Conservative party

Downing Street’s bureaucratic burden

Do head over to ConservativeHome, where Tim Montgomerie has put together a comprehensive guide to the revamped Downing Street operation. I won’t spoil its considerable insights here, except to highlight this: “An analysis of papers sent to Downing Street and the Cabinet Office has revealed that just 40% are directly related to the Coalition’s programme. Roughly 30% come from the Whitehall bureaucracy and another 30% from the EU.” James makes the point in his latest politics column that Tory ministers are becoming more and more Eurosceptic as they face the EU in government. That pile of European directives in the in-tray must just be getting too much.

Three reasons why David Cameron should get involved in the No to AV campaign

Over at Comment Central, Danny Finkelstein has written a post saying that it might not be in the best interests of the No campaign for Cameron to campaign heavily against AV. His argument is that the No campaign’s best hope is to run as a spiky, anti-establishment effort. I think this is true but that the No camp has rather forfeited this chance by appointing Margaret Beckett as its president and having a former Labour MP front its launch. If the No campaign is going to be use so many politicians as spokesmen for it, it might as well have one of the most able ones involved. Second, and most

How far will Cameron go to break the state monopolies?

Call it the Big Society, decentralisation, people power, whatever – but David Cameron’s vision for society just became a good deal more concrete. In an article for the Telegraph this morning, the Prime Minister makes a quite momentous proposal: that there ought to be a new presumption towards diversity in public services, whereby the private, voluntary and charitable sectors are as privileged as the state is now. Or as he puts it: “We will create a new presumption – backed up by new rights for public service users and a new system of independent adjudication – that public services should be open to a range of providers competing to offer

Cameron’s back is against the wall – now he must fight

Given that David Cameron will have a tougher fight than perhaps any postwar Prime Minister other than Thatcher, it’s a bit unfortunate that his team doesn’t like political combat. Losing to Rachel Johnson over forests last week exposed major weaknesses, and sent a message to the government’s enemies: that these guys have pretty poor political combat skills. Now word is out, the cuts protests in Liverpool today will be the first in a series of challenges. Cameron, too, is stung by the avoidable mistakes of the last few weeks – and is reshaping No.10 to account for them. Some changes are great, some less so, others downright worrying. Here’s my

Bad banking

No wonder the banks like Britain’s corporation tax regime. This morning’s newspapers all tell that Barclays paid just £113m in corporation tax in 2009, despite making profits of more than £11bn. In a rare instance of justified anger, Labour’s chosen men have launched an attack on the government’s failure to ‘take the robust action needed to make sure that the banks which caused the crash pay their fair share, and will stick in the stomachs of small businesses struggling to borrow and ordinary people feeling the pinch of the government’s austerity measures.’ Whatever the absurdities of Labour’s position, this news will ‘stick in the stomachs’ of the little people, whose

Cameron and Clegg, head to head

Now here’s a shock: something to trump the relentless tedium of the Cricket World Cup. The AV referendum. Labour MP Jim Murphy held his constituency surgery in a large supermarket today and it was well attended, but no one asked about the referendum. Murphy ruefully tweeted: ‘the public are so out of touch with today’s politicians.’ But it is odd, or at least it should be, that the nation’s second ever plebiscite has inspired only indifference; then again, electoral reform is not a subject to quicken the pulse. Even the campaigners are resigned to expect scant enthusiasm for their cause. The campaign is days old and already its emphasis has

The government has been weak over forests

A very dangerous precedent has been established today over the forest fiasco. Caroline Spelman earlier gave the most extraordinary interview on Radio 4’s PM. “We got it wrong,” she said in the Commons. “How so?” asked Eddie Mair. She wouldn’t say. As he kept asking her, it became increasing clear that she didn’t think they got it wrong. They conducted the U-Turn because they were losing the media war.   Really? Is that all it takes to defeat Cameron’s government? A decent two-week campaign with a couple of celebs? The forest policy was a good one: why do we need state-run timber farms? Not that this argument was ever aired.

James Forsyth

In the AV referendum, either Clegg or Cameron has to lose

Tomorrow both Clegg and Cameron will give speeches on AV, Clegg for and Cameron against. They’ll be very civil about their disagreement. But the truth is that one of them has to lose in this vote and the loser will have a very unhappy party on his hands. As Steve Richards points out in The Independent today, there’s been a lot more talk of the consequences for Clegg of AV going down than of what happens to Cameron if it passes. But Cameron would have almost as many problems if it passes as Clegg would if it failed. Fairly or not, a large number of Tory MPs will blame Cameron

Laws’ return is imminent

Tomorrow’s New Statesman speculates that David Laws is about to return to government. Kevin Maguire reckons that it is significant that Laws is turning down invitations to events after an unidentified date in mid-March. Laws is still awaiting the verdict of the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, but he is expected to be exonerated. Preparing for a return to government, he has been writing sharp columns in defence of the coalition’s economic policy and expanding into future policy areas like the 50p rate and increased spending on the pupil premium. But Laws has also been keeping close to Clegg in recent months, tasked with building a strategy for the next election –

Lloyd Evans

The Tories’ secret weapon

Too much time at the barbers. That’s the opposition’s problem. Ed Miliband showed up at PMQS today after a long morning lounging in the chair having his hair coiffed and burnished. His darkly gleaming scalp now looks like the kind of thing toffs scrape their boots on after a morning’s shooting. And that’s precisely what the Prime Minister proceeded to do with him today. With no time for a strategy meeting beforehand Ed had just grabbed a list questions from the last PMQs-but-three.   He began by having a go at Cameron on youth unemployment. But we know how Cameron deals with that one. Been a problem for decades, old

Parliament is not sovereign

Enough is enough. The British Bill of Rights is set to return: a consequence of the government’s running battle with parliament over the European Convention on Human Rights. Recent days have been filled with clues and suggestions of imminent reform: Dominic Grieve, a former advocate of the ECHR, went so far as to assert that Britain may leave the convention. Cameron let slip the news that a Bill Of Rights commission is to be convened at PMQs; at the time he was answering a question about the Supreme Court’s controversial sex offenders’ register decision. There are no details as to what the commission will consider, but Theresa May aired the

James Forsyth

Cameron breaks from the norm at PMQs

PMQs today contained a rare moment: the Prime Minister admitting that he wasn’t happy with government policy. Ed Miliband, who split his questions up this week, asked Cameron if he was happy with his position on forestry and Cameron replied, ‘the short answer to that is no.’ The answer rather drew the sting from the rest of Miliband’s questions on the topic. But it was a rather embarrassing admission for the PM to have to make.    Cameron made quite a lot of news at the despatch box this week. He accused Manchester City Council of making “politically driven” cuts, said that more regulations needed to be scrapped and announced

More trouble for the government over the military covenant

The news that serving soldiers have been given notice by email has been met fury from ministers. Liam Fox has answered questions in the House about this story and why 100 RAF pilots discovered they were redundant in yesterday’s newspapers. Fox was both livid and contrite, decrying the ‘completely unacceptable’ practices and reiterating the MoD’s ‘unreserved apologies’. He announced that an internal inquiry has been called, which Patrick Mercer believes will expose negligence among those officers who manage personnel. Fox also conceded that the sacked pilots, many of whom were ‘hours from obtaining qualification’, cannot be retained in some form of volunteer reserve, such is the squeeze on the MoD.

The AV referendum hasn’t captured the public’s imagination

It is odd to think that in just a few months we’ll be having only the second nationwide referendum in our history and no one is particularly excited about it. This is largely because the plebiscite is on AV, an unloved voting system that is a half-way house between first past the post and a proportional system. (Just imagine the level of conversation there would be if the vote was to do with Europe not electoral reform). At the moment, the yes side has a growing lead in the polls http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3115. But, given the vast number of undecideds, this could change very quickly. The No campaign, though, will have to

Why work experience matters more than ever

In my recent BBC2 documentary, Posh & Posher, I explained how networking and contacts played a crucial role in giving those with the right connections an early leg up in their careers. Internships and work experience are proving increasingly crucial to opening doors and opportunities in later life. Many have expressed the view that the best intern and work experience opportunities in fields like politics, finance and the media are going disproportionately to those who are already privileged and well-connected. From what I’ve seen myself in recent years I suspect that to be true. The Mail on Sunday gives a classic example (and a potentially embarrassing one for the Tories) of how it

Conservatives and Prisons: A Study in Contradiction?

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, asks a good question: When it comes to education, pensions, health care, Social Security, and hundreds of other government functions, conservatives are a beacon for fiscal responsibility, accountability, and limited government — the very principles that have made this country great. However, when it comes to criminal-justice spending, the “lock ’em up and throw away the key” mentality forces conservatives to ignore these fundamental principles. With nearly every state budget strained by the economic crisis, it is critical that conservatives begin to stand up for criminal-justice policies that ensure the public’s safety in a cost-effective manner. He’s writing about the United States where these problems are

Today’s battlefield

Today’s PMQs threatens to be overshadowed by the statement on Project Merlin, the government’s deal with the banks, expected at one o’clock. I suspect that Cameron will try and push away any questions on banks with the line that Miliband should wait for the Chancellor’s statement. But PMQs will still be a far livelier affair than last week’s one. Watch to see whether Miliband tries to attack Cameron for hurting the Big Society. Miliband has moved Labour away from ridiculing the idea to embracing it and saying that ‘Tory cuts’ are the threat to it. This is all part of Labour’s strategy to try and ‘recontaminate’ the Tory brand. But

What’s Labour’s alternative to the Big Society?

After a difficult few weeks for the Big Society, culminating in Liverpool’s nakedly political ‘withdrawal’ from the vanguard projects, Peter Oborne has already drafted an obituary for the Conservative’s policy agenda.   As Oborne says, the Big Society goes to the heart of this government’s reason for existence, and its (real or perceived) failure would damage the Conservatives. But it’s notable Labour has yet to come up with an alternative to the Big Society, or even a substantive critique of the idea. The problem for Miliband is that the Big Society agenda captures the centre ground of social policy – neither pro nor anti-state – and risks sidelining his party.

A good team with good policies

When the Tories were in opposition, non-aligned friends used to complain to me that the party’s front bench was unimpressive. Labour politicians had walked the political stage for more than a decade; many were household names, while the Tories were unknown. But eight months in and Labour’s top team is a largely unknown entity, with even its few ex-Ministers looking decidedly smaller without their briefcases, officials and government-issued cars. The Tory front bench, meanwhile, is the one looking serious and worthy of power. There is William Hague, a brilliant parliamentarian and that even rarer beast: a well-liked politician. Though currently suffering from a little newspaper criticism, he is seen as

Fraser Nelson

The laddie is for turning

In opposition, one of David Cameron’s strengths was the speed at which he dumped bad ideas. But, now, he is starting to acquire a habit for U-Turns – especially those called for by minor celebs. We’ve seen Scottish school milk, NHS Direct, BookStart, school sport – and soon, I suspect, forests, World Service cuts and (the biggie) NHS reform. A depressing pattern is emerging: anyone with a decent two-day campaign and a splattering of celebrities can probably force a concession out of the government. I make this case in my News of the World column (£) today. Here is a summary of my main argument. 1. Cameron seems to be