Read about the latest UK political news, views and analysis.
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.
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
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:
We’ve already collected some of the general blogosphere response to Labour’s manifesto launch, but this addendum is worth making separately. In a post describing the hostility of the Labour crowd towards the gathered media, Adam Boulton writes (with my highlights): “The crowd, including some cabinet ministers, booed and shouted at questions they didn’t like. Nick Robinson, the BBC’s political editor, had his question interrupted by jeering and Graham Wilson of the Sun was booed just for identifying his newspaper. Labour did not behave like that in the last three elections when the Sun backed them. Gordon Brown was happy to join in this confrontational mood. It was the most substantive
We have some video footage of Brown’s speech at Spectator Live, and you can read Pete’s analysis here. Elsewhere on the Web: Hopi Sen likes the promise on early diagnosis on Cancer care, and the fact that no incredible spending pledges have been included. The Guardian’s Julian Glover attacks a ‘meaningless manifesto‘: ‘Ed Miliband, who we are told wrote Labour’s manifesto, is fond of saying that the Tories are on the wrong side of the battle of ideas. It’s a neat phrase, but an empty one unless you have ideas of your own. On the basis of today’s manifesto performance, Labour doesn’t.’ Con Home argues that ‘Gordon Brown’s new-found aversion
“You got that, Britain? We. Are. The. Future. Future, future, future. The Tories are the past. We are the Future. The future that is fair for all. We are that future. For all.” And so, more or less, went Gordon Brown’s pitch to the nation at Labour’s manifesto launch. Except it lasted a good hour and a quarter. And it involved a eye-wateringly fuzzy screen behind Brown’s head. And a needless introduction from Harriet Harman. So if you managed to tune into it all, then well done: your enthusiasm for politics knows no bounds. But Labour’s problems today weren’t so much presentational as political. After thirteen years in power, Brown
1240: And Brown rounds proceedings off by saying “future” a few times. Did you manage to stay awake? Never mind – I did, so that you wouldn’t have to. My immediate thoughts below, of course. But I’ve given the actual manifesto a quick read-through as I’ve been typing – and will report back shortly. That’s it for this live blog. Thanks for tuning in, and all that. 1237: Brown says that “we are the party of everyone on middle or modest incomes in this country”. Hm – try telling that to everyone who lost out from the 10p tax debacle. 1235: This is dragging on. The Tories should be taking
Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary and former attack dog, seems to have been cast into outer darkness. As with Oliver Letwin’s disappearing act in the 2001, Labour is toasting this unofficial scalp. Denis MacShane has been adding poison to the potion this morning. The Tories are paying a heavy price for Grayling’s B&B gaffe, but it’s self-inflicted. Grayling’s comments were cackhanded and I think he is wrong, but they were nowhere near as controversial as was claimed – he was seeking a clarification of the law, not calling for Sandi Toksvig to be lynched. I doubt Grayling will be Home Secretary but such a senior Shadow minister can’t hide
Does anybody understand the Labour cancer leaflets story? I’ve listened to be about five BBC News reports and am no better off as a consequence. Labour apparently sent 250,000 cards out to women voters warning them that the Tories would renege upon Labour government promises for cancer tests. The question comes down to how those women were selected and why. If the Labour Party sent them out to women who its data insisted might be at risk from certain types of cancer, or were already sufferers, then it should not merely apologise, but the Prime Minister, if he knew about it, should resign. I hate to overstate the case, as
You know it’s the day you’ve all been waiting for, CoffeeHousers – the day of Labour’s manifesto launch. Last Thursday, Douglas Alexander described the document as a “progressive programme worthy of these testing times”. So, well, it must be good, mustn’t it? Problem is, this manifesto risks going the same way as the Budget. So much of it has been so heavily trailed, that there’s a danger we’ve already heard it all – and that it will be met with weary indifference by the media and the public alike. Votes for 16 year olds; jobs or training for unemployed under-25s; a referendum on an alternative vote system; a pledge
David Cameron takes a few journalists with him on each of his one-day tours, and it’s my turn tomorrow: 6am start. I should be able to get half an hour or so with him, to do an interview for The Spectator. As is customary, I’ll try and ask him some questions on behalf of CoffeeHousers – so please add any thoughts as a comment below.
The transformation of Nick Clegg from moderate Europeanist to a populist continues apace. The Lib Dem leader is very serious about capturing the anti-politics mood among the electorate – no easy feat for some who looks as Establishment as the rest. Though he will likely be pleased with today’s Observer interview, I wonder whether he will, in retrospect, feel comfortable with his view that a small Tory majority would somehow make a Cameron government illegitimate and that Britain could be plunged into “Greek-style unrest” if cuts were introduced. Where to begin? The electoral system works the way it does. It has many inbuilt problems – particularly for the Tories –
This poster by the LibDems is perhaps the most dishonest one of the campaign so far – and Vince Cable has pretty well admitted it to Jon Sopel on the Politics Show. Here’s the exchange. Jon Sopel: I mean let’s leave aside whether or whether not there is a black hole in the Tory’s finances. Leave that to one side. You don’t know factually, that they are going to raise VAT. That is your conjecture. St Vince Cable: It is a conjecture and it’s a reasonable assumption and I wouldn’t claim anymore than that. JS: And that £389 is a rough figure plucked… VC: “It’s a ball park estimate of
Underneath the IoS poll which David mentioned earlier there’s a set of election predictions from professional pollsters. Differing margins of victory aside, seven-out-of-eight of them foresee a Tory majority in a few weeks time. I mention this not just because it’s worth, erm, mentioning – but because a poll of readers over at our new Spectator Live election site produced a similar result. 85 percent of you predict that the election will produce a Tory majority. That’s very almost seven-out-of-eight. I promise I won’t ram Spectator Live down your collective throat every minute, but do check out the full results on this page here. Or vote in our latest poll
Lying is a politician’s occupational hazard. The Independent on Sunday has published a Com Res poll confirming that truism. The majority of voters do not believe that David Cameron and Gordon Brown are being honest about how they will tackle the deficit. We voters resent being taken for fools. If Brown and Cameron are being disingenuous about the economy, the honest Sage of Twickenham benefits – the Liberals are storming the marginals, a hung parliament is odds-on according to some pollsters. Is Vince Cable honest about reducing the deficit? Emphatically not. One minute he’s against a VAT rise, but refuses to rule it out the next. He’s in favour of unilateral charges
Many people’s walk to the polling station on 6 May will be spiced up by the prospect of playing a part in Gordon Brown’s removal from 10 Downing Street. Many people’s walk to the polling station on 6 May will be spiced up by the prospect of playing a part in Gordon Brown’s removal from 10 Downing Street. Each voter will have their own favourite gripe: the pensions heist, the debt, the failure in schools, the catastrophic mismanagement of the financial system, the scandal of welfare ghettoes. The sheer scale and variety of Labour’s failures may impel voters to remove the party from office, but this reason to vote Tory
The News of the World has its expensive and much-awaited ICM poll of the marginals tomorrow. There is some good news for Cameron, and some not-so-good news. First: 66 percent of voters in the marginals agree with the message “it’s time for change”. Bad news: a surprisingly large number think that Nick Clegg represents that change. A Lib Dem surge means that Tory swing is just 6 percent in the marginals, versus 5 percent nationally. Where is the Lord Ashcroft magic? In James’s political column this week, he says the Tories had been so confident about the marginals that they reckon they need a 5-point lead nationally to win, rather
Why vote for Cameron? The reasons for voting against Gordon Brown are so numerous that the positive pro-Tory reasons for voting are often lost. This week’s Spectator gives you all the ammo you need to win around wavering friends, colleagues and family. We have restricted ourselves to the ten most compelling points. I summarise them below: 1. School reform. In itself, it’s enough reason to vote Tory. Gove has specifically promise that within four years of a Tory government everyone will have an independent school offering to educate their kid for free. This should have been a 1981 Tory proposal, but Keith Joseph lost a battle with the civil service
This morning, we’ve already seen the two primary attacks which will be used against the marriage tax break outlined by George Osborne in the Times today. The first came courtesy of Vince Cable, who said it represents a “derisory” sum of £3 a week for those who benefit from it. And the second was from Ed Balls – who else? – who labelled the policy as “discriminatory,” because it doesn’t cover every married person, and nor does it account for couples who split. Or as he rather suggestively put it: “if your husband beats you up and leaves you you get no support.” One thing worth noting is how the
James Forsyth reviews the week in politics When a party loses an election, recriminations follow. But when it wins, an argument that is often as vicious breaks out over why it triumphed. This debate matters because, as Winston Smith knew, he who controls the past controls the future. The Tory party is preparing for such an argument right now. Those on the right are gearing up to say that it was the tax cut wot won it; while the so-called modernisers counter that the tax cut was illusory — and that the victory is a result of abandoning the old Tory tunes. That the Tories are preparing for this argument