Politics

Read about the latest UK political news, views and analysis.

Friday

The Spectator

The week that was | 12 February 2010

Here are some of the posts made at Spectator.co.uk over the past week. Fraser Nelson ponders the re-birth of history. James Forsyth offers a note of caution over Cameron’s welcome attack on lobbyists, and says that the Tories’ death ads are the sort of hardball politics the Tories should play. Peter Hoskin condemns the Tories’ attack poster as Brownite politics at its worst, and sees the Cameroons fleshing out the agenda that may define them. David Blackburn argues that the Tories’ dirty tactics are distasteful but effective, and is uneasy about Cameron’s personal attack on Brown. Lloyd Evans sketches a perky PMQs. Daniel Korski writes an obituary for Charlie Wilson.

David Blackburn

Mending Britain’s broken politics

If it turns out that a transparently self-serving referendum on AV isn’t an instant fix to Britain’s political problems, what are politicians to do? As Pete noted, the stalk your MP i-Phone app is a step in the right direction. Another welcome measure is Winkball’s unique video hustings. Over 3,000 parliamentary candidates of all hues are given a few minutes to summarise their broad manifesto and detail which local issues are important to them. Viewers can leave comments and lodge questions so some sort of dialogue is maintained. Although this initiative possesses an air of the gimmick every little helps, and understanding what you’re voting for at a constituency level

David Blackburn

The hunt for Hoon’s successor

Not the most arresting headline I grant you, but bear with me. Geoff Hoon’s political corpse is still warm (well, lukewarm as it’s Hoon), but the search for his successor is underway. The indefatigable Paul Waugh has the runners and riders: John Knight (the leader of Ashfield District Council), James Connell (Hoon’s former SpAd) and Michael Dugher (another former Hoon SpAd who is now Brown’s Chief Political Spokesman). Mischievously, Waugh asks: ‘Will Labour insist on all-women shortlist? And if not, why not?’ Why not indeed? Perhaps Joanne Cash could complete her volte face and stand for Labour. What strikes me most about Waugh’s list is that all of the candidates

David Blackburn

The Tories’ meddling is undermining the Unionist cause in Northern Ireland

The Times reports that Owen Paterson, the Tories’ Northern Ireland spokesman, will review the process by which the Northern Ireland First Minister is appointed – by creating a Northern Irish executive and official opposition. The prospect of what Paterson describes as a “voluntary coalition”, presumably between the Unionist parties, has the potential to keep Sinn Fein permanently in opposition. Such a coalition jeopardises Cameron’s neutrality if he becomes Prime Minister, a point that Sinn Fein will exploit. The Conservatives seek to move Ulster’s politics away from sectarianism and into the mainstream, concentrating on public services. That is a welcome aim but their means are ill-conceived, stemming from a misunderstanding of

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

Quote of the day | 11 February 2010

Is it just me, or is there something grimly hilarious about The Man Who Claimed To Have Abolished Boom-And-Bust describing our recent economic turmoil as a “one-off”?  Yep, here’s Brown in today’s FT: “We are paying a one-off cost for globalisation.” More seriously, this is the technocratic side of Brown which Downing St will hope to contain during the election campaign.  Calling the recession and its rocky aftermath a “one-off cost” is unlikely to play well with people who have lost their jobs and businesses.

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Con Coughlin & His Critics

David has already highlighted some of the more dubious arguments Con Coughlin deploys in response to his critics but a couple of other points may still be made. Con writes: If I understand correctly Alex Deane’s high-minded rant about the rights of innocent people receiving a fair trial (which, just to put the record straight, I fully support), he is prepared to accept at face value former Guantanamo detainee Binyam Mohamed’s claim that he was brutally tortured during his interrogation with the full complicity of British security officials. David Davies, the former shadow Home Secretary, made a similar argument on the Today programme this morning, preferring to believe the word of

David Blackburn

Lance Price: Brown became PM when his skills were declining

Gordon Brown is a creature of habit. Every morning at 7:30 he holds a telephone conference with his cabal of Shakespearean fools, who review the papers for him. I imagine a scene of domesticity, of coffee and muffins, an adoring wife and child milling about offering tactile affection – a hand on the shoulder, a kiss on the head. But then again Brown is a latter day John Knox and this morning he must have sat in pale fury as an aide summarised the extract from Lance Price’s latest book, published in the Independent. Price, Andrew Rawnsley and Peter Watt share the same lexicon. ‘Unforgivable’, ‘not a nice place for

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Dave’s Problem: Voters Don’t Trust Politicians. Dave’s Solution: Ask Them to Trust Me

Ben Brogan’s column in the Telegraph today is a rum one. His thesis is that David Cameron’s job is not merely to present himself as a plausible Prime Minister in waiting but also to persuade voters that they can and should trust politicians again. So, not a tricky job then. [W]e have lost our ability to suspend disbelief and take at face value what politicians tell us. The MPs’ expenses scandal has had the purgative effect Parliament desperately needed, but the collateral damage has been a growth in cynicism and a loss of trust. And no one is suffering the consequences of that more than Mr Cameron. His strategy has

Wednesday

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Will British judges be “responsible” for the next terrorist attack?

Con Coughlin has an awful piece up at the Telegraph arguing that, in the light of today’s decision in the case of Binyam Mohamed, “if another al-Qaeda bomb goes off in London, the judges will be as much to blame as Osama bin Laden.” Seriously. That’s what he wrote. It’s as preposterous as it is repellent. Happily, over at Conservative Home, Alex Deane does an excellent job dismantling this and the rest of Coughlin’s diatribe here. The crux of Coughlin’s argument – in as much as there is one beyond the notion that the judiciary is inviting al-Qaeda to attack the United Kingdom – lies in the idea that the

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The separation of powers

If you want to understand what the Cameroon’s are thinking, Danny Finkelstein is essential reading. He used to work with them and he thinks like them, there is almost a mind meld between him and them.  His column today is all about why it would make more sense to actually separate out parliament and the executive and elect the head of state. I’m rather sympathetic to this point of view, but I don’t think the Tories will do anything this radical even if they talk about it in private.   One thing they might well do, though, is have ministers who aren’t members of either the Commons or the Lords.

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The death tax ads are the sort of hardball politics the Tories should play

I must admit to rather liking the Tory death tax ads. They are the kind of hardball aggressive politics that the Tories need to master if they are going to win this election. Are they dishonest? Well, I think in the grand political scheme of things they qualify as fair: Brown won’t rule this out and it is definitely an option Labour is considering so it is fair game. If this attack is out of bounds, then so is most of the dossier Labour produced on Tory spending plans at the beginning of the year. The other thing that really infuriates me about this whole debate is the idea that

James Forsyth James Forsyth

A comic tale with serious undertones

The Joanne Cash affair is the kind of story you couldn’t make up. But once you get beyond the comic details there are a few things worth taking seriously. First, CCHQ has not covered itself in glory during this episode. It was aware of the problem but rather than dealing with it, it attempted to massage the situation. If CCHQ had acted decisively, this problem could have been resolved a fortnight ago without all this publicity and damage to the party. CCHQ’s performance hardly fills one with confidence about whether or not it has done the appropriate due diligence on its candidates all around the country.   Second, it is

Peter Hoskin

Best served cold

Good spot by the FT’s Jim Pickard, who has picked up on these informal minutes from the last meeting of Labour’s National Executive Committee.  He’s aleady rooted out some of the juiciest sections (including stuff about voting reform and the election date), so I’d suggest you head over to the FT Westminster blog for that.  But this deliciously sinister reference to the Hoon and Hewitt plot deserves repeating: “Two weeks earlier, members of the organisation committee had forcefully expressed grassroots anger at continuing outbreaks of indiscipline at senior levels and agreed that all members should be equally subject to party rules, but the NEC ended up adopting Dennis Skinner’s advice

Lloyd Evans Lloyd Evans

A perky PMQs<br />

The Tory graveyard poster – brilliant and shocking – cast a long shadow over PMQs today. The debate itself came down to fine judgements about the validity of the leaders’ arguments. Cameron demanded to know if Brown planned to introduce this grim levy or not. He quoted acidic comments from senior Labour figures who’ve called the tax ‘a cruel deception’, ‘badly costed’ and ‘poorly constructed.’ Brown’s response, which seems reasonable, is that the Conservatives ‘voted for this in the House and now they’re refusing to help us to give local authorities the resources they need.’ His plan was to turn the issue into a question of Tory inconsistency whilst taking

David Blackburn

The Tories’ dirty tactics are dispiriting but effective

This death tax levy is gutter politics at its most visceral and it’s thrilling drama. Brown’s and Cameron’s loathing for each other is pure soap opera, and they’re having a right old slanging match. I agree with Pete, it is dispiriting to see the Tories stoop to misrepresenting policies, the show-stopper in Brown’s repertoire. Together with Cameron’s personal attacks, the Tories have surrendered the high ground, but as Iain Martin notes is anyone really surprised? The Tories have been expecting, righty, Labour to fight a grubby election campaign and have decided to fight Brown’s mob with fire. Personal attacks appeal largely to those whose minds are settled, so I see

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Ask Not For Whom the Bell Tolls, David Mundell…

Bad news for David Mundell. The Tories’ sole MP in Scotland (at the moment!) might think himself the obvious choice to be Scottish Secretary, should David Cameron form a government later this year but the party leader seems much less convinced of poor Mr Mundell’s merits, telling the Herald today: “You will have to wait and see what appointments are made if we win an election but, suffice it to say, David has done an excellent job.” So, Cameron’s looking for an alternative. And reasonably so. Mr Mundell is an inoffensive man and that’s not something you can say about all MPs, but few people, I think, truly think that

Peter Hoskin

PMQs live blog | 10 February 2010

Stay tuned for live coverage from 1200. 1200: And we’re off, bang on time.  First question on Labour’s elderly care plans.  Brown delivers a load of platitudes about how the government is committed to better care.  Even adds that he hopes for cross-party backing. 1201: Cameron now.  He leads on elderly care plans too – and how they will be funded.  With a nod to a letter in today’s Times, he adds that people who will have to implement it thinks its disastrous. 1202: Brown’s on fiesty, if typically disingenous, form.  He says that he “knows how [Cameron] likes personality politics”.  His substantial point, though, is that the Tories supported

Peter Hoskin

Has that Tory poster made Brown’s job easier in PMQs?

Yesterday’s Guardian story about a potential death tax would have been perfect material for Cameron in PMQs. Even after Andy Burnham’s denials, there are still legitimate questions to be asked about it. For instance, would the government say that they will never propose the tax? And, if not, how will they pay for their social care guarantees otherwise? Fired across the dispatch box, these enquiries could have put Brown on the back foot. But now that the Tories have jumped the gun, and released that poster attacking a Labour policy which isn’t actually a Labour policy, they’ve rather limited that line of questioning. If the death tax comes up, all

Peter Hoskin

Cameron attacks tax-happy Brown

A strident interview from David Cameron in today’s Express, in which he touches on everything from inheritance tax to not, never, ever joining the Euro. It’s this passage that jumped out at me, though: “Middle Britain has had a wretched time under Labour. This Government has taxed mortgages, marriages, pensions, petrol and travel and raised national insurance and the top rate of income tax. We cannot keep squeezing hard-working families.” Why so noteworthy? Well, off the top of my head, this is the first time that Cameron has referred to the current system as a “tax on marriage”. In which case, you wonder if the Tories are planning to place