Labour party

We don’t quite know what Ed Miliband would really do about a lot of things just yet: this is the year when he plans (and desperately needs) to set that out so Labour isn’t just an Opposition that complains about things being expensive but a party that voters can imagine governing. But it’s significant that one of the policy areas where Miliband has felt it is important to get a lot of detail out pretty early is immigration. He, and everyone around him, is acutely aware that though their personal instincts might be to argue for the benefits of mass immigration to this country, the voters, rightly or wrongly, aren’t

Alex Salmond might not wish to be compared to Gordon Brown but there is one sense in which the two dominant Scottish political personalities of the age are more alike than either would care to acknowledge: they each love a good dividing line. In Edinburgh yesterday Salmond announced that all pupils in their first three years of primary school would henceforth be entitled to a free school lunch. This, he claimed, would save parents £330 a year per child. A useful benefit for those parents whose offspring do not currently qualify for free meals; a means of ending, the First Minister suggested, the stigma presently endured by those children who

Ed Miliband did vow to ‘relentlessly’ focus on the cost of living crisis facing hardworking families up and down the country (hopefully someone will develop a shorthand outline for this rather lengthy saying to save the pens of journalists who have to write it down repeatedly at launch events over the next 12 months) in 2014. So we should have expected this relentless focus to see Miliband’s shadow ministers pointing angrily at every expensive thing that they can find, regardless of whether it’s particularly heart-rending. Today we heard Luciana Berger thundering that David Cameron is so evil that he’s putting people off their new year’s resolutions. Yes, for all those

Yes, Eric Joyce, the MP for Falkirk until the next election, has issues. Yes, his copy book is well blotted. He has a conviction for assault which scarcely reflects splendidly upon him (even if many members of the public themselves wouldn’t mind sticking-the-heid on any number of MPs) and in his dozen or so years in Westminster he has made energetic use of his parliamentary allowances. Yes, yes, yes. But I have some time for almost anyone declared “unfit to stand for the Labour party”. It’s a kind of character reference. Moreover and despite his troubles, Joyce possesses many of the qualities we should desire in our parliamentary representatives. Chief of

Ed Miliband’s housebuilding announcement today is rather a re-heated announcement of his conference pledges on housing. Eric Pickles has already set out on Coffee House his belief that these new ideas are ‘more of the same high-tax and top-down policies that led to their housing boom and bust’. The announcement certainly allows for a bit of a knockabout between the two parties, neither of which has much to boast about when it comes to housing, but there’s one point that’s worth noting about the Labour leader’s announcement today. Over the past few months, the party’s Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary Hilary Benn and policy review chief Jon Cruddas have

This week’s Mail on Sunday carried two stories on the same page about immigration. Perhaps unwittingly the two stories — and one man in particular — demonstrate the craziness of this country’s immigration debate. One story was about a Conservative party candidate at the 2010 election who has defected to UKIP. Her ex-husband has released a video made while she was a Conservative candidate saying stuff about sending illegal immigrants and failed asylum seekers back home. The second story is about a Labour party pollster who tweeted sarcastic comments about Labour voters who express concerns about immigration levels. Perhaps unfortunately for him the Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi (who I once heard speak

Generally when someone says they ‘couldn’t give a toss’ about something, you can safely bet more than 50p and a cake that it’s the most important thing ever to them. So when Ed Balls told Sky’s Murnaghan programme today that he ‘couldn’t give a toss’ about speculation that Ed Miliband might move him, it meant a number of things. The first is, of course, that he could give a toss, but frankly it would be weird if the Shadow Chancellor didn’t care whether or not he continued in his job. Anyone answering that question honestly would have to admit that they jolly well do give a toss about whether they’re

Vince Cable is surely right in his comments yesterday that the most likely scenario for Britain leaving the EU is if Ed Miliband is Prime Minister after the next election. The theory, that you hear a lot in Westminster, goes like this: Miliband is forced by public opinion into promising a referendum on EU membership, he then becomes Prime Minister and is obliged to hold the vote. But by this time, the Tory opposition is advocating a No vote; arguing that a better deal can be negotiated. The country then votes No and the rest of the EU, for once, accepts the result of the first vote. Many senior pro-European

Ed Balls knew that his response to George Osborne’s Autumn Statement today was going to be difficult. As I blogged this morning, the Shadow Chancellor didn’t really have anywhere to go other than complain about the cost of living. This was aggravated by the fact that any Shadow Chancellor’s response to any autumn statement is a tough gig as he has no more advance sight of the figures and announcements than anyone else (perhaps George Osborne was just trying to be kind this year by briefing so much out in advance). But Balls’ strategy seems to have been the following: 1. Draft some good jokes in advance The jokes were