Politics

Ed Miliband’s pre-conference interviews in Progress and the New Statesman serve as a reminder of the Labour leader’s desire to move the political centre ground. To the New Statesman he talks repeatedly of changing the current ‘settlement’ both economic and political. I presume by that he means the orthodoxies of the Thatcher-Blair era. Indeed, he tells Progress of one area where he wants to do things differently: ‘…people used to say “it is anti-aspiration to talk about people at the top”, it is not anti-aspiration – it is pro-aspiration. It is pro-aspiration because if you have got banks who are not doing the right thing, if you’ve got people in banks

Ed Miliband is the man to rip up the rulebook. He uses the phrase half a dozen times in an interview with the New Statesman. Ever since the phone hacking saga climaxed in July, Miliband has been busy posing as an insurgent against the Establishment; the politician who refused to fawn to Rupert Murdoch. His version of events is utterly specious: he was happily quaffing News International’s champagne at the beginning of the summer. But that is immaterial. Miliband has recognised an opportunity to redefine his faltering leadership. Despite his stern rhetoric, Miliband says very little about policy to the Statesman beyond promises of a VAT cut and a few

Gordon Brown is back in the news this morning, or rather his legacy of debt is (an issue examined in depth by Pete and Fraser in 2008). The disastrous £12.7 billion NHS computer project is to be scrapped and, more important than that, the Telegraph reports that the care budgets at 60 hospitals are being squeezed by the costs of repaying PFI contracts totalling more than £5.4 billion. Andrew Lansley has taken to the airwaves to explain that Labour left the NHS with an “enormous legacy of debt”; he was keen to point out that no hospitals were built under PFI before 1997, so that there was no doubt where blame should

The row about which email account special advisers use for which emails is, I suspect, of very little interest to anyone outside SW1. But today’s FT story certainly has set the cat amongst the Whitehall pigeons. At the risk of trying the patience of everyone who doesn’t work within a mile of the Palace of Westminster, I think there is something here worth noting about our political culture. Christopher Cook’s story in the FT this morning is about an email that Dominic Cummings, one of Michael Gove’s special advisers, sent urging various political people not to use his Department of Education email. In this case, the email was perfectly proper. Ministers

Messy deals and fudged compromises: an inevitable feature of coalition politics. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that the resulting policy will always be bad. As a result of grubby negotiations in Downing Street, it looks as if we might just end up with a change in direction of tax policy which should have been made years ago. The battle over the 50 pence tax rate seems to be settling into an uneasy compromise: the Chancellor gets to abolish it possibly in 2013 ­ and in return the Lib Dems get some form of mansion tax, the levy proposed by Vince Cable on homes costing more than two million pounds. Ever the party of

Chris Huhne’s tough guy act aside, the major event in Birmingham today was the Lib Dems’ NHS debate. When Andrew Lansley’s contentious NHS reforms were derailed earlier this year, Liberal Democrats claimed the credit and senior party strategists believe the leadership must carry on broadcasting that message at any and every opportunity. The party seems to agree. Grande Dame Shirley Williams, eminent backbencher John Pugh and health minister Paul Burstow all crowed in unison that these reforms would look far worse but for the Liberal Democrats’ intervention. Williams and Pugh commended Burstow’s success in tempering reform while the absent Nick Clegg was also warmly applauded for his efforts. But the panel, and the hall,