With the Lib Dem party conference kicking off this weekend, Lloyd Evans has written a Web Exclusive preview of what the main party leaders can expect over the next few weeks. You can access it in the Essays section of the site, under the Spectator tab in the navigation bar, or by clicking here.
Nick Clegg joins the ‘progressive’ debate with a double of salvo in The Times and in a pamphlet, titled ‘The liberal moment’, published by Demos. The philosophically anachronistic Labour party is his target. He writes: ‘The contrast between Labour and liberals is starkest in their different approaches to power. While Labour hoards at the centre, liberals believe that power must be dispersed away from government – downwards to individuals and communities, and upwards to the international institutions needed to tackle our collective problems. State-centered, top-down solutions are wholly out of step with the demands of our age. Devising a fairer tax system, protecting civil liberties, reforming our clapped-out politics, breaking
Vince Cable has joined the cuts debate, arguing that the “time for generalities is over” and that “politicians must not shy away from explaining in detail how they will tackle the problem of deficits and debt”. He identified 9 areas for specific savings: public sector pay and pensions, centralised education, family tax credits, defence procurement, quangos, asset sales, ID cards and the NHS super computer. Crucially, he stated that no department should be “ring-fenced”, and proposed cutting fees paid to hospitals and scrapping the strategic health authority, a move backed by Michael Fallon in a Telegraph article last week. Indeed, it’s striking how much common ground there is between the
So what has David Cameron achieved with his speech on “cutting the cost of politics” yesterday? Quite a lot, judging by this morning’s papers. The coverage it receives ranges from wholehearted scepticism in the Guardian to front-page celebration in the Daily Mail, but – more importantly, from a Tory perspective – it steals the thunder from Alistair Darling’s public spending speech. The Chancellor’s innuendo about “nasty Tory cuts” is much less resonant when juxtaposed against the Tory leader calling for cuts in MPs’ perks, whether those cuts are regarded as populist or not. What’s more, Cameron has drawn quotes from Labour and the Lib Dems that may look a little
Nick Clegg’s statement today on Afghanistan strongly suggests to me that by the time of the next election the Lib Dems will be for withdrawal from Afghanistan. Clegg told the BBC that: “I think there’s a tipping point where we have to ask ourselves whether we can do this job properly, and if we can’t do it properly we shouldn’t do it at all. I don’t think we are there yet,” he said. Clegg’s use of the word yet seems to be a definite hint that he is moving towards advocating withdrawal. In crude political terms, this would make a lot of sense for the Lib Dems. It would give
As the Megrahi case grows more serious by the day, one thing should be cheering up those in the Brown bunker: Sky’s plan to host a debate among the party leaders. Now, Brown might be the only party leader yet to have agreed to the debate but he is the one with the most to gain from it. If Brown is to have any hope of stopping David Cameron from winning the next election outright, he needs a game changing moment—and a debate might just produce one. The first televised leaders’ debate will be a hugely hyped event. One has to imagine that it would draw a huge TV audience
So Mandy’s brought up the idea of a public debate between Brown and Cameron again, claiming – in interview with Sky (see footage above) – that the PM would “relish” the opportunity to “take the fight to the Conservatives”. If you remember, the last time Mandy mentioned it, Downing St quickly moved to dampen all the speculation – the rumour was that Brown was going to challenge* Cameron to a series of debates in his conference speech, and was irritated at the PoD for giving the game away so early. But now that Mandy has made the same point again – indeed, even more forcefully this time – I reckon
If further proof were needed that the public’s attitude to public spending has changed it comes in the latest Guardian / ICM poll. It finds that 64 percent of voters think that spending should be being reduced now as opposed to 28 percent who want it increased: the electorate is on the other side of Brown’s favourite dividing line. Even among Labour and Liberal Democrat supporters, a majority favour cuts. Amongst those who favour cuts, the Tories have a significant advantage. 46 percent of those who support cuts think Labour would cut too little with 21 percent saying it would cut too much. With the Tories, 30 percent worry they
The support for Britain’s involvement in Afghanistan is, for the first time, showing major signs of fraying. Nick Clegg broke ranks with the other party leaders last week, and this weekend the total number of British deaths went beyond the number of soldiers killed in Iraq. Understandably, the Sunday papers are filled with stories about the lack of troops and kit. The Observer reports that an emergency review is taking place in the MoD to see if more soldiers need to be sent out. So what to make of it all? First of all, it is clear that there were too few troops and civilians deployed to start off. I
Though Nick Clegg has greater pre-existing international experience than either David Cameron or Gordon Brown (having worked in Brussels), he cannot help but see international affairs through a narrow political lens. Last year it was Israel’s targetting of Hamas, now it is Nato’s Afghan mission. Clegg wants the British troop contribution to ISAF either massively expanded or for the boys to come home. Simple enough. But it is also a sign that the Lib Dems, despite having such foreign policy luminaries like Ming Campbell on their benches, lack depth. It would be great for the number of British troop in Helmand to be expanded. But with almost 9000 troops already
The thing that jumps out from Nick Clegg’s speech on families today is how aggressively – if, ultimately, unconvincingly – it sets about attacking the Tories. Yes, he also criticises Labour – but the attack on the Tories comes first and is more bitter in tone. Here’s a snippet: “David Cameron’s social policy is focused almost obsessively on marriage, cajoling people to conform to a single view of what a happy couple should look like. The Conservatives want marriage incentives in the tax system. And they may adopt Iain Duncan Smith’s proposals to put in place more legal roadblocks to divorce. This is both bizarre and patronising. Do they really
It was an honour to write the Spectator politics column this week. You can find my thoughts on the collaspe of Labour morale here.
Tom Harris doesn’t much care for the Liberal Democrats: Having seen the damage done to the Labour Party through its association with the Liberals in the Scottish Parliament in previous years, there is, if anything, more hostility among MPs to the idea of power sharing than ever. On the other hand, if the Liberal Party want to sign up to the implementation of Labour’s manifesto in the aftermath of the election, fine. So long as they don’t expect either Labour or Tory MPs to agree to a change in the electoral system so that every possible outcome in future would result in the Liberals being in government. Now I’m as
I was always shocked by the level of vitriol among New Statesman and Guardian readers when a writer stepped away from the comfort zone of received wisdom and cuddly “I’m a nice person too” leftie-ness. Suggest that perhaps Hamas is anything other than a resistance movement or that people who vote Conservative might be people too and the sky falls in. Where the stock term of self-righteous abuse used to be “fascist” – remember Rick from the Young Ones? – it is now “neo-con”, which consigns the target to the same ideological hell as George W. Bush. Since I’ve started this new blog I have not been called a neo-con. Instead, the insult
If there is one message Labour and Conservative politicians should take into the next election it is never to underestimate the Liberal Democrats. They always do better than you expect them to, especially in an electoral system where there is no rational reason to vote for them. There have now been two opinion polls this month putting them at 22 per cent, the level they reached at the last general election and a high-water mark in recent times. Could it be that the Liberal Democrats under Clegg and Cable can make a pitch to overtake Labour and become the real opposition to the resurgent Tories? Martin Kettle certainly thinks so
I know we are not supposed to take ComRes polls too seriously but there’s one aspect of the Independent on Sunday poll at the weekend that I really rings true. It may not quite be the case that Lib Dem support is up by seven percentage points and Labour down by seven. But I am convinced that the Lib Dems are not being squeezed in quite the way we are led to believe. The perspective of the Westminster bubble is particularly cruel on Nick Clegg’s merry band. Anyone who has seen the orangey-yellow machine in full flight in local or national elections will know it is a force to be reckoned with.