David cameron

David Cameron is using the Olympics today to strike a more upbeat tone after yesterday’s GDP gloom. The Prime Minister is speaking at 10am at a global investment conference to pitch for business from 180 chief executives from around the world. Cameron will tell the conference that he is ‘determined that Britain will be on of the great success stories’ in rebuilding its economy, and will say: ‘There will be no more passionate supporter of Team GB than me. But I’ve got a job to do this summer. And a big part of that job is to get behind British business… and do everything I can to help secure the

Downing Street confirmed today that the Prime Minister will meet US Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in Downing Street this week. It sounds like a sensible plan, given Romney is so close to Obama in the polls at present. But there’s just one tiny little problem. I have, in my shorthand notes from a lobby briefing on 5 March 2012, a quote from the Prime Minister’s official spokesman, which says the following: ‘As a general rule we do not meet candidates in foreign elections.’ Then the spokesman was talking about David Cameron’s failure to meet François Hollande, who was in Britain while campaigning against Nicolas Sarkozy for the French presidency.

The report published this week by Louise Casey, the Government’s ‘Troubled Families’ Tsar, has attracted a fair amount of criticism, but what it does illustrate is the chaotic lives these families lead – and the implausibility of thinking that their problems can be solved by the kind of flagship social policies traditionally favoured by either Conservatives or Labour. As Isabel put it, Conservative ‘reform of the welfare system will pass many of the families by. In these stories there is no calculated decision to opt out of the labour market because of generous benefits, more an endless failure to cope with life and the way it has worked out’. Likewise,

Europe, as everybody knows, is one of those issues on which a Tory leader needs to pay particular attention to the words he uses. This makes David Cameron’s behaviour in recent weeks all the odder. First, we had that Brussels press conference in which Cameron sounded rather too enthusiastic about the EU for his own side’s tastes. This was followed by his Sunday Telegraph piece in which he stressed that ‘the two words “Europe” and “referendum” can go together’ for him. Now, those close to Cameron complain that the two positions were perfectly compatible and that in the first instance he was quoted selectively. But given the importance that it is attached

With Parliament heading off for recess, politics will — barring some unforeseen event or the Eurozone crisis moving into one of its acute phases — be dominated by the Olympics for the next few weeks. David Cameron will be hoping that the global CEOs arriving in town will bring some good investment news with them. Boris Johnson, meanwhile, will revel in the global media attention. Indeed, Boris is already demonstrating an ability to brush off the organisational hiccups that other politicians can only envy. But most ambitious Tories will spend the summer thinking about the reshuffle, currently pencilled in for the third of September ahead of a Tory parliamentary dinner

The coalition is doing pretty well, thank you very much. In case last week’s rebellion of the 91 on Lords reform and continuing tensions over Europe had you fooled, up pops the Prime Minister this morning with a soothing comment piece in the Sunday Times.  David Cameron tries to shrug off Lords reform within three paragraphs of his op-ed. ‘What’s far more significant is that we are working together on so much else – and after last week, it’s vital that everyone reminds themselves of that fact,’ he argues. As part of his health-check piece, the Prime Minister details signs that the coalition is functioning well. When he mentions the

Have the Tories’ manoeuvres over Lords reform signalled the end of the coalition? In this week’s magazine, our leader argues that Tuesday’s rebellion shows that Tories are back in full force, while James Forsyth writes that a coalition break-up date before 2015 is now not a case of if, but when. But Nick Clegg is not the only party leader to suffer from Tuesday’s Lords revolt. In this week’s View from 22 podcast, recently-resigned PPS Conor Burns MP accuses David Cameron of not appealing sufficiently to his own party: You see this so often when you watch interviews on television – someone speaking for the coalition, you see someone speaking

The post-match analysis of last night’s vote on the House of Lords Reform Bill shows the Prime Minister has a bigger rebel problem on his hands than he might have initially thought. It is true that there is a significant hardcore within the Conservative party of rebels who happily defied the whip on the other big rebellion of this Parliament – October’s vote on holding a referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Union. But that group only accounts for 57 per cent of last night’s rebels. The 81 in October did not simply increase by 10 to 91 last night. The table below shows that there were 39 MPs

‘Shouldn’t we just go home?’ the SNP’s Pete Wishart asked Sir George Young this evening after the Leader of the House revealed the government was dropping its programme motion on the House of Lords. ‘You know it’s all over. They know it’s all over,’ he added. But they didn’t go home, and the Commons has just voted in favour of the second reading 462 votes to 162. Early reports suggest that there were 86 Conservative MPs who defied the whip, which would make this the biggest rebellion in this parliament. Nick Clegg paused from trying very hard not to grimace on the front bench to cheer as Mark Harper told

There’s long been a certain amount of speculation in Westminster about how long the coalition will last. This topic used to be the sole preserve of those who were sceptics of it; it was a question hoping for the answer not that long. Enthusiasts for coalition, took it as a given that it would last to 2015. But today Matthew Parris, one of the commentators who has been most welcoming of the coalition, writes, ‘I’m close to despair and no longer confident that the coalition can continue even into next year.’   When even the coalition’s friends are saying this, then it is time for the Prime Minister and deputy

‘What do you think David Cameron stands for?’ a Tory MP asked me recently. Unsure of his point, I burbled something about ‘responsibility’ and couple of other random abstract nouns. The MP shook his head grimly. ‘No,’ he said. ‘I’ll tell you what David Cameron stands for.’ I leant forward, intrigued. ‘David Cameron stands for being Prime Minister.’ It turns out that this MP isn’t the only one who thinks this way about Cameron’s motives. A survey of ConHome readers, published today, found that 50% believed he was only interested in being Prime Minister and did not have a strong vision for the country. The list of questions the site