Michael gove

A few years back, Mr Steerpike wrote a blog entitled ‘How Danny Finkelstein botched the reshuffle‘ – revealing how those around Iain Duncan Smith were furious to see his future in an expected reshuffle being discussed on Newsnight by the Fink. Our joke: that IDS might well have moved to the Justice department has he not heard the Fink talking about the move as if it were a done deal. Today, in his Times column, Lord Finkelstein repeats this story – except he upgrades it from joke to fact. ‘If it wasn’t for me, Iain Duncan Smith wouldn’t have resigned last week as work and pensions secretary,’ he announces to his

People — nice people, members of the public, concerned voters — keep coming up to me saying, ‘We want to hear the arguments about the EU referendum.’ It sounds a strange thing to want because, since the last years of Margaret Thatcher’s government, the arguments have rarely been out of the news for a week, and jolly boring they often are. But what such people go on to say is that they seek the objective facts and cannot get them from either side in the campaign. They would like some useful fact sheet which answers all their questions. Well, from time to time, papers like the Telegraph and the Times

Surely there is a difference between Mark Carney’s intervention in the Scottish referendum last year and in the EU one now. In the first, everyone wanted to know whether an independent Scotland could, as Alex Salmond asserted, keep the pound and even gain partial control over it. The best person to answer this question was the Governor of the Bank of England. So he answered it, and the answer — though somewhat more obliquely expressed — was no. For the vote on 23 June, there is nothing that Mr Carney can tell us which we definitely need to know and which only he can say. So when he spoke to

Although the Tories currently find their party divided over Europe, they can at least take heart that the opposition face greater internal conflict. In fact, rather than attack Matthew Hancock in the Commons today over the Cabinet’s Brexit issues, Labour’s deputy leader Tom Watson opted to make a joke about his own party’s misery: ‘Mr Speaker sadly I am not in the strongest of positions to lecture the poor minister on handling splits in his own party.’ Watson did at least manage to find time to take a small jab at the Conservatives. He asked the minister whether he really believed that Jeremy Heywood’s decision to ban SpAds from providing ministers with material that could be used to support Brexit would really

Michael Gove’s BBC interview, in which he disagrees with his Prime Minister over whether his renegotiation deal is indeed legally binding, is a sign of how confusing the referendum campaign is going to get. The Justice Secretary is perfectly polite as he dismisses the stance of his own government, but he is still the Justice Secretary dismissing the stance of his own government, and that is only made marginally less odd by the suspension of collective responsibility. Gove said: ‘The European Court of Justice interprets the European Union treaties and until this agreement is embodied in treaty change, then the European Court of Justice is not bound by this agreement.’

George Osborne’s plan for this referendum was to turn it into a question of the future versus the past, for both the country and the Tory party. He wanted the voters to see the Out campaign as a bunch of people who wanted to take Britain back to a bygone era. Inside the Tory party, his aim was to have the talent and the ambition on the IN side with only old war horses and the passed over and bitter on the other side. But the events of the past 36 hours have blown this plan off course. Out now has one of the most popular politicians in the country

At Cabinet this morning, every minister spoke in strict order of Cabinet seniority. This meant that Michael Gove was the first person to make the case for Out. I’m told that his argument to Cabinet was essentially the same as the hugely powerful statement he put out afterwards, which you can read in full here. The theme of the Cabinet discussion was, broadly, the trade-off between sovereignty and access to the free market. According to one of those present, where you fell on that question determined your position in the debate. One IN supporting Cabinet minister tells me that Oliver Letwin was the most persuasive speaker for that side of

[audioplayer src=”http://rss.acast.com/viewfrom22/spectatorpodcastspecial-davidcameronseudeal/media.mp3″ title=”Isabel Hardman, James Forsyth and Fraser Nelson discuss the EU deal” startat=18] Listen [/audioplayer] As the EU Council meeting in Brussels drags on and on, the chances of a Cabinet meeting this evening are receding. But based on discussions I’ve had, the Cameron circle now seem pretty much resigned to losing Michael Gove to the Out campaign once the deal is done. If Gove has gone to Out, it will be a shot of pure adrenaline for the Out campaign. It will give it intellectual respectability and genuine Cabinet heft. The move will also confirm Gove’s status as a conviction politician. No one seems to know what Boris

David Cameron heads to Brussels today still not knowing which Tory big beasts he will have supporting him in the referendum campaign. The Cameron circle had always been confident that Boris Johnson would ultimately back staying In. But that confidence has been shaken by yesterday’s meeting between Boris and the PM. Part of the problem is that what Boris has always said that he wants on sovereignty is very hard, if not impossible, to actually deliver. If the Cameron circle is worried about Boris, it seems increasingly resigned to losing Michael Gove to the Out side. As I say in the column this week, an immense amount of emotional energy