Ed Balls's suggestion that £2bn could be cut off the schools budget in England is not an entirely academic debate for those interested in Welsh politics.
Students of the Barnett formula will already have worked out that this would leave the Welsh Assembly Government with around £100m less to spend.
It's a sign of how quickly the economic crisis has changed the political debate that a Labour Minister has been able to float the idea without howls of outrage (beyond the teaching unions).
If the idea had come from, say, the Conservatives, even in dire economic times, politicians in Cardiff Bay would be sticking pins in their John Redwood effigy dolls.
Showing posts with label Barnett formula. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barnett formula. Show all posts
Monday, 21 September 2009
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
Public service blogging
Consensus politics lives, up to a point. Labour, Plaid Cymru and SNP politicians emerged from today's Joint Ministerial Committee at Westminster to declare unity on the issue of the day - public spending.
Their cause - endorsed by the arrival of Gordon Brown towards the end of the meeting - was the need to keep spending high until the recession is over, a policy that isolates the Conservatives.
There were limits to the consensus. The Labour/Plaid Cymru coalition that runs the Welsh Assembly Government want an advance on their budget for 2011/2012 so they can carry on spending next April for the 2010/2011 financial year.
Will they get it? Welsh Secretary Peter Hain pointed out that "you can't keep bringing forward capital spending because it's within a fixed envelope over a period of years" although UK Ministers will consider the request. Ministers hope that economic recovery will be underway before next April, removing the need for a continued fiscal stimulus.
Plaid were also happy to get agreement for Ministers and officials to consider independent arbitration in deciding levels of public spending in Wales. At the moment the Treasury decides how the Barnett formula works and whether Wales gets a slice of extra spending in England, e.g. on the London Olympics.
Peter Hain offered limited hope to his nationalist partners/foes: "You cannot in the end settle issues of spending and finance and the distribution in our case between England and Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland by some independent court. You need to find a way of resolving disputes but in the end it'll come down to politics and what the public support and don't support."
Their cause - endorsed by the arrival of Gordon Brown towards the end of the meeting - was the need to keep spending high until the recession is over, a policy that isolates the Conservatives.
There were limits to the consensus. The Labour/Plaid Cymru coalition that runs the Welsh Assembly Government want an advance on their budget for 2011/2012 so they can carry on spending next April for the 2010/2011 financial year.
Will they get it? Welsh Secretary Peter Hain pointed out that "you can't keep bringing forward capital spending because it's within a fixed envelope over a period of years" although UK Ministers will consider the request. Ministers hope that economic recovery will be underway before next April, removing the need for a continued fiscal stimulus.
Plaid were also happy to get agreement for Ministers and officials to consider independent arbitration in deciding levels of public spending in Wales. At the moment the Treasury decides how the Barnett formula works and whether Wales gets a slice of extra spending in England, e.g. on the London Olympics.
Peter Hain offered limited hope to his nationalist partners/foes: "You cannot in the end settle issues of spending and finance and the distribution in our case between England and Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland by some independent court. You need to find a way of resolving disputes but in the end it'll come down to politics and what the public support and don't support."
Tuesday, 28 July 2009
Summertime
The MPs have left Westminster, some for the beaches, others for Closer magazine.
For the hacks left behind, there is the odd crumb of a story - Esther Rantzen's political career is taking off again today - and a chance to muse on the issues of the day.
You may think that it's summer and life is too short to discuss the Barnett Formula, but before the Cabinet awayday to Cardiff is forgotten I thought I'd share the Prime Minister's views on the way the devolved institutions are funded.
This is Gordon Brown's take on the formula in the light of recent reports suggesting it is too generous to Scotland but short-changes Wales:
"The principle of spending allocation in the UK is that we allocate resources according to need. The Barnett formula has been the traditional means that we do it. If any changes are needed in the Barnett formula as a result of these reviews, we'll look at this. But I think Rhodri Morgan has said himself that spending in Wales by the Assembly has doubled over the last few years.
"And we've made it possible for wales to have better health pieces, better schools and better spending on the infrastructures of transport and policeing on which we depend, and so we will continue to ensure that spending is allocated fairly according to need."
That was Mr Brown's answer to the second question in a two-question "interview" he gave at the end of the awayday. His definition of "need" would be challenged by many critics of a population-based formula.
So what will change? He doesn't appear in a hurry to rush to his constituents to explain why they should get less public spending to help the under-funded Welsh.
The Conservatives, who hope to take power within a year, have occasionally made noises about changing the formula but despite the imminence of a general election have yet to spell out what they would do in this area, as in so many others.
At this rate, the formula will outlive the sprightly Lord Barnett himself.
For the hacks left behind, there is the odd crumb of a story - Esther Rantzen's political career is taking off again today - and a chance to muse on the issues of the day.
You may think that it's summer and life is too short to discuss the Barnett Formula, but before the Cabinet awayday to Cardiff is forgotten I thought I'd share the Prime Minister's views on the way the devolved institutions are funded.
This is Gordon Brown's take on the formula in the light of recent reports suggesting it is too generous to Scotland but short-changes Wales:
"The principle of spending allocation in the UK is that we allocate resources according to need. The Barnett formula has been the traditional means that we do it. If any changes are needed in the Barnett formula as a result of these reviews, we'll look at this. But I think Rhodri Morgan has said himself that spending in Wales by the Assembly has doubled over the last few years.
"And we've made it possible for wales to have better health pieces, better schools and better spending on the infrastructures of transport and policeing on which we depend, and so we will continue to ensure that spending is allocated fairly according to need."
That was Mr Brown's answer to the second question in a two-question "interview" he gave at the end of the awayday. His definition of "need" would be challenged by many critics of a population-based formula.
So what will change? He doesn't appear in a hurry to rush to his constituents to explain why they should get less public spending to help the under-funded Welsh.
The Conservatives, who hope to take power within a year, have occasionally made noises about changing the formula but despite the imminence of a general election have yet to spell out what they would do in this area, as in so many others.
At this rate, the formula will outlive the sprightly Lord Barnett himself.
Thursday, 2 April 2009
Formula One
I've just realised what's been missing from my life these past few months.
My sabbatical from Barnet formula stories is over. As the world's most powerful leaders met in London, I caught up with last night's meeting of a House of Lords committee to discuss the formula that dictates much public spending in devolved nations.
Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy was robust in his defence of a formula which opposition politicians (and some Labour ones) believe short-changes Wales.
Pointing out that he'd lived with the formula for much of his political life, he told peers: "Although there have been ups and downs, I can't think of a better one."
Barnett critics argue that the population-based formula takes no note of needs in poorer parts of the UK.
The Murphy response? "I think it has met the needs certainly in terms of the country I represent around the Cabinet table. I do believe it's met those needs well, indeed some
some English Members of Parliament and Members of the House of Lords would think it's met them too well.
"Certainly from the devolved administrations' point of view they have done pretty well I think out of the system."
That prompted a challenge from Lord Richard of Ammanford, he of that report on the Assembly's powers: "I don't think that's the view of the administration in Cardiff."
The former leader of the Lords said that having taken evidence in Cardiff: "It was very difficult to find anybody saying an enthusiastic word for the existing Barnett formula and the general feeling there seemed to be that a fairer system was capable of being developed and it would be more equitable were it to be introduced."
Paul Murphy: "I'm not saying it's perfect but I don't think there's a better one....it's served us well.
"The problem you have always got is that we'll get people in Wales arguing the case that the formula isn't good enough for them and then you get people in England saying it's too good for them."
Replacing it could be "more trouble than it's worth".
My sabbatical from Barnet formula stories is over. As the world's most powerful leaders met in London, I caught up with last night's meeting of a House of Lords committee to discuss the formula that dictates much public spending in devolved nations.
Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy was robust in his defence of a formula which opposition politicians (and some Labour ones) believe short-changes Wales.
Pointing out that he'd lived with the formula for much of his political life, he told peers: "Although there have been ups and downs, I can't think of a better one."
Barnett critics argue that the population-based formula takes no note of needs in poorer parts of the UK.
The Murphy response? "I think it has met the needs certainly in terms of the country I represent around the Cabinet table. I do believe it's met those needs well, indeed some
some English Members of Parliament and Members of the House of Lords would think it's met them too well.
"Certainly from the devolved administrations' point of view they have done pretty well I think out of the system."
That prompted a challenge from Lord Richard of Ammanford, he of that report on the Assembly's powers: "I don't think that's the view of the administration in Cardiff."
The former leader of the Lords said that having taken evidence in Cardiff: "It was very difficult to find anybody saying an enthusiastic word for the existing Barnett formula and the general feeling there seemed to be that a fairer system was capable of being developed and it would be more equitable were it to be introduced."
Paul Murphy: "I'm not saying it's perfect but I don't think there's a better one....it's served us well.
"The problem you have always got is that we'll get people in Wales arguing the case that the formula isn't good enough for them and then you get people in England saying it's too good for them."
Replacing it could be "more trouble than it's worth".
Wednesday, 26 March 2008
That formula again
The Welsh Grand Committee is sometimes as much fun as a visit to the dentist but today's meeting was worth staying awake for.
Barnett formula anoraks will have found plenty to whet their appetite. Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy warned that a review of the way Wales is funded from Westminster could leave the country worse off.
Public spending is relatively higher in Wales than England. With English Labour MPs agitating for change, Mr Murphy warned: "We have to be very careful on Barnett because it could mean we end up worse off than we are at the moment."
Anyone hoping that the Assembly will acquire the power to vary taxes is also likely to be disappointed - "There isn't a case for tax raising powers in Wales. I don't think anybody wants it."
Mr Murphy said the "resource base" would be lower than in Scotland and said it would be very difficult to give the Assembly tax-raising powers without the approval of voters in a referendum.
Barnett formula anoraks will have found plenty to whet their appetite. Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy warned that a review of the way Wales is funded from Westminster could leave the country worse off.
Public spending is relatively higher in Wales than England. With English Labour MPs agitating for change, Mr Murphy warned: "We have to be very careful on Barnett because it could mean we end up worse off than we are at the moment."
Anyone hoping that the Assembly will acquire the power to vary taxes is also likely to be disappointed - "There isn't a case for tax raising powers in Wales. I don't think anybody wants it."
Mr Murphy said the "resource base" would be lower than in Scotland and said it would be very difficult to give the Assembly tax-raising powers without the approval of voters in a referendum.
Wednesday, 5 March 2008
Formula one
Today's Telegraph reports that Gordon Brown has asked the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, to review the Barnett formula, which as any political anorak will tell you decides much public spending in Wales and Scotland.
The Telegraph say No 10 told them that the review - denied by Downing Street - would "inform the debate".
It would certainly offer a chance for people in Wales to influence the debate, although the greatest pressure to review the formula comes not from Scotland or Wales.
There are a couple of clues in the Telegraph headline - "Questions over £1,500 tax subsidy for Scots" and this sentence: "The Prime Minister wants the policy re-examined in an attempt to head off mounting English resentment over the millions of pounds of public money sent to Scotland every year."
Be careful what you wish for?
Downing Street's official response may dampen down the excitement throbbing throughout the land when the formula is discussed: "It is not the case that the Prime Minister has ordered a review of the Barnett Formula. The Scottish Parliament has recently approved a review process aimed at strengthening devolution. As the Government announced to Parliament in January the Chancellor will lay before Parliament a factual paper on the funding mechanisms for the devolved administrations. There are no current plans to change the Barnett Formula."
The Telegraph say No 10 told them that the review - denied by Downing Street - would "inform the debate".
It would certainly offer a chance for people in Wales to influence the debate, although the greatest pressure to review the formula comes not from Scotland or Wales.
There are a couple of clues in the Telegraph headline - "Questions over £1,500 tax subsidy for Scots" and this sentence: "The Prime Minister wants the policy re-examined in an attempt to head off mounting English resentment over the millions of pounds of public money sent to Scotland every year."
Be careful what you wish for?
Downing Street's official response may dampen down the excitement throbbing throughout the land when the formula is discussed: "It is not the case that the Prime Minister has ordered a review of the Barnett Formula. The Scottish Parliament has recently approved a review process aimed at strengthening devolution. As the Government announced to Parliament in January the Chancellor will lay before Parliament a factual paper on the funding mechanisms for the devolved administrations. There are no current plans to change the Barnett Formula."
Thursday, 8 November 2007
That question again
Some interesting thoughts from Peter Riddell in the Times on how to answer the West Lothian question (if I may be permitted to use the words "interesting" and "West Lothian question" in the same sentence).
He says the idea is to give devolved governments a bigger role in raising their own budgets. That would also help tackle the point made by Stephen Crabb recently that the current system fuels a culture in which there is an inbuilt incentive to demand higher public spending.
Peter's article is another reminder that the pressure for a review of the way Wales is funded is not only coming from west of Offa's Dyke. Arguments about public spending in Scotland may be driving the debate but Wales will be caught in the slipstream.
He says the idea is to give devolved governments a bigger role in raising their own budgets. That would also help tackle the point made by Stephen Crabb recently that the current system fuels a culture in which there is an inbuilt incentive to demand higher public spending.
Peter's article is another reminder that the pressure for a review of the way Wales is funded is not only coming from west of Offa's Dyke. Arguments about public spending in Scotland may be driving the debate but Wales will be caught in the slipstream.
Tuesday, 9 October 2007
Post-pre-Budget report
I managed to survive the day without using too much of the accountancy jargon thrust upon us after Alistair Darling's spending review.
As a bonus, we even managed to entice a Government Minister or two onto the airwaves.
But when you look at the small print of the Welsh settlement there are big questions to ask about why the Assembly Government budget this year is more than £200m less than it expected.
The answer, according to governments at both ends of the M4, is that the NHS in England (unbelievably you might think given its financial crises) actually underspent last year and under that formula I try to avoid mentioning a couple of hundred million or so that could have been spent in Welsh hospitals or on other public services was sliced off the balance sheet.
(Under the formula, Wales gets a share of any increase in comparable spending in England - and a share of any decrease).
The Assembly Government says it's keen to negotiate with the Treasury to get the money - after all it's twice what John Redwood sent back during his time as Secretary of State in the 1990s.
The reduction of up to £260m a year also allows the UK Government to claim bigger increases in Welsh spending, thanks to the lower base. (I should point out that spending will still increase in real terms, although not as quickly as the Assembly is accustomed to).
As you might expect, opposition parties are queuing up to attack what's been called the "worst" spending round since devolution.
That rather assumes all state spending is a good thing - you don't need to be John Redwood to prefer a more neutral ("tightest"?) term but the budget will certainly make life more interesting for Labour and their new best friends in Cardiff Bay.
As a bonus, we even managed to entice a Government Minister or two onto the airwaves.
But when you look at the small print of the Welsh settlement there are big questions to ask about why the Assembly Government budget this year is more than £200m less than it expected.
The answer, according to governments at both ends of the M4, is that the NHS in England (unbelievably you might think given its financial crises) actually underspent last year and under that formula I try to avoid mentioning a couple of hundred million or so that could have been spent in Welsh hospitals or on other public services was sliced off the balance sheet.
(Under the formula, Wales gets a share of any increase in comparable spending in England - and a share of any decrease).
The Assembly Government says it's keen to negotiate with the Treasury to get the money - after all it's twice what John Redwood sent back during his time as Secretary of State in the 1990s.
The reduction of up to £260m a year also allows the UK Government to claim bigger increases in Welsh spending, thanks to the lower base. (I should point out that spending will still increase in real terms, although not as quickly as the Assembly is accustomed to).
As you might expect, opposition parties are queuing up to attack what's been called the "worst" spending round since devolution.
That rather assumes all state spending is a good thing - you don't need to be John Redwood to prefer a more neutral ("tightest"?) term but the budget will certainly make life more interesting for Labour and their new best friends in Cardiff Bay.
Thursday, 13 September 2007
Hey big spender?
Next month, Chancellor Alastair Darling will announce the Government's spending plans for the next few years.
In Wales, much public spending is decided by a population linked formula, you know - the one named after Joel Barnett.
Spending per head in Wales has traditionally been higher than in England, although many Welsh politicians argue that the formula doesn't reflect the country's relative poverty.
My BBC Scotland colleague Brian Taylor suggests the Treasury has been playing hard ball in the run up to the spending review and that far from making Barnett more generous the settlement for the devolved governments may be tighter.
Of course, the UK Government could just be lowering expectations to head off demands for a more generous settlement, but it's certainly a twist that will raise eyebrows west of Offa's Dyke as well as north of Hadrian's Wall.
Alternatively, the new "Scottish Government" may be getting its retaliation in first ahead of the spending review's conclusions.
Isn't life grand now the age of spin is no more?
In Wales, much public spending is decided by a population linked formula, you know - the one named after Joel Barnett.
Spending per head in Wales has traditionally been higher than in England, although many Welsh politicians argue that the formula doesn't reflect the country's relative poverty.
My BBC Scotland colleague Brian Taylor suggests the Treasury has been playing hard ball in the run up to the spending review and that far from making Barnett more generous the settlement for the devolved governments may be tighter.
Of course, the UK Government could just be lowering expectations to head off demands for a more generous settlement, but it's certainly a twist that will raise eyebrows west of Offa's Dyke as well as north of Hadrian's Wall.
Alternatively, the new "Scottish Government" may be getting its retaliation in first ahead of the spending review's conclusions.
Isn't life grand now the age of spin is no more?
Thursday, 6 September 2007
For Wales, see England
Some interesting thoughts from the ever-thoughtful Adam Price, faithfully reproduced by the Western Mail this morning.
Price points out that public spending per head is slightly higher in the North East of England than it is in Wales and draws the conclusion that Wales would be better off as a region of England, although presumably he's not proposing a redrawing of national boundaries.
It's an interesting contribution to the debate over how Wales is funded, although I had hoped to make it through September without referring to the Barnett formula.
The source of his figures is the Treasury. The difference between Wales and North East England in 2006/7 is estimated at £38 per head - spending in Wales is higher than in seven of the other eight regions of England, London being the exception.
Spending on health is £110 higher per head, education is £32 per head higher in the North East, a region thought comparable to Wales due to its heavy industrial past and the consequences of that.
The difference in health spending can't be attributed solely to the overall level of funding - it's a question of priorities for the Welsh Assembly Government (and its new Plaid Cymru Ministers?).
Price poses interesting questions too for the UK Government and the Wales Office. Its response: “The Barnett formula delivers a stable funding base for Wales - £14 billion this year - and there is no guarantee that replacing it would provide a better deal for Wales.
“Spending per head in Wales is 11 per cent higher than the UK average and 14 per cent above the average for England - that is £1,000 a head more in Wales than across England."
Price points out that public spending per head is slightly higher in the North East of England than it is in Wales and draws the conclusion that Wales would be better off as a region of England, although presumably he's not proposing a redrawing of national boundaries.
It's an interesting contribution to the debate over how Wales is funded, although I had hoped to make it through September without referring to the Barnett formula.
The source of his figures is the Treasury. The difference between Wales and North East England in 2006/7 is estimated at £38 per head - spending in Wales is higher than in seven of the other eight regions of England, London being the exception.
Spending on health is £110 higher per head, education is £32 per head higher in the North East, a region thought comparable to Wales due to its heavy industrial past and the consequences of that.
The difference in health spending can't be attributed solely to the overall level of funding - it's a question of priorities for the Welsh Assembly Government (and its new Plaid Cymru Ministers?).
Price poses interesting questions too for the UK Government and the Wales Office. Its response: “The Barnett formula delivers a stable funding base for Wales - £14 billion this year - and there is no guarantee that replacing it would provide a better deal for Wales.
“Spending per head in Wales is 11 per cent higher than the UK average and 14 per cent above the average for England - that is £1,000 a head more in Wales than across England."
Tuesday, 24 July 2007
A (very) light grilling
Peter Hain is facing his annual grilling before MPs on Parliament's select committee on Welsh affairs.
Not too much to disturb the airwaves yet. The session actually began with the committee chairman congratulating Hain on the Wales Office annual report. Hopefully other members of this scrutiny committee will fulfil the hardcop function.
Members of the Labour/Plaid Cymru coalition in the Welsh Assembly Government won't have enjoyed the Hain advice on their plans to review the way Wales is funded from Westminster.
In brief, the secretary of state views it as "a perilous exercise" that could lead to a cut in its budget.
He told MPs that public spending per head in Wales is 11 per cent higher than in the UK, and 14 per cent higher than in England.
"I don't think there is any guarantee that replacing the Barnett formula would get a better deal for Wales."
He was also cautious about any calls for corporation tax to be reduced in Wales, as EU rules meant that cut would have to be off-set elsewhere - possibly in "a reduced budget for Wales".
The Wales Office's top civil servant also faced a rare public grilling. Alan Cogbill was questioned about a memo leaked to Dragon's Eye that suggested he was less than chuffed with his department's performance on an improvement programme.
In the memo, Cogbill wrote: "I've been disappointed that despite good efforts and some improvements we have not made decisive progress.
"I'd say reasons are weaknesses in priority and direction, communication, co-ordination and response".
On a couple of occasions the media that have gleaned snippets from inside the office and if they just came and asked me straight they'd get their straight story".
(We did ask to speak to him at the time but the Wales Office turned down our request for an interview).
Cogbill told the MPs he thought the department had had "a decent year and done a good job for Ministers and for Wales."
He confirmed that the Wales Office had spent £37,000 on an improvement programme.
Sadly he wasn't asked about another snippet I've gleaned - the external consultants brought in promised civil servants they would be given "Lego-style" bricks so that officials could make their own ideas on restructuring the office "three-dimensional".
Apparently the bricks never arrived, although any link between their non-arrival and the lack of progress with the improvement programme is coincidental.
Not too much to disturb the airwaves yet. The session actually began with the committee chairman congratulating Hain on the Wales Office annual report. Hopefully other members of this scrutiny committee will fulfil the hardcop function.
Members of the Labour/Plaid Cymru coalition in the Welsh Assembly Government won't have enjoyed the Hain advice on their plans to review the way Wales is funded from Westminster.
In brief, the secretary of state views it as "a perilous exercise" that could lead to a cut in its budget.
He told MPs that public spending per head in Wales is 11 per cent higher than in the UK, and 14 per cent higher than in England.
"I don't think there is any guarantee that replacing the Barnett formula would get a better deal for Wales."
He was also cautious about any calls for corporation tax to be reduced in Wales, as EU rules meant that cut would have to be off-set elsewhere - possibly in "a reduced budget for Wales".
The Wales Office's top civil servant also faced a rare public grilling. Alan Cogbill was questioned about a memo leaked to Dragon's Eye that suggested he was less than chuffed with his department's performance on an improvement programme.
In the memo, Cogbill wrote: "I've been disappointed that despite good efforts and some improvements we have not made decisive progress.
"I'd say reasons are weaknesses in priority and direction, communication, co-ordination and response".
On a couple of occasions the media that have gleaned snippets from inside the office and if they just came and asked me straight they'd get their straight story".
(We did ask to speak to him at the time but the Wales Office turned down our request for an interview).
Cogbill told the MPs he thought the department had had "a decent year and done a good job for Ministers and for Wales."
He confirmed that the Wales Office had spent £37,000 on an improvement programme.
Sadly he wasn't asked about another snippet I've gleaned - the external consultants brought in promised civil servants they would be given "Lego-style" bricks so that officials could make their own ideas on restructuring the office "three-dimensional".
Apparently the bricks never arrived, although any link between their non-arrival and the lack of progress with the improvement programme is coincidental.
Monday, 23 July 2007
The Brown formula
Gordon Brown turned in a predictably solid (clunking?) performance at his first Downing Street news conference this morning.
The new PM may lack the smooth PR skills of his predecessor but he still knows how to avoid answering a question he doesn't want to answer.
His body language is less relaxed than Tony Blair's. Brown would periodically put his hand inside his jacket pocket, although he never seemed to find what he was searching for. Students of jokes about less than generous Scotsmen can fill in their own punchline.
Flooding was the top story today, but he also faced questions about Iraq, Turkey, the Middle East, how he's finding his new job - and the Barnett formula.
The Welsh Assembly's review of the way Wales is funded from Westminster does not appear to have appeared on the Brown radar.
The prime minister confirmed that this autumn's comprehensive spending review will be decided on the basis of the formula and he acknowledged that "difficult choices" lie ahead in deciding how cash is divided between different parts of the UK.
He told reporters: "It is a formula that has been well tested and tried. It's been used by all governments of all political colours and I believe that will be the basis on which the public spending settlement will be signed."
Brown did show more evidence that he can think on his feet - and use humour - when asked about his "puritan" instincts in announcing U-turns on gambling and drugs.
The PM said he'd been in London 24 years and the question reminded him of Mark Twain's arrival from a puritanical church-going background in Nevada, a state where he discovered drinking, gambling and womanising going on.
Twain decided: "This was no place for a puritan and I did not long remain one."
Brown's time in London has been rather less colourfully spent.
The new PM may lack the smooth PR skills of his predecessor but he still knows how to avoid answering a question he doesn't want to answer.
His body language is less relaxed than Tony Blair's. Brown would periodically put his hand inside his jacket pocket, although he never seemed to find what he was searching for. Students of jokes about less than generous Scotsmen can fill in their own punchline.
Flooding was the top story today, but he also faced questions about Iraq, Turkey, the Middle East, how he's finding his new job - and the Barnett formula.
The Welsh Assembly's review of the way Wales is funded from Westminster does not appear to have appeared on the Brown radar.
The prime minister confirmed that this autumn's comprehensive spending review will be decided on the basis of the formula and he acknowledged that "difficult choices" lie ahead in deciding how cash is divided between different parts of the UK.
He told reporters: "It is a formula that has been well tested and tried. It's been used by all governments of all political colours and I believe that will be the basis on which the public spending settlement will be signed."
Brown did show more evidence that he can think on his feet - and use humour - when asked about his "puritan" instincts in announcing U-turns on gambling and drugs.
The PM said he'd been in London 24 years and the question reminded him of Mark Twain's arrival from a puritanical church-going background in Nevada, a state where he discovered drinking, gambling and womanising going on.
Twain decided: "This was no place for a puritan and I did not long remain one."
Brown's time in London has been rather less colourfully spent.
Wednesday, 4 July 2007
Formula one
Breaking news, of a sort, on the anoraks' favourite subject, the Barnett formula.
The news is that there's no news, and that the Government is sticking to its public line that the formula, which effectively decides how much the Welsh Assembly Government can spend on public services, won't be changed.
Scotland on Sunday, a newspaper, had reported that the Treasury would be reviewing the formula under pressure from English MPs miffed by higher public spending in Wales and Scotland.
Now a member of Gordon Brown's Cabinet, leader of the Lords Baroness Ashton, says Ministers have no plans to review the Barnett formula, which was introduced as a temporary measure in the 1970s.
She told peers this afternoon: "It's interesting how many things that have been brought in for a year or two actually survive the course and we believe this has survived the course and have no plans to review".
Before self-appointed members of "civic society" take to the streets of Cardiff, we should acknowledge that the words used, almost a formula in themselves, would allow the Government to change its plans.
Some MPs are rather perplexed by demands from Cardiff Bay for a review of the formula, as they fear it could lead to a cut in Welsh spending rather than an increase.
The news is that there's no news, and that the Government is sticking to its public line that the formula, which effectively decides how much the Welsh Assembly Government can spend on public services, won't be changed.
Scotland on Sunday, a newspaper, had reported that the Treasury would be reviewing the formula under pressure from English MPs miffed by higher public spending in Wales and Scotland.
Now a member of Gordon Brown's Cabinet, leader of the Lords Baroness Ashton, says Ministers have no plans to review the Barnett formula, which was introduced as a temporary measure in the 1970s.
She told peers this afternoon: "It's interesting how many things that have been brought in for a year or two actually survive the course and we believe this has survived the course and have no plans to review".
Before self-appointed members of "civic society" take to the streets of Cardiff, we should acknowledge that the words used, almost a formula in themselves, would allow the Government to change its plans.
Some MPs are rather perplexed by demands from Cardiff Bay for a review of the formula, as they fear it could lead to a cut in Welsh spending rather than an increase.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)