Politics

So, we’ve had nearly a week to digest the results of the American election and contemplate what, if anything, it might all mean for politics there and, naturally, in this country too. Let’s begin with a necessary caveat: the “read-across” from American elections to the British political scene is something that must be handled deftly. If considered with a sensible measure of proportion, however, it can be instructive since some of the challenges facing political leaders in Britain are comparable in kind (though not always in degree) to those faced by their cousins in the United States. Demographics aren’t destiny and policy matters more than journalists sometimes liked to pretend.

George Osborne’s public interventions on issues other than the economy are few and far between, which is why his article in today’s Times merits attention. In it, Osborne analyses some of the causes of Barack Obama’s victory and then applies his findings to the 2015 election in Britain. On the basis of this article, we can conclude that the Tories’ leading strategist expects to fight the next election in a challenging economic climate against two men, Ed Balls and Ed Miliband (in that order), who he intends to blame for causing Britain’s ills. He will present Ed Balls and Ed Miliband (in that order) as reactionaries who exist beyond the

It is a busy day on the economic front, with new inflation figures (which are expected to show an increase) to be released at 9.30am and Ed Davey, the energy secretary, to address the House about further allegations (published in the Guardian this time) that the wholesale price of gas has been fixed by traders. The claims were made by a whistleblower, Seth Freedman, who used to work at ICIS Heren, an agency that reports on gas prices. The Financial Services Authority and the energy regulator, Ofgem, have both swung into action to investigate Freedman’s allegations. It is only natural that the government would state its response to the House and

The Sunday shows have been dominated today by the aftermath of George Entwistle’s resignation. But Phillip Hammond gave a significant and combative interview on the Sunday Politics. Pressed by Andrew Neil on Michael Portillo’s criticisms of renewing Trident, Hammond dismissed them with the line that the former Defence Secretary ‘doesn’t have access to the information that would allow him to make that judgement on a sound basis.’ He then went on to argue that Trident is a necessary insurance policy in a world that will see an ‘an arms race in the Middle East’ if Iran does get the bomb. Iran, and the dangers it poses, was also Hammond’s justification

Tom Watson’s Twitter feed has gone a bit quiet recently. Strange, as he is normally quite vocal about media ethics and their failings. But his silence is well-judged: when he stood up in PMQs and referred to a ‘a powerful pedophile network linked to Parliament and Number 10’ and referred to ‘senior aide of a former Prime Minister’ he started a massive and tawdry guessing game, just as the Newsnight investigation did. And was his evidence any stronger? Harriet Harman has just been asked on BBC Sunday Politics, and she didn’t know. For those who missed it, here’s Watson’s PMQs intervention: listen to ‘Tom Watson’s allegations in PMQs’ on Audioboo

Is the idea of any form of statute relating to the press inimical to liberty and therefore incompatible with Conservative belief?  Fraser Nelson argues that it is but it is time for Conservatives to think again and for journalists to reassess who is really on their side in this debate. People elect Conservative Prime Ministers to sort things out.  They expect us to take difficult decisions and to confront unaccountable power along the way.  The unavoidable truth is that there is unaccountable power vested in the hands of newspaper editors and proprietors which has contributed to the current crisis in journalism.  Why do wealthy individuals want to own newspapers?  They