PMQs live blog | 18 January 2012
PMQs 18 January
David cameron
Wednesday
What Boris Island tells us about Cameron
He already has his bikes and his buses, but might Boris get his island too? Today’s Telegraph reports that David Cameron is going to announce a consultation into building a new airport in the Thames estuary, as was first proposed by the London Mayor. The PM will wait until that consultation is over before making a final decision, but he’s said to be ‘provisionally supportive’ of the plan at the moment. Nick Clegg, by the sounds of it, is more provisionally negative. Even the very prospect of Boris Island is a triumph for the Mayor, and not least because Cameron and George Osborne were previously opposed to it. It also
The new politics of leaning on business
Ed Miliband the consumer champion, the saviour of the squeezed classes. That, more or less, is how the Labour leader has always sought to sell himself — but this morning the sales pitch goes into overdrive. He has an interview with the Daily Telegraph in which he attacks ‘Rip-off Britain’. Not the TV show, mind, but those companies that hammer their customers with extra costs and hidden charges. Excessive savings fees, car-parking charges, airline levies, bank charges, consumer helpline costs and energy bills; all these should come to an end, says Miliband. And he has a few measures for achieving that. What strikes me, when reading the interview, is how this
Monday
A Cameron-friendly backbench group
The 301 Group is the nearest that David Cameron has to a loyalist backbench support group; it is named after the number of seats the Tories will need at the next election to win a majority. The Times today reports the group’s concerns that the Tories are in danger of forgetting the importance of a broad agenda that goes beyond the party’s staple issues. I suspect that several people in Downing Street will nod along at these concerns. The group has certainly been encouraged by Number 10, which has difficult relations with the 1922 Committee. Its early speakers have included the chief whip Patrick McLoughlin and the vice-chairman of the
Friday
The hypocrisy of Cameron’s Saudi trip
A year ago, Tunisian strongman Zine El Abidine Ben Ali fled Tunisia for Saudi Arabia, thus ushering in the Salafi Spring. No doubt now bored out of his mind, this once stubbornly secular leader is said to have caught religion of the deranged Wahhabi variety propagated by his oil-rich hosts. In turn, the Saudis are preparing to welcome Rachid Ghannouchi – the notoriously humble leader of the even more notoriously moderate Ennahda that now controls Tunisia’s parliament – on a state visit. This week Ghannouchi has been heaping praise on the Persian Gulf monarchies, doing us all the favour of revealing where his true sympathies lie when it comes
Hague’s misplaced optimism
William Hague has an article in the Times today arguing against what he refers to as the ‘pessimism’ of those who have expressed concerns about the direction of the ‘Arab Spring’. As somebody who cannot see the virtue of either optimism or pessimism as policy, and preferring facts to moods, I think the Foreign Secretary’s central points should be answered. Particularly as he chose so injudicious a day to publish his piece. Mr Hague’s argument against pessimism is that ‘such pessimism misses the extraordinary opportunities that popular demand for freedom and dignity bring’. Certainly the government of which Mr Hague is a part is not missing any opportunities. Today David Cameron is
IDS must stay the course on welfare reform
Welfare wars are erupting again, with Iain Duncan Smith’s bill amended in the Lords and more showdowns ahead. Number 10 has been completely robust, threatening to use rarely-invoked powers to overrule the Lords. In my Telegraph column today, I say why it’s so important that David Cameron does not go wobbly – as his predecessors did. Tony Blair understood the need for radical welfare reform, especially when his idol Bill Clinton introduced it in America. Listening to his speeches in the mid-90s is heartbreaking: he had precisely the right idea, but lacked the determination to implement it. Frank Field was asked to ‘think the unthinkable’, but when disabled protesters
Cameron hints at child benefit taper
David Cameron’s comments to The House magazine on child benefit are causing quite a stir this morning. The Telegraph splashes on the PM’s line that ‘Some people say that’s the unfairness of it, that you lose the child benefit if you have a higher rate taxpayer in the family,’ he said. ‘Two people below the level keep the benefit. So, there’s a threshold, a cliff-edge issue.’ ‘We always said we would look at the way it’s implemented and that remains the case, but I don’t want to impinge on the Chancellor’s Budget.’ I suspect that what Cameron means by this is that they are looking at a taper. When one
Thursday
Uncivil service
Political cultures differ. In Iran, for example, hyperbole is expected in all political conversations. So slogans always call for ‘Death to the US’, and nothing less. In Britain, of course, the use of language is more even-tempered, but other rules apply. Blaming the civil service for failure is considered OK, but charging an individual official, even a Permanent Secretary, for the same is considered off-limits. If a minister were to try it, then he’d be accused of trying to pass the buck on towards defenceless officials. But, as Camilla Cavendish points out in today’s Times (£), failure is often also the fault of senior officials who, despite problems in the
Signal failure | 12 January 2012
The latest Spectator is out today, and it contains an article by William Astor that attacks the government — and, by extension, David Cameron — over their decision to proceed with HS2. Given that it’s causing quite a stir across the news agenda, we thought CoffeeHousers might like to see it for themselves: Rail privatisation by the Major government heralded the largest growth in passenger numbers in decades. This was down to improvements in service and a timetable to suit passengers, coupled with some attractive fare offers. But future growth of rail travel is unlikely to be at the same high rate and there we have the nub of
More Mili-woe
It gets worse for Ed Miliband in the polls today. After revealing last week that just 20 per cent of the public think he’s doing well as Labour leader, YouGov now find that only 17 per cent think he’d make the best Prime Minister. That’s his lowest score yet, and it compares to 41 per cent for David Cameron. But the way those numbers break down may be even more worrying for Ed. Only half of current Labour supporters say he’d be the best PM, and a minority — just 43 per cent — of 2010 Labour voters pick him. By contrast, Cameron has the backing of 97 per cent
Wednesday
Why Ed Miliband’s PMQs slip-up matters
The exchange about rail fares in PMQs earlier was, it’s true, not one for the photo album. But the way it’s resolved itself this afternoon has been considerably more diverting. You see, it turns out that David Cameron was right: Labour did arrange for these fare increases when in government. And, what’s more, Ed Miliband was wrong: the coalition didn’t ‘reverse’ the cap on fares that Labour then conveniently introduced in the run up to the general election. That cap was limited to one year by the Labour government itself. It was always intended that it would expire on 1 January 2011, at which point — barring a new cap
Ed Miliband lives to flop another day
Miliband survives! That news should steady Labour nerves. For today at least. Their leader has the knack of turning near-certain defeat into absolutely-certain catastrophe, but he bumbled through PMQs this afternoon without suffering a serious setback. He has so little ground from which to attack the government that he had to lead on a niche issue. Rail fares. He asked the prime minister why the operating companies have managed to hike prices by 11 per cent on the busiest routes. Cameron: ‘Because of a power given to them by the last Labour government.’ With that lethally terse response the PM sat down. To his credit, Miliband wasn’t rattled. But
A fairly bland PMQs
Today’s PMQs was rather a bland affair. Ed Miliband started with three questions on train fares that David Cameron batted away, but there is a little row brewing over whether Cameron’s claim that he is simply continuing the policy of the last government is correct. Later, Miliband moved onto the safe territory of the Union and consensus broke out with only the half dozen SNP MPs dissenting from it. Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, then asked the PM a question that, in a preview of the SNP’s campaign tactics, was designed purely to get the words Cameron, Thatcher and Scotland into the same sentence. There were two other things
PMQs live blog | 11 January 2012
PMQs 11 January
Will Miliband use his lifeline in PMQs?
At the weekend, Tories were anticipating giving Ed Miliband an almighty kicking at PMQs. Lord Glasman’s description of Labour’s economic record as ‘all crap’ had given them a killer line. As one member of the Cameron circle joked to me, ‘we’ve never had more material to work with.’ But Ed Miliband now has a get out of jail free card. If he asks six questions about the Union and the referendum, it will be impossible for Cameron to have a pop at him without looking distinctly unstatesmanlike. On Scotland, the two leaders need each other. The Unionist side cannot win without the Labour party and the Labour party will
Tuesday
Salmond’s running rings around Cameron
Edinburgh If anyone had any doubts why Alex Salmond picked up almost every UK political award going last year, then they should study how he has dealt with the referendum issue this week. At every turn he has out-manoeuvred his UK counterparts — and this was perfectly demonstrated tonight. Earlier today, in the Commons, Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, had delivered the UK government’s riposte to the SNP’s referendum plans. Mr Moore was considered, clever and smart. In fact, it was a first cogent and effective strike back by the UK government on this issue for more than a year. But what will lead tomorrow’s papers in Scotland? It won’t
The battle for Britain | 10 January 2012
So, Alex Salmond has named his date for the independence referendum: August 2014, a few weeks after the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn. David Cameron wanted it earlier, and may yet refuse to grant Salmond this date — No10 hasn’t yet responded. Cameron was forcing the issue on the grounds that he wanted to end uncertainty — Salmond is now offering certainty, at least in terms of timing. But he hasn’t said whether he wants a two- or three-question referendum. This is crucial, because Salmond is likely to lose an independence referendum and he knows it. So his game plan will be to have a third option, a consolation prize,
Miliband tries to get his message heard
Ed Miliband is trying to do something interesting today. He is attempting to answer the question, ‘what’s the point of Labour when there’s no money left to spend?’ This is the problem that Miliband has been grappling with since winning the leadership and there’s no easy answer to it. It seems that today Miliband will give us more of a sense of the ‘new economy’ which he wants to see in this country. The test of the speech will be whether it gets beyond generalities about a long-term vision for an economy that is ‘fairer’. The challenge for Miliband will be to make his subtle message heard above the chatter
Monday
Cameron’s balancing act over Scotland
The Cabinet is meeting about 5 miles away from Downing Street today, at the Olympic Park in Stratford. But its collective mind will be on a patch of land another 270 miles further on still. Yep, Scotland and Scottish independence are the matters at hand today. According to the Beeb, David Cameron and his ministers will discuss their ideas for the referendum, its content and its timing. It’s thought that they may allow a referendum that’s binding on the UK government – but only so long as it takes place in the next eighteen months, and offers a simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ vote on independence. You can understand Cameron’s thinking
