| Newspaper review Papers ponder welfare reforms bbc.co.uk |
Ryder Cup 'cigar guy' is City analyst Rupesh Shingadia Londoner Rupesh Shingadia upstaged Tiger Woods and became a web hit. telegraph.co.uk |
Labour's response to the spending review will be critical | Nick Pearce and Gavin Kelly Alan Johnson will have to make tough and unpopular decisions if Labour is to assert itself as a credible oppositionThe announcement next week of the coalition's spending review will rank as one of the most important political events of this parliament. It will set the spending totals for government departments and social security expenditure for the rest of the coalition's mandate, framing the terms of British politics and public life for years to come. How Labour responds to the spending review will be a critical test – not just of its political acumen, but of its economic credibility, seriousness of purpose and straight-dealing with the electorate.The new shadow chancellor, Alan Johnson, has a strong reputation for calming troubled waters, but if he is to put Labour on the road to recovery he will need to make some very tough and unpopular decisions, and set out a credible plan for economic growth, tax rises and spending cuts. The easiest thing for the short term would be to let the coalition take all the heat for cuts and remain broadly vague, other than reasserting a loose commitment to Alistair Darling's plan on deficit reduction. But that would be a strategic mistake. Labour needs to show the electorate now that it is serious about both the deficit and restarting economic growth. The overall goal of halving the deficit over four years is still broadly correct, but Labour must now go further by setting out a transparent plan that links the exact pace of fiscal consolidation to the rate of economic growth. It must reclaim the mantle of economic pragmatism in how it will tackle the deficit, and let others argue their case on ideological grounds.The fixed, faster and deeper path for deficit reduction set out in George Osborne's June budget is both highly risky and unnecessary. The recovery is still fragile and global growth prospects are weak and uncertain. Britain is not struggling to finance its deficit and the bond markets are not clamouring for hasty cuts: they want credibility, not speed. There is no need to sacrifice vital investments in the country's infrastructure and public services at their altar.But Labour was wrong in government to propose cuts in infrastructure investment – in transport and housing in particular – that undermine Britain's longer term growth prospects. We were both working in No 10 when the decision was taken, and it was largely done to make the figures add up rather than for strategic reasons.Labour's planned reduction of capital expenditure has been endorsed by the coalition, with a sharp fall projected from £39bn this year to £20bn in 2013–14. This must be largely reversed, so that net investment is protected at around £30bn, or 1.8% of GDP – the level it was at in 2005-6, before the financial crisis. Pro-growth investment in areas such as low carbon energy, housing and transport must be prioritised, while investment in new hospitals can now fall. This is not only the right thing to do economically, it is also pro-business and will allow Labour to show that it supports wealth creation and enterprise again.To achieve this rebalancing of priorities – and to stop a full-scale crisis in other key areas such as care for the elderly, which will otherwise be totally slashed – Labour must undertake some major policy reversals. It should drop its pre-election commitment to ringfence the NHS, schools and police numbers. All departmental expenditure except international development should be brought into the frame, ensuring that more sensible and fair decisions can be taken. If all these areas are considered for cuts, no department would need to bear a real cut of more than 10% over the next four years.Other sacred cows also need slaughtering. Universal benefits for the over 60s – such as the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes – serve no pressing economic or social need for an increasingly prosperous pensioner generation. So they should be cut or taxed. Defending the principle of universalism in key areas – such as child benefit or children's centres – does not mean dying in a ditch for every universal benefit.None of this will be easy, but all of it is necessary. It's time for Alan Johnson to take a leaf out of the book of his new boss and show that he is far more ruthless than people thought.LabourAlan JohnsonSpending review 2010Tax and spendingLiberal-Conservative coalitionNHSPoliceSchoolsNick PearceGavin Kellyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Man charged with landlord murder A man is arrested and charged with the murder of a pub landlord in East Lothian in the early hours of Thursday. bbc.co.uk |
Identity-fraud survey points the finger at victims' nearest and dearest Theft of personal information can happen to anyone, regardless of their social or economic class – and many of those asked claim a family member is most likely to be the culpritNearly a third of victims of identity theft know the perpetrator – and they often believe it to be a member of their own family, according to a new report.Around 31% of victims revealed that they knew the fraudster who had misused their personal information for financial gain, with more than two-thirds believing a relative was responsible, the survey by credit-reference agency Experian revealed.Published to tie in with National Identity Fraud Prevention Week, the report found that as many as a quarter of victims suspect fellow tenants in a shared building, often because they have access to victims' mail which is delivered to shared hallways.Friends appear to be less untrustworthy than their nearest and dearest, however, with just 3% of the 5,000 identity-fraud victims interviewed pointing the finger at a pal. About 2% blamed a former partner and 1% a work colleague.Nearly 2 million people have their identities stolen every year, at a cost to the UK of £2.7bn, according to a separate report published by the National Fraud Authority earlier this week.Crooks once focused their attention on more prosperous targets but now appear to be no respecter of social or economic class. Experian said it saw evidence of criminals committing higher volumes of lower-value fraud against people whose lifestyle made them more vulnerable to the crime.At increasing risk appear to be young professionals and single parents on low-incomes, as well as those living in flats with communal halls and shared postal deliveries, and those making frequent home moves.Peter Turner, of Experian's ProtectMyID.co.uk service, said: "Unfortunately, it seems that those who are most trusted are also those most likely to be put under the spotlight when ID fraud is committed."With this research revealing that so many victims think they know who the perpetrator is, suspicions are bound to run riot as to who it might be. It has never been more important to be vigilant with personal details and ensure you keep passwords and private data to yourself."Consumer affairsIdentity fraudScamsguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |