Politics

Read about the latest UK political news, views and analysis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rod Liddle

Rise of the juristocracy

Who should we get to sort out our venal and cavalier bankers? It’s an interesting question. The Labour party wishes to inflict upon them a plague of lawyers, to use Jeremy Bentham’s apt expression, presided over by some bewigged and self-regarding judge. A judicial inquiry, then, which will end up costing the equivalent of a whole bunch of bankers bonuses and then some. The argument seems to be that the government, in preferring the inquiry to be carried out by parliamentarians, is affording the matter too little seriousness. Select committees are all well and good for the minor stuff, but such is the public outrage on this particular matter that

Isabel Hardman

Lib Dems push the boundaries

That the Liberal Democrats might try to scupper the boundary reforms if they don’t get their way on Lords reform has been the talk of the tearooms in Westminster for months. But today the threat comes to the fore as Nick Clegg’s departing head of strategy Richard Reeves warns the Independent that there will be ‘consequences’ if Tory MPs try to block reform of the upper chamber by voting down the Government’s programme motion for debating the legislation. This is what he told the newspaper: ‘There would be broader consequences for the Government’s programme, particularly around political and parliamentary reform. The idea that a failure to deliver a government commitment

Isabel Hardman

‘David Cameron stands for being Prime Minister’

‘What do you think David Cameron stands for?’ a Tory MP asked me recently. Unsure of his point, I burbled something about ‘responsibility’ and couple of other random abstract nouns. The MP shook his head grimly. ‘No,’ he said. ‘I’ll tell you what David Cameron stands for.’ I leant forward, intrigued. ‘David Cameron stands for being Prime Minister.’ It turns out that this MP isn’t the only one who thinks this way about Cameron’s motives. A survey of ConHome readers, published today, found that 50% believed he was only interested in being Prime Minister and did not have a strong vision for the country. The list of questions the site

Fraser Nelson

Anarchy on Question Time

So what did George Osborne tell The Spectator? The words he used to James Forsyth became the centre of a Question Time bust up last night and one that had to be broken up by a Sex Pistol.   Let’s start with Ed Balls’ version. He told the Commons that Osborne impugned his integrity by accusing him of being personally involved in the Libor scandal. Untrue: Osborne had said that those around Brown were involved in Libor. Balls, he said, had questions to answer.  He drew a clear a distinction, and James made this clear in the piece. On Question Time, Alan Johnson tried to play the same trick. His

Isabel Hardman

The battle to be the party of the armed forces

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has the unenviable task today of announcing a cull of army units as the force is cut from 102,000 to 82,000. The Army 2020 review, the launch of which was delayed beyond Armed Forces Day last weekend, also doubles the number of reservists to 30,000. This leaves it half the size it was during the Cold War era, and the smallest since the Boer War. This is obviously deeply unpleasant for those troops whose units are being abolished. It is also uncomfortable for the Tories, who have long enjoyed the reputation of being the party of the armed forces. Tim Montgomerie tweeted this morning: ‘Biggest tax

James Forsyth

QCs could be the solution to the banking inquiry row

There are, though partisans don’t want to admit it, problems with both a judicial inquiry and a parliamentary inquiry into the Libor scandal and the wider culture it has revealed. A judicial inquiry would drag on and, judging by the Leveson Inquiry, there’s no guarantee that the judge would understand the industry he’s meant to be examining. But, as yesterday demonstrated, the standard of questioning at any parliamentary inquiry is going to be patchy.   John Thurso, a Lib Dem member of the Treasury select committee and one of the most respected MPs, has been out floating a compromise solution. His idea is that the Joint Committee should have the