Politics Archives

Saturday

11 Dec 2010

Students provide lesson in the Big Society

It’s quite something when the editor of The Spectator concedes that revolting students (if not the rioting ones) have a point. Fraser makes a persuasive point that no government department should have been immune from cuts. The political fallout from the decision to slash university budgets and hike tuition fees will continue long after the students withdraw from the streets. The devastating hit on higher education makes the coalition look like just another crew of right-wing philistines. One of the curious aspects of this fiasco is Nick Clegg’s attempts to represent this as his Clause Four moment, when the Liberal Democrats finally became a grown-up party of government. The reality

James Forsyth

A strength and a weakness

As with so many things, the coalition’s great strength is also its great weakness. On the one hand, it is two parties working together, politicians putting aside their differences to cooperate in the national interest. This is something that, broadly speaking, the electorate likes. On the other, it is a government that nobody voted for. There’s a danger that the public come to see coalition as an arrangement that just allows both parties to worm out of their manifesto commitments on the grounds that they didn’t win the election. The coalition’s national interest case is a strong one. But it needs to be made with greater frequency. It cannot be

James Forsyth

Politics: Nick Clegg must reform his party for the sake of democracy – and survival

Nick Clegg’s tuition fees nightmare was never going to be over after the Commons vote. Nick Clegg’s tuition fees nightmare was never going to be over after the Commons vote. Even if every Liberal Democrat MP followed him into the ‘aye’ lobby, it would still not change the party’s policy on the issue. That fight goes on. The Lib Dem Federal Policy Committee has already shown that it plans to make the Deputy Prime Minister go several more rounds. It declared recently that the abolition of fees remains party policy, whatever its leader might say. At the next Lib Dem spring conference, a motion will almost certainly be tabled (and

Friday

10 Dec 2010

Alex Massie

When Bubba Came Back

Can you imagine Gordon Brown holding a meeting with Tony Blair in Downing Street, then agreeing to share a the Prime Ministerial podium with his predecessor and then disappearing to another engagement, leaving Blair to hold court for half an hour? No, I don’t think so. And not just because Brown hated Blair’s guts. Even Gordon might have appreciated that this might lead to unflattering comparisons. People might even find themselves thinking, Golly, what ever happened to that guy Tony? He was awfully good wasn’t he? This, basically, is what happened at the White House this afternoon. For half an hour Bill Clinton seemed to be President. Now it’s a

Daniel Korski

The students vs the Lib Dems

One of the things I heard yesterday when I strolled around the edges of the protests, particularly from older people, was how the coalition’s policies had politicised Britain’s young. “It has really made my children wake up”, said an elderly bystander with a wistful look in his eyes. Student leaders say they now hope to punish Lib Dems who voted for the tuition fees, targeting MPs in seats such as Bath, Burnley, Bradford East, Bristol West and Brent Central. The sense of rage directed against the Liberal Democrats comes, I suspect, from a deeper sense of betrayal – and not simply student dissatisfaction over today’s issue. In politics time

Alex Massie

Defining Authentic Conservatism

Tim Montgomerie tried to define his “Mainstream Conservatism” project again this morning. (My first take on it is here and Pete’s astute view is here). Bear in mind that Tim contrasts liberal conservatism with what he calls “authentic conservatism” and that while he insists upon the importance of breadth (good!) his movement is the one that’s deciding which conservatives are “authentic” and which are not. To take Tim’s points in order: 1. “Co-operation with the Liberal Democrats in government is working well, but far from perfectly.” By “far from perfectly” he means that the coalition agreement isn’t an entirely Tory document (just 80%!). Well, yes, that’s what happens in a

Ed Howker

Revealed: The Olympic cash-in

It’s costing more than the government cuts in welfare, more even than the UK’s Irish bail-out, but what exactly is all that money set aside for the 2012 Olympic Games actually being spent on? You might be surprised. In this week’s Spectator, Andrew Gilligan and I disclose, for the first time, all the petty, legally-binding demands made by the 115-member International Olympic Committee (IOC) of London. This is information that the government, the mayor and the London Olympic organisers never wanted you to see – even though it forms a binding part of the Host City Contract signed when we won the right to host the games in 2005. Paul

Daniel Korski

Serbia’s Nobel U-turn

Yesterday, I blogged that Serbia’s decision not to attend the Nobel Prize ceremony because of Chinese pressure was a shameful stance for the Balkan would-be EU member to take. Many others felt the same. Now, feeling the international pressure, it seems that Serbia’s government has decided that the country’s Ombudsman, Sasa Jankovic, will attend the event as special representative of Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic. A good outcome, and a sensible decision, which will hopefully be followed by a reprimand to Serbia’s calculating Foreign Minister, Vuk Jeremić, who originally decided that Serbia would not attend the ceremony.

Peter Hoskin

The coming battle over Mainstream Conservatism

It’s not just the students who are waging a political struggle. In yesterday’s Times (£), Tim Montgomerie fired up a debate over the future of the Conservative Party that will no doubt simmer through the rest of this Parliament. For those who can’t delve behind the paywall, the argument was broadly this: that a tension is emerging between liberal Conservatism and a more traditional Conservatism. On the side of the Liberal Conservatives are those who want to extend the union with Nick Clegg and his party; a group which may well include the Tory leadership. On the other side are those who want the Tories to go it alone after

Fraser Nelson

Sifting through the wreckage

The revolution may not be televised, but protests certainly are – and the process magnifies the drama. Since last night, the news broadcasts have all had footage of two thugs trying to smash the windows of the Treasury and, in the process, familiarising themselves with the properties of bombproof glass. The attack on Charles and Camilla’s royal limo is splashed across all this morning’s front pages. The script is so well-rehearsed now that I hesitate to repeat it: the vast majority are peaceful protesters, infiltrated by vandals who soak up the attention. Many of the protesters yesterday looked like they’d get a cab straight back home to their Notting Hill

Alex Massie

Mainstream vs Liberal Conservatives

Tim Montgomerie is on maneuvers again and, as tends to be the case when Tim’s on patrol, it’s worth listening to what he says. At ConservativeHome and in the Times (£) he outlines what he sees as a divide between “Mainstream” and “Liberal” Conservatism. In part this is simply a matter of using the grass-roots to keep the party leadership “honest” and in part it’s an attempt to head off any talk of electoral pacts in 2015 that might see the coalition run for a second term. All of which is fine and dandy. Nevertheless, the divide between Mainstream and Liberal may not be as clear as Tim suggests. For

Thursday

9 Dec 2010

James Forsyth

The divisions laid bare

When The Speaker called a division, the Labour side roared a passionate No while the coalition benches delivered a rather muted Aye. I did not see a single Lib Dem open their mouth at this point. Instead, they sat on their benches looking emotionally exhausted. Even those Lib Dems who have been proved right in their warning about the party’s position on fees—notably, David Laws and Jeremy Browne—appeared downcast. In the end, the government won but with a much reduced majority. 21 Lib Dems voted against the coalition, as did six Tories. Simon Hughes abstained despite Ed Miliband’s entreaties to come with him into the no lobby. This

Peter Hoskin

Coalition wins fees vote with a majority of 21

The final tally was 323 in favour of lifting the cap on tuition fees from £3,290 to £9,000 a year, with 302 against. The second vote, on raising the basic cap to £6,000, passed with the same majority. Although we don’t know the divisions yet, we can safely say that it’s the biggest rebellion of this Parliament so far – the lowest government majority until today was 51. UPDATE 1: 28 Lib Dems voted with the government; 21 against; and 8 either didn’t vote or abstained. This is the biggest Lib Dem rebellion since the party was founded. UPDATE 2: Six Tories voted against the government: Andrew Percy (Brigg &

Ed Howker

Exclusive: the fee hike won’t create a market

The fee vote really comes down to two questions. First, will the fee hike proposed by the coalition government actually create an internal market in higher education? Second, what will be the effect on the public finances? There is good reason to be doubtful. First, the market: the idea, I suppose, is that world-class universities might charge higher fees than second and third tier ones. But, in the last few days, I’ve spoken to several very senior higher-education sources who privately report that universities like Leeds Met, Bolton and Worcester are very seriously considering charging the full £9,000 tuition for their courses once legislation is in place. The government is extremely concerned. As you can imagine, if that

Alex Massie

The Tuition Fees Stramash and Why Nick Clegg is Like George HW Bush

The absurdity and knavery of modern politics has been on full display during the “debate” about university tuition fees. So much so, in fact, that almost no-one emerges from the process with their reputations enhanced. As is customary in such entertainments it helps that there is no issue of principle involved. Hopi Sen put it well the other day: The Prime Minister wishes his government to introduce a policy which is a major extension of a policy he voted against in opposition. The Deputy Prime Minister would like to vote for the government’s proposals, but is considering abstaining because he promised to vote against them. The opposition are opposing what

Peter Hoskin

Putting the Lib Dem rebellion into context

A useful guide from Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart: If 11 Liberal Democrat MPs vote against the whip, it will be the largest Lib Dem rebellion so far this Parlaiment. (The current record is 10, on an amendment to the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill in November). If 16 Liberal Democrat MPs vote against the whip, it will be the largest Lib Dem rebellion since the party was founded in 1988-89. If 30 Liberal Democrat MPs vote against the whip (something we doubt very much), it will be the largest rebellion by the Liberal Democrats or any of their predecessor parties since the Maurice Debate of 1918, which saw

Peter Hoskin

The Lib Dems walk through the fire

Brace yourselves, CoffeeHousers. Today is the day of the tuition fee vote, along with all the froth and fury that will attend it. The government’s motion will most likely pass through the Commons – yes, even without the support of Simon Hughes – but the wider repercussions are, as yet, uncertain. The main question is what the Lib Dems will achieve by walking through the fire, as Nick Clegg puts it. Will they emerge from the other side, a more credible party of government in the public’s eyes? Or will they just get burnt to ashes? At the very least, the yellow bird of liberty is stuttering this morning. As

Wednesday

8 Dec 2010

Peter Hoskin

The Tories keep plugging away at the Big Society

The Big Society never really went away as a theme, but it certainly became a less insistent catchphrase after the general election. The Tories were no doubt stung by the ambiguous response their invitation to government, and felt that the early days of coalition government were not an opportune moment to reheat their central election message. Months went by where the words “big” and “society” barely made any contact at all. That changed with David Cameron’s conference speech, of course. And, since then, the Big Society has been back, loud and proud. Only this week, Philip Hammond was talking about a “Big Society approach” to dealing with the snow. Nick

Lloyd Evans

Miliband rises from his deathbed

At last Wednesday’s PMQs Cameron kicked Ed Miliband into touch with a debonair swagger. Today anger replaced disdain. The PM’s eye-popping rage is so palpable that some commentators take it for vulnerability or even a hint of self-doubt. Milband has Cameron rattled? Nothing of the sort. Cameron just can’t control himself. Asked about the Coalition’s higher education policy, he heaped rancid abuse on the opposition leader from a lofty perch. He called him “an opportunist,” who “posed about social mobility” and was guilty of “rank hypocrisy.” “He saw a big crowd in the Mall,” fumed Cameron, referring to the student protests, “and said, ‘I am their leader I must

James Forsyth

Miliband’s jibes throw Cameron off course

After last week’s PMQs, Ed Miliband needed a clear win today—and he got one. Cameron, who had admittedly just flown back from Afghanistan, didn’t seem on top of the whole tuition fees debate and kept using lines that invited Labour to ridicule the Lib Dems. When Cameron tried to put Miliband down with the line, ‘he sounds like a student politician—and that’s all he’ll ever be’, Miliband shot back that “I was a student politician but I wasn’t hanging around with people who were throwing bread rolls and wrecking restaurants.” It was a good line and threw Cameron off for the final exchange. The rest of the session was