Is Brown the Prime Minister reversing the boost to long-run economic growth given by Brown the Chancellor?
Two recent developments make me suspect so: last week's decision to increase support for students, and this week's announcement of a big housebuilding programme.
The effect of these will, eventually, be to reduce the amount of debt young people have: lower student loans, and lower mortgage payments as increased housing supply bids down prices.
But this could reduce long-run labour supply.
Put it this way. My generation (early 40s and older) left college with little debt, and could buy relatively cheap housing. As a result, we could save, build up housing equity, and perhaps pay off our mortgage quickly. This means many of us are in a position to downshift (as I did years ago) or look forward to early retirement.
This means the economy could lose a cohort of highly-skilled workers.
However, more recent graduates are saddled with debt and high mortgages, and so will have to work longer. This improves the long-run supply potential of the economy; in 25 years' time, many of today's 30-year-old graduates might still be working.
I suspect the effect of New Labour's education reform - increasing the number and indebtedness of graduates - was not (just) to improve the quality of the labour force, as to improve its duration. Brown's reforms of the last week threaten to reduce the duration of the graduate labour supply.
The question is - and I'm not sure here - is this effect significant enough to materially affect growth?