Labour party

Mandelson finally gets his man

For months now Lord Mandelson has been encouraging his friend and former colleague Tristram Hunt to continue the quest for a safe Labour seat. Indeed, there was a furore last month when Labour supporters in the Leyton and Wanstead constituency – a Labour stronghold – objected to the support Hunt was receiving from Downing Street in his bid for that candidature. At the time, the Standard ran quotes from a local member stating bluntly: “We do not want a No 10 candidate being pushed on the constituency.”   Duly, the candidature was given to John Cryer and not another word was mentioned. Until this Monday that is, when the FT

Fraser Nelson

A new Brownie Buster

Michael Scholar: hero. The newish head of the UK statistics authority is finally coming to the aid of the statistics nerds who have been protesting that Gordon Brown makes things up. Normally, the ONS do not censure Mr Brown when he misrepresents their data: that’s not their job. But as head of the Statistics Authority, Sir Michael has – wonderfully, inspirationally – written an open letter to the Prime Minister telling him not to lie. Well, not quite in so few words, but this is the plain implication. What is significant is that Sir Michael is using his job to protect  the integrity of statistics in Britain. One of my

Whitehall’s hung parliament contingency plans vindicate Tory alarm over the economy

There it is. The Tories’ premier weapon emblazoned across the front pages of the Guardian and the Telegraph: Brown could stay on as PM in a hung parliament, even if the Tories win more seats. To be fair to Brown, the headlines are misleading. It is his duty to remain in office until it is clear that David Cameron or another politician commands the confidence of the House, which may take weeks in current circumstances. Mandarins are drawing up radical contingency plans to ensure that some modicum of economic stability is maintained during that period. These measures include temporarily proroguing parliament for 18 days after the election (rather than the

Why Blair’s return is good news for the Tories

Blair’s return will be worth a good 2-3 points to the Tory lead. Like Mandelson, he can dazzle journalists who admire his tradecraft. Like Mandelson, he is loathed by the public who see a snake oil salesman. Blair mis-sold the country a project in 1997, and delivered none of what he promised (and it was with those broken 1997 problems in mind that the News of the World backed the Conservatives last weekend). He is not very popular now. When he gave evidence to the Chilcott Inquiry, the crowds came from near and far to denounce him. One placard, which I found outside my office, said “Blair is a war

Guess who’s back

Yep, you guessed right: Tony Blair was doing his bit for the Labour cause this morning, with a speech in his old constituency.  In truth, there was little in it of any note – or that we haven’t heard countless times from his successor.  Thus the Tories were derided as either the “old Tory party,” or as confused about their direction of travel.  Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling were hailed as the men who brought us through the worst of the economic storm.  And even the soundbites (“meeting not just future challenges, but seizing future opportunities”) sounded as if they had come from straight from the Brownite copybook.  Perhaps the

Is David Davis talking off-message?

James Macintyre asked yesterday, in response to a speech Davis made at the Bristol Chambers of Commerce. The question should enter John Rentoul’s entertaining list of questions to which the answer is No. Macintyre takes Davis’ comments out of context: ‘First, he [Davis] praises the post-war Labour Prime Minister Clement Atlee, who is credited with creating the NHS and the Welfare State, and effectively compares him to Margaret Thatcher: “Attlee created the modern Welfare State at a time when the country was bankrupt after the war. Mrs Thatcher transformed the country after 1979 when it was at its lowest ebb.”’ What Davis actually said was: “When times are tough, that

Labour have moved on from the death tax for now – and so should the Tories

Labour’s plans for a national care service aren’t looking too sharp this morning.  Andy Burnham is expected to announce a cap on residential costs for the elderly later today – to be funded by freezing inheritance tax bands, raising the statutory retirement age, and (lo!) efficiency savings.  But the full, free-for-everyone-at-the-point-of-use service will have to wait some time – or at least until a new independent commission has decided on how it can be funded in the long-term.  In other words, the government has decided to park the death tax issue until well after the election. Presentationally speaking, this is proving difficult for the government.  I mean, just rewind to

Fraser Nelson

Osborne’s silent victory

I think Osborne’s main victory tonight would be to reassure those who thought him a clueless idiot. The left demonise him, and it’s easy for the right to despair at him too (yes, guilty). But the figure we saw tonight was calm, collected and assured – and I reckon this was his achievement. He allayed fears. Expectations of his performance would have been rock bottom, and he’d have surpassed them easily. He was playing it safe. Vince Cable did his after-dinner speaking comedy act (I met William Hague in the ‘spin room’ afterwards, who swears that some of Cables lines were nicked from his repertoire), and the studio audience loved

Tory poll lead widens further

I’ll spare you the nitty-gritty, but suffice to say that three separate polls tonight record growing leads for the Tories – of 7, 7 and 10 points, respectively.  One of the 7-point leads is from the YouGov Daily Tracker, which has been hovering around the 4 point mark for the past few weeks.  You could argue that we’re still operating more or less within the margin of error.  That’s true.  But throw in the polls from the weekend, and you’d be hard-pressed not to conclude that the tide is turning, at least momentarily, in Cameron & Co.’s favour.  Either way, Tory folk around Westminster certainly seem more relaxed than they

Few fireworks – but solid performances from Cable and Osborne<br />

So now we know what happens when you put three would-be finance ministers into a room, and start asking them questions.  There’s plenty of esoteric language, a good dash of posturing – and next to no fireworks.  Thinking about it, perhaps we shouldn’t have expected much else. Not that the pyrotechnics were completely absent, of course.  Both Cable and Darling rounded on Osborne over the Tories’ national insurance plans, and Osborne hit back with some well-directed attacks on Labour’s own tax and spend agenda – even getting Darling to waver and admit that a “death tax” is no longer on the cards.   But, for the most part, calm and

James Forsyth

Brown and Cameron’s Commons clash serves as the warm-up for tonight’s debate

Gordon Brown and David Cameron have just been facing each other in the Commons chamber. Brown was notionally reporting back on the European summit meeting, but in relaity Brown and Cameron were setting the stage for the Chancellor’s debate tonight. Cameron claimed that there was a new dividing line in British politics, the Tories for ‘efficency and aspiration’ and Labour for ‘waste and taxes.’ Brown claimed that the Tories were indulging in panic measures and that their plans announced today would ‘withdraw the support that is necessary for the economy to have a sustained recovery.’ Brown might have some Keynesian economists on his side when he says this. But it

How long will it take Gordon Brown to act on this?

Defence minister Kevan Jones was extremely foolish to re-open the Gurkhas’ residency issue at the electoral cycle’s eleventh hour. Accusing Joanna Lumley of maintaining a “deathly silence” over the campaign was a temptation too many for fate.   She’s silent no longer. She convened a press conference and immediately gained the moral, and strategic, high-ground, saying: “(There is) a sense of regret that it has come to this, almost clearing our name in public. “We want to call on the prime minister to confirm that the policy is one that he still completely supports, to affirm from the prime minister that the MoD is still behind what it said it

Fraser Nelson

Back to his Tory best

George Osborne has just set the scene for tonight’s Chancellors’ debate by announcing something neither Darling or Cable will be able to match: a tax cut. It’s a real one, it will benefit some 20m workers and (best of all) it will be paid for by spending cuts. While the amount is not huge – everyone on under £43,000 will be £150 better off – it indicates the route the Conservatives would go down in government.   Trusting people with their own money, and stoking the recovery by cutting the tax on jobs. Here are the main points: 1) Osborne would raise National Insurance threshold in Apr11. One of the

A smart move by Osborne – but he needs to ready himself for his opponents’ attacks

There’s little doubting it: the Tory plan to (at least partially) reverse Labour’s national insurance hike has handed George Osborne a high-calibre weapon for tonight’s TV debate.  It is, I suspect, an attractive and attention-grapping policy in itself.  But it also helps the shadow Chancellor paint the Tories as the party of aspiration.  Or, as Tim Montgomerie has put it: “Seven out of ten working people will be better off if Cameron becomes Prime Minister.” But announcing the policy this morning has also given Alistair Darling and Vince Cable a chance to very publicly denounce it later today.  We’ve already had a preview of what’s likely to form the central

Labour’s Political Football

Elections really are pretty grim. Perhaps it’s because I’ve been overseas for some of them (well, 1997 and 2005) that this one seems especially awful. First there’s the rash of “celebrity endorsements”* which are themselves enough to make one abandon any remaining hope. I mean, if the Tories are “backed” by Ulrika Jonsson, John McCririck, Tony Handley and Jimmy Greaves how can any sentient person consider that an argument for the Conservative cause? Then there’s this latest election-gimmick from Labour: proposals** to “give” football supporters’ groups a 25% stake in their club’s shareholding. By give, of course, I mean insist. Really, it’s hard to know where to begin. But this

The most corrupt parliament ever?

It makes you proud to be British. Where resourcefulness and self-worth are concerned, our political class is unmatched. Former Sports minister and ambassador for the 2018 World Cup bid, Richard Caborn, has been stung by the Sunday Times soliciting influence for £2,500 a day ‘plus expenses, obviously’. Obviously Richard, we would expect nothing less from a man of your eminence. So to for former Defence Minister, Adam Ingram, who takes lobbying so seriously he charges VAT. I wonder how Colonel Gadaffi reacted to the 17.5 percent extra charge when Ingram facilitated the construction of a new Libyan defence academy? Hypocrisy is more ubiquitous at Westminster than Pugin. Apologists for the expenses scandal argue that

Fraser Nelson

Explaining the NotW endorsement

The News of the World’s endorsement of the Conservatives today is worth reading. It has taken some time and much soul-searching for the paper to make this decision. Papers, even under the same proprietor, have different readerships with different outlooks on life. The Sun came out for the Tories on the last day of the Labour conference last September, but its stablemate has taken far longer. It has been firm in its denunciation of Brown’s failings but – like many voters – it has looked long and hard at just how a Tory government would correct them. The reason for its endorsement now is laid out in the leading article.