David cameron

In many ways, today showed this current Parliament and the Prime Minister at their best. David Cameron hadn’t brought Flashman with him to Prime Minister’s Questions today in any case, but for his statement on the Hillsborough tragedy, he adopted a solemn and respectful tone. The whole chamber was still, save for sharp intakes of breath from MPs as horrifying findings from today’s report from the Hillsborough independent panel were read to them. The worst was that many more – possibly 41 –  lives could have been saved had the response to the disaster been adequate. ‘Anyone who has lost a child knows the pain never leaves you. But to

Treasury questions is one of the more entertaining spectacles on offer in the Commons. There’s the standard banter between George Osborne and Ed Balls – today we saw the Chancellor dub his opposite number ‘the member for Unite west’, with Ed Balls noting in his reply that at least he’d only been heckled by a few trade unionists rather than the entire Olympic stadium. There were new ministers to welcome too: Greg Clark received such a warm cheer that he joked he felt ‘like Boris Johnson’. But the centrepiece of the session was – along with the confirmation that the Autumn Statement will take place on the rather wintery date

The stock Cameroon line on Boris has always been that he might be a rival to George Osborne, Michael Gove, Phillip Hammond, Grant Shapps and other future leadership contenders, but he isn’t one to David Cameron. This line, though, is becoming rather tenuous. For it is becoming clear that the London Mayor isn’t thinking about a Tory leadership election as some far-off, distant event. Certainly, the assiduousness with which he and those around him are reaching out to those left feeling bruised by Cameron’s reshuffle suggests a desire to build a support base for a rather more imminent contest. There have been attempts today to laugh off Zac Goldsmith’s offer

We haven’t yet seen precisely who has been appointed as a PPS following the reshuffle. But I understand that Downing Street has decided that those who defied the whip on the EU referendum motion will be considered for the jobs. However, no one who rebelled on the House of Lords will receive preferment. I suspect that there are three reasons for this. First, the talent pool is simply too small if you rule out anyone from either group of rebels. Second, this is meant to show the Lords rebels that there is a way back for people who rebel on one big issue. Finally, given the Prime Minister’s evolving views

I’m coming to the conclusion that the character of the Cameron government is the inversion of the Brown government. During the dying days of New Labour there was a snarling, socially dysfunctional Prime Minister whom most of the electorate found deeply unappealing. But around Gordon Brown was a group of Cabinet ministers who were really pretty impressive and, well, normal. Alistair Darling, Jacqui Smith, James Purnell, Andy Burnham, Ruth Kelly (remember her?), Alan Johnson, Yvette Cooper: these are all people who it was possible to imagine having  a chat or a drink with in the local pub (or perhaps wine bar).  I could go on. The inverse is true with

Has David Cameron’s reshuffle been a move to the right, a rearrangement of chairs on a sinking ship or will it make no difference at all? On this week’s View from 22 podcast, Fraser Nelson provides his take on what the reshuffle says about the future direction of Cameron’s premiership: ‘I think we’ve seen David Cameron stamp his authority on the government. This is a very unusual government, because it’s very close at the top and very loose at the bottom. You did have a situation where the coalition had started to become more warring groups than joint partners. David Cameron has sent in strategically placed shock troops to try to

It was straight back into the old routine at PMQs today. Ed Balls heckled the Prime Minister who shouted back, John Bercow managed to call several of the MPs who irritate the Prime Minister most, and Cameron was, perhaps, slightly ruder to Ed Miliband than he had been intending to be. Miliband’s attack, followed up by several Labour backbenchers, was that no one should believe Cameron’s new initiatives on housing, infrastructure and planning given that the PM’s previous, much heralded initiatives on them have not delivered. The point is debatable. But Cameron responded, as he so often does, with a slew of insults — some clever, some not so. He

Say this for David Cameron’s autumn reshuffle: it hasn’t unravelled as quickly or spectacularly as George Osborne’s last budget. Hurray for that. But nor has it been deemed a grand success. See Telegraph writers here, here and here for evidence of that. If you want to make a difference – that is, if you wish the general public to sit up and think, By Jove, he’s finally got it – you need to defenestrate an admiral or two. A reshuffle that leaves the Great Offices of State as they were cannot pass that test. Which means, I’m afraid, that only sacking George Osborne would have made this a memorable reshuffle.

In Tampa, the Republican conference has heard a line of powerful speakers talk about government debt in compelling and urgent way. There’s a contingent of eight Tories out there, led by party chairman Sayeeda Warsi, but I doubt they’ll be taking many notes. The finely-honed attack lines that the Republicans are coming out are more use to Labour than to the Tories. Take the below, from Paul Ryan’s speech on Wednesday. ‘They’ve run out of ideas. Their moment came and went. They were elected in the middle of a crisis, as they constantly remind us, but they’re now making it worse. They have added £11,000 of debt for every man,