The Government had next to no living standards message at the election. It needs one now – and to explain how it fits in with those three priorities.
The debate has come to symbolise much of what differentiates us from the Left: robust policy based on evidence that supports free markets, versus dogma based on statism.
The lacklustre General Election campaign was consigned to second place. Donald Trump’s inauguration was a distant third.
Small firms have had to struggle due to bureaucratic inertia by some councils. At least the culprits have been identified.
The Universities Minister takes on Lord Adonis, and insists the new regulator will control pay by insisting on transparency and the right benchmarks.
The Prime Minister’s stance on regulatory alignment is very hard indeed to square with his vision of a freewheeling Britain. Watch this space.
Yet embracing change doesn’t mean blinkered acceptance. It is a core Conservative belief that robust rules are needed to ensure one person’s freedom doesn’t trample that of others.
Developers must hand over the payments agreed – and councils need to put more thought into spending it effectively.
If the Conservative Party is to remain successful, we must solve Britain’s productivity puzzle and deliver a tangible financial boost for voters.
The Chancellor has not suddenly changed who he is; he has carefully analysed the issues we face and plotted out a course of action to build a Britain fit for the future.
The Tories are working hard not just to argue but to demonstrate that Scottish interests are best served within British institutions and frameworks.
Plus: We need a Housing Minister who will do for new homes what Michael Heseltine did with development corporations in the 1980s.
Since the Stamp Duty announcement I’ve spotted soft ‘Corbynistas’ actually congratulating the Chancellor by name.
Hammond tries to lure Stormont back to its feet with yet more powers; Scots Tories highlight Budget role; and more.
The FT has the balanced “Grim outlook overshadows housing drive” while the Times goes for “Hammond eases off austerity”. The i has “Hammond’s hard-hat budget”.