Curious exchange of the BBC, Alistair Darling admitted that the Tories were winning the opening stages of the campaign: “They might have got their political tactics right for the first day or so but their overall judgment is just plain wrong.” Ben Brogan has more details. This looks remarkably like an admission of defeat on the politics of the National Insurance, which, considering it took Labour 10 to respond, seems an accurate assessment. Not good politics, Darling.-
Labour can’t lay a finger on the Tories over national insurance. And desperation has morphed into hysteria. Alistair Darling has just told Sky News that David Cameron contradicted George Osborne and that the Tory plan is “unravelling”. “He is going to have to find deeper cuts, some experts are saying tens of thousands of jobs will go,” he said. “He’s had to go on to say that he’s going to have to cut which will mean job losses.” Now, Cameron said: “Even after our plans for public sector pay and pensions, benefits, ID cards – yes, it’s still not enough. I accept that.” But that does not contradict George Osborne,
It is difficult to fault Cameron’s idea of a national volunteer force. While the Labour Party was forced to spend today defending the National Insurance hike, the Tories were able to seize the intiative with a genuinely far-sighted proposal. All the more galling for the government that this idea has been rattling around in Labour circles for at least a year. Cameron has stolen Labour’s clothes on this just as he did on co-operatives. David Lammy will be seething. His ideas for compulsory civic service were promoted in the pages of Prospect a year ago. He has been lobbying within the Labour Party for the policy for considerably longer. Unfortunately,
Labour today has tried to shift the National Insurance debate from whether you should cut waste to prevent a tax rise, to whether the Tories’ sums add up. When the Tories announced their plan to avoid the worst of Labour’s NICs rise by cutting waste they made a conscious decision not to offer details on how they would make these efficiency savings. As one shadow Cabinet minister explained to me, they had no desire to repeat the experience of the James Review when they were going on Newsnight to argue the toss over individual savings. The Tories think that the argument that government can save one pound in every hundred
Is this a pledge we can count on? After the Lib Dems suggested they wouldn’t increase VAT earlier, the Labour Chief Whip has told ITV’s Lucy Manning that his party won’t either. If so, it’s quite a turnaround from when both Darling and Cable refused to rule out VAT hikes during last week’s Chancellor’s debate. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a LibLab pincer movement against the Tories now: the two parties who seem to have ruled out VAT hikes against the one which is being being slightly more equivocal about it. As I said earlier, it would hardly be edifying politics. But the real worry is if it
So much for the positive vision. Labour have spent most of the day attacking the Tories and their national insurance cut. You’d have heard Brown trying to wheel out statistics about it during his Today Programme interview. And then the PM’s press conference, alongside Peter Mandelson and Alistair Darling, reduced to a How The Tories’ Sums Don’t Add Up session. One thing that’s striking about the latest attacks is how Labour are slipping, with calculated ease, between different figures to represent the efficiency savings that the Tories hope will fund their NI policy. Here’s a quick guide to the numbers, so you know what’s what: £6 billion: This is roughly
Phil Woolas has just been confronted on Daily Politics about immigration figures which we uncovered on Coffee House yesterday, showing 99 percent of new jobs since 1997 are accounted for by immigration. His response is (unintentionally) hilarious. He is immigration minister, yet appears not to know what immigration figures mean. Here’s the transcript: Phil Woolas: I think that the Spectator’s analysis, perhaps not surprisingly, is confusing two completely separate things Andrew Neil: These are Office of National Statistics figures.which we checked this morning. Do you accept that there are 1.7 million new jobs for people of working age between 16 and 64, correct? PW: Yes AN: And according to the
Campaigns are conducted in poetry, former New York mayor Mario Cuomo once said. This one seems to be conducted in hyperbole. Every party is doing their level best to show that there is a difference, and a big one, between them and their opponents. That’s normal. But to do so, they are stretching good arguments beyond what is sustainable. “Brownies” may be a particular mendacious form of hyporbolic campaigning (and governing), but there are bound to be a few Tory and Lib Dem exaggerations on display during the campaign. Exhibit A. The Tories say a hung parliament will doom Britain as the markets will react badly to a potentially unstable
Well, now we know. Charlie Whelan enjoys the liberty of Westminster at the invitation of the parliamentary Labour party. Guido points out that it’s highly unlikely Whelan isn’t officially connected to Labour’s campaign. Labour tried to keep all this quiet, attempting to avert an ‘affluence for influence’ story that might undermine Brown’s attempt to turn the election into a referendum on Lord Ashcroft. However, though this should prove bad news for Labour, these stories have little impact outside Westminster. Neither the Ashcroft scandal nor previous Whelan sagas moved the polls.
Labour’s press conference this morning was a classic example of a party struggling to both have its cake and eat it. Not only did we get Gordon Brown, as expected – but he was introduced, and joined, by Alistair Darling and Peter Mandelson. Three heavy hitters to bash out one message: that the Tories’ national insurance plans are a “threat to the recovery”. Or make that one-and-a-half messages, if you include the claim that the Tories couldn’t realistically expect to make the efficiency savings to fund their NI cut this year. There is, claimed the Labour triumverate, a “black hole” where the Tories’ tax and spending proposals should be.
Woah. I doubt Brown will endure many tougher twenty-minute spells during this election campaign than his interview with on the Today Programme this morning. You could practically hear the crunching of his teeth, as John Humphrys took him on over Labour’s economic record; practically smell the sweat and fear dripping down his brow. It was compulsive, and compelling, stuff. Humphrys started by putting a grim story to Brown: that his “handling of the economy was not prudent … your record suggests that the economy is not safe in your hands.” The PM’s mission was to deny all this, and he did so with his usual stubborness and disingenuity. His pitch
I really enjoyed Anne McElvoy’s Standard column today. She is absolutely right to identify the false notes of day one of the election campaign. Gordon Brown really was talking nonsense about his ordinary middle-class background and David Cameron should certainly drop the glottal stop. She is right to say that neither has any clarity of vision yet. For what it’s worth I agree with Kevin Maguire agreeing me that Labour looked more confident on day one and that the Tories seemed nervous. On day two, Cameron was beginning to get into his stride and Brown’s interview with NIck Robinson was awful. The wall-to-wall media coverage is almost all completely absorbing,
Mark the date: the first major heckle of the election campaign happened today, and Gordon Brown was the victim. The perp was one Ben Butterworth, and he was angry at how his children can’t get into their choice of state school – a frustration which will be shared by thousands of parents across the country. I wonder what they’ll think when they see that Brown ignored the man. The Tories will seize on this with considerable joy. Their plans for widening school choice are – as the leader says in tomorrow’s magazine – the best reason for voting Conservative. Mr Butterworth might just have made himself the poster boy for
Well, the manifesto pledges sure are spilling out of Brown today. After his proposals for cleaning up politics earlier, he’s now told Channel 4’s Gary Gibbon that Labour will pledge to keep the main rate of income tax at 20 pence in the forthcoming Parliament. Whether that will satisfy those who would see their national insurance contributions rise over the same period, or placate those who were moved from a 10p tax rate to the 20p rate as a result of Brown’s politicking a few years ago, remains to be seen. Here’s the video:
Gordon Brown’s visit to the Innocent smoothie HQ in London today is the subject of a great post from Paul Waugh, who reveals how close the PM came to a photo-opp nightmare. But it also reminded me of this insight from Jonathan Freedland a few months ago, which I blogged at the time: “[The Labour campaign team have] taken a look at the branding of Innocent smoothies, hoping the authentic, unspun look might fit their own ‘unairbrushable’ product, G Brown.” I wonder whether Innocent picked up any branding tips from Brown earlier, in return…
So, mending our broken politics has been shoved to the forefront of the election campaign – at least for the time being. Brown has just given a speech on the issue, which – if you divorce it from all context – was actually fairly effective. Sure, things like reducing the voting age to 16, or a referendum on the alternative voting system, may not be your – or many people’s – cup of chai. But there were several proposals which, taken in isolation, will probably be as popular as they are sensible: banning MPs from working for lobbying comapanies, for instance. Or giving the voters the ability to recall MPs
Give Gordon Brown credit for chutzpah at least. Then again, what else if left to the poor man? It’s tough to be the incumbent and run a campaign based on the promise of Change. But this seems to be what El Gordo is attempting. Good luck with that. Labour appear to have accepted that they’ve lost the Change vs Experience battle and so they’ve opted, rather brazenly you might say, to present themselves and their platform as “Real Change”. The Tories, on the other hand, presumably offer phoney Change. It’s a risky business, this Change stuff and you have to be very careful you don’t buy the wrong type of
As I said earlier, today’s PMQs was all about giving the various parties’ campaign messages a walk around the block. Cameron’s questions reduced down to “They’ve failed – give us a go”. Clegg pushed the Lib Dem’s Labservative prospectus. And Brown droned on about “£6bn being taken out of the economy,” as well as about Lord Ashcroft and “securing the recovery”. In which case, it’s striking that Denis MacShane used a question to denounce the Tories’ alliances in Europe. Indeed, Peter Mandelson did exactly the same in a speech this morning. Here’s how he put it: “David Cameron chooses to sit alongside the xenophobes and homophobes in the European Parliament.
Stay tuned for live coverage of PMQs. 1200: We’re about to start. Brown is flanked by Harriet Harman and Jim Murphy. Douglas Alexander, Alistair Darling and Alan Johnson are also on the front bench. The heavy hitters are out in force… 1201: And here we go, for what could be Brown’s last ever PMQs as Prime Minister. He starts, as usual, with condolences for fallen soldiers. 1202: The first question is as plantlike as they come: will Brown take £6 billion “out of the economy”? Brown spins the usual dividing line about investing in frontline services, adding that the Tories would risk a “double dip” recession. Hm. 1204: Massive cheer
PMQs today is going to be the last time that Gordon Brown and David Cameron face-off against each other before the debates. Both men will be keen to score pyschological points against the other and to send their troops off in good heart. This means that PMQs will be an even noisier affair than usual. But both leaders will have to remember that if they behave in the debates as they do in PMQs it would be a disaster for them. The aggressive, shouty nature of PMQs would not translate well to the debates. One thing to watch today is what Nick Clegg does. He’s racheting up the rhetoric again,