Politics

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

James Forsyth

Will Miliband use his lifeline in PMQs?

At the weekend, Tories were anticipating giving Ed Miliband an almighty kicking at PMQs. Lord Glasman’s description of Labour’s economic record as ‘all crap’ had given them a killer line. As one member of the Cameron circle joked to me, ‘we’ve never had more material to work with.’    But Ed Miliband now has a get out of jail free card. If he asks six questions about the Union and the referendum, it will be impossible for Cameron to have a pop at him without looking distinctly unstatesmanlike. On Scotland, the two leaders need each other. The Unionist side cannot win without the Labour party and the Labour party will

James Forsyth

The battle lines that are being drawn over Scotland

In the wrangling between Westminster and Holyrood over the referendum there are two big issues at stake, the date of the vote and —more importantly — the number of options on the ballot paper. Salmond, as he made clear on the Today Programme this morning, wants to have the referendum in autumn 2014 and have three options — the status quo, independence and ‘devo-max’ — on offer.   The reason Salmond wants ‘devo-max’ to be there is that he’s not confident he can get independence through this time round. Indeed, I suspect that Salmond’s ideal result would be Westminster resorting to the courts to stop a vote in Scotland allowing

Romney wins comfortably this time

Last night Mitt Romney became the first Republican, excluding sitting Presidents, to win both the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary. And unlike in Iowa last week, his supporters didn’t have to wait until the next day to start celebrating. The exit polls were enough for Romney to be declared the winner within an hour of the voting booths closing. And now, with 95 per cent of the votes counted, he’s secured about 39 per cent of the vote – slightly higher than the share McCain received in 2008, and 16 points ahead of Ron Paul this time. Romney looks more the inevitable nominee than ever, and his victory

Alex Massie

Romney’s March Continues

Bill Kristol, in his ongoing bid to supplant Dick Morris’s as America’s Worst Pundit, has been trying to spin Mitt Romney’s victory in the New Hampshire primary as a disappointing outcome for Romney. By the time the ballots are all counted, however, Romney will have taken close to (and perhaps more than) 40% of the votes and become the first Republican (barring sitting Presidents) to win both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. Yeah, that’s a campaign that’s in trouble and struggling to get “traction”. Sure, something could happen to defeat Romney. Sure, he’s not a compelling front-runner. Sure, there are reasons to be worried that turnout in

Salmond’s running rings around Cameron

Edinburgh If anyone had any doubts why Alex Salmond picked up almost every UK political award going last year, then they should study how he has dealt with the referendum issue this week. At every turn he has out-manoeuvred his UK counterparts — and this was perfectly demonstrated tonight. Earlier today, in the Commons, Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, had delivered the UK government’s riposte to the SNP’s referendum plans. Mr Moore was considered, clever and smart. In fact, it was a first cogent and effective strike back by the UK government on this issue for more than a year. But what will lead tomorrow’s papers in Scotland? It won’t

The coalition finds its balance over Scotland

As much as I dislike the phrase ‘the third way’, it sums up what the coalition has done today. Given the choice between hobbling or accommodating Alex Salmond and his referendum on Scottish independence, it has decided to do neither and both. In the words of the Scottish Secretary Michael Moore, speaking in the House just now, the referendum will be ‘made in Scotland, by the people of Scotland’ — just so long as Westminster okays it first. Maybe that’ll make more sense if we look at what, specifically, was announced today. Moore’s main point was that any referendum held by the Scottish government, without the approval of the UK

Fraser Nelson

The battle for Britain | 10 January 2012

So, Alex Salmond has named his date for the independence referendum: August 2014, a few weeks after the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn. David Cameron wanted it earlier, and may yet refuse to grant Salmond this date — No10 hasn’t yet responded. Cameron was forcing the issue on the grounds that he wanted to end uncertainty — Salmond is now offering certainty, at least in terms of timing. But he hasn’t said whether he wants a two- or three-question referendum. This is crucial, because Salmond is likely to lose an independence referendum and he knows it. So his game plan will be to have a third option, a consolation prize,

Alex Massie

Alex Salmond Claims his Date

Since I was watching the House of Commons just now, I needed twitter to tell me that it seems as though Alex Salmond, ever the tweaker, has announced he wants to hold his referendum in the autumn of 2014. Hurrah. That’s fine. No need, in my view, for Westminster to object to this. On the contrary all parties should welcome it. All that Westminster needs to do is make sure the referendum billl can survive any legal challenge. Then we can get on with the game. The most importat thing is that the principle of the thing is now agreed. The detail can be sorted out in due course. What

Alex Massie

Ed Miliband is No Teddy Roosevelt

This is, I know, a statement of the obvious but Ed Miliband is no Teddy Roosevelt. There are two reasons to be thankful for this. First, TR was really a ghastly man; secondly, if Ed Miliband were able to muster a quarter of Roosevelt’s brio he’d be faring rather better than he is. In the present circumstances, the opposition should be thumping the government every day. Granted, this requires more credibility than either Mr Miliband or Mr Balls can boast but the fact remains that a) George Osborne’s economic hopes have been vanquished by events and b) there is little substantive difference between his proposals and those made by Alistair

Can Scotland make it on its own?

What would an independent Scotland’s public finances look like? ‘Good, actually,’ says the SNP as they present their ongoing case for independence. They like to claim that, discounting the rest of the UK, Scotland was in surplus for ‘four out of the last five years’ — it’s Westminster, not Holyrood, that can’t manage the public’s money.  Which would be a powerful argument were it actually true. You see, the SNP are talking about the ‘current budget balance’, which excludes the £6.4 billion a year that Scotland spends on capital. When you include that spending — according to the Scottish government’s own figures — there has been a deficit for every

Miliband’s speech fails to excite

Was Ed’s Big Speech worth the extended wait? Not really. It wasn’t a stone-cold terrible speech, but neither was it the rambunctious, attention-grabbing number that his leadership could do with. In fact, we could have saved ourselves the effort by simply reading his New Year’s message again. That was considerably shorter, and covered almost all of the same ground. Squeezed middle? Check. Tackling vested interests? Check. An admission that Labour will need to cut? Ch… oh, you get the point. The best that could be said about today’s speech is that it presented some of these arguments more clearly than in the past. Indeed, the attack on George Osborne’s fiscal

James Forsyth

Miliband tries to get his message heard

Ed Miliband is trying to do something interesting today. He is attempting to answer the question, ‘what’s the point of Labour when there’s no money left to spend?’ This is the problem that Miliband has been grappling with since winning the leadership and there’s no easy answer to it. It seems that today Miliband will give us more of a sense of the ‘new economy’ which he wants to see in this country. The test of the speech will be whether it gets beyond generalities about a long-term vision for an economy that is ‘fairer’. The challenge for Miliband will be to make his subtle message heard above the chatter

Alex Massie

David Cameron has given Alex Salmond an opportunity to play the statesman

Shockingly, it is possible some of you did not see my appearance on BBC News this afternoon. Thanks to the wonders of Youtube and the baffling enthusiasm some people have for clipping and sharing these things, you can catch up with it now. As is always the case, I forgot half the things I wanted to say. Jon Sopel asked if it was really plausible for David Cameron to “do nothing”. Well, of course it is. Indeed when you cannot offer anything useful it is best to offer nothing at all. The time – as a few of us argued back then – for Conservatives to back a referendum came

Enter, David Miliband?

‘Every day, in every way, it’s getting worse for Ed Miliband.’ That’s what I said last Thursday, and it has been more or less borne out since then. Friday, of course, brought that Twitter embarrassment. Saturday, the subsequent headlines, as well as Miliband’s unconvincing attempt to push back against them. Sunday featured some of the most vicious attacks on his leadership by Labour MPs so far. And even today we’ve got the sort of ‘helpful’ advice from a senior Labour figure — in this case, Alan Johnson, suggesting that ‘too often we sound like a debating society rather than a political party’ — that comes across as frustrated criticism. Forget

Alex Massie

Cameron’s Caledonian Gamble: Unwise and Unnecessary

So. it looks as though David Cameron is following the Spectator’s advice not mine. What a nincompoop! But if the reports are correct then Cameron is playing us for fools. That is, there’s nothing wrong with suggesting a referendum on Scottish independence be held sooner rather than later; adding conditions to it is a different matter. It matters little, really, whether a referendum is binding or advisory; a Yes to Independence vote would be impossible to ignore, politically and practically speaking, even if the referendum were only advisory. So, to this extent, Cameron’s suggestion that a vote can be binding if held within 18 months but only advisory if held

Just in case you missed them… | 9 January 2012

…here are some of the posts made on Spectator.co.uk over the weekend: Fraser Nelson asks why Ed Miliband stopped his brother becoming Labour leader. James Forsyth looks at the implications of HS2 on the Cabinet, and reports on Cameron’s latest attempt to redefine fairness. Peter Hoskin says Miliband’s position is under increasing threat, and asks what’s more important to David Cameron: actual fairness or presentational fairness? Jonathan Jones examines Ed Miliband’s boastful Guardian interview, and says that the Democrats stand ready to face Mitt Romney. Martin Bright says now is not the time for Ed to share his view of his own capacities with us. On the Book Blog, Pamela Nash

Cameron’s balancing act over Scotland

The Cabinet is meeting about 5 miles away from Downing Street today, at the Olympic Park in Stratford. But its collective mind will be on a patch of land another 270 miles further on still. Yep, Scotland and Scottish independence are the matters at hand today. According to the Beeb, David Cameron and his ministers will discuss their ideas for the referendum, its content and its timing. It’s thought that they may allow a referendum that’s binding on the UK government – but only so long as it takes place in the next eighteen months, and offers a simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ vote on independence. You can understand Cameron’s thinking

James Forsyth

Why the battle over Downhills Primary School matters

Downhills Primary School in Haringey is fast becoming a political battleground. Before Christmas, David Lammy, the local MP, a bunch of union leaders, left-wing opponents of education reform and Labour councilors wrote to The Guardian complaining about Michael Gove’s plans to convert primary school with poor academic records into academies. In the New Year, Michael Gove responded with a speech in which he attacked those opposing to dealing with these sub-standards schools. He accused them of being subscribers to the “bigoted backward bankrupt ideology of a left wing establishment that perpetuates division and denies opportunity.” (Pete blogged about the significance of the speech at the time.) The power of Gove’s