Politics

Downing Street has made clear today that Theresa May will not move to prune down or veto David Cameron’s resignation honours list. This is the right decision. Whatever you think of the list, it wouldn’t be right for a new Prime Minister to seek to amend the resignation honours list of their predecessor. If this started to happen, it would make politics even more bitter and factional than it is today. Imagine if this Downing Street transition was not from one Tory to another but a Labour PM being replaced by a Tory who immediately vetoed all the honours proposed by the outgoing Labour Prime Minister. Now, this doesn’t mean

His time in No.10 might have come to an end last month but it’s David Cameron who is on the front pages of several newspapers this morning. The former PM’s resignation list of honours has sparked outrage since it was published by the Sunday Times yesterday. And today the fallout shows no sign of dampening down. Many of the usual suspects have attacked Cameron but what’s interesting about the criticism is its unanimity. Labour MP Tom Watson said it was ‘cronyism, pure and simple’; and many Tory MPs seem to agree. Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen said those who were going to be rewarded were the ‘people who brought politics into disrepute’.

For the past few weeks there have been reports circulating that David Cameron’s resignation honours list has been held up over ‘ethical concerns’ regarding his nominees. Today the Sunday Times offer a glimpse as to why this may be by publishing the ‘leaked list‘ on its front page. It does not make for an inspiring read. Although David Cameron was criticised for awarding Sir Lynton Crosby a knighthood for ‘services to politics’ in the new year honours, at least Crosby actually won an election. The same cannot be said for the majority of the Remain campaigners, donors and aides who allegedly make up the bulk of the roll call. Among the Remain foot soldiers who

After the verdict of the referendum had been announced, the most interesting comment was delivered by Nigel Farage. The vote had represented not only a victory against an undemocratic and faceless bureaucracy in Brussels but ‘against the big merchant banks and big businesses’. Worryingly, neither the majority of the Brexiteers nor their Remainer counterparts – at least among the political and journalistic classes – have grasped what the former Ukip leader understood instinctively; that Brexit is in fact a sub-plot in a much larger, overarching narrative: the battle between international finance and the one force that can realistically check its relentless and apocalyptic march – the nation state. Understand this and

Parliament is off for the summer, and the exodus to the beaches has begun. But Theresa May isn’t heading off there. She has serious work to do this summer, she has to work out what she wants out of the UK’s EU exit deal. As I say in The Sun this morning, May is just being honest when she says that she has an ‘open mind’ on what the deal should look like. But she doesn’t have long to decide what she does want. Indeed, I understand, that the Mays have already scrubbed one planned summer break to allow her to work on this. May is right to want the

If the SNP ever succeeds, it will be because of the failure of the English to understand its game. English people with no goodwill towards Scottish nationalism keep saying that ‘Scotland voted to remain in the EU’. It is not true. The Scots, like all other voters, answered the question which was put to them, which was whether theUnited Kingdom should leave or remain in the EU. They were not asked about what Scotland should do, any more than London, Liverpool or Bristol — three cities which voted Remain — were asked whether they sought secessionist EU membership. To say that Scotland must have another referendum on anything because a majority

For all Gordon Brown’s economic mistakes, he at least tried to build confidence in the British economy. In the build-up to the European Union referendum, David Cameron and George Osborne did the opposite. Osborne, as Chancellor, ignored the good news, accentuated the bad and tried to portray Britain as an economic weakling propped up by EU membership. He was joined by a great many investment banks who produced analyses saying that Britain’s life outside the EU would be catastrophic. Since the referendum, these anticipations of doom have continued. It is rather strange to watch. Encouraging economic news — the increase in high-street spending, the buoyant demand for jobs through recruitment

Yesterday was supposed to be the day the nuclear button was finally pressed – a vote by the board of French energy company EDF to go ahead with Hinkley C power station was assumed to be the moment at which the project would finally spring off the drawing board. Instead, business secretary Greg Clark announced that he needed until September to make a final decision on the government’s behalf. He is to be commended for not being pushed into the go-ahead. Hinkley – along with Heathrow and HS2 – is one of three ‘Hs’ bequeathed by the Cameron-Osborne years: hugely expensive infrastructure projects seemingly frustrated by chronic indecision. How tempting

When asked to write the Spectator diary, I diligently collated a list of topics to cover. But the problem is I still need to talk about Brexit. Because I’m not over it yet. I don’t mean I am still raging against Leavers and calling for another referendum. Nor do I regret we held it. Instead, by the Monday I was extolling the virtues of thinking positive for obvious economic reasons. I found reassurance in the quiet hum of my office that morning after the despondency of the weekend (moments when I stood in a corner of my bedroom, unable to control the ricochets of fury; resisting the tempestuous urge to

For all Gordon Brown’s economic mistakes, he at least tried to build confidence in the British economy. In the build-up to the European Union referendum, David Cameron and George Osborne did the opposite. Osborne, as Chancellor, ignored the good news, accentuated the bad and tried to portray Britain as an economic weakling propped up by EU membership. He was joined by a great many investment banks who produced analyses saying that Britain’s life outside the EU would be catastrophic. Since the referendum, these anticipations of doom have continued. It is rather strange to watch. Encouraging economic news — the increase in high-street spending, the buoyant demand for jobs through recruitment