Coalition

Winning in 2015

Danny Finkelstein’s column in The Times today (£) is well worth reading. Finkelstein sets out two worries, first that the Tories do not have enough of a strategy for winning re-election and second that the NHS reforms might compromise Cameron’s standing as a different kind of Tory. On the latter point, Finkelstein is echoing the views of an increasing number of Tory MPs and ministers. They worry that these poorly understood reforms have put the NHS back on the political table and that, as is so often the case when this happens, the Tories will suffer. Finkelstein’s first worry is that if the government sets out deficit reduction as its

PMQs live blog | 26 January 2011

VERDICT: Ed Miliband had it all, going into today’s PMQs: weak growth figures, the uncertain demise of control orders, rising youth unemployment, and more. And yet, somehow, he let most of it go to waste. Barely any of his attacks stuck – or, for that matter, stick in the mind – and Cameron rebuffed them with surprising ease. It helped that the Prime Minister seemed more comprehensively briefed than usual, with a decent compliment of statistics, and one or two sharp lines, at his disposal. (Although, measuring by the Labour cheers, I doubt he will thank Jacob Rees-Mogg for invoking Thatcher immediately after his exchange with the Labour leader.) In

From control to surveillance

Like husband, like wife. Yvette Cooper has begun shadowing Theresa May where Ed Balls stopped: by lacerating Nick Clegg’s naïveté in believing that control orders should be abolished. There is a faint note of animus in her politicking too. ‘National security,’ she said, ‘should not be about keeping Nick Clegg safe in his job.’ The government invited Cooper’s charge with its own crass political calculation. Spinning the new measures as a Liberal Democrat victory could only elicit that response from an opposition that is intent on exploiting the government’s broad weakness on law and order. In fact, as Lord West has remarked, the government has not even come close to

Why our national debt went up by £1,300 billion today

It’s not just the growth figures, you know. Today, the Office for National Statistics also released its latest estimates for the state of the public finances. Among the headline findings was a crumb of consolation for the Treasury: it is on track to meet its borrowing target for the financial year. But that’s by the by when compared to this other snippet from the ONS release: our national debt went up by £1,300 billion in December. Don’t worry, though – it’s not really as terrible as all that sounds. What’s happened is that the human calculators have finally worked out how to account for Lloyds and RBS on the public

Call in a bulldozer for growth

As the coalition considers how to develop a growth strategy, it would do well to call in Paddy Ashdown and hear about the ‘Bulldozer Initiative’ he launched while in Bosnia working for the United Nations. Not a highway programme, the Bulldozer Initiative was instead one of the smartest pro-business schemes I have seen. And something like it is now needed here. The brainchild of a French businessmen and based on the ideas of Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto, it involved building a partnership between politicians and businessmen to identify specific legislation and regulations that prevented companies from expanding their businesses and creating more jobs. The steering committee, made up of

Ed Balls: I don’t think a double dip is the most likely outcome

And this, folks, is a day where Ed Balls is having his cake and eating it too. Not only is he basking in the grim light of the growth figures, but he is using the opportunity to recast his own stance on the economy. Speaking on the Daily Politics just now, he de-emphasised the argument that in-year cuts were to blame for today’s numbers, instead claiming that people have “changed their behaviour in anticipation of what’s coming in the future.” And, more ear-catching still, he added: “I don’t think [a double dip] is the most likely outcome.” This, as Fraser suggested earlier, is surely necessary caution on Balls’s part. He

Does it matter what the government is called?

Danny Finkelstein has written an interesting post objecting to Channel 4 referring to the ‘Conservative-led coalition’ last night. Finkelstein’s objection, and a valid one to my mind, is that ‘Conservative-led’ makes a judgment about the nature of the coalition. Of course, this whole spat has been set off by a clever letter from Ed Miliband’s communications director Tom Baldwin to broadcasters objecting to their use of the word ‘coalition’ to describe the government on the grounds that it implies that the government is a collaborative enterprise. I suspect that this whole row will rumble on for a while yet. It is tempting to dismiss the whole thing as absurd, as

The government must continue to liberalise Europe’s market

For a long time, the terms of Britain’s Europe debate has been about the merits – or otherwise – of membership. This has occluded discussion about the need to promote a deregulated and economically liberal single market, for which the Conservatives have fought so successfully since Britain joined the then EEC in 1973.   Now Lord Brittan has shown the way. In a speech to Business for New Europe, he takes aim at the many illiberal practices that hamper economic development across Europe and hurt British business: “Portugal still has rules governing the minimum distance requirements between driving schools; and in Greece, directors of dancing schools need to live within

The coalition needs to address bonuses

Much ado about bankers’ bonuses this afternoon. Tim Montgomerie reports that the proposed banking deal has run aground in Whitehall. The timing is inconvenient: Cameron and Clegg are due to fly to Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. The government hopes to allay public resentment by coercing banks into increasing their lending; which is also a crucial part of its nascent growth strategy. It adds to the impression that the government is failing to make progress in any other realm than cuts. For the time being, Tory spinners are content to distract attention by telling anyone that will listen about Ed Balls’ record on bank regulation and boundless enthusiasm

Sexism is a red-herring; it’s family that matters

I’m afraid that women have been faking it, having us men on. You see they understand the offside rule and always have done. How could they not? It’s so simple that even a brace of abject football pundits know that an actively involved player is offside when he is closer to the opponent’s goal line than both the ball and the second-to-last defender, but only if he is in his opponent’s half of the pitch. Messrs Keys and Gray may not be too sharp on interpretation – unlike the ‘young lady’ (£) they berated – but they’re smoking hot on the theory. So do me a favour love and drop

DD’s classy intervention

David Davis’ interview on Jon Pienaar’s show this evening has revived the debate about whether or not it matters how posh the Cameron top table is. Andy Coulson was the most senior person there who understood what it is actually like to work your way up the ladder and with him gone that experience is missing. But what matters far more than the personalities involved is the policy outcomes. As I said in the Mail on Sunday, the most important thing for Cameron to do is to deliver for these voters. To cut their taxes and give them public services that offer them value for money. One other thing worth

Re-introducing Ed

We already knew Ed Balls was behind Gordon Brown’s economic policy. He devised the policy on spending that left Britain with the worst deficit heading into the crisis, and wrote the bank regulations that his colleague Douglas Alexander attacked earlier today.   What we have discovered today, from Balls’ first foray into economic policy as Shadow Chancellor, is that he was also behind the old Brown ploy of twisted facts and absurd assertions.   First, he claimed the public finances are better than the Treasury forecast. Yet the independent Office for Budget Responsibility found that the structural deficit – the hole we have to fix – was worse than Labour

James Forsyth

Sizing up the runners and riders to replace Coulson

I suspect the identity of the Prime Minister’s next director of communications is of far more interest to those who work in Westminster than those in the country at large. But the identity of Coulson’s successor will reveal something about the balance of power in the coalition and at the Cameron court. I’m told that the Tories are in no rush to make the appointment, they’d rather take their time and try and find the right person. Despite what Nick Clegg said on Marr this morning, I’m informed that this will be very much a Tory-run selection process. Those in the know say that as with the Coulson appointment, George

Fraser Nelson

Exposing the con man

  To the chagrin of CoffeeHousers, I have long rated Ed Balls and his abilities. He has a degree of brilliance, albeit tragically deployed in the services of a destructive economic agenda. But as we welcome him back, it’s worth reminding ourselves that his abilities are of a specific type. He understands economics (even though he did PPE) but his speciality is in creative accounting. His only tactic is to spend, borrow and cover both up by cooking the books. He is a trickster, not an economist. More Arthur Daley than Arthur Laffer. In my News of the World column today (£) I say he is dangerous to Labour as

Hague hasn’t lost his mojo

There has been no shortage of depressing news for the Tories lately. But, the other day, Benedict Brogan wrote a lengthy post about William Hague that must have made particularly unpleasant in-flight reading for the Foreign Secretary as he jetted around the South Pacific. It argued that: “In his absence – and even when he is back in Britain – Mr Hague is the subject of a whispering campaign among his colleagues, who say that the spark of ambition has died in his heart, and with it his effectiveness as the front man for the nation’s diplomatic effort. The Foreign Office has got its mojo back, just when Mr Hague

Why Coulson’s departure matters

Courtesy of the ConHome tag team of Paul Goodman and Tim Montgomerie, two articles that are worth adding to your Saturday reading list. Both capture why Andy Coulson’s resignation matters, if not to the general swell of British politics, at least to internal operations in Coalitionville. The wider argument of Paul’s article for the Guardian is captured by its headline: “Andy Couslon had a nose for the view of the aspirational voter.” But it also homes in on the point that Coulson’s departure tilts No.10 in favour of Steve Hilton – something that, rightly or wrongly, will bother the Tory right far more than it does Lib Dems of any

And what about the Lib Dems?

After the gales of recent weeks, the past few days must have been relatively blissful for the Lib Dems. No fake constituents with hidden dictaphones. No massive student protests. No especial focus on their opinion poll ratings. But, instead, a mephitic heap of problems, or at least embarrassments, for Labour and the Tories. Warsi, Johnson, Coulson, even EMAs – Clegg & Co. have been spared the worst of it. Which isn’t to say that the Lib Dems will be unaffected by recent events. For instance, as Paul Goodman suggests, Andy Coulson’s departure unsettles the delicate balance of the coalition – and that will always have ramifications, however minute, for the

The Coulson story won’t be buried – but will it matter?

There’s not much chance that the Andy Coulson story will be buried in tomorrow’s newspapers. Blair’s appearance at the Chilcot Inquiry will scatter a handful of earth across it, as will AJ’s travails. But it’s not as though people outside the Westminster bubble will fail to notice all this. Watching the 24 hour news channels now, it’s all Coulson, Coulson, Coulson. In which case, this is bound to inflict some damage on the government in the short term. The public is not inclined towards liking, or trusting, spin doctors. And Andy Coulson leaving Downing Street through a fug of phone-hacking allegations will not do anything to change that. Questions will

Coulson’s resignation statement

Here’s Andy Coulson’s resignation statement: “I can today confirm that I’ve resigned as Downing Street director of communications. It’s been a privilege and an honour to work for David Cameron for three-and-a-half years. I’m extremely proud of the part I’ve played in helping him reach No 10 and during the coalition’s first nine months. Nothing is more important than the Government’s task of getting this country back on its feet. Unfortunately, continued coverage of events connected to my old job at the News of the World has made it difficult for me to give the 110% needed in this role. I stand by what I’ve said about those events but