Politics

During the love-in at the start of the coalition, no one really asked which Tory pledges bit the dust. It becomes relevant now: the Tory pledge to reduce immigration to the “tens of thousands,” for example, was in their manifesto but not in the coalition agreement. Although verbally restated later, it is still seen as being a flexible pledge due to its absence in that document. There is no record of what was dropped, so we at CoffeeHouse have provided one below. I won’t say it’s a rip-roaring read. But for those who think manifestos mean something, it’s good to have on the record. UPDATE: I agree with Mycroft, below,

An inventive article from Ben Brogan this morning, arguing that a new vigorously Tory foreign policy is emerging. I can be a little slow sometimes, but I haven’t noticed anything new or Tory about Britain’s foreign policy. Brogan records that the Prime Minister has let it be known that British troops will withdraw from Afghanistan by 2015. Cameron said nothing of the sort; he said he wanted British troops out of Afghanistan by 2015, something quite different. Contrary to expectations, relations with Europe are flourishing under the coalition, as pragmatic government has superseded bellicose opposition. William Hague hopes to influence the EU closely. In a speech today, he will attempt

Just before the voting on the Budget started, all Tory and Lib Dem MPs received a letter from David Miliband calling on them to vote against it. Attached to the letter were more than 1500 other signatories who Miliband had got to sign on to his letter online. It was a gimmick, but not a bad one. However, in an idle moment one Tory MP started to leaf through the list of signatures and was amused to find that the petition had been signed by one R U Serious:

Every conversation I have about the durability of the Coalition comes back to the AV referendum. The conventional wisdom is that if AV is defeated then it will be very hard for Clegg to keep his party in. For this reason, people pay extremely close attention to the Tory leadership’s attitude to AV. We are waiting to see if there is even a hint that Cameron is prepared to soften his position on the issue to strengthen the Coalition.   So Danny Finkelstein’s blog this morning suggesting that ‘AV might provide the answer to the otherwise impossible question – if the parties stay together, how can they fight the election

George Osborne is an enigma. For many, his politics and personality are defined by a photograph of him sneering in the Bullingdon’s clashing colours. The determined face that presented the Budget contradicted that stereotype; it suggested that Osborne was coming of age.    Paul Goodman was part of Osborne’s Shadow Treasury team and one of the ‘Gang of Four’ who prepared IDS and Michael Howard for PMQs, along with Boris, Cameron and Osborne. He has written an extensive appraisal of Osborne the man and politician. Read the piece: it’s enthralling, a detailed account of Osborne’s political adolescence through the years of defeat and a candid analysis of his tactical expertise.

Whatever happened to Sir Hugh Orde?  A few months ago, he was threatening to resign over the Tories’ plans for elected police commissioners.  But later, in a speech to the Association of Chief Police Officers, he seems to have come over considerably more cooperative.  On spending cuts, he stresses that police numbers will likely be reduced, but adds that “we fully understand that all will have to share the pain.”  And on elected police commissioners, the worst he can bring himself to say is that “the test is reconciling it with operational independence for policing … we have an absolute right to clarity on how this system will work.”  There

First, David Miliband was telling Brownies about the public finances.  Now, his brother’s at it too.  Here’s what he told the Daily Politics earlier: “Over thirteen years, Labour did increase spending on public services … In the coming five years, the Conservative coalition wants to undo all of that increase in spending.  So they want to return to a time before 1997.” But here’s what Labour’s spending increases (and those Tory spending cuts) look like once you’ve accounted for inflation: And, even as a percentage of GDP, the Tories are hardly “undoing” all of Labour’s spending:

Who’d have thought it? There’s David Miliband getting all self-righteous about the “cons” in George Osborne’s Budget, when – oh dear – he slips in a small con of his own.  Here’s the relevant passage: “[The Budget] was avoidable. Labour set out plans to cut the deficit by half over the next Parliament. The Tories have chosen to cut the whole of the deficit and more to the tune of £32billion in public services and £11billion in welfare.” And here, going off Labour’s own plans, is what he should have written: “[The Budget] was avoidable. Labour set out plans to cut the structural deficit by ‘more than two-thirds’ over the

Yvette Cooper has condemned IDS’ ‘nasty’ rhetoric this morning and claimed that the government’s proposals are about ideological cuts, not welfare reform. It’s simple, but effective. IDS’ reforms are both radical and necessary. The plan is to incentivise movement out of areas of welfare dependency with regional tax breaks and housing guarantees. There is a clear link between this policy and the non-EU migrant cap, which will protect at least some low skilled or unskilled jobs. A policy that encourages fairness, aspiration and a first chance in life for those condemned to worklessness by accident of birth. But the coalition is losing the rhetorical argument. When used in conjunction with