Politics Archives

Wednesday

11 Jan 2012

Why Ed Miliband’s PMQs slip-up matters

The exchange about rail fares in PMQs earlier was, it’s true, not one for the photo album. But the way it’s resolved itself this afternoon has been considerably more diverting. You see, it turns out that David Cameron was right: Labour did arrange for these fare increases when in government. And, what’s more, Ed Miliband was wrong: the coalition didn’t ‘reverse’ the cap on fares that Labour then conveniently introduced in the run up to the general election. That cap was limited to one year by the Labour government itself. It was always intended that it would expire on 1 January 2011, at which point — barring a new cap

Lloyd Evans

Ed Miliband lives to flop another day

Miliband survives! That news should steady Labour nerves. For today at least. Their leader has the knack of turning near-certain defeat into absolutely-certain catastrophe, but he bumbled through PMQs this afternoon without suffering a serious setback. He has so little ground from which to attack the government that he had to lead on a niche issue. Rail fares. He asked the prime minister why the operating companies have managed to hike prices by 11 per cent on the busiest routes. Cameron: ‘Because of a power given to them by the last Labour government.’ With that lethally terse response the PM sat down. To his credit, Miliband wasn’t rattled. But

James Forsyth

A fairly bland PMQs

Today’s PMQs was rather a bland affair. Ed Miliband started with three questions on train fares that David Cameron batted away, but there is a little row brewing over whether Cameron’s claim that he is simply continuing the policy of the last government is correct. Later, Miliband moved onto the safe territory of the Union and consensus broke out with only the half dozen SNP MPs dissenting from it. Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, then asked the PM a question that, in a preview of the SNP’s campaign tactics, was designed purely to get the words Cameron, Thatcher and Scotland into the same sentence. There were two other things

James Forsyth

Will Miliband use his lifeline in PMQs?

At the weekend, Tories were anticipating giving Ed Miliband an almighty kicking at PMQs. Lord Glasman’s description of Labour’s economic record as ‘all crap’ had given them a killer line. As one member of the Cameron circle joked to me, ‘we’ve never had more material to work with.’ But Ed Miliband now has a get out of jail free card. If he asks six questions about the Union and the referendum, it will be impossible for Cameron to have a pop at him without looking distinctly unstatesmanlike. On Scotland, the two leaders need each other. The Unionist side cannot win without the Labour party and the Labour party will

James Forsyth

The battle lines that are being drawn over Scotland

In the wrangling between Westminster and Holyrood over the referendum there are two big issues at stake, the date of the vote and —more importantly — the number of options on the ballot paper. Salmond, as he made clear on the Today Programme this morning, wants to have the referendum in autumn 2014 and have three options — the status quo, independence and ‘devo-max’ — on offer. The reason Salmond wants ‘devo-max’ to be there is that he’s not confident he can get independence through this time round. Indeed, I suspect that Salmond’s ideal result would be Westminster resorting to the courts to stop a vote in Scotland allowing

Jonathan Jones

Romney wins comfortably this time

Last night Mitt Romney became the first Republican, excluding sitting Presidents, to win both the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary. And unlike in Iowa last week, his supporters didn’t have to wait until the next day to start celebrating. The exit polls were enough for Romney to be declared the winner within an hour of the voting booths closing. And now, with 95 per cent of the votes counted, he’s secured about 39 per cent of the vote – slightly higher than the share McCain received in 2008, and 16 points ahead of Ron Paul this time. Romney looks more the inevitable nominee than ever, and his victory

Alex Massie

Romney’s March Continues

Bill Kristol, in his ongoing bid to supplant Dick Morris’s as America’s Worst Pundit, has been trying to spin Mitt Romney’s victory in the New Hampshire primary as a disappointing outcome for Romney. By the time the ballots are all counted, however, Romney will have taken close to (and perhaps more than) 40% of the votes and become the first Republican (barring sitting Presidents) to win both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. Yeah, that’s a campaign that’s in trouble and struggling to get “traction”. Sure, something could happen to defeat Romney. Sure, he’s not a compelling front-runner. Sure, there are reasons to be worried that turnout in

Tuesday

10 Jan 2012

Hamish Macdonell

Salmond’s running rings around Cameron

Edinburgh If anyone had any doubts why Alex Salmond picked up almost every UK political award going last year, then they should study how he has dealt with the referendum issue this week. At every turn he has out-manoeuvred his UK counterparts — and this was perfectly demonstrated tonight. Earlier today, in the Commons, Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, had delivered the UK government’s riposte to the SNP’s referendum plans. Mr Moore was considered, clever and smart. In fact, it was a first cogent and effective strike back by the UK government on this issue for more than a year. But what will lead tomorrow’s papers in Scotland? It won’t

Peter Hoskin

The coalition finds its balance over Scotland

As much as I dislike the phrase ‘the third way’, it sums up what the coalition has done today. Given the choice between hobbling or accommodating Alex Salmond and his referendum on Scottish independence, it has decided to do neither and both. In the words of the Scottish Secretary Michael Moore, speaking in the House just now, the referendum will be ‘made in Scotland, by the people of Scotland’ — just so long as Westminster okays it first. Maybe that’ll make more sense if we look at what, specifically, was announced today. Moore’s main point was that any referendum held by the Scottish government, without the approval of the UK

Fraser Nelson

The battle for Britain | 10 January 2012

So, Alex Salmond has named his date for the independence referendum: August 2014, a few weeks after the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn. David Cameron wanted it earlier, and may yet refuse to grant Salmond this date — No10 hasn’t yet responded. Cameron was forcing the issue on the grounds that he wanted to end uncertainty — Salmond is now offering certainty, at least in terms of timing. But he hasn’t said whether he wants a two- or three-question referendum. This is crucial, because Salmond is likely to lose an independence referendum and he knows it. So his game plan will be to have a third option, a consolation prize,

Alex Massie

Alex Salmond Claims his Date

Since I was watching the House of Commons just now, I needed twitter to tell me that it seems as though Alex Salmond, ever the tweaker, has announced he wants to hold his referendum in the autumn of 2014. Hurrah. That’s fine. No need, in my view, for Westminster to object to this. On the contrary all parties should welcome it. All that Westminster needs to do is make sure the referendum billl can survive any legal challenge. Then we can get on with the game. The most importat thing is that the principle of the thing is now agreed. The detail can be sorted out in due course. What

Alex Massie

Michael Moore’s Quietly Sensible Consultation

Michael Moore’s statement to the House of Commons on the question of how a referendum on Scotland’s constitutional future may be held was clear, composed, sensible and modest. In other words it was everything that the last few days have not been. The Prime Minister in particular – as bemoaned here, here and here – has not distinguished himself in recent times. Perhaps it is fairer (it is certainly kinder) to presume this was just as innocent a cock-up as any Prime Ministerial cock-up can be; regardless is was a desperate piece of floundering that made Mr Cameron look something of a chump. The Secretary of State’s consultation paper makes

Alex Massie

Ed Miliband is No Teddy Roosevelt

This is, I know, a statement of the obvious but Ed Miliband is no Teddy Roosevelt. There are two reasons to be thankful for this. First, TR was really a ghastly man; secondly, if Ed Miliband were able to muster a quarter of Roosevelt’s brio he’d be faring rather better than he is. In the present circumstances, the opposition should be thumping the government every day. Granted, this requires more credibility than either Mr Miliband or Mr Balls can boast but the fact remains that a) George Osborne’s economic hopes have been vanquished by events and b) there is little substantive difference between his proposals and those made by Alistair

Jonathan Jones

Can Scotland make it on its own?

What would an independent Scotland’s public finances look like? ‘Good, actually,’ says the SNP as they present their ongoing case for independence. They like to claim that, discounting the rest of the UK, Scotland was in surplus for ‘four out of the last five years’ — it’s Westminster, not Holyrood, that can’t manage the public’s money. Which would be a powerful argument were it actually true. You see, the SNP are talking about the ‘current budget balance’, which excludes the £6.4 billion a year that Scotland spends on capital. When you include that spending — according to the Scottish government’s own figures — there has been a deficit for every

Peter Hoskin

Miliband’s speech fails to excite

Was Ed’s Big Speech worth the extended wait? Not really. It wasn’t a stone-cold terrible speech, but neither was it the rambunctious, attention-grabbing number that his leadership could do with. In fact, we could have saved ourselves the effort by simply reading his New Year’s message again. That was considerably shorter, and covered almost all of the same ground. Squeezed middle? Check. Tackling vested interests? Check. An admission that Labour will need to cut? Ch… oh, you get the point. The best that could be said about today’s speech is that it presented some of these arguments more clearly than in the past. Indeed, the attack on George Osborne’s fiscal

James Forsyth

Miliband tries to get his message heard

Ed Miliband is trying to do something interesting today. He is attempting to answer the question, ‘what’s the point of Labour when there’s no money left to spend?’ This is the problem that Miliband has been grappling with since winning the leadership and there’s no easy answer to it. It seems that today Miliband will give us more of a sense of the ‘new economy’ which he wants to see in this country. The test of the speech will be whether it gets beyond generalities about a long-term vision for an economy that is ‘fairer’. The challenge for Miliband will be to make his subtle message heard above the chatter

Monday

9 Jan 2012

Alex Massie

David Cameron has given Alex Salmond an opportunity to play the statesman

Shockingly, it is possible some of you did not see my appearance on BBC News this afternoon. Thanks to the wonders of Youtube and the baffling enthusiasm some people have for clipping and sharing these things, you can catch up with it now. As is always the case, I forgot half the things I wanted to say. Jon Sopel asked if it was really plausible for David Cameron to “do nothing”. Well, of course it is. Indeed when you cannot offer anything useful it is best to offer nothing at all. The time – as a few of us argued back then – for Conservatives to back a referendum came

James Forsyth

Osborne the Unionist

There’s much chatter in Westminster today about the fact that George Osborne is chairing the Cabinet committee on Scotland. Osborne is, of course, the Conservatives’ chief electoral strategist as well as the Chancellor of Exchequer. This has led to some suggestions that he wouldn’t be too upset by a referendum defeat that would make it an awful lot easier for the Tories to win a majority at Westminster. This is unfair: Osborne is a Unionist. What those around Osborne have long been interested in is the option that the coalition seems to be ruling out: fiscal autonomy. The circle around Osborne have long believed that it is only when Scottish

Peter Hoskin

Enter, David Miliband?

‘Every day, in every way, it’s getting worse for Ed Miliband.’ That’s what I said last Thursday, and it has been more or less borne out since then. Friday, of course, brought that Twitter embarrassment. Saturday, the subsequent headlines, as well as Miliband’s unconvincing attempt to push back against them. Sunday featured some of the most vicious attacks on his leadership by Labour MPs so far. And even today we’ve got the sort of ‘helpful’ advice from a senior Labour figure — in this case, Alan Johnson, suggesting that ‘too often we sound like a debating society rather than a political party’ — that comes across as frustrated criticism. Forget

Alex Massie

Cameron’s Caledonian Gamble: Unwise and Unnecessary

So. it looks as though David Cameron is following the Spectator’s advice not mine. What a nincompoop! But if the reports are correct then Cameron is playing us for fools. That is, there’s nothing wrong with suggesting a referendum on Scottish independence be held sooner rather than later; adding conditions to it is a different matter. It matters little, really, whether a referendum is binding or advisory; a Yes to Independence vote would be impossible to ignore, politically and practically speaking, even if the referendum were only advisory. So, to this extent, Cameron’s suggestion that a vote can be binding if held within 18 months but only advisory if held