Politics

In a risky break from blogging orthodoxy, I’m actually attending a political event today (and tomorrow!) and have travelled north to Perth for the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party’s annual conference. Next year’s election – assuming we have to wait until then – will be a strange one in Scotland since, for the first time, the electorate will have two parties against which to cast protest votes. That is, voters may choose to vote against either Labour or the SNP. Or both. Add the complexities of a four-party system in a first-past-the-post election and the picture rapidly becomes somewhat murky. That the Caledonian campaign is something of a sideshow that

I have been reading Marcia Williams’s 1972 memoir of her time with Harold Wilson, Inside Number 10 (no don’t ask why) and come to the chapter with the wonderful title The Inevitability of Gradualness. Here, Wilson’s former personal and private secretary weighs up the successes and failures of the 1960s Wilson governments. On the negative side, failure to reform the civil service, on the plus side the Open University: that sort of thing. At one point Williams quotes New Statesman and Observer contributor Francis Hope writing in the New York Times about the Wilson years: “The achievements of the Labour Government were mostly minor acts of decency.” I discover that

Like Bagehot I think this one of most entertaining – and revealing – reactions to the revelations of the Great Expenses Swindle of 2009: The latest batch of expenses details revealed by the Telegraph included the fact that Peterborough MP Stewart Jackson had made a claim of £304.10 for the upkeep of a swimming pool. In response he said: “The pool came with the house and I needed to know how to run it. Once I was shown that one time, there were no more claims. I take care of the pool myself. I believe this represents ‘value for money’ for the taxpayer.” Priceless, if you know what I mean.

We blithely say that politicians are despised even more than journalists. But those who work closely with MPs generally end up thinking they are a pretty decent lot. The revelations of the past week have changed all that. Speaker Martin’s intervention today was a new low point. Beyond embarrassing, it verged on the seriously chillling. Poor Nick Robinson looks like he has had the stuffing knocked out of him. Those columnists who have made a career out of saying we should have more respect for politicians look pretty stupid now. In a previous post I found myself saying that the expenses scandal would not have made such a splash in less desperate

Christopher Caldwell’s* diary in the latest edition of the print magazine is good fun and I look forward to reading his new book. This part was especially entertaining: For many years, the ingenuity of the British press in exploiting the Brown-Blair rivalry story amazed me. What a gift the papers had for conveying that, this time, it was really about to blow. It was good to see last week that this old journalistic warhorse can still be saddled up, with the help of Hazel Blears’s remarks about the Prime Minister’s ‘lamentable’ failure to communicate. To an American audience, Blears’s insistence that she was 100 per cent behind the prime minister

So how damaging is the expenses scandal? Harriet Harman has told Sky that it is all within the rules, and I’m sure that’s true. But that’s not the point. To the public, this will look like plunder pure and simple. Straw claiming his council tax back, etc. Ministers had best calibrate their response very carefully, and here is an example in how not to respond from Sir Stuart Bell, who sits on the House of Commons Commission: “If this was received by unauthorised means, it is disgraceful that a national newspaper should stoop so low as to buy information which will be in the public domain in July. It undermines