David cameron

Wednesday

Daniel Korski

The Wei forward for the Big Society

The Big Society was dealt another blow with the resignation of Lord Wei yesterday. Sceptics will see this as a vindication of the concept’s problems. Most people, however, won’t notice that he has gone. The debate about the Big Society has long since become an elite sport, a jousting match between a determined promoter — the Prime Minister — and equally determined detractors in the media. Most people don’t care, and it won’t help or hurt the Tories at the next election. That’s a shame. For the Tories could use a positive post-Thatcher narrative about their administration. They may not need it if the country returns to economic growth. But

Peter Hoskin

Cameron and Obama’s mutual appreciation has its limits

And the Word of the Day is “we”. Both David Cameron and Barack Obama deployed it liberally in their joint press conference just now, as they ran through all the mutual pleasantries and backslapping that attends these events. “We have discussed the two things we care about the most,” flushed Cameron, “getting our people jobs, and keeping our people safe.” From there on in it was first name terms — “thank you, David” — and claims about the strength of our two countries’ special, essential, unique relationship, etc. With the sun blazing down on the garden of Lancaster House, I’m sure the photos will turn out nice. Cameron appeared to

James Forsyth James Forsyth

A good day for Cameron

Today is one of those days when David Cameron gets full political benefit from being Prime Minister. He is basking in the president of the United States’ reflected glory. The papers this morning are full of him playing table tennis with Barack Obama and tonight’s news bulletins will lead on their joint press conference at lunchtime. As Cameron stands next to Obama, he’ll look both a statesman and a centrist. It’ll be hard for Labour to attack Cameron as an extremist on deficit reduction when he keeps stressing how he and Obama agree on a sensible level and pace to get their budgets heading back into balance. There are, obviously,

Peter Hoskin

The Tory divide over European bail-outs

As Obama and Cameron played table tennis yesterday, a considerably more furious game was being waged between the government and Tory backbenchers. It related to a Parliamentary motion tabled by Mark Reckless – and described here – that sought to stem UK involvement in any future bailouts for eurozone countries. All well and good, you’d think, until a rival amendment percolated down from on high to dilute Reckless’s proposals. This new amendment would only go so far as to “urge the Government to raise the issue of the [bailout mechanism] at the next meeting of the Council of Ministers of the European Council”. The green benches were set for a

Tuesday

James Forsyth

A good time to go

Today is, as the saying has it, a good day to bury bad news. With President Obama on the ground and an ash cloud in the air, not much else is going to get a look in on the news’ bulletins. But it is worth noting that Nat Wei, the government’s big society advisor, has quit his role today having scaled back his involvement in February. Wei has been pretty detached from Downing Street for the last few months, his role rather usurped by Cameron’s big society ambassadors, Shaun Bailey and Charlotte Leslie. So his departure won’t make much difference to the government. But it is still rather embarrassing as

David Blackburn

A coup for the Tories?

The Tories are cock-a-hoop about the defection of UKIP MEP David Campbell Bannerman – positively crowing, in fact. “There’s nothing more satisfying,” said one CCHQer, “than UKIP suffering.” Activists and MPs alike reckon that the Conservatives could have won a majority last May if it weren’t for UKIP in the south-west. Vengeance is sweet, but is it of lasting importance? Campbell Bannerman has used a blog post to justify his action: David Cameron is an inspiring leader and an avowed eurosceptic. Perhaps it will become a salve for the right, increasingly seen as Cameron’s blind spot. Equally, the answers Campbell Bannerman gave to Total Politics’ Amber Elliott could be used

David Blackburn

An especially businesslike relationship

The ash cloud nearly claimed its first victim last night: Barack Obama had to leave Ireland early in order to fly to Britain. The Palace’s insistence on protocol has been upset and the President’s entourage has been advised not to risk the tap water; other than that, all is well. However, the visit has set sceptical tongues wagging. Some diplomats wonder why the President is here. Afghanistan, the Middle East, joint national security and the world economy are on the agenda, but there is no unifying theme to discussions. Some ideologues fear that the eternal bond between Britain and America is relaxing into a union of convenience. On the other

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

The austerity hasn’t started yet

Another month, and another all-time record for state spending in Britain. The government splurged £1.8 billion a day in April — of which £332 million a day was borrowed. Up goes the national debt. All of which leaves us with the question: where is this austerity that George Osborne keeps talking about? He’s been in No.11 a year now, and each month state spending has been — on average — 4.9 per cent higher than the same month under Gordon Brown. He seems to be taking the St Augustine approach to fiscal conservatism: Lord, give me spending restraint. But not yet. The below graph shows state spending, per month. The

Daniel Korski

Stop Gordon Brown

Gordon Brown’s friends have launched a shameless effort to compel the government into nominating him for the IMF post. The government would be mad if they did. Mad. This is not about petty score-settling, as yesterday’s Evening Standard would have it. This is about qualifications to lead, and the former Prime Minister, despite his intellect, does not have those skills. He led the country to ruin and remains in denial about it: he saved the world, don’t cha know. The UK should be smarter about using talent from across the House, but there are limits. And it is a bit rich for the ex-PM’s friends to argue that David Cameron

Monday

Fraser Nelson

Cutting through the BS

If the Big Society were a horse, it would be shot. The wounds are too deep, the contamination too great, its legs are broken. And, worse, the Big Society is giving a good idea a bad name. David Cameron tried manfully today, but we only ever hear about the BS (as most Tory MPs call it) when he’s trying to relaunch it. No agenda can be sustained with such thin support. It has become hopelessly confused as an issue. Myths have crept in that volunteering relies on heavy state spending, so Cameron is talking out of his hat. It ain’t so — Jonathan Jones did the digging — but people

James Forsyth James Forsyth

What the attorney general needs to do

I’m sure that all CoffeeHousers know who the footballer is with the super injunction preventing newspapers from publishing anything about his affair with the Big Brother contestant Imogen Thomas. But if you didn’t, the papers would have made pretty odd reading over the past few days because the press keeps making little in jokes that are only funny if you know the player’s identity. David Cameron this morning announced that he knew the identity of the player.  This highlights one of many ironies of the situation, which is that far more people are now aware of who the errant footballer is than would have been if the news had just

Peter Hoskin

Going big on the Big Society

You certainly can’t fault David Cameron for his perseverance. Six years after pushing the thinking behind the Big Society in his pitch for the Tory leadership, and three relaunches of the idea later, he is still at it in a speech today. He will, apparently, stress that the Big Society is not some nebulous nothingness — but, rather, “as gritty and as important as it gets”. And as if to underline the point, the PM will announce some solid new measures to bolster his grand projet, such as £40 million of extra funding for volunteering. Cameron is, I suspect, making this case for two main reasons: to counter criticism of

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

More thoughts on Cameron’s Cabinet of the undead

CoffeeHousers raised some very good points about my post on Cameron’s undead ministers. I thought I’d reply in a post, rather than the comments thread. 1. About the ‘undead’. Cameron leads a radical government of surprisingly competent people: the ambitious tasks of welfare and school reform are testimony to how far he is moving. Cameron’s policy is to delay a reshuffle for as long as he can. While Blair did reshuffle a lot, he tried his best not to do so to satisfy the media headlines. This is when the concept of undead ministers first arose. You’d have people like Geoff Hoon in defence and Stephen Byers in transport, who

Sunday

Daniel Korski

Cathy Ashton beats UK ministers to Bengazi

EU foreign policy Tsar Catherine Ashton has come under a lot of criticism, much of it unfair and/or put forward by those who want the EU to supplant the member-states. In this piece, I have tried to defend her. I argue that her realistic take on the EU’s role is in the UK’s interest: the last thing London needs is someone who ignores member-states to build an independent foreign policy. And she has managed to get Europe’s SAHEL policy in a better shape, worked closely with William Hague and Guido Westerwelle to coax Serbia into negotiations with Kosovo and helped to solve, at least for the moment, a crisis in

David Blackburn

A special relationship | 22 May 2011

The visit of President Obama on Tuesday has not yet inspired rapid British soul searching about the ‘special relationship’, not by comparison to David Cameron’s trip to America last July at any rate. After an awkward beginning, the Obama administration has been at pains to stress that America’s alliance with Britain is inviolable even in a changing world. The administration’s deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said “there’s no closer ally for the US than the UK” last week. But like all close alliances, the two parties have their differences. The Sunday Telegraph reports on a strategic divergence in Libya, where Britain apparently wants greater American leadership and the US

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Cameron should cleanse his Cabinet of the undead

Chris Huhne “cannot be sure” whether he might, after all, have been driving his car that fateful night. Ken Clarke cannot be sure why he spoke about rape in that way. Andrew Lansley cannot be sure. All this we learn from the Sunday newspapers: three ministers are for the chop — it’s just a matter of time. They will sit in the Cabinet death row alongside Caroline Spelman, unforgiven for her handling of the forests fiasco, and Vince Cable, caught on tape boasting about his “nuclear option” of resignation. This makes no fewer than five dead men walking — and that’s before you think about the party chairmanship. As I

Friday

James Forsyth

Brown hasn’t contacted Cameron or Osborne about IMF job

‘Brown makes pitch for IMF job with plea to rich nations to meet education pledges’ reads the headline on page 3 of The Guardian today. This is all part of a growing body of evidence that Gordon Brown really does think he is in with a chance of succeeding Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Certainly, the usual suspects are out and about talking up his chances. Realistically, Brown is not going to get the job. But if Brown really does want to have a go, it is bizarre that he’s not tried to contact either David Cameron or George Osborne to reassure them about how he’d behave if he got the job; Danny

Peter Hoskin

Miliband tries to explain himself

As the weekend drifts closer, there is a case that Ed Miliband has just enjoyed his best week as Labour leader. Not really from anything he has done — although his PMQs performance had more vigour than usual — but thanks to the backwash from the Ken Clarke calamity. MiliE’s spinners could barely have dreamed, even a few days ago, that their man would gain the the fiery approval of The Sun on matters of law and order. But that is effectively what they gained yesterday. “Labour is now tougher on crime,” bellowed the paper’s leader column, “than our Tory-led government.” Even today their editorial laments, “so much for David

Thursday

James Forsyth

Clarke for the high-jump

Dominic Grieve’s fate as shadow Home Secretary was sealed by a lunch at News International headquarters in Wapping. Grieve went to lunch with various Sun executives and rather than talking tough on crime he laid into the paper for how it covered the issue, claiming that it stoked fear of crime. The word then came back to Tory high command, via Andy Coulson, that the paper would not endorse the Tories as long as Grieve remained in that job. He was duly replaced by Chris Grayling in the ‘pub-ready reshuffle’ of January 2009 after less than a year in the job. So one can only imagine how Downing Street feels

Wednesday

Daniel Korski

Keeping the States interested

David Cameron has a good relationship with Barack Obama, which will be on display when the US president visits Britain shortly. They speak regularly and frankly and their senior advisers are in near-constant contact. The idea that the Lib Dems would foist a more “Love Actually” policy onto the coalition has come to naught. Yet Britain’s influence in Washington has waned. This is no fault of the Prime Minister. In fact, his personal diplomacy has probably slowed-down the process. Instead it has to do with structural changes in the US: the coming to power of a “pacific” President, the importance of US-China ties, the emergence of the Tea Party. As