Politics

Buoyed by its huge popularity in the opinion polls and the fact that it is managing Brexit so well, the government has decided to further endear itself to the voters by shooting hundreds of thousands of badgers. Its cull of these creatures, previously limited to a few specific areas (where it has been staggeringly unsuccessful), is to be rolled out nationwide. This, then, is what we might call a Hard Brocksit strategy and it was revealed late on a bank holiday weekend in the hope that nobody would notice. But we did notice. It is not known yet how exactly these animals will be despatched. Previously the hunters have sprinkled

A few years ago, some friends came to stay with us on Exmoor. After they unfurled from their Volvo, they presented us with some unctuous Parma ham and a few bottles of Barolo, all of which I received eagerly. ‘Thank you so much!’ I cried, adding, ‘Such a shame we don’t have any Charentais melons, otherwise we could have this as a starter tonight!’ Even though he’d just ferried his family four hours from Primrose Hill and up our bone-shaking unmade track to reach the valley, Justin looked stricken at the thought of Parma ham sans melon. ‘No problem, I’ll run and get some,’ he said, jumping back into the

I’m not in the least surprised to learn that WH Smith has been voted Britain’s worst high-street retailer in a Which? survey of more than 10,000 consumers: this is the eighth year in a row that the newsagent and bookseller has come bottom or second-to-bottom in the same poll. These days its cramped shops give more shelf space to bottled water than to books, but if you do pick a paperback from the narrow choice of ‘bestsellers’ on offer — or a copy of The Spectator, if you can find it behind Men’s Health and Closer — you’re channelled into a dehumanising encounter with a self-service till, usually followed by

“The greatest politician in the world”, a friend quipped recently, “is the Westminster projection of Ruth Davidson”. I do not think this was meant altogether unkindly. It was, in part, a reflection of the age-old truth that what you cannot have so often seems more attractive than what you can. Davidson is a formidable communicator; interested in ideas but blessed with the common touch. She has a no-nonsenseness about her that contrasts favourably with the grey men and women occupying chairs around the cabinet table in Downing Street. Better still, she is neither tarnished by nor responsible for Brexit. That alone is enough to give her a freshness that seems

Never one to shy away from a platitude, the shadow attorney general, Shami Chakrabarti, has declared that the PM must reform abortion law in Northern Ireland on the basis that women there “have been let down by privileged women and men for too long” and that, so far as Theresa May is concerned, “the test of  feminists is whether they stick up for all women”. So far as this woman is concerned, I’ve been trying to work out the logic of these observations in terms of the abortion question and failing, so let’s just give up and cut to the chase. Abortion is a devolved issue in Northern Ireland and

Ruth Davidson’s Glasgow speech is making headlines about the NHS because that’s where most political village attention is right now. We all know that a big government announcement on health funding is coming and Davidson knows it too. As a former hack, she also knows how to hijack someone else’s story, so her speech is deftly done. (In the trade, this would be known as byline banditry, and it’s Jeremy Hunt’s byline she’s attempting to bandit, or at least share.) But I’m more interested in what she said about immigration. Yes, she repeated a previous call to scrap the stupid “tens of thousands” target because it’s, well, stupid. That’s not

Oh dear. The Labour party is one of the loudest cheerleaders when it comes to giving 16-year-olds the vote. At PMQs in January, Emily Thornberry was particularly keen to push the cause. The shadow foreign secretary accused the Conservatives – who oppose such a move – of being in a ‘coalition of cavemen’, before going on to list all the things 16-year-olds could do: leave home, start a family, marry, work, pay taxes and join the army. But there is one other thing that she is not able to add to that list: Labour Live. Mr S was surprised to learn of the ticketing rules for the upcoming Labour Corbyn-tastic Jez-fest

The wags of the right have been chuckling since the Irish electorate voted to legalise abortion. Ha, ha, ha, they cry, look at all those liberals. They deplore the Brexit referendum result and seek to have it overturned but are whooping with delight at the – wait for it – referendum result in Ireland. Here is Mark Littlewood of an Institute of Economic Affairs that is blocking its ears to the economic consequences of Brexit. And here is Matthew Goodwin, an academic whose attention seeking has become so desperate, I should call the Daily Mail comment desk and beg it to put the poor chap out of his misery by

It’s safe to say that the Tory think tank Bright Blue hasn’t always enjoyed the greatest respect among the Conservative party-at-large. Although it has a dedicated following from Liberal Conservatives, its focus on green issues has seen more traditional Tories snipe that it bears a closer resemblance to Lib Dem yellow than a Tory blue. So, with a plethora of new think tanks emerging in recent months to plug the apparent policy hole in Tory rejuvenation, is its time running out? Mr S suspects not. For all the publicity Onward, Freer and the CPS have so far received, it seems that its the soft blue think tank that is currently making the

Oh dear. It’s six months since Philip Hammond stood up in the Autumn Budget and announced a new railcard for those aged 26-30 ‘giving 4.5m more young people a third off their rail fares’. Yet the millennial railcard remains a near mythical artefact – with a mere 10,000 released on the day of the official ‘national’ launch. It’s understood the delay is down to a row over who should pay for them. The Treasury had hoped they would be a cost neutral policy but Network Rail aren’t convinced so it is being slowly trialled – and in the short term the Treasury don’t want to be landed with a bill while everything is

It’s safe to say the New York Times doesn’t take a particularly fond view of Britain these days. Whether it’s their ongoing Brexit coverage, writing up Sajid Javid’s appointment as Home Secretary with the headline ‘a new face won’t cover the British government’s racist heart’, mistaking a newspaper sketch writer’s joke about the French for Brexit bias or attempting to cash in with a $6,000 Brexit tour of… London, the American paper’s gloomy editorial team tend to see the glass as empty – let alone half empty. So, Mr S was curious to read the latest NYT take on Blighty. On the paper’s front page lies an article titled ‘In Britain,

Italy’s new populist government – the first in western Europe – collapsed last night before it even had the chance to govern for a single day. Italy, the Eurozone’s third largest economy and the beating pulse of European civilisation, now finds itself in a constitutional crisis as grave as any of the many it has had to confront since the fall of fascism in 1945. The way this thing pans out in the next days and weeks will effect the future not just of Italy but of Europe. And indirectly also of Britain with Brexit. The two Italian populist parties which were on the verge of forming a government that