The Great Debate UK
Today and tomorrow, the Netherlands will host the third Nuclear Security Summit (NSS), but while more than 50 world leaders converge on The Hague to focus on enhancing security of the stockpiles of nuclear materials and nuclear facilities across the world, key elements of the debate on nuclear security will be missing.
As a conference organised by Delft University last weekend on nuclear security, policy and ethics highlighted, a fully comprehensive agenda for the Hague sessions would also include socio-technical and ethical aspects of nuclear security, including nuclear disarmament and expansion of nuclear energy.
from The Great Debate:
The crisis in Ukraine underscores the prescience of the international efforts to eliminate all nuclear weapons and weapon-grade material there after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Their success lowered the danger of deadly nuclear assets falling into the wrong hands.
President Barack Obama and the more than 50 world leaders meeting at the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague on Monday need to show the same vision. They must seek to eliminate the persistent weak links in the global nuclear security system that can make dangerous materials vulnerable to nuclear terrorists.
from The Great Debate:
The Internet and mobile phones have transformed our connections to people around the world. This technology has also, however, led to a widening gender gap in poorer countries. For it is largely men who control the information revolution that helps to educate, inform and empower.
In low and middle-income countries, a woman is 21 percent less likely than a man to own a mobile phone, according to research done by GSMA. In Africa, women are 23 percent less likely than a man to own a cell phone. In the Middle East the figure is 24 percent and in South Asia, 37 percent,
A central pillar of George Osborne’s 2014 budget was the announcement that pensioners will no longer have to buy an annuity upon retirement and that they would have more control of their pensions pots, including the freedom to withdraw cash without incurring penalty tax changes.
This is a true blue move that has Conservative values right at its heart – giving retirees the right to do what they want with their money. While in most instances being freed from the shackles of government is something to be celebrated, in this instance a little government paternalism can be a good thing.
Confidence up. Inflation down. Exports up. Unemployment down. Growth forecasts up. With this backdrop it must have been difficult for George Osborne to draw up his fifth Budget. But what we have ended up with is a Budget for blue rinsers rather than businesses. He obviously thinks that everything is heading in the right direction with the economy and exports so there is no need to do much, despite all the supportive rhetoric around helping businesses.
George Osborne had good news to tell in his 2014 budget. The deficit continues to fall. Forecasts for 2014 growth, at 2.7% , are better than expected. Employment levels are now on a par with the US (he did not add that they lag behind Australia or Canada). The challenge he has set for this country is to increase exports to one trillion pounds by the end of the decade. That means the UK must increase its exports each year by 10.4 per cent.
–Cathy Corrie is a researcher at the independent think tank Reform. The opinions expressed are her own.– Today’s budget was a good news story. There is now no major advanced economy growing faster than the UK. Yet underneath the chancellor’s celebration, the end of austerity is nowhere in sight. With national debt heading inexorably up to over 75% of GDP, in the words of the chancellor: “The job is far from done.”The chancellor today made reference to two strategies to secure the public finances for the long term; the first, an Annual Managed Expenditure (AME) cap to limit welfare spending, and the second, a new Charter for Budget Responsibility, to be announced in full this autumn. Through these new measures Osborne has pledged to “fix the roof when the sun is shining to protect against future storms”, by returning to absolute surplus in the years of growth. The goal is to allow the UK to enter recessions from a position of financial strength, not on the back foot.Yet while the chancellor should be applauded for keeping fiscal discipline at the top of the agenda, history shows he faces a daunting challenge to deliver on his promise. For twenty years, governments have allowed debt to build by consistently spending more in recessions than they save in periods of growth. Debt has been left £124 billion higher as a result. It’s worth noting that 22 out of the last 26 forecasts have promised a return to surplus. No government since 2002 has thus far delivered.
–Dr Richard Wellings is Deputy Editorial Director at the Institute of Economic Affairs. The opinions expressed are his own.–
History is unlikely to be kind to George Osborne. Four years after he became chancellor, the national debt has exploded, the budget deficit remains at dangerously high levels, and an increasing share of tax revenues must be devoted to repaying creditors.
With the next general election just over a year away, it is likely Chancellor George Osborne will want to keep his powder dry and hold back any vote winning announcements for the Conservative Party manifesto or for the election campaign itself. That said, there are pressures from both the UK public (especially those experiencing the continued squeeze on household incomes) and businesses that are continuing to experience the effects of the recession. With this in mind, I have set out below what I think could happen on Wednesday, and some of the measures I’d like to see introduced.
The headlines generated by the forthcoming UK budget are likely to be political rather than economic; the general election is next year. Despite a faster than expected fall in unemployment and inflation, macroeconomic developments since the December autumn statement present limited scope for forecast revisions to government borrowing. But come the post-budget analysis, some of the seemingly esoteric revised economic assumptions may have important consequences for how the budget is perceived politically.