David cameron

Tories who say that Cameron is making ‘no difference’ underline the coalition’s communications failure

You should take note when Benedict Brogan, an influential and widely sourced journalist who has been very close to the Cameron and Osborne operation over the years, writes of the fire-sale of Cameron shares. He says in today’s Telegraph that Cameron’s party view him as a ‘lame duck’ who makes ‘no difference’. This is an extraordinary claim for disaffected Tories to make. True: the economy is mired and the government has tied itself to only one course of action. There have also been disasters at the department of health; and energy policy ought to be giving Number 10 an enormous headache. But Cameron’s coalition is changing the landscape of education and

David Cameron’s immigration speech fails to capture the imagination

This morning’s papers have followed the lead of yesterday’s TV news bulletins: the prime minister’s immigration speech was not the success it might have been. The Times is lukewarm (£). The Guardian is suspicious. The Mail is derisive. And our own Douglas Murray is contemptuous of a speech which merely stated the ‘utterly obvious’. Yet again, the government has failed to convince the media. Part of the problem is that the numbers are inconclusive. The Guardian has built on yesterday evening’s BBC news reports, which claimed that only 13,000 migrants from that part of the EU have claimed JSA since 2009. This contrasts with Mr Cameron’s concerns about a widespread ‘something for nothing’

Cameron sticks to the script at the ’22

David Cameron has just delivered his end of term address to the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers. The Prime Minister made little news apart from going out of his way to praise Maria Hutchings, making clear he had no truck with efforts to blame her for the party’s poor performance in the Eastleigh by-election. He stuck to the same messages that he had when addressing the parliamentary party the other week, one backbencher left complaining ‘we’ve heard it all before.’ But what should cause some concern Number 10 is how few MPs turned up to hear the Prime Minister. The audience was estimated at between 80 and 100, less than

Douglas Murray

Despite the fanfare, David Cameron still isn’t doing anything on immigration

Well, it was right not to expect much. The full text of David Cameron’s speech on immigration is here but it can be summarised in one sentence: ‘mass migration has brought some good things, but it has also brought problems so here is some tinkering we propose.’ There are so many problems when our politicians speak on this subject. Not least is that they expect to be congratulated for saying the utterly obvious. For instance, most British people worked out a long time ago that those of us who already live here ought to have priority in housing over people who have just arrived. We also worked out some time

Isabel Hardman

What Tory backbenchers want on immigration, and what the PM can give them

David Cameron knows that immigration is an issue that bothers voters, and that the mainstream parties have snubbed it in recent years to their detriment. So his speech today is partly an attempt to regain ground from UKIP, which fought a campaign in Eastleigh that was all about immigration, bringing every gripe back to that. He also knows, as I explained on Friday, that Tory MPs are preparing for the first dedicated Commons debate on Bulgarian and Romanian migrants, and he wants to take some of the steam out of that by announcing clear measures to reduce the ‘pull factor’. Those measures, which the Prime Minister will detail in a

Migrants debate looms as PM prepares immigration speech

It’s not just Nick Clegg who is having a good long think about immigration at the moment: David Cameron is as well. He’s got a big immigration speech on Monday, which shows how spooked the parties are by UKIP that they feel they need to at least address the topic, even if they insist that they’re not adopting Nigel Farage’s terms of debate. As he writes his speech, Cameron will probably have in mind the looming problem of how many Romanian and Bulgarian migrants are coming to this country when transitional controls lift at the end of 2013. If he doesn’t, he should, because that backbench debate from Mark Pritchard

The Spectator’s Notes | 21 March 2013

There is supposed to be a Leveson Part II, although everyone has forgotten about it. As well as telling him to look into everything bad about newspapers (‘Please could you clean the Augean stables by Friday, Hercules’), David Cameron also asked Lord Justice Leveson to investigate who did what when over phone-hacking. This was postponed because of the forthcoming criminal trials, but I mention it because it is a reminder that things are back to front. Normally when you have an inquiry, you first work out what happened and then you work out what to do about it. Leveson is the opposite, hence the resulting chaos. The problem is particularly

Alex Massie

Referendum Spin: Beware the Tory Bogeymen!

So we have our date with destiny. Scotland will march to the polls nine days after the 501st anniversary of the Battle of Flodden. September, 18th 2014. There are fewer than 600 days to go. And already the spin is starting. Stephen Noon, that smart nationalist strategist, is first out the blocks with a post asking who would stand to benefit from a No vote? His answer should not surprise you. Noon thinks David Cameron’s own re-election campaign will be boosted if Scotland says no to independence: Labour and Tories may share a platform and campaign together before the vote, but as soon as the votes are counted there would

PMQs sketch: Everyone talks about nothing, while no-one listens

Let’s have a breather. It seemed like a truce had been tacitly declared between the party leaders at today’s PMQs. Instead of going on the offensive, Cameron and Miliband turned their solemn and unified gaze towards the sorrows of the eastern Mediterranean. Miliband asked about Syria. Cameron used the opportunity to take a pot-shot at the EU, still agonising over the arms embargo. Their sluggish and dithersome talks, he said, reminded him of the hesitation that caused needless bloodshed in Bosnia. Cameron wants the rebels to get tooled up pronto and to finish off the appalling Assad regime. He called it ‘hateful’ three times, just be sure. Next the EU

Budget Day: should our times really be called ‘the age of austerity’?

It is Budget Day. Prepare for another barrage of “messages” about the virtues or perils, depending on your point of view, of ‘austerity’. From where has this ubiquitous term come? And should it apply to our times? Dot Wordsworth, our language columnist, has some answers: ‘If we are invited to think we are experiencing austerity, despite the heaps of cheap clothes in Primark or expensive food in Waitrose, then it is Mr Cameron’s doing. In April 2009, not so long ago, at the Conservative spring conference (that needless enterprise) he promised an ‘age of austerity’. In the same speech he promised a ‘People’s Right To Know’, a plan under which

Number 10: Cameron was awake and available throughout the negotiations

A senior Number 10 source tells me that David Cameron was awake and available throughout the Leveson negotiations. They also point out that Nick Clegg left the meeting at 11.30pm, before the crucial business was done. On the Hacked Off point, they insist that Oliver Letwin ‘very politely’ asked them to leave the room for the sensitive part of the discussions. I’m told that Cameron then chaired a 6am conference call on the result of the negotiations where he declared himself satisfied. He feels that he’s avoided a press law. Downing Street is bristling at the idea that they got the worst end of the deal. They argue that Hacked

Isabel Hardman

Press regulation: Ceci n’est pas une statute

The party leaders should finish their discussions on Leveson – by phone – in the next hour or so. We’ll then get a statement in the Commons on the outcome of those talks, and it’s highly likely that all three leaders will speak as part of that statement. But the big debate now is whether what they have signed up to already constitutes the statutory underpinning that David Cameron was so very keen to avoid. There are two amendments to two different pieces of legislation relevant to press regulation: one on the Crime and Courts Bill on exemplary damages, and one to the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill which prevents

Afriyie fails the interview test

The Adam Afriyie leadership speculation has now got to the point where he’s been interviewed by Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics. His first big broadcast interview as a potential leadership candidate was always going to be a big test for Afriyie and he failed to impress today. Afriyie, who looked like he’d been heavily coached for the encounter, failed to properly answer the questions put to him or to make a case for any alternative vision. He was even unprepared to say whether or not he supported means-testing pensioner benefits. On the whole question of his own ambitions, Afriyie was hugely unconvincing. Moments after declaring ‘I have no ambition

David Cameron tells Tory Spring conference: Our battle is with “socialist” Labour

The Tories know that if the next election is a referendum on the current government, it’ll be very difficult for them to win. But if it is a choice between them and a Labour government, then they are in with a good chance. David Cameron’s speech to his party’s Spring Forum today ends with a list of what a Labour government would do in its first 100 days in office. It shows how keen the Tories are to frame the next election as a choice, not a referendum, that Cameron is prepared to publicly contemplate defeat to do this. Interestingly, there’s no mnetion of the Liberal Democrats or the coalition

David Cameron brings Leveson debate to a head over bill hijack fears

Those involved in the Leveson talks from the Labour and Lib Dem side say they had no idea the Prime Minister was going to pull the plug on the cross-party discussions this morning until a conference call shortly before David Cameron’s hastily-arranged press conference. An angry Lib Dem source tells me: ‘It was completely out of the blue to be honest. Over the last few days the talks have been making gal progress and we were moving towards a deal. We thought a solution was possible. There were other things we war pushing for, such as some form of statutory underpinning to protect the Royal Charter from future political interference.

PMQs sketch: Nothing changes, yet everything is different

There comes a moment in a PM’s journey when he crests the ridge and starts on the downhill leg. David Cameron made that unhappy transition today. PMQs began with a gag from a Labour backbencher. Tom Blenkinsop: ‘The prime minister may believe there’s no alternative to the double dip. But some in the cabinet believe there is an alternative. To him!’ Cameron replied by listing his usual trinity of attainments. Lower deficit, more jobs, interest rates at record lows. Then Ed Miliband had a go. Instead of raising an issue, he went for Cameron’s reputation. ‘Given the government’s U-turn on alcohol,’ he said, ‘is there anything the prime minister could

Isabel Hardman

PMQs: David Cameron flails as Tory backbench stays glum

Today’s Prime Minister’s Questions was not a good one for David Cameron, but it could have been a great deal worse. With a U-turn on minimum pricing on the cards and open dissent in the Cabinet and on the backbenches, the PM arrived knowing he’d have his back up against the wall, even though Ed Miliband has struggled to make effective attacks on big issues in the last few weeks. The Labour leader had some good jokes, too. His opening line – ‘in the light of his U-turn on alcohol pricing, can the PM tell us, is there anything he could organise in a brewery?’ – was particularly good, and

Alex Massie

David Cameron won’t debate Alex Salmond because televised debates are for losers.

The standard assumption about political debates is that the campaign with most to gain in all in favour of them while the candidate presumed to be the front-runner wants nothing to do with them. Franklin Roosevelt refused to debate Wendell Wilkie in 1940, LBJ refused to debate Barry Goldwater in 1964 and, four years later, Richard Nixon (perhaps recalling his experience in 1960) declined to debate Hubert Humphrey. Indeed, you can argue that the modern American practice of Presidential debates might not exist at all but for the weakness of the position in which Gerald Ford found himself in 1976. As matters stand, I suspect there will be some reluctance

Tory loyalists strike back

Lynton Crosby spoke to Tory MPs this evening about the imporance of party discipline. With the Chief Whip in the chair, meetings of the Tory parliamentary party are normally fairly loyalist events. Tonight’s was no exception and with David Cameron and Lynton Crosby in attendance there was an even greater incentive to good behaviour. I’m told that James Morris, who sits for a West Midlands marginal, earned cheers when he implored colleagues to remember that when they sound off, they hurt those like him who are trying to cling on to their majorities. Kris Hopkins, the no nonsense leader of the 301 Group, complained about ‘self indulgent buffoons’ who keep

Isabel Hardman

The Tory leadership needs to make MPs feel valued, not stop them tweeting

Lynton Crosby is holding his election strategy meeting (first revealed on Coffee House) with Tory MPs at 5.30 this afternoon. One of the things he’ll bring up, as reported by Benedict Brogan this morning, is that MPs need to be a little less unruly on Twitter. Obviously that’s not their biggest worry, as there’s also the problem of MPs coalescing around different future leadership contenders, who are all thinking ahead to what will happen after the 2015 leadership election. I understand from friends of Adam Afriyie that their campaign has managed to stop seven or eight letters asking for a leadership contest to oust David Cameron going to 1922 Committee