Politics Archives

Wednesday

18 Apr 2012

Let’s move the Lords to Manchester

Andrew Adonis, one of the policy brains of the Blair government and now seated in the House of Lords, has a letter in tomorrow’s edition of the Spectator responding to Neil O’Brien’s cover article of last week. In it, Adonis suggests one way that the political class could help purge the Londonitis from its collective system: move the House of Lords to Greater Manchester. Here’s the full text of the letter, for CoffeeHousers: Sir, As Neil O’Brien rightly says, London is New York, Washington and LA rolled into one, which is unhealthy for our national politics. So I have a serious suggestion. If the House of Lords is going to

The Spectator

Transcript: Nick Clegg on the budget and the local elections

Here’s the full transcript of this morning’s Today programme interview with Nick Clegg: James Naughtie: Coalition government involves some pretty hard bargaining, some difficult compromises for both parties. You might think therefore that the opportunity of a local election campaign would be quite welcome, party leaders being themselves, talking to their own parties without having to worry too much about the other lot. But for Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats, times are tough. He doesn’t even need to look at the opinion polls to know that. He said himself at the weekend that coalition life was a roller coaster and acknowledged that any government sooner or later found

Peter Hoskin

QE comes to the fore

It’s roughly seven months until George Osborne’s Autumn Statement, so no better time to consider which political issues will come to the boil ahead of it. Fuel costs, I’m sure, will be one if them; because they never really go away, and the 3p rise in fuel duty will have just been implemented in August. But I’d say the safest bet is the finances of the elderly. If the furore over the frozen income tax allowance for pensioners didn’t put that voting bloc at the forefront of Osborne’s mind, then the demographics behind UKIP’s poll jump will surely do the trick. He will be under severe pressure to act. Actually,

Tuesday

17 Apr 2012

Peter Hoskin

After Abu Qatada

It has been a mixed news day so far as Britain’s relationship with the ECHR is concerned. There’s been the good stuff: Abu Qatada has been arrested and is set to be deported, with the government now confident that he can be shipped to Jordan without provoking the ire of Europe’s legal class. And then there has been the less than good stuff: according to the Times, which has a leaked document in its possession, Britain’s official proposals for reforming the ECHR have been diluted ahead of the Council of Europe meeting in Brighton this week. This outcome, as I suggested back in February, is hardly surprising — but it

Jonathan Jones

Lib-Lab bonding over legal aid

The Legal Aid Bill limps back to the Commons this afternoon, having had a rough ride through the upper chamber where the Lords inflicted 11 defeats on the government. And it looks like its next stint in the lower chamber might not be much smoother. As Paul Waugh reports, a group of MPs have tabled a new amendment to the Bill (actually, an amendment to an amendment tabled by the government on Friday) to continue to provide legal aid advice (but not representation) for reviews and appeals of benefit cases. What’s significant is that the amendment is signed by seven Lib Dem MPs, including party president Tim Farron, and four

Alex Massie

Planet London & Planet Edinburgh

Sure, the Economist’s cover story has received heaps of attention these past few days but it’s not the most interesting or even the most important cover story published by a British political magazine last week. Though I would say this, Neil O’Brien’s “Planet London” article for the Spectator is the piece the Scottish National Party should be more interested in. O’Brien makes a compelling case that London is now, more than ever, a place apart. Its triumph is both magnificent and dangerous. Magnificent because London is, in ways scarcely conceivable forty years ago, a global behemoth; dangerous because of the distorting effect this must have on British politics. In significant

Fraser Nelson

Anders Borg: Europe’s best finance minister

In the current issue of The Spectator I interview Sweden’s Anders Borg, perhaps the most successful conservative finance minister in the world — both in his economic track record, and the accompanying electoral success. His response to the crash was a permanent tax cut to speed the recovery. At the time, everyone told him it was madness. But Borg is unusual amongst finance ministers, in that he is a trained economist. To him, madness lay in repeating the formula of the 1970s and expecting different results. Last year, Sweden celebrated the elimination of its deficit. It’s perhaps worth mentioning a few other points which I didn’t fit into the interview.

Monday

16 Apr 2012

Peter Hoskin

Galloway swears in

Here, via the New Statesman’s George Eaton, is footage of George Galloway being sworn into Parliament today: And while we’re on the subject of Galloway and swearing, here’s one for CoffeeHousers to ponder. In his interview with the Big Issue today, the country’s latest MP says: ‘Because I don’t drink, I don’t swear, I’m not crude, sometimes male company turns me off. And from an early age I was the person who drove everybody home and I always saved the prettiest girl to drop off last.’ Others have already touched on the not drinking thing. But not swearing? What about this report, from 2006, by the Spectator’s own Hugo Rifkind:

Peter Hoskin

Will Osborne stop at £10 billion?

On one side of the Atlantic, there’s Christine Lagarde begging for more cash for the IMF. On the other, there’s George Osborne more or less willing to hand it over on behalf of British taxpayers. This is how it’s been for months now. This is why it’s no surprise to read in today’s Telegraph that Osborne may be ‘close to agreeing’ an extra £10 billion for the fund. There are the usual caveats, of course: the Exchequer will only stump up if various other countries do likewise, and then the money has to go into one big pot for all the world, not into special mechanisms targetted at the eurozone.

Alex Massie

Osborne’s Failure

If this has been a disappointing spring for David Cameron, it has been a calamitous season for George Osborne. The notion of Prime Minister Osborne has always struck me as odd but, on present trends anyway, it is one that need not trouble us any longer. I fancy many voters are able to resist the Osborne charm and though the “common touch” is not essential to success some basic understanding of how your decisions may be perceived surely is. And Osborne appears utterly deficient in that department. For a so-called master strategist he appears hopeless at tactics and, perhaps, strategy too. As Andrew McKie, writing in the Herald, puts it

The Spectator

Just in case you missed them… | 16 April 2012

…here are some posts made on Spectator.co.uk over the weekend: Fraser Nelson says an independent Scotland could survive financially, welcomes the downfall of the wind farm agenda, and does not approve of Cameron’s trade mission. James Forsyth thinks Lansley might hang on and looks at the upcoming 1922 commitee elections. David Blackburn asks how serious is Ed Miliand’s his funding promises, reports on the latest in the ‘charity tax’ row, and examines Labour’s union funding. And Rod Liddle is disappointed by BBC4’s take on Southern Boogie and wishes Boris well.

Sunday

15 Apr 2012

James Forsyth

The ‘22 equation

Next month’s elections to the 1922 Committee of Tory backbenchers have taken on particular importance in the current circumstances. The fact that a couple of the officer positions are held by Cameron’s harshest critics, and that some MPs broadly supportive of the leadership have decided to take on the ‘wreckers’, means that the results will be seen as a sign of where backbench opinion in the party really is. As I write in the Mail On Sunday today, three of the 2010 intake — Charlie Elphicke, George Hollingbery and Priti Patel — have decided to endorse a joint candidate for secretary of the committee. This candidate will stand seeking a

David Blackburn

How serious is Miliband?

The Tories reckon that Ed Miliband’s proposed donation cap of £5,000 is a con that will hit their funding every year, while preserving Labour’s funds except at election time thanks to the union levy being exempt. Housing minister and regular attack-dog Grant Shapps laid out the party’s position on Andrew Neil’s BBC Sunday Politics show earlier today. Here is the transcript of their exchange: Shapps: Well I watched the interview and I thought this sounds big and important, so to a quick look afterwards and discovered that of the £10m Labour got from the unions last year, they still get 9.9 million of it, so this is a complete wheeze, one of

Rod Liddle

Good for Boris

Boris Johnson has set an excellent precedent. The mayor of London has banned an advert from appearing on London buses because it is both offensive to some people and its claims are of dubious provenance. The ad in question is the poster from a mentalist Christian group who believe people can be cured of homosexuality. ‘Post-Gay and Proud – Get Over It!’ the advert proclaims. I cannot think, offhand, of any advert which isn’t a)offensive and b)lies, especially car adverts and those ones which tell women they’ll never be constipated again if only they’ll drink some awful French dairy product once a day. Are homosexuals the only people who have

David Blackburn

The politics of taking big money out of politics

Ed Miliband is nothing if not persistent. Party funding has been a running theme of his leadership, necessitated by his cosy relationship with the unions. He has returned to the subject today, with a blog post and an appearance on the Andrew Marr Show. The news is that Miliband wants to cap donations from individuals, organisations and companies at £5,000. That is £5,000 less than was recommended by Sir Christopher Kelly, and £45,000 less than the Conservatives propose. Miliband claimed that this would dramatically reduce Labour’s funding from the trade unions, forcing his party to diversify its revenue sources. Obviously, it would also reduce the Tories’ funding sources. This is

David Blackburn

The charity row intensifies

David Cameron finds himself in the midst of a blue-on-blue barney over the charity tax, which has prompted rumours that ministers may dilute the current proposals by adopting an American-style legacy deal. Tory party treasurer Lord Fink has said that the proposed changes would ‘put people off giving’, and some boisterous Conservative MPs are openly challenging the leadership. Zac Goldsmith has penned a diatribe in the Mail on Sunday in which he says: ‘I am ashamed that a Conservative Chancellor has not only announced measures that will undoubtedly depress giving in this country; he has spun a narrative in which philanthropists are now the enemy.’ Meanwhile, David Davis told the

Fraser Nelson

Downfall

It did not take long. Last month, Matt Ridley argued in a Spectator cover story that the wind farm agenda is in effect dead, having collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions. The only question is when our ministers would realise. In an interview with the Sunday Times (£), climate change minister Greg Barker admits that his department has adopted an ‘unbalanced’ approach to wind farms and will now look at other options. ‘Far from wanting thousands more, actually for most of the wind we need… they are either being built, being developed or in planning. The notion that there’s some new wave of wind [farms] is somewhat exaggerated.’ Indeed, the phrase ‘somewhat exaggerated’

Saturday

14 Apr 2012

Charles Moore

The Spectator’s Notes | 14 April 2012

People often tell opinion polls that ‘The Conservatives are the party of the rich’, and this worries party managers, because the rich are, almost by definition, few, and the voters are many. But would it actually be better, electorally, if people thought ‘The Conservatives are the party of the poor’, or even, which is often thought to be the best, ‘The Conservatives are the party of people like me’? Isn’t it a significant part of the Tories’ appeal that they carry the subliminal suggestion that, if you vote for them, you might get richer? ••• For this reason, among others, the Conservatives need to be careful about excoriating tax avoidance.

Fraser Nelson

An independent Scotland could pay its own way<a id="fck_paste_padding"></a>

The Economist has some fun with Scotland this week, running a cover suggesting my motherland would go bust if it was independent. The map has lots of gags: the Outer Hebrides is renamed ‘Outer Cash’, ‘Edinborrow’ twinned with Athens etc. But it suffers from one central defect: the thesis is nonsense. Saying that Scotland would go bust without English subsidy is the clichéd unionist attack line, which has lost force over the decades because it is demonstrably untrue. The emergence of new nation states, many much smaller than Scotland, has shown it that small is viable (something that wasn’t as evident in the 1970s) and even the Economists’ own story

James Forsyth

Politics: Which party will win the anti-politics vote?

One might think that the Cameroons would be desperate about a poll showing their leader’s personal approval rating to be the lowest it has ever been. But the Prime Minister’s negative rating, minus 27, looks positively healthy when compared to those of the other two party leaders: the same poll showed Ed Miliband at minus 41 and Nick Clegg at minus 53. We are now in an era when the public are dissatisfied with all political parties and their leaders. Ask them which of Cameron, Clegg and Miliband would make the best prime minister and 46 per cent of them say they just don’t know. This is part of a