Uk politics

Tuesday

David Blackburn

Would Britain buy Balls?

Asks Iain Martin, and I suspect he’s back in Rentoul territory. It is, nonetheless, a question that merits more than a cursory no in reply. For all his egregiousness, you know where Balls stands: in the crude but distinctive colours of the old left. He is convinced that any approach to spending cuts other than his own will precipitate a double-dip recession. As Iain puts it: ‘Balls is also calculating that the second half of a double-dip recession is on the way and is staking out ground on which he can be the one to proclaim to the country: I told you so.’   In terms of Britain’s economic debate,

David Blackburn

Still spinning

According to the Spectator’s literary editor, Peter Mandelson wrote the most boring book review ever published by the Spectator. I imagine he did. You don’t read the Mandelson memoir; you wade through it in leaking gum boots. The lack of illumination is nothing compared to the faceless prose. Mandelson cannot evoke the personality of Alan Clark’s or Chris Mullin’s diaries. Form is crucial in that memoirs justify and diaries observe. Clark’s love of Mrs Thatcher and his self-importance match Mandelson’s love of Blair and his preening conceit that there was a ‘Third Man’ at the heart of New Labour’s tenure in office – Mandelson spent most of it in exile.

Peter Hoskin

Tony Blair, everywhere

To be honest, these Mandelson memoirs are already losing their lustre. I was planning to do a summary of this morning’s revelations, as yesterday – but swiftly lost the will. It’s not that this first draft of New Labour’s history is unappreciated, of course. But so much of it is just plain unsurprising: ministers thought Labour was cruising for an electoral kicking; Alistair Darling proposed a VAT hike; David Miliband was considering running for the leadership in 2008; and so on and so on. Sadly, it’s not quite enough to enliven this grey morning in Westminster. One general observation does emerge from the latest extracts, though: the omnipresence of Tony

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Will the coalition defeat the roadblocks to reform?

The biggest reform to the NHS since its inception since 1948. A move away from bureaucracy towards a proper internal market. GPs commissioning. A revolution, taking on the vested interests. Yes, there was so much to savour in the NHS Plan of 2000 – enough, Alan Milburn would later joke, that he kept re-announcing its policies for the next three years and getting headlines. Well, the Tories can play at that game too. Now, it has been reannounced by Andrew Lansley and called the coalition NHS White Paper. This is, in my book, a compliment to Lansley. In opposition, he sided with the unions and attacked Labour from the left

Monday

David Blackburn

Ducking the issue?

As I wrote earlier, a large proportion of Andrew Lansley’s white paper had to be devoted to accountability. Much of it is, but little is explained. Patients are central. The creation of GP consortia is for their benefit and they will hold the consortia to account by excercising choice (4:21). Choice is the tyrannical panacea that does not exist. A patient can only improve a treatment if they are given it; and many GPs are closer to Doctor In the House rather than Dr.House. GPs are independent practitioners working within the NHS framework. For example, it is impossible for the patient to make recommendations about unavailable cancer drugs. In addition

Peter Hoskin

Gove goes on the attack

This afternoon’s education question felt like a pressure valve being released. For a week now, the story has been all about the heat building-up under Michael Gove. But, today, the Education Secretary looked far more comfortable, and managed to swing the blowtorch back in Ed Balls’ direction. The message that the coalition had been struggling to make previously came out clear and loud: the Building Schools for the Future cuts are a result of waste and bureaucratic mismanagement by the previous government. And Gove even came armed with examples, such as the £1.3 million paid to an individual consultant from the BSF fund. His point: this would be better directed

David Blackburn

A question of accountability

In theory, curbing bureaucracy in the NHS should have you reaching for the Champagne. But giving GPs control of £80bn is an enormous risk. GPs know their patients’ needs, so Andrew Lansley’s thinking is that empowering GPs will improve patient care, and therefore patient outcomes. Many GPs will be chomping at the bit to get their hands on budgets; on the other hand, many will not – it takes a certain kind of mind to be thrilled by balance sheets. Also, those that are may fight their corner rather too vigorously, which would merely deepen imbalance in the health service. The success or failure of Lansley’s initiative depends on ensuring

Peter Hoskin

The Mandelson question

As Peter Mandelson has us knee-deep in Kremlinology already, it’s worth pointing out this insight from Mary Ann Sieghart in the Independent: ‘It was quite clear in 2008 and 2009 that Brown was going to lead Labour to defeat, whereas a messy leadership contest was by no means certain ….  Mandelson by then knew that Labour would lose under Brown. ‘Surely you know we can’t win with Gordon as leader?’ a colleague asked him last year. To which the reply was, ‘Do you think I’m mad? Do you think I don’t realise that?’ But Mandelson was convinced that Labour couldn’t win a majority under any leader. His big strategic mistake

Peter Hoskin

Five highlights from the Mandelson serialisation

So now we know what happened during those uncertain days following the election in May – or at least we know Peter Mandelson’s side of it.  The Times begins its serialisation of the Dark Lord’s book today with a front-page photo of Nick Clegg and the legend, “Clegg the Executioner”.  And, inside, Mandelson explains how the Lib Dem leader made Gordon Brown’s departure a precondition of any coalition deal with Labour.  Not the most surprising news ever, but worth having on record nonetheless. Aside from that, there’s little of much weight in these first extracts, but plenty of titbits for political anoraks. Here are five that jumped out at me:

Sunday

Peter Hoskin

Will Labour ever start love-bombing the Lib Dems?

Let’s dwell on the Labour leadership contest a second longer, to point its participants in the direction of John Rentoul’s column today.  Its central point – that Labour should “leave a door ajar” for Nick Clegg – should be self-evident to a party which has been forced out of power by a coalition.  But, in reality, Labour seems eager to ignore it.  At best, there’s a lazy assumption that the Lib Dems will one day divorce the Tories and quite naturally shack up with the lady in red.  At worst, there’s outright hostility to Clegg and his fellow, ahem, “collaborators”.  Neither approach will do much to break the ties that

Peter Hoskin

Osborne to strengthen Parliament’s role in OBR appointments?

It may not be the sexiest story in today’s newspapers, but the ongoing Office for Budget Responsibility row is certainly among the most important.  After all, a great deal rests on how it is resolved.  Not only could we end up without a body capable of restoring trust in fiscal forecasts, but the government’s promising transparency agenda could be sunk before it has even had chance to sail.  Much will depend on how far George Osborne goes to reinvigorate the OBR’s independent credentials. In which case, it’s worth highlighting the Sunday Telegraph’s summary of Sir Alan Budd’s proposals to do just that.  The departing OBR chief is expected to outline

Peter Hoskin

Mandelson and Miliband kick open the hornets’ nest

Oh joy, Labour are at war again.  The animosities which have largely been kept in check since the election are now piercing through to the surface again – and it’s all thanks to Peter Mandelson’s memoirs.  After the ennobled one’s insights about Gordon and Tony in the Times yesterday, Charlie Whelan is shooting back from the pages of the Sunday Telegraph.  And, elsewhere, Brown is said to have told friends that “this is going to be a very difficult time for me.”  Yep, it’s just like the glory days of last summer. Amid all this, there’s a sense that Mandelson and David Miliband have coordinated their efforts to trash Brown

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Cameron’s refreshing honesty on schools

David Cameron has today told the News of the World that he is “terrified” about the prospect of sending his children to an inner-London state school. This is quite some statement, given how many tens of thousands of parents are in the same predicament. Isn’t it the classic politician’s error? To betray how his aloofness from voters by showing how he fears what ordinary parents have to put up with? That’s what Tony Blair thought – so he’d pretend to be happy with state schools while sending his kids to the ultra-selective Oratory School. That is hypocrisy. What David Cameron has said represents honesty. After all, why shouldn’t he be

Saturday

David Blackburn

The Gove fight-back begins

His apology earlier this week was a reminder of how Cabinet Ministers used to behave. Today’s cock-ups and crises have increased the pressure on the Education Secretary – two schools face cuts despite meeting the government’s criteria. Now Gove has penned a defensive article for the Sunday Express. He writes: ‘Reform is never easy, and certainly not when cash is tight… but school building will not stop under this government.’ Gove is, of course, right. Money is tight. But he must explain why reform is necessary in and of itself, and why his ideas should be adopted. There was an aloofness and arrogance about his performance on Newsnight on Monday, suggesting that Gove believes

David Blackburn

Insane culture

I’ve just flicked on the television in search of fresh disasters. The news that Raoul Moat shot himself when cornered in a kessel is still ‘breaking’. In this heat I’d be surprised if he wasn’t oozing by now, but 24 hour news doesn’t concern itself with such trivialities. The ‘Yours Concerned’ BBC reporter intoned in horror that 2 tasers had been used in the operation.  Now, I wouldn’t arm the officious clown who asked why I was carrying a bottle of Crozes Hermitage through Waterloo station yesterday evening. I oppose the adoption of tasers in anything other than extreme circumstances. But Mr Moat was fairly extreme in my book, given,

David Blackburn

Miliband’s analysis simply confirms his own weakness

John Rentoul, who knows a successful Labour leader when he sees one, is having palpitations about David Miliband’s latest hustings speech. Everyone seems to be in fact. I’ve taken a look, following the Berkeleian principle that if everyone thinks something is important it invariably is. It’s a good speech. At last, one of the Labour leadership contenders has attacked Gordon Brown. Under Gordon Brown, Miliband argues, Labour’s failings, spin and high-handedness intensified. An expression about Sherlock and excrement comes to mind, but the first stage in a party’s renewal is to admit defeat, acknowledge failure and offer contrition. David Miliband has begun that process, which can only serve him well.

David Blackburn

Sir Humphrey always has the last word

The Great Repeal Act seems to have gone the way of all flesh. Perhaps the task was deemed too cumbrous. Or perhaps the Civil Service replaced their original contrivances with a bill so convoluted that the Repeal Act itself would have to be repealed. As Alan Clark wrote: ‘Give a civil servant a good case and he’ll wreck it with clichés, bad punctuation, double negatives and convoluted apology’. I mention the civil service because the government plan to ‘cure Labour’s Health and Safety neurosis’. Lovely turns of phrase from David Cameron in interview with the Mail: concern for safety and welfare has invaded the private sphere and it will be

David Blackburn

Send for Chote

And so it continues. The FT reports that Sir Alan Budd has denied that George Osborne cooked the OBR’s job loss forecasts. ‘It was genuinely a forecasting correction with no ministerial interference,’ he said, blandly. The correction was the result of the OBR’s use of a narrow definition of public sector workforce than is employed by other statisticians. That is not abnormal: statisticians are a law unto themselves. But, as the saying goes, it doesn’t look good. The OBR’s figures supported the government and the story is beginning to emit of a whiff of mendacity. Once more, George Osborne is in a mess of his own making. His political instincts veer

Friday

David Blackburn

The ’22 bares its teeth

Tim Montgomerie reports that the 1922 Committee is to launch its own inquiry into the Tories’ election campaign. This, as I understand it, is in addition to the party’s official inquiry, and therefore suggests that the backbenches want to assert their independence by criticising Steve Hilton and George Osborne’s strategy. After May’s ruptures between Cameron and the backbenches there is a chance that this story could snowball. There is a sense that some of the ’22 haven’t yet buried the hatchet. And the feeling’s mutual. Some Cameroons and modernisers are disdainful – ‘self-indulgent farts’ was how one put it. But the ’22 must assert itself and I welcome this review.

Peter Hoskin

A question of independence

And so this morning’s Office for Budget Responsibility story rumbles on, with various Labour figures questions whether the organisation is as independent as it should be.  The most significant intervention, though, is from the government.  As the FT reports, George Osborne’s Treasury team is hanging onto its ability to select the next head of the OBR. Of course, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the next OBR chief will be a placeman, sympathetic and mouldable to the Tories’ wishes.  In fact, my guess is that Osborne will go out of his way to find an uncontroversial, neutral replacement for Sir Alan Budd.  But with a PoliticsHome poll showing that only 16