22/11/2017 The Papers

Hello and welcome to our look ahead

to what the the papers will be

bringing us tomorrow.

With me are Caroline Wheeler,

deputy political editor

at the Sunday Times, and Ben Chu,

economics editor of the Independent.

Tomorrow's front pages -

starting with...

The Financial Times leads

with the Chancellor's budget,

writing that it's been overshadowed

by the biggest downgrade in economic

growth since the financial crisis.

The Telegraph headlines

with the budget's abolishing

of stamp duty for some

first-time buyers.

The Metro says that Philip Hammond

has tried to help millions get

onto the housing ladder,

but that experts believe it

will just raise prices.

The Express writes that

Number 11 have unveiled

a £3 billion package for Brexit,

which the paper says,

shows the UK is ready to leave

the EU without a deal.

The Times says the Chancellor

has eased off austerity

with a £25 billion giveaway

to counter political

and economic pressures.

The Guardian claims Mr Hammond

is trying to mask Britain's

deteriorating economic situation

by pledging to revive

the homeowning dream.

And the Mail takes back it's

nickname for the Chancellor -

Eeyore - which he was given

for his gloomy outlook on Brexit.

They have all taken slightly

different takes. Let's start with

the Financial Times. A grim outlook

overshadows housing drive. That kind

of sums up the budget. Some positive

headlines for some people, but

things not looking too good on the

economic front. That's right, and

that's happened with a few

announcements and economic words,

where he basically described the

fact that the growth forecast had

been slashed on the run-up to this

spending review period, which gave

him less wiggle room to do

interesting things with. When we

started this budget cycle, it always

begins after party conference

season. The initial trajectory was

that this would be a big, bold, make

or break budget for the Chancellor,

a career show stopping budget. The

fact that these forecasts came out

at the same time meant he had

limited ability to make

announcements, and that set the tone

for the budget, which is why he got

that out the way to begin with as

almost a warning shot to MPs. Saying

that the economy is not doing as

well as expected, so downgrade your

expectation a bit.

The Telegraph has an awful lot on

the budget on its front page.

Outlook gloomy, but there to be

proved wrong. It is relatively early

days for Theresa May, but not for

the Conservative government. They

will have wanted better headlines

about the economy.

Of course.

Hammond came in saying, I'm really

up beat and positive about Brexit,

trying to throw off this Eeyore name

that he's been given for being too

gloomy and downbeat. Then he had to

present this catastrophically bad

growth forecast. These are the worst

five-year growth forecast ever

produced by the OBR since it was set

up. Never have they had growth

forecast lower than 2%. This is the

worst of any of the Treasury

forecasts as well.

What is causing

it?

Interestingly, everyone is

implying it's about Brexit. But it

isn't. The OBR has decided that our

productivity and growth potential is

weaker than had been thought. Since

the financial crisis, it was assumed

that our growth would bounce back to

2.5%, but that hasn't happened.

That's why the growth forecast is

bad and borrowing is up, and why the

outlook is bleak.

Let's look at some

of the positives. A helping hand for

first-time buyers, but even then,

experts are saying, it's not as good

as you think.

Another surprising

thing about the budget, other the

fact that Philip Hammond cracked a

few jokes, such as saying that he'd

asked the Prime Minister to bring

him some cough sweets.

He looked

really happy about that.

He did. The

stamp duty announcement was one of

those that had been widely rumoured

that it might come about. This is to

help first-time buyers. There's been

a feeling within the political

movement, particularly since Jeremy

Corbyn started making key

announcements around younger voters,

that the Conservatives were not

doing enough to support younger

voters, and that there was a

intergenerational unfairness,

particularly around housing. This

was their way of trying to help them

to do this, reducing the amount of

tax they pay when buying their first

property up to £300,000, and

reducing the amount they pay on

homes up to £500,000. But the OBR

immediately poured a little bit of

cold water on it, saying it would

only help 3500 people, and that it

would push up house prices and was

one of these things that was

potentially open to misuse by people

pretending to be first-time buyers,

suggesting that the only thing that

would stop them is the fact they

would have to lie to their

solicitors.

And there is the

overwhelming task of saving up for a

deposit in the first place. The

cartoon on the front page of the

Telegraph sums it up. House prices

go up because demand goes up. Estate

agents saying, no more than two

young people at any time.

If you are

stoking up demand, you are feeding

the problem rather than solving it.

The solution lies in more supply.

The trouble with the stamp duty cut

is that it pushes up prices, and it

isn't dealing with the supply issue.

It is just helping a fuel lucky

people who will benefit, but doesn't

address the problem. We have seen

headlines about £44 billion for

housing. That is not government

cash. It is slightly obscure

guarantees. It is a big number and

it's not surprising the Treasury

want to push that out there. But we

don't know how many homes will

actually be built.

The Times says

that Hammond eases off austerity.

Really?

They are making a lot of the

idea that he has this £25 billion

giveaway. But there are smoke and

mirrors here, particularly with

housing, the possibility that savvy

Javed was pushing, this £50 billion

for the government to invest in a

house building scheme. Actually what

we got was a £50 billion

announcement that wasn't actually

government money. It falls a long

way short of what had been asked for

per year. It is kind of smoke and

mirrors.

It has been described as

Hammond's hard hat budget. There is

an image of a concrete mixer there.

It was a tough budget for him as

well as for everyone else that it

affects. He didn't have a lot to

play with.

He didn't. Very high

personal stake for him, because

after his last budget in March, he

put up national insurance on the

self employed, and Downing Street

basically told him to undo it, which

was a humiliating reversal. He had

to get this one right. That's why he

was so cautious. We knew stamp duty

was coming, so there was nothing

surprising in it. Apparently, he had

been running it passed a lot of Tory

MPs to make sure there was nothing

they could complain about. He played

it very safe.

Some papers saying

that this budget tells us about the

Brexit plans. UK faces worst decade

of economic growth in 60 years. The

deficit will not be wiped out until

at least 2031, and we have to get to

the other side of Brexit.

The

interesting thing is that it doesn't

factor in Brexit really. The OBR was

pointing towards her Florence

speech, which indicated a divorce

bill of about £20 billion. Other

indications show that it could be

more than twice that. That hasn't

been factored into these figures,

neither has what we get from these

negotiations. Transition has not

been pinned down, and that could

really impact businesses if we don't

get that pin down before the end of

the next quarter.

The Daily Express

describes it as £3 billion to speed

up the EU exit. Showing that the

government, it says, is willing to

have no deal.

I think it will add up

to more than that. There was this

debate between Hammond and the rest

of the Cabinet as to whether he

should put more money aside to deal

with Brexit. They are spinning it as

good for Brexit, because it shows we

have this money to spend. £3 billion

is not going to cut it and it smacks

of a massive compromise.

It shows

that Downing Street have won out. A

month ago he was saying that it was

irresponsible to open up the cough

and spend money on Brexit.

Let's

have a look at Buzzfeed. They always

have a slightly different take. They

are very close to the ground. They

are taking the line that it is going

to cut down on tax dodging by

Internet companies. That is

something that a lot of people get

angry about.

And fair enough, it is

profit shifting. They don't pay

corporation tax because they

artificially shift their profits out

of the UK.

That didn't grab many

headlines.

That's because they've

been hammering away at this issue

for a while. Hammond is trying to

tighten up existing measures

further. This is also about VAT,

which is another tech element of it.

These platforms where people are not

paying VAT they are trying to bring

that into line. It is essentially

digital companies which are avoiding

tax.

Caroline, with all of your

connections at Number 10, you can

describe what's going on in the

Daily Mail.

It's an interesting one.

The idea that he is no longer this

Eeyore. That was his nickname

because he was always so pessimistic

about everything. Despite everything

we have heard about the growth

forecasts, the Daily Mail has

decided to go on a more optimistic

picture of the budget, talking about

the help for first-time buyers,

which says more about the

positioning of the Daily Mail than

anything else. A lot of papers have

been critical of the Chancellor, who

was a remain voting minister.

Hammond has got a kicking from that

particular camp, so the fact they

have come out in favour of him shows

he is in the Prime Minister's good

books at the moment.

Caroline, Ben,

thank you for taking us through the

front pages.

Don't forget you can see the front

pages of the papers online

on the BBC News website.

It's all there for you - seven days

a week at bbc.co.uk/papers.

If you miss the programme any

evening, you can watch it

later on BBC iPlayer.

Thank you to my guests,

Caroline Wheeler and Ben Chu.