Politics

Mike Smithson has an interesting post with how the fallout from the al-Megrahi affair is damaging Labour. He writes: ‘Where I think that Labour is going wrong here is in trying to cover up what has happened and by hiding behind the Scottish dimension. Why not come out and say that the paramount objective was energy and the need to open up new areas? A reference to Russia’s aggressive energy strategy would underline the point. What’s becoming clear is that the truth will out – why not get in with their explanation first?’ He’s right that Labour have made an enormous tactical blunder by not coming clean over this piece

So far, Gordon Brown has refused to specifically comment on the Scottish Government’s decision to release Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi to Libya.  Yes, we’ve heard that he was “angry and repulsed” by al-Megrahi’s reception in Libya, and that our government had “no role” in the decision.  But there’s been nothing on whether he actually agrees or disagrees with the Scottish government’s actions. The official excuse has been that Brown has to respect the devolution settlement and can’t comment on devolved matters.  But – what’s this? – it seems he hasn’t had a problem with commenting on another devolved matter before now: the level of health spending set by the Scottish Government. 

Despite a week of international codemnation, a YouGov poll shows that 42 per cent of Scottish voters still agree with Kenny MacAskill’s decision to release al-Megrahi, whereas 51 per cent oppose it. Channel Four’s Gary Gibbon notes that this undermines Labour’s arguments that the SNP’s decision is not backed by the Scottish working class, and that Labour will find the Glasgow North East by-election hard going. I’m not so sure. Clearly it’s going to be tight, but Labour will take heart from this poll, which also reveals voting intentions. The SNP is down 6 points to 33 per cent and Labour is up 5 to 33 per cent. It was

In The Times today, Danny Finkelstein defended the most hated profession in contemporary politics – the Special Advisers, or SpAds. Booo, hissss. The case against was (again) laid out by a number of former senior officials, with ex-Cabinet Secretary Andrew Turnbull telling a Lords committee recently that he did not like  SpAds rising to become Cabinet ministers by the time they were 38 “without touching the sides of real life”. Booo. Hisssss. Boooo. But how many of the current Shadow Cabinet do you think have been SpAds in the past? Come on, what do you think? Half? A third? Out of the 28 members of the Shadow Cabinet, including David

So the Afghans have now voted in their second-ever presidential elections. Well, some of them have. But with the extent of voting unclear, accusations of poll-rigging rife and violence claiming countless innocent lives, it is far too early to call the process a success. Today, the Elections Commission will likely release preliminary results, with a full tally expected in a month’s time. Wisely, key US and UK officials have been circumspect in their pronouncements. The EU Monitoring Mission has said the election was “mostly good and fair.”  But Afghan observers cited “some credible allegations of fraud and mistakes by elections officials.”  NDI, the US organisation, said the poll “involved serious

In an episode of Yes Prime Minister, a tobacco mogul asks Sir Humphrey: “Does he carry any clout in Whitehall?” The Mandarin replies: “None at all, he’s only a minister.” The context has changed but the essential truth remains – most Cabinet ministers have no clout in government whatsoever. That at least is the view of four former Sir Humphreys. Lords Turnbull, Wilson, Butler, and Armstrong are quoted in the Guardian saying that New Labour has centralised government around a clique of special advisers. The result? The marginalisation of the cabinet and the breakdown of what they term ‘the efficient and proper conduct of government’. Not even Jonathan Powell denies

Last week, defence maestro Kevan Jones launched his master-strategy to smear General Sir Richard Dannatt. It was ingenious. An FOI request would reveal the General to be a spendthrift, abusing taxpayers’ generosity by lavishing their money on his grace and favour accommodation and on raucous parties for his army mates. To borrow a phrase, there was just one small flaw in the plan: it was rubbish. The Mail reveals that General Dannatt’s grace and favour apartment is a stable block, not a palace, and that he pays tax on it because he views it as a perk. His other claims are modest. Audiciously, Sir Richard secured £19,270.77p in expenses between 2005