge in Liverpool this week as Labour look to emphasise two key points. First, that growth has flatlined and the Coalition agenda has failed, with an urgent need for 'Plan B'; and, second, that the Lib Dems are the political tail being wagged by the Conservative dog, with no real liberal influence on government policy, economic or otherwise.
Under Ed Miliband's leadership Labour has consistently polled 6-7% over the Conservatives. While this will please both his inner-circle and delegates alike, there is widespread acceptance that this would not be reflected at the polls were an election held tomorrow and, crucially, that the Labour leader needs to articulate his own vision for the Party and an alternative view to that of the Coalition on kick-starting the faltering economy.
The big question is whether or not we face a week of overt attacks on the issue of growth, or more pertinently the lack of it, or whether such attacks will come with any hint of what Labour might do differently. And by that they must go beyond the 'too fast too soon' mantra.
That's the theory, anyway. In reality it should come as no surprise if we see a complete lack of detailed new policy ideas, with the focus much more on the failings of the Coalition.
It certainly wouldn't be the first time an Opposition has pointed a finger without presenting any solutions.]]>