Politics Archives

Tuesday

10 Jul 2012

Cameron’s leadership is bruised by Lords rebellion

‘Shouldn’t we just go home?’ the SNP’s Pete Wishart asked Sir George Young this evening after the Leader of the House revealed the government was dropping its programme motion on the House of Lords. ‘You know it’s all over. They know it’s all over,’ he added. But they didn’t go home, and the Commons has just voted in favour of the second reading 462 votes to 162. Early reports suggest that there were 86 Conservative MPs who defied the whip, which would make this the biggest rebellion in this parliament. Nick Clegg paused from trying very hard not to grimace on the front bench to cheer as Mark Harper told

Jonathan Jones

Get set for rebellion number 248

The coalition’s backbenchers have already proven the most rebellious of any government. There have already been — by my count, adding the 239 rebellions up to the end of April listed in Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart’s Bumper Book of Coalition Rebellions to the eight listed on the Public Whip since then — 247 votes on which at least one Tory or Lib Dem backbencher has cast their vote against the government whip. That’s not quite the most of any parliament — there were 309 against Wilson and Callaghan in the 1974-79 parliament, 259 against Blair from 2001 to 2005, and 365 against Blair and Brown in the last parliament

Isabel Hardman

J’accuse backfires

Andrea Leadsom seems to have backed down a little from last night’s suggestion that George Osborne ‘should apologise’ for saying that Ed Balls had ‘questions to answer’ about Libor. This morning, perhaps after a cheery morning phone call from someone at CCHQ, she took to the airwaves to clarify what she had said: ‘Look, I was talking about a very specific point last night, which is the extent to which the Labour party may have leaned on the Bank of England, which Paul Tucker completely refuted. I want to be very clear here: this is an inquiry about the banks’ behaviour, and Ed Balls still has a huge amount to

James Forsyth

Cameron will pick party over coalition on Lords reform

The government’s apparent decision to pull the programme motion on the Lords Reform Bill is an admission that it would have lost the vote tonight, and heavily. The rebel numbers have more than held up today and by mid-afternoon even previously loyal MPs were contemplating jumping in to the rebel camp. The question now is what the coalition does next, does it plough on with the bill and try to guillotine it at a later date or quietly drop it. Certainly, the Tory opponents of the bill are in no mood to back down. They are making clear that even if the government comes back offering twenty days of debate

James Forsyth

Lords reform is in the long grass

The look on Nick Clegg’s face as he entered the chamber to hear Sir George Young announce the withdrawal of the programme motion said it all. The Deputy Prime Minister knows that Lords reform is now in the long grass and it will only come out of there if either the Tory rebels back down or Labour agree to a programme motion, both of which are unlikely scenarios. Source close to Nick Clegg say that the Prime Minister informed the Deputy Prime Minister today that he needed more time to build consensus on his own side. The public plan is now to try for a programme motion again in the

Isabel Hardman

The Osborne/Balls stalemate

George Osborne and Ed Balls are now locked into something of a staring match over the Libor scandal, with one waiting for the other to flinch. After Paul Tucker’s evidence to the Treasury Select Committee yesterday cleared the Shadow Chancellor and his ministerial colleagues in the Labour government of leaning on the Bank of England, Balls demanded an apology from Osborne for his comments to the Spectator. Andrea Leadsom, one of the members of the committee, saw enough in Tucker’s testimony to publicly call for an apology. This is significant because Leadsom is not the sort of MP who openly briefs against her bosses. She may have a slightly rebellious

Fraser Nelson

Yellow dove down

The Lib Dem dove has been shot by a well-aimed Tory arrow tonight, and you can bet that more than a few of Nick Clegg’s allies will feel deeply betrayed. The Lib Dems walked on the coals of the tuition fee rises, and for what? The Tory leadership cannot really claim to be giving its full backing to Lords reform. Yes, William Hague was sent on the radio this morning – in theory to urge obedience over the reform. But when the Foreign Secretary started laughing you had the feeling that he did not quite take his mission very seriously. Every Tory MP knows that the whips have given mixed

Monday

9 Jul 2012

James Forsyth

Charlotte Leslie becomes the latest 2010 MP to oppose Lords reform

Charlotte Leslie becomes the latest star of the 2010 intake to come out against the coalition’s version of Lords reforms. Explaining her decision, she emphasised to The Spectator her concerns that while the new Lords would be elected ‘they would not carry the great benefit of democracy, accountability’. As Leslie points out, this means that a Lord ‘could get elected on a myriad of populist promises, then fail to honour any of them’. She also has worries about the loss of expert knowledge from the chamber when it is elected. But her objections are, perhaps, best summed up by her attack on the argument that Tories should vote Lords reform

Isabel Hardman

What Labour did next on banking

When Ed Miliband gave his speech to Labour’s autumn conference last year, he rather tied himself in knots about how to end predatory capitalism. The Labour leader was trying to make it clear that he would stand up to vested interests, but the message was lost under a row about whether he was pro- or anti-business. Today Miliband managed to put that speech into context a little more, by announcing Labour’s plans to change the culture of banking in this country. Instead of predator banks, he wants ‘stewardship banking’, which builds ‘a long-term, trusted relationship with their customer’ and serves the real economy as well as the industry itself. The

Isabel Hardman

The day of the Lords arrives

Lords reform makes its way into the Commons today, but it’s hardly a relief for the whips that after weeks of threats from the rebel camp, the legislation is finally being debated. With tales circulating the House that there are 110 Tory MPs prepared to defy the whip on the programme motion, this could be the first time the Government is defeated on its legislative programme. The BBC’s Norman Smith tweeted this morning that the rebels were being told to vote against second reading rather than the programme motion if they were unhappy with the legislation. But even if, as Paul Goodman argues, not every rebel on that list of

Isabel Hardman

Tucker denies Labour leant on Bank over Libor

So Labour ministers did not ‘lean on’ the Bank of England to encourage lowballing of Libor rates, according to Paul Tucker. The Deputy Governor of the Bank told the Treasury Select Committee this afternoon that he had held conversations with officials about how able Barclays was to fund its operations. This is the exchange between Pat McFadden and Mr Tucker. McFadden asked whether any minister had tried to ‘lean on’ him over Libor: ‘Absolutely not.’ Asked whether Shriti Vadera had leant on him: ‘I don’t think that I spoke to Shriti Vadera throughout this whole process.’ Ed Balls? ‘No’ Other ministers? ‘No’ He confirmed that the ‘senior official’ that he

James Forsyth

What Mark Harper isn’t telling us

Mark Harper is touring the broadcast studios at the moment making the case for the coalition’s Lords reform bill. Being Nick Clegg’s Conservative deputy is not an easy job. But there is something particularly disingenuous about one of the arguments that Harper is using. Harper said On Sunday, as Conservative Home reported, that: ‘It’s been Conservative policy to have a mainly elected House of Lords since 1999. I stood on the last three elections on that manifesto and the Coalition Agreement does no more than ask both the Coalition parties to deliver what was in both of our manifestos’. What this ignores is that in 2007, Harper voted against

James Forsyth

Is Lords reform heading for a slow or quick death?

At the end of last week, Number 10 was optimistic that it and the whips were having some success in limiting the rebellion on the Lords. Some were even suggesting that the vote on the programme motion was winnable, after all. But that feeling has evaporated this morning. First, the weekend ring round by various senior figures did not meet with great success. Second, the ‘dear colleague’ letter signed by 74 MPs means that the programme motion is now pretty much certain to be defeated. Indeed, the rebels number considerably more than 74 when you include the PPSs who are planning to vote against it, the backbench opponents trying to

Douglas Murray

The problem with UKIP’s opponents

Leafing through a pile of Economists I’ve just caught up on a Bagehot column from last month which inadvertently demonstrates exactly where UKIP’s opponents go wrong. The very final lines of the piece explain: ‘Mr Farage’s real dream is to reshape Britain, by pulling the Conservatives to the right and bouncing Mr Cameron into a referendum on EU membership. If he pulls that off, his insurgency will be no laughing matter.’ It is what is assumed here, rather than what is said, that is most revealing. Why should the prospect of a consultation of the British people on their membership of the EU be so fearful? Surely it could only

James Forsyth

Clegg takes a hammering over Lords reforms

Nick Clegg was standing at the despatch box to move the second reading of the coalition’s Lords reform bill. But the reception he got was reminiscent of what used to happen to Lib Dem leaders at PMQs. He was barracked mercilessly by both Labour and Tory benches while his own benches remained oddly silent, only one of his MPs intervened on his behalf. Watching the Tory benches during Clegg’s speech it was hard not to imagine a considerable rebellion tomorrow night. At one point, the interventions were coming in so thick and fast that Clegg appeared to be almost ducking at the despatch box. The Tories seemed to be

Sunday

8 Jul 2012

Nick Cohen

Westminster’s hollow men

In my Observer column today I say that a judicial review into the banking scandal would have achieved little unless the judge could have persuaded the politicians to change the law. As if on cue, Ed Miliband and Ed Balls popped up to demonstrate that they have no desire to change banking law in any way that might make a difference. Their proposals to expand the number of banks and make it easier for customers to switch accounts, amount to more of the same. Instead of five big banks running on taxpayer guarantees, we will have seven big banks running on taxpayer guarantees. Neither Labour nor the Tories is willing

James Forsyth

The Tory troublemaking begins on Lords reforms

One instructive way to think about Tuesday’s vote on Lords reform is, do you want to have proportional representation used to elect people to the Westminster parliament? I suspect that most people on the centre-right would answer no to that question, and with good reason. In the current British system, PR would work against the centre-right’s political interests. It is for this reason that the term rebel is a bit of a misnomer for those Tories trying to thwart the coalition’s plans for Lords reform. The likes of Andrew Griffiths, an adviser to Eric Pickles when he was party chairman, and Angie Bray, a former Central Office staffer, are

Saturday

7 Jul 2012

Alex Massie

Scotland needs more immigrants

I’ve written an article for the Scotsman today arguing that Scotland needs many more immigrants. Aside from all the usual arguments in favour of this kind of blood transfusion I should also have said that increasing the number of non-Scots in Scotland is a useful hedge against being governed by, you know, Scots should we ever get around to voting in favour of independence… Anyway, here’s the gist of the damn thing: Though polling data says Scots are about as immigrant-friendly as Londoners – and, therefore, likely to be more relaxed about immigration than people in other parts of the United Kingdom – that still means some 70 per cent

Fraser Nelson

How to solve a problem like the LibDems

I’d like to offer my own solution to the coalition problem that James referred to earlier. First, my theory of what went wrong. At first, the coalition worked well and was radical. Nick Clegg felt that he’d build up his party’s support over time, by proving it could work well in government. This didn’t work, and the (avoidable) tuition fee u-turn sunk Clegg’s credibility. His party started to kick off, especially after AV. So they position themselves not as do-ers, but as restrainers. Their pitch is: ‘we’re the good guys in the coalition, priding ourselves on what we stop these wicked Tories doing’. The coalition then moved from a constructive

James Forsyth

Is the coalition’s time drawing to a close?

There’s long been a certain amount of speculation in Westminster about how long the coalition will last. This topic used to be the sole preserve of those who were sceptics of it; it was a question hoping for the answer not that long. Enthusiasts for coalition, took it as a given that it would last to 2015. But today Matthew Parris, one of the commentators who has been most welcoming of the coalition, writes, ‘I’m close to despair and no longer confident that the coalition can continue even into next year.’ When even the coalition’s friends are saying this, then it is time for the Prime Minister and deputy