Yesterday Labour organised another debate on Universal Credit.

The idea behind the reform is to simplify the complex benefits system, ensure financial support for those who need it, and to make it easier to get into work. Labour used to support the general aims of the reform, but they now want to slow down its implementation.
The government reports that people find faster routes into work from Universal Credit which is designed to make it always worthwhile working. They estimate another 250,000 getting into work as Universal Credit is rolled out.

Universal Credit provides a basic income for those out of work, and tops up incomes of those in lower paid work. It gives people more if they have children, if they are disabled, and if they need help with housing costs. The aim is no-one in our society should be unable to afford normal living costs, ending up homeless or cold or hungry.

Promoting work helps people achieve higher incomes. Benefit is withdrawn in a way which leaves people better off as they work more hours or take on better paid work. There is every incentive to get a job, get a better job and move to full time working from part time employment. Labour are right to speak out for people who are stuck in low pay employment or in underemployment. The government shares their wish to help people move into something better, and supports the aim of giving them benefit to top up inadequate incomes.

The best way to raise living standards is to help, mentor and train people so they can get into better paid work. Quite often it is easier to get into better paid work from less well paid work, or into a full time job from a part or contract job. That is why we need a benefit top up system that is flexible and helps people when they have need of financial support. A growing economy, and an economy that is thriving with growing companies in new and advanced areas of work, is the best ally of getting people higher living standards.

Meanwhile there have been some welcome improvements in the scheme following lobbying and consultation. More money will be made available earlier for claimants, with the 7 day waiting period going in February. Claimants will be told the housing component in any benefit they receive can be paid directly to landlords if they wish. Interest free advances of credit will be available to new claimants, as it is paid monthly in arrears.

Yesterday reminded us how far the EU wish to push the UK even to get to talks about a future Agreement. The talks ended in disagreement about the Irish border issues.

I continue to support the government’s stated view that it must take back control of our money, our borders and our laws, and that no deal is better than a bad deal. There is no news about a future Agreement, as we still have not started talking about one.

Yesterday’s opening of the new Facebook headquarters was a timely reminder of how the business community sees us. Facebook has chosen to invest in an important new architect designed building close to Oxford Circus and to expand its workforce substantially. It is recruiting engineers, as it likes the UK as a base for designing new technology services. It is setting up an incubator to help mentor and assist some of the UK technology start up businesses. Facebook appreciates the UK as a source of talented employees, a good base for business, and a place that offers world class accommodation and facilities.

Google too has grown quickly in London and is taking substantial space.It is working on a 1 million square foot headquarters at Kings Cross. Amazon meanwhile is attracting more and more business from UK shoppers and is taking on a range of properties around the country to allow it to deliver products in a timely and efficient way.

The new economy majors see the UK as a fast growing opportunity, with many people wanting to expand their use of digital media for everything from shopping to their social life, from news and entertainment to banking. These latest investments are important for future UK growth and development.

Brexit continues to dominate the media because there remain two different views of how to implement it.

There are those in the civil service who understand the wish of the majority to leave. They realise we voted to take back control of our money, our borders, our law making and our international relations, especially on trade. They are working diligently on what can come as soon as we leave. They are planning a new fishing policy, a new agricultural policy, new trade deals with non EU states, and much else. I am pleased they are and look forward to the results of their detailed labours for Ministers.

There are others who seem to think after Brexit we need to mirror all the arrangements and controls we had when in the EU. They have been busily mapping every nook and cranny of EU involvement and interference in our government and daily lives. They present each intervention or control as a problem, or as something we have to negotiate to continue it or to replicate it. They also seem to think the UK is in a weak position because in their view it needs to keep so much, so they recommend making many concessions to the EU negotiating position in order to cling on to something similar to what we have.

There is an irony here. The Remain advocates who encourage this type of thinking are often the same people who told us before the referendum that the EU did not have much power over us, that we remained a sovereign state even within the EU, and that Eurosceptics exaggerated when we claimed the EU now does control a lot of our lives. The vote has made a difference to their view on all this.

The truth is the EU does currently control a lot of matters which a self governing country controls for itself. We have agreed between remain and Leave advocates following the result that we should aim to take back control of our law making on departure, but to ensure continuity we will replicate in UK law all the features of EU law. Parliament will then at its leisure review, amend or repeal what we do not need or can improve.

This model should not be diluted by rushing to agree permanent extensions of EU law, or by seeking to newly bind us into decisions of the ECJ or into regulatory bodies we do not control. We can only only take back control of our laws, our money and our borders if we leave with no further commitments to EU jurisdiction. We also need to remind the EU there is no legal requirement to pay a so called divorce bill, and I still want us to spend our money on our own priorities from the day we leave the EU. The government still states its policy as taking back control of our laws, our borders and our money. That is all a good idea. Let’s set the deadline as 29 March 2019 and work to it. There is still enough time to ensure all works well under the WTO option if the EU continues to refuse a sensible discussion of a Free Trade deal.

The Republicans cleared a big hurdle this week with the Senate voting for a sweeping tax reform with substantial tax cuts for individuals and companies.
It is true the Senate Bill and the House Bill still need to be reconciled, because there are differences between them. There could still be last minute problems which stalled the policy. However, the Senate vote and the House rhetoric implies that they do think they need to pull this off. The Republicans could ill afford a failure on tax reform after their public inability to agree reform of Obamacare. They need something to show for their year’s debates. They are more likely to keep their majority in the mid term elections if they can show solid achievement.

The tax reform is also more likely to win them friends and voter support than the healthcare reform which divided the nation as Obamacare itself did. Whilst it is true some of the polling on the tax cuts themselves is not great, there will be huge support for measures which boost growth and take home pay. Voters often tell pollsters they do not in aggregate want tax cuts,especially if they think the cuts go to companies and people richer than themselves. They also tell politicians in the ballot box that if the politicians vote to put their taxes up or fail to support tax cuts they will vote for someone else instead. People may not welcome large company tax cuts, but they will welcome more investment, more jobs and better pay from companies that retain more of their profits, and they will like the boost to pension funds and other savings vehicles from a stronger corporate sector.

This large tax reform is a game changer. It is a substantial fiscal stimulus to the US economy as conventionally defined, with a costed $1.4 tn of giveaways over ten years. The US may end up collecting more tax than forecast as the rates are cut, as official forecasters often underestimate the dynamic positive effects on turnover and revenue from lower rates. The idea of persuading more companies to repatriate profits and cash to the US with a lower rate could also work, giving US companies much more money at home to invest to grow their US businesses.

There will be beneficial effects for the rest of the world economy as the growth rate of the world’s largest economy accelerates. The rest of the world needs also to understand that with these tax changes the US will get more competitive, and will become a relatively more attractive place for investment.

When the pound was going down we had daily reports of how worrying this was, usually ascribed for no good reason to Brexit.
The pound is now up by 12.5% from its recent low, but there is little comment. It does not normally feature on news broadcasts in the way it did when going down. Is this big move up also because of Brexit? Is it good news?

I have both before and after the vote said that the pound has been volatile against the dollar and the Euro all the time we have been in the EU, and will doubtless still go up and down once we are out of the EU. Its movements are not usually to do with the Brexit.

I look forward to the government pressing ahead with a solution to the issues over the Irish border that preserves an open border on the UK side. The government has set out in papers how this can be done. It would be good if the EU bought into the Uk solution, or provided an acceptable alternative.

Some people who claim there has to be a hard border once we leave the EU need to understand the nature of the current border. Whilst it is true there are no custom dues to levy on products within the EU crossing the border, it is still a currency, VAT, Income and Corporation tax border. It does require processing the right paperwork or electronic information to ensure the correct authorities levy the appropriate VAT, Income Tax, Corporation tax and the rest, and the right exchange rate is applied to transactions.

The Republic of Ireland has a standard rate of VAT of 23% compared to the UK 20%, but also has three lower rates and a zero levy depending on products. The Republic only charges Corporation Tax on trading Income at 12.5% compared to the UK 19%. All of these differences are handled without needing a physical barrier and checks at the border, so it would also be possible to levy customs duties in the same way without a customs post and delay for trucks. Registered importers and exporters can notify electronically and pay electronically. Small trade activities by locals crossing the border regularly could be exempt.

Both sides to the negotiations say they wish to keep the Common Travel area, so there is no need for new border barriers to deal with people. The UK and the Irish authorities already have in place methods for dealing with illegal migrants and criminals seeking entry.

How many more times do we have to go over this well trodden ground? The UK government should just press ahead with its plans for leaving in March 2019

One of the many wrong forecasts by official bodies before the referendum was a likely fall in house prices and in housebuilding after a No vote. Almost a year and half later, house prices are up modestly and housebuilding has expanded by around 15%.

The latest house price survey from Nationwide shows prices up 2.5% over the last year. The rate of price growth rose to 5.6% after the vote in August 2016 and has since calmed down a bit. The movements post the vote are not very different from before the vote. The February 2017 level of 4.5% growth was the same as the growth rate in December 2015, as an example. The recent cooling in house price rises reflects the Bank’s decision to slow credit growth a bit.

In 2016-17 the UK added 217,350 dwellings to the stock, a rise of 15%. Housebuilding numbers are continuing to expand. The biggest source of growth by far is new construction. Conversions from commercial property are also making a growing and useful contribution. The decision to allow conversion of office space to residential with simplified planning has helped. There will also be shops on the edges of retail areas that will be suitable for conversion as the public switches to more on line and main centre shopping. 37,190 new homes have come from change of use over the last year.

The previous high for new homes came in 2007-8 just before the crash, when the UK produced 223,530. There was then a 44% fall in numbers as a result of the banking slump.

Meanwhile main commercial property companies still report good tenant demand. British Land is the latest company to report sales of properties at 13% above their valuations, showing that valuers continue to be unduly cautious about values.

I attended the Urgent Question on the Brexit discussions yesterday.

The government made clear that they still believe No deal is better than a bad deal. They confirmed to me that they are continuing to plan for a No Deal exit. They need to do this as No Deal is still a possible outcome. They also need to do so as the government will have no capacity to resist a bad deal at the last minute if we are not ready to leave without an Agreement.

The government believes they can secure a good deal. This would embrace a full free trade agreement and various other features of a comprehensive economic partnership. It is important it leaves the UK free to negotiate our own trade deals with the rest of the world, settle our own borders, make our own laws and no longer be under the ECJ. The government states they have not offered any specific sums of money, but have indicated areas where they will consider making ex gratia payments in return for a good deal.

Some contributors to this website want me to write all the time about Brexit and respond daily to the false rumours, stories and comments that abound in this area. I have no intention of doing so. Any likely Agreement is probably a year away. It will only be possible to decide whether the Deal is better than No Deal when we know what it is. The discussions will get very repetitious, and my attitude will not change daily as the news flows. In the meantime I do have other constituency interests to pursue. I will continue to engage on the many matters that do not relate to Brexit that affect the lives of my constituents.

No Deal ticks four of the five boxes of what we want from Brexit. It gives us control of our borders, our laws and our money. It means no special divorce bill. It means we are free to negotiate our own trade agreements around the world. It does not deliver us a free trade agreement with the EU, though later after we have left the EU might want one after all. Any Agreement needs to improve on this to be worthwhile.

The ambition of improving people’s living standards is shared across the UK political spectrum. Our debates are not about what we are trying to achieve. All sensible people want their neighbours, friends and relatives to do well, to find worthwhile jobs, and to earn a decent living. The arguments are in practice all about how we achieve that, though some seek to misrepresent the views of others by implying some do not want people to succeed.

The good news is it is not a zero sum game. Someone doing well should not make it more difficult for someone else. As more people set up businesses they create more jobs. As more large companies sell more product and pay higher bonuses, so there is more money to spend on other things, in turn creating more employment.

Nor is the world of school and university a zero sum game. We have expanded educational opportunity substantially, by effectively raising the school leaving age and increasing the number of university places on offer. There is no ceiling on how well any individual can do, no firm limit on how many good degrees are awarded.

Today we read that some places appear better than others at assisting and mentoring people from low income backgrounds so they can succeed in education and go on to well paid jobs. We need to study what has worked best and what has not worked so well, and spread best practice from place to place. Schools need to be properly funded and good teachers valued and supported. It is also a task for the wider community and for the families concerned. Individuals are motivated and assisted by different things. It may only take one comment or expression of support to make the difference for a young person, but as we can never be sure what that is so those in the local community need to try what they can to show more people that there is opportunity for all and effort can be rewarded.