Conservative party

Sunday

James Forsyth

Readying the bombardment

Westminster might be in holiday mode, but behind the scenes the coalition is preparing to take on the new Labour leader. As I say in the Mail on Sunday, the coalition is determined to hit whichever Miliband wins early and hard. The Cameroons believe that Tony Blair’s decision not to attack Cameron straight away in 2005 was crucial in allowing him to present himself to the public on his own terms. By contrast, both Hague and Duncan Smith were made to look like losers by the Labour attack machine within months of becoming leader of the opposition. The result of the Labour leadership election will be announced on the 25th

Peter Hoskin

The return of Alan Milburn

Frank Field, John Hutton and now Alan Milburn – the red tinges to the coalition mix are like a Who’s Who of reforming Labour politicians. Milburn, we learn today, is to return to government as an adviser to David Cameron on social mobility. It’s a role he should be accumstomed to, as he was tasked with writing a report on the issue under Brown. That time, his suggestions were buried by a government which didn’t want to face up to the sorry facts. This time, you hope they meet with a more constructive response. But why wasn’t a Conservative (or conservative) appointed? That’s the question which Iain Dale asks over

Saturday

James Forsyth

The coalition’s university challenge

The contours of an agreement on how to pay for university education are clearer today after Rachel Sylvester’s interview with David Willetts. Up-front fees look to be on the way out.  Willetts tells Sylvester, ‘It’s very important that it’s signaled very clearly that the money that is paid back comes out of your earnings once you have graduated and are in work.’ It also seems that different courses at different institutions will have different prices. Willetts proclaims that he wants something that ‘links you to your university and the course you did at that university.’   So far, this looks like simply collecting variable fees through the tax system. But the

Friday

Peter Hoskin

What can Green achieve?

Handbags across Whitehall this morning, as Vince Cable responds to the government’s appointment of Sir Philip Green as an efficiency adviser in a disgruntled, if evasive, manner. He tells City AM: “There’s a lot I could say on this, but I’d better miss this one out … I’m tempted to comment, but I think I’d better not.”   And it’s clear why the Business Secretary, and many others, might be a little peeved. A hard-partying, perma-tanned, rotund and ostentatious figure, with question marks hanging over his tax status, Sir Philip is simply not designed for this age of austerity. He is nothing like the cadaverous technocrats who usually sift through

Wednesday

David Blackburn

To Labour’s successors…

Following this morning’s coalition press conference, the Tories’ have released this video: Labour’s Legacy. It’s effective, especially in view of Labour’s continued refusal to acknowledge that Gordon Brown did to Britain what Peter Ridsdale did to Leeds United, albeit on a grander scale.

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The coalition gets political

The joint Tory Lib Dem press conference to attack Labour’s legacy was a sign of how comfortable the two parties are becoming together. Chris Huhne and Sayeeda Warsi’s message was that the ‘unavoidable cuts that are coming are Labour’s cuts’ and that Labour is ‘irrelevant’ until it admits its responsibility for the deficit. The message was essentially the one that Chris Huhne and Michael Gove set out at the political Cabinet at Chequers last month. In a move that is bound to generate some headlines, Warsi has written to those Labour leadership contenders who were ministers asking them to forfeit their severance pay and to ask the ex-ministers supporting them

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

The questions surrounding Cameron’s benefit crackdown

There were hints of toughness in his article at the weekend, but now David Cameron has rolled up his shirt sleeves and pulled out the baseball bat. In a combative piece for the Manchester Evening News the PM outlines out a zero tolerance approach to welfare fraud and administrative error. The two problems “cost the taxpayer £5.2 billion a year,” he says, “that’s the cost of more than 200 secondary schools or over 150,000 nurses. It’s absolutely outrageous and we can not stand for it.” And so IDS is going to prepare “an uncompromising strategy for tackling fraud and error,” which will be published this autumn.    Two things are

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

The Treasury’s cutting difficulty

Among the most eyecatching, and potentially important, stories of the day is this one in the Telegraph. It suggests that various departments have “failed” to outline a “worst case scenario” of 40 percent cuts that was demanded by the Treasury. And it even names and shames Caroline Spelman’s Department for Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs as one of the offenders. Mrs Spelman, we’re told, has now “been forced to use the time before her holiday to work up the projections with her officials and permanent secretary.” Nothing like a last minute job, then. To be fair to Whitehall civil servants, there is a general sense that they have set about

Peter Hoskin

Will Hughes succeed in stirring up trouble over Right to Buy?

Simon Hughes led the angry response to David Cameron’s thoughts on social housing, and now he’s stirring it up again. In an interview with the South London Press – picked up by Sunder Katwala over at Next Left – the Lib Dem deputy leader has attacked the Right to Buy, saying that local councils should decide whether to offer it or not. Given the Thatcherite roots of the policy, there’s a firecracker quality to Hughes’s comments: lobbed into the debate, and designed to provoke the Tories. I’m not sure the Tories will be too perturbed by Hughes’s intervention, though. Of course many of them are proud and supportive of Thatcher’s

Peter Hoskin

The politics of the Lib Dem conference

It’s only gesture politics, but sometimes gestures matter – which is why the Tories are thinking seriously about dispatching a party envoy to the Lib Dem conference in September. The idea, naturally, is to cement the bonds of friendship between the two sides, as well as to suggest that the Tories are happy to mix it with the wider Lib Dem party. But there’s a problem: that wider party doesn’t seem eager to play along. As soon as there were rumblings that Cameron might speak at their conference, they slapped the idea down with the unswerving efficiency of an executioner. And they’ve done similar today in response to reports that

Friday

Robert Halfon MP

Democracy in the BBC

What is that quote at the end of King Lear?  I think it is something like “the wheel has come full circle”. I felt a sense of that wheel with the announcement by Mr Miliband yesterday that the BBC should be democratised and become some sort of mutual co-operative. I have been campaigning for democratisation of the BBC licence fee for a while now, first writing about it on ConservativeHome in 2008 and most recently tabling an Early Day Motion, only a couple of weeks ago. Inevitably a few brickbats were thrown. My idea was loftily dismissed when I suggested it to BBC staff and Danny Finkelstein called it the

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

Cable, Cameron and speaking out in public

For the foreseeable, Vince Cable is going to be a political barometer figure: journalists and other innocent bystanders will sift through everything he says to check the temperature of the LibCon coalition. In which case, they’ll find little to excite or worry them in his cool interview with the Newcastle Journal today. The Business Secretary says all the right things about staying his role for the full five years (“that’s my intention, yes”) and about the internal dealings of the coalition (“it works in a very business like way”), even if he does quash the idea of a full merger between the two parties. It’s all unsurprising, uncontroversial stuff. Indeed,

Peter Hoskin

Why Gove’s school reforms could go further

The latest issue of the magazine is out today and, with it, all of the articles from last week’s edition have been made available online to non-subscribers. Among them is Toby Young’s column which raises some important points about, and criticisms of, Michael Gove’s school reforms. Toby, if you hadn’t heard, is working to set-up a free school himself – so he’s very much operating at the coalface on this, and his thoughts deserve attention. In which case, here’s the entire article for CoffeeHousers’ benefit: It has been described as the most radical overhaul of the school system since the introduction of comprehensives. Ed Balls condemned it as ‘the most

Peter Hoskin

The battle over IPSA enters a new phase

MPs have never really got along with the new expenses body, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. But now their mood towards it seems to have become even frostier. I imagine that IPSA’s three-month anniversary, and the rather complacent-sounding celebrations that accompanied it, are something to do with that. Tom Harris’s wonderfully acerbic Birthday message, from a couple of days ago, captures how many MPs feel about the whole affair. In letters to the Telegraph today, Michael Fabricant and Denis MacShane ratchet up the attacks on IPSA. And while many will not see them as the ideal poster boys for a rebellion against an expenses watchdog, it’s worth remembering that they

Wednesday

Andrew Haldenby

What you need know ahead of the Spending Review – Health

With this autumn’s Spending Review set to be one of the most important moments in the life of the coalition government, Coffee House has linked up with the think-tank Reform to investigate what could – and should – be in the final document. This first post, by Reform’s director Andrew Haldenby, is the first in a series of “What you need to know” summaries, looking at each of the main policy areas – in this case, health. Other posts will cover specific policies, examples from abroad and Reform events. We’re delighted to get the ball rolling… What is the budget? The NHS is the biggest public service budget in England

Peter Hoskin

Bring on the debate about social housing

David Cameron did say that his proposal to end council houses for life would trigger “quite a big argument” – and that is exactly what he has got today. The Lib Dems’ Simon Hughes has offered the most vociferous dissent so far, stressing that this “in no way represent the policy of the coalition and certainly do not represent the policy of the Liberal Democrats.” And, to be fair, he has a point: the idea had not gone through coalition channels before Cameron mooted it yesterday, and neither was it contained in the Tory manifesto – so there still needs to be a lot of conversation and consideration before anything

Peter Hoskin

The equality landmines that Labour have left the coalition

Oh dear, the Treasury is mired in another controversy about equality after the Guardian published a letter which Theresa May sent to George Osborne before the Budget. In it, she warned that the government could face legal action if it is unable to show that its decisions were made with a consideration to “existing race, disability and gender equality duties.” As she puts it: “If there are no processes in place to show that equality issues have been taken into account in relate to particular decisions, there is a real risk of successful legal challenge by, for instance, recipients of public services, Trade Unions or other groups affected by these

Peter Hoskin

How tightly are the Lib Dems bound to the Tories?

A thoughtful and thought-provoking column from Danny Finkelstein (£) in the Times this morning, which is well worth a trip beyond the paywall to read. In it, he makes a persuasive point: that, despite their plunging poll ratings, the Lib Dems aren’t doing too shabbily at all. After all, who, looking back at the party’s recent history, would have thought they would be in power in 2010? That they are suggests, in Danny’s words, that “this is not not the bottom for the Lib Dems, it is the top.” From there, an important point is made against those who still contend that the Lib Dems would have been better off