Politics

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

Matthew Parris

Did David Laws have to jump, or did we push him?

In the world of political commentary, to quote Enoch Powell’s dictum that for politicians to complain about the press is like ships’ captains complaining about the sea has become almost tedious. But the brisk finality of that remark is too useful to dispense with. Is it, though, correct? Observing the awful story of David Laws’s resignation unfolding over last weekend has caused me to question whether Powell’s really is the last word on the subject. On one thing Powell was right: it is not for politicians to complain. That Mr Laws has not complained (and, I think, genuinely doesn’t complain) has made him the more admirable, and admired. But what

The week that was | 4 June 2010

Here are some of the posts made at Spectator.co.uk over the past week. Fraser Nelson comments on the Commons’ bizarre new chemistry. James Forsyth notes that more than a thousand schools have applied for academy status, and watched David Cameron impress on his first outcome. David Blackburn analyses a PR disaster for Israel, and sees a tacit endorsement of David Miliband from Peter Mandelson. Daniel Korski calls for change at the DfID. Rod Liddle believes that Israel’s standing in the world has been harmed. Alex Massie challenges some received opinions about immigration. Melanie Phillips defends Israel’s actions. And Cappuccino Culture is hearing whispers from Hay.

Noises off, officers

David Cameron is caught between a rock and a hard place. His government is rightly committed to its AfPak policy and the need to keep ties with the United States strong and close. But the Prime Minister and his aides probably also know that the assessments offered by a number of senior military officers of the campaign are rose-tinted, and suspect that the US administration may pivot and head for the exit far quicker than is comfortable for its allies. This is a tough choice; a wrong move could damage transatlantic ties and set back the fight against Jihadism. Staying the course will mean greater opposition from both Right and

Wrong kind of sex in the City

By far the most surprising twist in the sorry tale of the demise of David Laws, is that it has yet to unleash another round of banker bashing. There is plenty potential for it. Why, it might be asked, would such a confident and accomplished MP refuse to admit to being gay? Why in this day and age, when so many have paved the way before him, couldn’t he have just come out? The answer may well lie in his career background. Laws came from one of the very hardest places for gay man to be open about their sexuality: the City of London. As I know from my own

Flotilla follies

Two groups in the Conservative party that have worried most about Con-Lib government are the social conservatives and the neo-conservatives. The latter have been particularly worried about UK relations with Israel. There is a real concern in parts of the Conservatives Party that three factors would come together to sour Anglo-Israeli relations: what the neo-conservatives see as the Foreign Office’s knee-jerk Arabism, the presence of many supposed Arabists in Cameron-Hague’s teams, and the anti-Israel bias exhibited by many leading Liberal Democrats. Whatever the truth of these allegations, they are held with considerable fervour. But Nick Clegg’s reaction to the conflict shows that the Lib Dem leader is both holding to

Alex Massie

Mods & Trads: Australian Edition

An interesting piece from the BBC’s Nick Bryant, arguing that Australian conservatives have concluded that Cameron failed to win an overall majority because he was insufficiently clear – that is, right-wing. The Liberal leader Tony Abbott appears determined not to make the same mistake [sic*] and is modifying, that is to say abandoning, some of his predecessors modernising touches as Australia prepares for its election next year. If Abbott wins – though at present the polls suggest the electorate doesn’t like Abbott’s Liberals or Prime Minister Rudd’s Labour party and would, in a burst of Aussie Cleggmania hand the Greens 16% of the vote – then we can expect the

Alex Massie

Immigration: A Question of Patriotism

Ben Brogan’s column in the Telegraph urges David Cameron to get tough on immigration and act quickly. He need have no fear on that front. Since Labour seemed to have decided – erroneously – that immigration cost them the election the Conservatives and Labour are racing one another to see who can be beastliest about and to folk born outside the United Kingdom. He writes: It [immigration] fell [from 233,000] to 163,000 in 2008, but only because more people left the country. The number of people entering Britain that year actually rose, from 574,000 to 590,000. Even now, they keep on coming, drawn to a country that offers more opportunities

Harman’s schtick

Harriet Harman is irresistibly attracted to the absurd. This morning, she has decreed that the shadow cabinet be split 50:50 between men and women. Naturally, she would pervert Labour party rules to ensure the quota was a statutory requirement. To be honest, I’ve lost track of Harman’s myriad ruses to increase the female presence in high politics; and to be equally honest I’m no longer interested. It’s Harman’s schtick, leave her to it. Speaking to the national Unite conference, Harman made some sensible points about Labour’s electoral failure. She said: ‘We must listen and learn… Our biggest loss of support was from hard-working families who, worried about housing and jobs,

The Third Man for the third way

Peter Mandelson’s Machiavellian streak runs deep. Like the wily Florentine, Mandelson wants to retire to the country to farm and be close to the earth; but first, there is the small matter of a book for political princes. In this morning’s Times, Mandelson has written an exhaustive plug for his forthcoming book, The Third Man: Life at the heart of New Labour.   In the course of writing his publisher’s press release, Mandelson makes two important points: one historical and one current.   He admits his greatest mistake was to broker Blair and Brown’s deal in 1994; the soap opera that followed, Mandelson argues, would never had occurred had they fought it

James Forsyth

Cameron impresses on first outing

The shootings in Cumbria this morning meant that today’s PMQS was always going to be a subdued affair. David Cameron was impressive, though.  You wouldn’t have guessed it was his first time answering questions and he controlled the pace of the session expertly. There were fewer people on the front bench than last week meaning that Nick Clegg was more visible than he had been during the opening of the Queen’s Speech debate. Clegg sat to Cameron’s right while Hague was on his left. Harriet Harman asked some cleverly constructed questions, her ones protesting at plans for those accused of rape to be given anonymity are never going to be

PMQs Liveblog

15:00 Stay tuned for live coverage. 15:00: Clegg and Cameron sitting abreast and Douglas Carswell kicks the session off. And Cameron begins with the butcher’s bill from Afghanistan. He makes a short statement about the rampage in Cumbria. Nothing about Gaza, thank God. Carswell asks if the government will make all our lawmakers will be elected by the end of the year. Cameron promises a bill for a predominantly elected second chamber. 15:05: Harriet Harman stands up. It’s Gaza and the Israeli blockade. Her delivery is clear, almost impressive. Cameron answers with the facts about British nationals being held by Israel and describes himself as a friend of Israel and

Cameron must not radically change his style at PMQs

Watching David Cameron’s mannequin-like performance during the TV election debates, it became apparent just how good he is at the dispatch box. Quick witted, funny and incisive, Cameron invariably demolished Gordon Brown at PMQs. Daniel Finkelstein’s column is a must read today, bludgeoning the absurd guff about  the ‘new politics’. But Finkelstein argues: ‘David Cameron is very good at being combative in the chamber. He has won many battles. And it will seem unecessarily risky to change his style. But the prize is great. For he can be a national leader, not a party one. And he can make a reality out of the nonsense of the new politics.’ Answering

James Forsyth

What to look out for at PMQs

Today is the first PMQs of the new term. Given the Coalition, the whole thing will be a bit different from what we’re used to. The leader of the opposition will, as before, have six questions. But no other MP will have more than one question.   There’ll be a couple of little things I’ll be keeping a particularly close eye on. During the opening of the Queen Speech debate last week, the front bench was so crowded that Nick Clegg was not really visible on the TV. Instead, Cameron appeared to be flanked by two Tories. It’ll be interesting to see if this leads to a slightly different seating

The novelty factor

Nick Clegg was run-through when he and Jim Naughtie last crossed swords. A different outcome today – the deputy Prime Minister was composed, defending the coalition’s tight agreement. Naughtie was in ‘we’re lolling in a cafe on a dusty street, a donkey brays at the dying sun’ mode, and never pressed Clegg.   First, Clegg assured Naughtie that government continued without David Laws, and he echoed John Redwood’s and William Waldegrave’s point that Chief Secretary is a political job in which the author of the coalition agreement, Danny Alexander, has every chance of excelling. Naughtie didn’t mention Lib Dems’ hypocrisy on expenses, which might have shaken Clegg. CGT tapering came next. Clegg

Labour’s gruelling task

There was a great sense of pathos after the election, when Jack Straw was the only Labour politician who could recall the shadow cabinet room’s location. It must have been surreal for those who knew only government. The loneliness of opposition would have struck at last week’s Queen’s Speech. The party must renew whilst avoiding the internecine struggle that condemned the Tories to 13 years in opposition. Fantasy politics won’t be sufficient. Introspection must yield a coherent and credible agenda, free from the undeliverable abstractions and the oscillation between arrogance and desperation that characterised the Brown government. The leadership campaign will define Labour in opposition; Hopi Sen offers the contenders

Alex Massie

David Laws: A Problem of Folly, Not Corruption

So, yes, as several commenters pointed out, the timing of this post about David Laws proved unfortunate. James and Fraser have said much of all that needs to be said on the matter. Perhaps if Laws had been in any other cabinet post he could have survived this firestorm – though the alacrity with which he resigned despite entreaties from David Cameron and Nick Clegg that he should stay – suggests otherwise frankly. The impression given is of a man appalled by the consequences of his blunder and horrified by the impact of the fall-out on his housemate, family and friends. Contra Tom Harris and the opinions of some of

Call the committee to order

It’s committee chairmanship season in Westminster, and there are two noteworthy battles. Michael Fallon and Andrew Tyrie are scrapping over the Treasury Select Committee. The FT summarises the pros and cons of both. Fallon, who served as John McFall’s deputy, remains the front-runner, but the cerebral Tyrie has an impeccable record as an economist, committee member and constituency MP – I grew up near Chichester and Tyrie deserves credit for tackling the city’s perennial flooding problems; and, for what it’s worth, he won the Spectator’s backbencher of the year award again last year. I understand that Tyrie has the requisite number of backers, as well as ties with Nigel Lawson,

Just in case you missed them… | 1 June 2010

…here are some of the posts made at Spectator.co.uk over the bank holiday weekend. Fraser Nelson charts the rise and fall of David Laws. James Forsyth laments a disaster for British public life, and ponders the Labour leadership contest. David Blackburn considers the attendant irony in Lord Prescott, and thinks the Telegraph’s latest expenses campaign is misjudged. Daniel Korski offers some names for Downing Street to consider for its defence council. Rod Liddle fought the laws and the laws won. And Melanie Phillips condemns an attempted terrorist outrage.