These strikes are wrong, ad nauseam
Okay, as it’s Friday, here’s footage of that weird, repetitive Ed Miliband interview that has been bouncing around the blogosphere since yesterday:
Read about the latest UK political news, views and analysis.
Okay, as it’s Friday, here’s footage of that weird, repetitive Ed Miliband interview that has been bouncing around the blogosphere since yesterday:
Amid all the union sturm und drang yesterday, it was easy to forget about last night’s Parliamentary by-election in Inverclyde. But a by-election there was, after the death of the seat’s previous Labour MP, David Cairns, in May. And the result was in some doubt, too. After the SNP’s strong showing in last month’s corresponding Scottish Parliamentary election, there was a sense, beforehand, that Labour’s majority could be whittled down to naught. But, in the end, it wasn’t to be. Labour won with a comfortable majority of 5,838 and a vote share of 53.8 per cent, albeit it down on the 14,416 and 56 per cent they secured in last
The Foreign Secretary finds himself in the rather unique position today of trying to deal with the consequences of a crisis that he largely predicted. In May 1998, William Hague gave a speech warning that the single currency would lead to social unrest as governments tried to cope with one size fits all interest rates. It is a reminder of how much Hague was swimming against the tide of bien-pensant opinion that Michael Heseltine claimed this prediction was so extreme as to drive the Tories off the centre ground. But what is, perhaps, more interesting than Hague’s vindicated view that the euro, in a crisis, would be the ‘economic equivalent
Will Britain recognise Palestine as a state if, as planned, the matter comes to a vote at the UN General Assembly in September? Right now, the government says it has not decided. But if France were to push, the likelihood is that William Hague will order British diplomats either to accept or abstain from the vote. The strategic rationale for a Yes vote is obvious: at a time when Britain is waging war in Libya and rallying support against Syria and Iran, it would be disadvantageous to be seen by Middle Easterners as blocking Palestinian aspirations. And having accepted the case for Palestinian statehood in principle why not support it
In Britain, public sector strikes always bring with them the whiff of national decline. They are a reminder of a time when the country was becoming less and less competitive and the civil service regarded its job as the management of decline, a mindset only broken by the Thatcher government. But today Britain faces a choice almost as acute as the one it faced in the late 1970s. Is this country content with declining slightly less quickly than the continent of Europe as a whole, or does it want to equip itself for a new world in which economic power is moving east? It is in this context
Tim Pawlenty’s Presidential campaign may be stranger than any of his rivals’. For some candidates – Gingrich, Cain – running for the Republican nomination is an outlet for excess egomania. For others – Johnson, Paul – it’s an opportunity to raise issues and a style of conservatism that’s notably unfashionable. Others – Bachmann, Palin, Huntsman – fly a standard for sectional interests within the broader conservative movement. And Romney, of course, is interested in winning. But Pawlenty? What’s he about? Quite. There’s no interesting reason for Pawlenty to run at all. His starting ambition appears to be the “Oh God, I suppose he’ll have to do” candidate. His appeal –
Roy Greenslade’s report in the Evening Standard that The Sunday Times will hand over to Essex Police the tape of Chris Huhne talking to his estranged wife Vicky Pryce that got the speeding points story motoring in the first place has revived speculation in Westminster about the future of the Energy and Climate Change Secretary. The Sunday Times’ report says that the tape contains Pryce telling Huhne that, ‘It’s one of the things that worried me when I took them; when you made me take the points in the first instance.’ Huhne, of course, has always denied that anyone ever took points on his behalf. It should be stressed that
In 1997 New Labour was not just a domestic programme; it was a foreign policy too. Known as the “Neue Mitte” in Germany, Blair’s Third Way soon attracted such converts as the German chancellor, the French prime minister and the Danish leader. In the end, it produced few results for Britain, failing – much as Harold Wilson did in the 1970s – to curry favour for the UK through party political links with other leaders. But for a few years, much as New Labour looked across the Atlantic to the Democratic Party, so Europe’s Social Democrats looked across The Channel. International recognition for his deficit reduction plan notwithstanding, David Cameron
The mini Tory rebellion last night, 15 Tory MPs voted to allow couples to transfer their personal tax allowance, has further strained relations between the whips office and some backbenchers. One complained to me earlier that the whips had been overly heavy-handed in their approach, describing their behaviour as ‘quite terrifying’. Now, these things are in the eye of the beholder and I suspect that the whips involved just thought they were doing their bit to maintain party discipline. One other thing worth noting is that even those unhappy with the behaviour of the whips are going out of their way to say that the chief whip Patrick McLoughlin is
Superwonk Ed was back today. For the third week running he tried to nobble Cameron at PMQs by taxing him on some miniscule detail of policy. ‘Of the 163 statutory organisations in the health service’, asked Miliband, ‘how many will be left after the government’s top-down reforms?’ Cameron hadn’t a clue. And even at this early stage a sense of resignation was settling over the watching thousands. Trying to kick the PM with a footling facticule doesn’t play with the general public. It rarely makes the news. It has commentators reaching for lines of speed to keep awake. And the only people it excites are the opposition leader’s all-star team
Having been stumped by Miliband’s focus on detail in the past two PMQs, Cameron came prepared today. He was determined to highlight the fact that the Labour leader wasn’t asking about the big picture. So after Miliband had asked a series of questions about the nuts and bolts of NHS reforms, Cameron used his final answer to launch into Miliband. ‘He can’t ask about strikes because he is in the pockets of the union’, he started. He rattled off a series of other great issues of the day on which Miliband was silent, building up towards his conclusion with the line‘ he has to talk about the micro because he
VERDICT: Once again, Ed Miliband caught David Cameron out on an obscure point; this time about NHS reform. But, it was much too narrow a line of questioning and he had nothing to say on today’s other issues (Greece, Ken Clarke’s knife crime u-turn or tomorrow’s strikes etc.). Indeed, Labour was silent on the issue of tomorrow’s strikes and the economy. Cameron easily turned this to his advantage, painting Labour as being trapped in the pocket of the unions. Thus, was victory won from an awkward position. 12:30: Finally, a question Labour’s backbenchers about pension reform in the public sector, but it sounds like a half-hearted after-thought. Cameron defends his
Go go Gove, still trying to pack in the initiatives before summer recess. The focus today is on maths and the sciences, where the Education Secretary feels our students are falling behind. In a speech earlier, he set out a number of measures to help ameliorate the situation, including adding his name to City AM’s appeal for bankers to donate to the Further Maths Support Programme charity. But, really, it was his more general remarks that caught the ear. He emphasised, for instance, the growing gap between us and the Asian nations: “At school, British 15-year-olds’ maths skills are now more than two whole academic years behind 15-year-olds in China.
The appointment of Christine Lagarde as head of the IMF is a diplomatic victory for George Osborne. The Chancellor was one of her earliest supporters, was the first to nominate her and hit the phones hard on her behalf. She will be a useful ally for Osborne in this position especially given how choppy the global economic waters remain. But the UK government also used the IMF nomination process to do some diplomatic horse-trading. The government made it clear that UK support for Lagarde was contingent on Paris agreeing that Britain should have to play no part in the coming bailout of Greece. There will be those who argue that
Ed Miliband is learning. He has written a blog on Thursday’s strikes and it is plain that he has learnt from the errors he made during the March against the Cuts by associating himself with militancy. First, he places himself firmly on the side of parents who will be inconvenienced by Thursday’s strikes: “The Labour Party I lead will always be the party of the parent trying to get their children to school, the mother and father who know the value of a day’s education.” Miliband gives the unions and their members pretty short-shrift to be honest. He writes: “I understand why teachers are so angry with the government. But
Whoever first came up with the saying, “the left won the culture war, the right won the economic war and the centre won the political war,” deserves some kind of prize for encapsulating the politics of the late 20th century. It is a sign of the extent of the shock the current crisis has brought that none of this trio of truisms now holds true. The left won the culture war? So it once appeared. But look at the boomerang that has whirled back through the air and smacked the children of the 1960s in the face. As liberal-leftists they knew that racists, homophobes and misogynists were bad people with
Michael Gove is tenacious. With strikes set to close one in four schools on Thursday, Gove has launched a direct assault on the left-wing teaching unions. In a consultation published today, Gove has announced that exceptional graduates in maths and science will be paid bursaries of up to £20,000 to undertake teaching training. He also indicates that responsibility for teacher training will shift from universities to schools; teachers will predominantly learn on the job, as they do under the successful Teach First scheme. Also, ministers will attempt to close failing training courses, which they see as the cause of extraordinary levels of wastage. According to the Telegraph, 10 per cent
…here are some of the posts made at Spectator.co.uk over the weekend. Fraser Nelson goes to Saltaire, a town built by philanthropy. James Forsyth wonders if there will be a re-shuffle of the whips’ office, and is concerned by Russia’s arrival in Greece. David Blackburn notes that Ken Clarke’s revised bill is still not tough enough for the Tory right, and examines Ed Miliband’s attempt to remould the Labour party. Daniel Korski believes the civil service has escaped lightly for its role in the debacles of Iraq and Afghanistan. And Alex Massie considers how one reads in this age of distraction.
The Ministry of Defence is one of Whitehall’s largest and most dysfunctional departments; and it has long resisted effective reform. However, the parlous public finances dictate that reform take place. 8 per cent Budget cuts have to be delivered, while attempting to bring a £36bn black hole under control. Strategic retrenchment aside, efficiency is Liam Fox’s most potent weapon. To that end, Lord Levene has conducted an examination into departmental structures. Levene reports that the MoD’s maze of committees and sub-committees should be ripped-up to improve decision making and save money (and perhaps one of the ministry’s five ministers of state). ‘Sound financial management,’ he says ‘must be at the
Further to Daniel’s piece about declining immigration in Europe, it is worth highlighting this passage from Iain Martin’s column in the Mail: ‘But once in Downing Street, Cameron was confronted by research from his personal pollster, Andrew Cooper, which confirmed the true extent of public concern about high levels of immigration. Ironically, Cooper was one of the very modernisers in the Tory Party who did not want Cameron to be tainted — as he saw it — by being seen as tough on immigration in the run-up to the election. But now he has changed his tune — and taken the Prime Minister along with him. In fact, Cooper has