Knowing when it is safe to take the shot

There is a clip circulating of our very own Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, trying to skip. Now this is not a post about Gorgeous George's fiscal competence and I am not going to make any cheap cracks about jump starting the economy. No, this is a post about how to avoid looking like an idiot at an event where there are cameras.  There is only one thing you need to do and it is really simple: you need to make sure you have a press officer with you who knows my five top tips for avoiding having you look like an idiot. 

So my top tips for press officers are:  

• What is in the background? Will there be a plant coming out of your boss's head? A swastika? A man dressed as a monkey or any kind of animal? Have you checked all the angles? Anything to make your guy look like an idiot? If there is anything, anything at all, don't let him/her stand in front of it. Make him/her take a different route, put some people in front it, do whatever you can to avoid the shot.
• Don't let him/her do any sport or physical activity at all if they are rubbish at it. Even if they really are really good (not just good in their own head), don't let them do it in a suit. The only person who gets away with it is Barack Obama shooting hoops and that is because he really is very good at basketball, doesn't play with his jacket on and is super cool.
• Make sure that your guy is absolutely clear that he/she must never accept an invitation to do engage in any kind of activity or hold any piece of equipment which you haven't arranged.
• Don't let him/her wear ridiculous headgear. Hard hats are ok, but enter food preparation areas at your own peril.  If there is some kind of religious or cultural requirement to wear specialist head covering and/or remove shoes, think about the rest of their outfit - do you need to ditch the Savile Row for something with a more local flavour?  
• Be very careful when it comes to eating/drinking in public. It is best to avoid it, unless of course it is a visit to a pub or restaurant. In a pub, if you guy is an actual guy he should have a pint in a straight glass, you have more leeway if your guy is a gal. But no champagne for either gender. In an eating establishment, the shot is your guy eating a forkful, that's all that needs to be consumed.  

In the end it is all about maintaining dignity, the dignity of your guy, his/her office, his/her organisation and about maintaining your reputation -  you don't want to be known as the person who allowed the Chancellor to look like an idiot. 

George gets his axe out

So Gorgeous George finally had his day. After months of anticipation, yesterday he revealed the size of his axe. And my, wasn’t it big? £81 billion worth of cuts, with many departments taking massive hits to protect spending of health, education and defence. The Departments of Communities and Local Government will have to cope with cuts of 68 per cent, god alone knows how it will survive.

If the Chancellor appeared unperturbed by the fact that the cuts will lead to 490,000 public sector job losses, he looked completely overjoyed to be slashing the welfare budget by £18 billion. For as well as blaming Labour for the financial mess in which we now find us, he also attributes responsibility to those who make a lifestyle choice to live off the state. I have yet to meet anyone who has chosen to survive on £65.45 per week (or £51.84 if you are lucky enough to be under 25) but I am sure that Mr Osborne knows loads of them. That is presumably why he has declared war on benefit scroungers and cheats and is taking tough action to tackle the cost of benefit fraud which he estimated at £5 billion (a number which is somewhat at odds with the DWP’s own figures something we will ignore for the time being but see Cathy Newman for an explanation if you are interested). He has been talking about it for weeks including several of the 61 minutes of yesterday’s speech and was banging on about it again on morning on the Today programme.

It is important for everyone to have an enemy and all those people living the life of Riley at taxpayers’ expense are his. But many of his Lib Dem colleagues are less comfortable with his choice of villain. They would rather that the government tackled tax cheats – and apparently it is. For during his speech Mr O did reveal (albeit sotto voce) that £900 million would be invested at the HMRC to tackle tax evasion and fraud which costs us, wait for it, a staggering £7 billion – yes, that is £2 billion more than benefit fraud. Now you will be forgiven for not being aware of this since it barely got a mention in the post-review briefings by Government ministers or in the media coverage. One does wonder why there is less interest in this war. . .

Battle of the Chancellors

So after months of phoney war, we finally had the first formal battle in the election campaign. Yes, the campaign has yet to start officially but last night's debate between Alistair Darling, George Osborne and Vince Cable was surely the first proper skirmish. Who won? Hard to say. All three came across as nervous but all three will be pleased that they didn't drop any major clangers. Vince Cable has to be pleased that he delivered a few memorable sound bites - "pinstrip Scargills holding the country to ransom" - and got a couple of laughs. Standing centre stage, Cable, while a bit doddery, did what he does best, position himself as the man of the people, the non-politician, avoiding any real scrutiny of his own policies. He and Darling tag teamed Osborne quite effectively on the Tory decision not to impose the planned increase in National Insurance (not quite a tax cut more not a tax increase) but Osborne held his ground. Darling looked relatively assured but not as confident or polished as when he delivered the budget last week. And that was one of the issues, in the House of Commons these three battle, parry and joust all the time. They do it naturally and with confidence, without worrying about cameras. Last night, they were perhaps too fixed on their "performance". The Party Leaders are more used to being on camera so in theory ought to be more relaxed about the medium when it comes to their debates. However, given the 76 rules that will apply to the debates, I fear we may will have to endure three rather dull programmes.