Politics Archives

Wednesday

14 Apr 2010

Labour’s response to the Tory manifesto

Anyone else think that Labour’s latest poster is like a negative of the Tories’ “Vote For Me” effort? White text on a black background, instead of black text on a white background. A picture of Cameron, instead of Brown. I mean, the only thing that isn’t swapped over is the tone: both go on the attack, rather than presenting a positive vision. Labour’s message here is that the Tories’ Big Society manifesto washes its hands of the people. Which echoes the caricatures – “an agenda for abandonment” – that Peter Mandelson wheeled out yesterday, and which you can expect to hear again and again between now and polling day. The

Peter Hoskin

The Lib Dems’ turn to convince?

So now it’s the Lib Dems’ turn to present their prospectus for the country. And, in some respects, I expect they’ll want a fairly uneventful day. They have, after all, endured the most topsy-turvy campaign of the three main parties so far. Brown has given us no more, and no less, than what we expected. The Tories have been riding the crest of a national insurance wave. But the Lib Dems have bounced around from the highs of Nick Clegg’s performance on Newsnight to the lows of their misleading VAT poster, from their continuing Labservative attacks to Ed Balls describing their schools policy as “creditable” on Sky this morning. Make

Tuesday

13 Apr 2010

Martin Bright

Still Looking for the Clear Blue Water?

With the publication of the Labour and Conservative manifestos we should now have some idea of the real differences between the two largest parties. But I am more struck by the similarities. I know we are supposed to believe that Labour is the party of the enabling state, but it chose to emphasise how it would enable the individual during its manifesto launch, just as the Tories did. For the Tories’ Big Society read Labour’s “mutualisation”. There is not as much difference as the politicians would have you believe. Both policies are born out of a simple, pragmatic realisation that the state will not have the cash to intervene even

Peter Hoskin

Counting the cost of Labour’s national insurance hike

Insightful work from the FT’s Chris Giles, who has dug out a couple of academic articles – including one co-authored, in 2007, by George Osborne’s current chief of staff, Rupert Harrison – to work out how many jobs Labour’s national insurance rise might cost the economy. The results? Well, according to Giles, one says that 23,000 jobs will be lost, and the other comes up with 22,000. Neither of these are figures that Labour will want to crow about. But, as Giles points out, they are below the “57,000 jobs in small and medium-sized businesses alone” that the Conservatives predict in their manifesto. And they suggest that the national insurance

David Blackburn

Brown will fear the foreign policy debate most of all

The Tories’ Invitation to join the Government was never going to dwell on defence. (You can listen to the brief chapter on defence here.) But that doesn’t mean defence isn’t an election issue. It is, and it’s one that the Tories will win. Brown’s defence record is abysmal even by his standards. Former service chiefs have described how Brown ‘guillotined’ defence budgets whilst fighting two wars, and field commanders in Afghanistan have made constant reference to equipment shortages. These accusations were corroborated by facts that Brown then tried to distort before a public inquiry. That’s not all. As Alex notes, buried in Labour’s manifesto, is an admission that the Defence

Alex Massie

The Tocquevillian Tories

I think that today’s Tory manifesto is really quite a piece of work and potentially a work of genuine radicalism. It looks west and back and while it honours plenty of traditional Tory themes its inspiration is American in ways that not even Margaret Thatcher would have imagined – and that the Lady would have found too radical. Hopi Sen worries that none of the questions he asked about the manifesto have been answered. So here, in a fraternal spirit, is how they might be so answered: 1. Why is a pledge on cutting inheritence tax for millionaires a higher national priority than reducing the deficit or tax cuts for low income

Daniel Korski

Voting blues

One of the key questions in any election is turnout: whose voters will turn up and whose won’t. People are clearly disappointed in the political class – on a scale from 0 to 10, trust in politicians and parties is hovering around 3 points – but does it mean that they will stay at home, spoil their ballots or opt for fringe parties and single-issue candidates? What about the talk of a hung parliament ? Will it make voters believe that their vote counts – and so bring them to the polling stations — or make them stay at home, giving up on the idea that any change is possible?

Alex Massie

Party Just Like We’re In the Year 2000

It was Peter Mandelson who reminded me. Oh, I don’t think the Dark Lord had any intention of jogging my memory but there it was anyway: this election rmeinds me a little of the American Presidential election in 2000. Now David Cameron’s no George W Bush even though I think some Labour types do misunderstimate the young, inexperienced Tory leader but there are times when one wonders whether Gordon Brown is another Al Gore. They share some things anyway, not least the unfortunate habit of being mocked for things they didn’t quite say but everyone thinks they did (“I invented the internet!” “Well, I saved the world!”). But neither is

Daniel Korski

The Big Idea Competition

Whatever your political leanings, it is hard to deny that the Tories won the Big Idea Competition. The Labour Party offered a series of unconnected (if occasionally innovative) initiatives. But they lacked coherence. Their manifesto had what Peter Mandelson called “Blair Plus”, but also what could be referred to as “Prescott Squared”. “What’s The Big Idea?” asked Sky’s Niall Paterson. The Tories on the other hand have a Big Idea – decentralisation. Giving power to citizens in a number of different ways. It is a concept that gives shape to the Tory manifesto, providing a ready stock of sound-bites. But why do we need Big Ideas, as opposed to

Alex Massie

Labour’s Defence Weakness

Meanwhile, I’m puzzled by quite a bit of Labour’s manifesto. Some of it seems rather sullen, defensive and most put-out. Take the passage on defence for instance: there’s much protesting that, actually, defence budgets so have risen and it’s rotten that anyone should ever think anything to the contrary. And yet Labour seem to concede – implicitly anyway – that their critics have a point. Otherwise why would they feel the need to promise – as part of “the next stage of national renewal” no less – to “conduct a Strategic Defence Review to equip our Armed Forces for 21st Century challenges”? Doesn’t this rather suggest that the Armed Forces

The Spectator

Around the Web: Conservative manifesto

You can read Fraser’s verdict here, but this is what the rest of the Web had to say: Janet Daley described it as ‘the perfect pitch’: ‘The Conservatives have just given a launch performance for their manifesto which was as close to perfect as any I have seen. It was clear, coherent and genuinely compelling: the message was simple: people power rather than state power.’ Ben Brogan welcomes less, not more: ‘Today was also about David Cameron. He made a long speech, too long, and so reminded us that when he is scripted he is less effective. It was later when he let rip with a bit of Angry Dave

Fraser Nelson

The Tories’ great manifesto launch

Battersea Power Station is chosen as an allegory for Britain – “a building in need of rejuvenation in a country in need of rejuvenation” says David Cameron. As for Cameron’s speech – great stuff. He delivered the ‘empowerment’ message and gave hard examples, and wrapped it up into a greatest hits of his best soundbites (none the worse for that). It was so up our street that, at times, I thought he was working his way through the leader in the current edition of The Spectator. I’ll save my full verdict on Cameron’s speech and positioning for the magazine this week. But here’s the rest of the launch. The Tories

Alex Massie

A Big Election?

What a curious election this is. As Tim Montgomerie points out over at Spectator Live (visit!) the Conservative manifesto appears to have been written as though the great Fiscal Crash had never happened. This is either bold or brave or, worse, perhaps both. Then again it’s not as if Labour are offering anything more convincing. A chart will help explain this: So there you have it: squabbling over £12bn; total silence over the £155bn rest that might need to be cut. Marvel at how narrow our politics can be. Granted these numbers are taken from the Institute for Economic Affairs but even if you quibble with their calculations the broad

Peter Hoskin

Tory manifesto launch – live blog

Stay tuned for live coverage from 1100. 1238: And that’s it. Phew – quite a marathon. A strong central message, I think, but it could have been said in fewer words. Thanks for tuning in. 1235: The Guardian’s Nick Watt asks why the Tories aren’t talking more about the extent, and the consequences, of spending cuts. Cameron’s response is that he has “always been frank” with the public. 1233: Key question on whether withdrawing the state will mean worse public services for folk. Cameron says that he not looking to pull the rug from under people, but just to introduce choice and competition to counter the “dead, dull hand of

Daniel Korski

Don’t mention ze Europe

The Conservative Party’s departure from the European People’s Party came down to a choice of expediency over principle. If you are inclined to accept that Britain will stay in the EU and that membership helps this country – even if it requires some compromises – you will likely find the move unfortunate. If you are more concerned about the principles at stake – and feel that Britain’s loss of sovereignty has gone too far – and do not care about the loss of influence on the legislative process, you are likely to be in favor of the Tory move. David Cameron is keen to keep the issue of Europe

Peter Hoskin

Where’s the surprise?

Am I the only one who’d care for a bit more uncertainty and surprise when it comes to the election campaign? I mean, yesterday, Labour released a manifesto which had been heavily trailed for weeks, even months, in advance. And, today, it looks as though the Conservatives are going to do likewise – with the political barometer saying that their Invitation to Join the Government of Britain won’t contain anything substantially new. Its cover was even published last night. And, if you want an sense of what Cameron will say today, then just read his article in this morning’s Times. Of course, it’s the job of a well-oiled campaign machine

Monday

12 Apr 2010

Peter Hoskin

The Tories invite you to join government

Battersea Power Station was the site of one of the Tories’ most effective publicity stunts of recent months – and it will be the venue for their manifesto launch tomorrow. Details are already emerging about the document (ConHome has a good summary here), which sounds as though it won’t contain much, if anything, that we haven’t heard before. As with Labour earlier, this approach risks an indifferent response from the media and the public. But at least the Tories have clearer flagship policies to broadcast – the national insurance cut among them. While the manifesto may not contain any new policy, it sounds as though the Tories have gone to

Peter Hoskin

Unison enters the political poster fray

In which case, two questions for CoffeeHousers to mull over: i) To what extent will union attacks harm the Tories, with the threat of strikes rumbling on in the background? ii) Have Unison read the IFS’s research into Labour cuts? The comments section is yours.

Daniel Korski

Labour’s nuclear no-show

Today, President Barack Obama hosts leaders from 46 countries for a two-day nuclear security summit that will focus on how to better safeguard weapons materials, both old and new, and to keep them out of the hands of terrorists. Labour’s manifesto was also launched today. What do the two things have in common? Not a lot, really. But they could have had a lot in common – if the Labour government had been willing to be bold. Here’s how. As preparation for the summit, the US signed a new treaty with Russia last week to reduce the nuclear stockpiles of both nations, and the Obama administration issued a revised nuclear arms

Fraser Nelson

What Brown really offers Britain…

Labour’s manifesto cover has been the cause of much merriment online – creating what the Americans call “subvertisments”. ConservativeHome has already lined up some spoofs. We asked Carla Millar, who has done quite a bit of work for The Spectator, to do a version with a mushroom cloud of debt in the middle and the family shielding their eyes. This is the result. Carla is a studiously apolitical Canadian, but I’m sure CoffeeHousers will agree that she has captured the essence of it all: