Uk politics

The way the Lib Dems have responded to the Trojan Horse revelations must be causing the Conservatives to thank their lucky stars they took Tony Blair’s advice on shaking up the public sector and prioritised school reforms at the start of the Coalition, rather than leaving the reforms until later. Nick Clegg’s comments about academy oversight and curriculum requirements this morning did rather suggest that if they’d had their time again, his party would only have backed legislation with a rather different character. Naturally, the Conservatives in the Education department aren’t particularly impressed that this morning the Deputy Prime Minister suggested that ‘you need to get the balance right’ on

How to deal with Islamist extremism is one of the great issues of our time. What has gone on in these Birmingham schools is a reminder of how real a threat it is to this country and how determined the proponents of this warped worldview are. But before we turn to that question, a quick reflection on the politics of today’s events in the Commons: The row between Michael Gove and Theresa May over how to approach this issue resulted in the Education Secretary having to apologise and May having to jettison one of her special advisers. It was a major political embarrassment to the government. Labour tried to capitalise

You can judge a minister by their special advisers. Ambitious ministers surround themselves with aides who view their primary loyalty as being to the minister rather than the Prime Minister or the government as a whole. But those who are just happy to be in Cabinet accept the advisers they are sent by Downing Street and CCHQ. Theresa May was, without a doubt, in the former category. Her aides are ferocious defenders and promoters of her. Indeed, May is, in many ways, the Gordon Brown of this government. Anyone who her team thought was interfering in her domain got their head bitten off. Even on relatively minor issues like visas

Theresa May’s adviser Fiona Cunningham has resigned as part of the fallout from the Cabinet row over extremism as David Cameron seeks to regain control of his ministers. The Prime Minister today received the results of Sir Jeremy Heywood’s investigation into the row, which exploded onto the front page of the Times and spread like wildfire through other media as the Gove and May camps briefed against one another. Both have been set tasks by the PM to demonstrate that this row is over. Gove has written to Charles Farr and Cameron apologising for his briefing over lunch to the Times which sparked the row. As for the furious response

So, the Tories have managed to hold onto Newark with a surprising 7,000 majority. For Ukip, it was a disappointing evening as they failed to come close to taking the seat. Despite adding 22 points to their 2010 vote share, the march of the People’s Army has encountered some unexpectedly difficult terrain. There were some interesting signs about the state of the parties and some hints as to what we might see in the general election next year. Here are six things that we’ve learnt from Newark: 1. Ukip are far from a Westminster breakthrough Despite picking a local candidate in Roger Helmer and putting in a significant amount of

[audioplayer src=”http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_5_June_2014_v4.mp3″ title=”James Delingpole and Michael Heaver debate whether Ukip stands for anything” startat=1222] Listen [/audioplayer]I’m worried about Ukip. It’s possible that my concerns are entirely misplaced but let me give you some examples of what I mean. First, a tweet from Ukip’s Newark candidate Roger Helmer (whose heroic stance on energy and climate change I greatly admire): ‘Meet Robert Jenrick, the Tory candidate for Newark: Gilded youth. Posh Tory boy. London property millionaire.’ Second, the party’s official response to a local newspaper interview given by Donna Rachel Edmunds, one of Ukip’s new councillors in Lewes, East Sussex, in which she argued — on perfectly sound libertarian principles — that businesses should

Four years after promising a recall system for MPs, the coalition has delivered on its promise in today’s Queen Speech. Or has it? The Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith doesn’t think so. The long-time campaigner for a proper recall bill believes that the proposals announced today are a ‘pretence’. On this week’s View from 22 podcast, Goldsmith reveals why he doesn’t believe the recall announced is really a recall: ‘Under the government’s proposals, there isn’t a recall referendum…effectively the [Parliamentary Standards] committee decides an MP qualifies for recall, they’re finished. That’s it. It’s all power to the committee, all to the institution and no to the voters’ Goldsmith also thinks that

The Conservatives have accidentally emailed a database of their activists’ details to other members, Coffee House has learned. The database, called ‘volunteer record NEWARK’ was accidentally attached to a generic thank you email for those campaigning in the by-election, and contained the email addresses of activists and MPs who had signed in at a certain station in the constituency. Sent from a generic email address belonging to the Tory chairman, the email thanked activists for visiting Newark, and asked them to continue campaigning by visiting the constituency again on polling day or making calls to voters from home or CCHQ. The database was attached at the bottom. This isn’t a