Uk politics

RIP EDA?

If you listen to the Tory front bench, you’d be excused for believing that Rue des Drapiers, 17-23, Ixelles in Belgium houses a place of unadulterated anti-British evil. What lies at this address? The European Defence Agency (EDA), which the Tory party has pledged to pull Britain out of should they win power. Does this institution really aim to curtail Britain’s procurement of its own military hardware, and suborn future purchases to a common European plan? The truth is different and a lot more boring. The EDA does not procure anything for EU governments. It does not force the military to do anything. It exists to develop European defence capabilities

At last, the Tories get organised

Three weeks ago, James argued that the Tories’ incoherence emanated from their disjointed campaign management. Steve Hilton, Andy Coulson, George Osborne and George Bridges were not communicating and the stark clarity on the economy and ‘Broken Britain’ was obscured. James urged the Cameroon duma to put its house in order. Cameron heeded some of his advice, but this morning brings the most significant change. Tim Montgomerie reports that Andy Coulson and Steve Hilton have at last joined forces and will report direct to George Osborne, who will be replaced by Ken Clarke as the Tory’s economic face. That that this is news reveals the utter chaos  that ruled the campaign;

Affluence for influence

I’d assumed the left was dead, but Mehdi Hasan says otherwise. The left is triumphant. Whilst Hasan defines left with abstractions like ‘progressive’ and ‘empowerment’, I prefer something more concrete. Unionism is triumphant. With New Labour in rigor mortis, the Unions slipped their moorings and struck out for old havens. Whelan, Crow, Simpson and Woodley are fixated on disruption. Crow will close the railways next Friday, the BA cabin crew suicide pact is now all but signed in blood, and thousands of civil servants will exchange the pen for the sword. Certainly, the members have grievances, but who doesn’t? Britain is emerging from the deepest recession since 1929 with a

Hague’s modern Realism

In a splurge of activity, William Hague gave both an interview to the FT and another foreign policy speech at RUSI outlining the views of a Conservative government. It was time for an update on Tory thinking, not least because David Cameron’s description of his policy as “liberal conservatism” and his unwillingness to march into a “massive euro bust-up” has had little effect. That is because a struggle over how to engage with the world continues to run beneath the party leader’s message of party unity. Four main schools of diplomatic thought exist in the party: the modern Realists, the Neo-Conservatives, the anti-Europeans (not the same as the Euroskeptics, which

Endless saga<br />

The four members are before a magistrate, attempting to clear their names. I’m not sure if it’s more preposterous than it is shaming to claim that conventions protecting free speech apply to false accounting. If only Enron’s lawyers had been as ingenious. In addition to Morley et al’s abuse of parliamentary privilege, Alan and Ann Keen have been fined £1,500 today, which, as Paul Waugh notes, is lenient compared to the Parliamentary Privileges and Standards Committee’s damning verdict. Expect to hear more on that decision as public anger over expenses remains unabated. Some time ago, I thought the expenses scandal would only be resolved by the catharsis of a General

City middlemen don’t like Osborne precisely because he is competent

The City’s elopement with New Labour has ended violently. A poll of leading financiers, conducted by City AM, reveals that 73 percent think that a Tory majority would be best for the economy; a mere 10 percent support Labour. But the City has little enthusiasm for George Osborne: 23 percent believe he has the mettle to be Chancellor, 13 percent behind Ken Clarke. So where is it going wrong for Osborne? James Kirkup observes that the Tories recent collapse in the polls coincided with Osborne and Cameron obscuring their economic message. But the City’s antipathy to Osborne is long established. Disquiet reigned even when Osborne and the Tories were storming

Clegg’s conditions

Nick Clegg is the rage of the papers this morning. His interview with the Spectator is trailed across the media and the Independent has an interview where Clegg once again lists the four demands that would be his initial negotiating tests for backing a minority government. They are: – Raising the income tax threshold to £10,000 through taxes on the rich. – An education spending boost for the poorest in society through the ‘pupil premiums’. – A switch to a Green economy, less dependent on financial services.  – Political reforms at Westminster, including electoral reform. What to make of that quartet? There is much that is sensible, much that is

Hague and Cameron are vindicated for leaving the EPP

Daniel Hannan breaks the, sadly, not very surprising news that MEPs have voted overwhelmingly in favour of an EU Tobin tax. The margin: 536 to 80. Only the European Conservatives and Reformist group and a handful of radicals opposed the motion. The EPP, which describes itself as ‘centrist’, voted uniformly in favour. Cameron was right to withdraw from a grouping whose interests are at odds not only with British Conservatives but with Britain itself: a tax on all financial transactions would castrate the City. What does this division mean for Britain? On the face of it not a lot: anyone of the member governments could veto it. However, many European

Fraser Nelson

Clegg: Heir to Thatcher?

Nick Clegg has a blue rose in his mouth in tomorrow’s Spectator, serenading readers – and showing his hidden Tory side. I have to say, he puts his heart into it. Not only does the Lib Dem leader say he’ll end the structural deficit with 100 percent spending cuts (not the 20 percent tax rises, 80 percent cuts combo that the Tories advocate), but he even heaps praise in Lady Thatcher. More, he describes her as something of an inspiration: just as she took on vested interests in the 1980s, so he will take on the banks now.   Personally, I can’t quite see the equivalence – and Clegg as

James Forsyth

The Tories will have waves of dirt thrown at them<br />

If you want a flavour of what is going to be thrown at the Tories between now and May 6th, read Jonathan Freedland’s column today. Freedland has a fair point about how Michael Ashcroft should pay tax in this country, in my view no one should be eligible for an honour let alone a seat in the legislature if they are not fully domiciled in this country for tax purpose, but it is all dressed up in the language of the class war. I’ve never met Richard Drax, Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax to give him this full name, but it seems rather cheap to drag up his family’s involvement in the

The Budget will be on 24 March

So now we know.  Gordon Brown has just announced that the Budget will be on 24 March – which strongly implies an election date of 6 May.  Brown could dissolve Parliament on 6 April, the manifestos would be published on 12 April, and then we’d be into the campaign proper.  Which means even more speeches, polls and dread speculation than we’re getting now. As for the Budget’s general flavour, we’ll probably get an idea of that today, too.  Brown’s currently giving a speech in which he’s brushing over recent tremors in the markets, to say that we are “weathering the storm; now is no time to turn back”.  Which comes

Tough on dangerous dogs, blind to the causes of dangerous dogs

It’s ‘dangerous dogs’ season again – but is there more to the story? The Today programme gave this its main 8.10am slot. The BBC sought to interview some chavs to sneer at – the listener being invited to conclude that the law must be brought to bear on them. But Brendan O’Neill was quite right in this week’s magazine, where he describes how government seeks to use this scare for yet another power grab over the citizens. The aim, he says “is not only to bring dog-owners into that very big tent of People Continually Spied On By The Authorities, but to weed out the ‘devil dogs that terrorise socially

Vaizey drops Cameron in it (again)

Michael Wolff’s portrait of David Cameron in the latest issue of Vanity Fair is well worth reading, even it it’s a weird kind of a beast. Wolff concludes – at the start of the piece, as it happens – that he’s “impressed” by the Tory leader. But then spends the best part of 2,000 words spraying out quotes and observations which will harden the attitudes of Cameron’s detractors, on both the left and the right. Cameron is a “toff”; Boris doubts his “intellectual bona fides”; the Tories have “anti-riffraff” policy on marriage, and so on. Wolff even quotes one Fraser Nelson, saying that he doesn’t “believe for a minute [Cameron]

A warning that applies to the Tories as much as it does to Labour

As James Kirkup says over at the Telegraph, it’s worth paying attention to the credit rating agency Fitch when it says that the UK deficit will need to be cut quicker than is currently planned – to 3.3 percent of GDP by 2015, rather than 4.4 percent.  Throw in similar warnings from the Confederation of British Industry and the Institute of Directors yesterday, and you’ve got a bunch of testimonies which are broadly supportive of the Tory narrative.  You can expect CCHQ to give them plenty of airtime over the next few days.    But, lest it need repeating, the pleas from the CBI and others could well be directed

Fraser Nelson

Bringing Clegg to the table

My gut feeling is that Cameron will win with a majority. But I had a gut feeling that Carey Mulligan would get Best Actress at the Oscars. When Scotland play rugby, I have a gut feeling that they will win. My gut, alas, has a pretty poor track record. But if I look at the polls, it suggests that Cameron will not win outright, and that Nick Clegg will be needed to form a majority. Today’s daily Sun/YouGov tracker has the Tories with a five-point lead – which suggests that Cameron is 26 seats short of a majority, and that Nick Clegg has just 22 MPs to bring to the

A well-timed change of heart from Lord Paul?

Previously, there were rumblings that Lord Paul was considering quitting the Lords to keep his non-dom status. Today, he has confirmed that he will end his non-dom status and remain in the Lords. If you were being cynical, you might think that there’s been a change of heart so that Labour can ramp up their attacks on the Tories over Lord Ashcroft. But surely Brown & Co. would want to keep their focus on the “serious business” of government, wouldn’t they?

Charlie Whelan’s role in Labour’s election campaign

If you want a sense of how much work Charlie Whelan and Unite are doing on behalf of Gordon Brown, then I’d recommend you read Rachel Sylvester’s column in the Times this morning.  There are the millions of pounds in funding, via the taxpayer, of course.  There’s Unite’s “virtual phone bank,” canvassing votes for Labour.  And then there’s Whelan himself – now almost as involved as ever with the Downing Street operation, and “working closely” with Douglas Alexander on Labour’s election campaign.  This is, I remind you, the Charlie Whelan who was copied into the Smeargate emails, and whose other indiscretions are better described by Martin Bright and Nick Cohen,

Labour and Tories level in marginals poll (but look to the swing)<br />

I know, I know – there are only so many polls a reader can take.  So I’ll spare you the details from tonight’s YouGov poll, or the Opinium poll in the Daily Express.  But this Populus poll in the Times is worth highlighting, if only because it seems to be attracting the most buzz.  It has Labour and the Tories both on 38 percent across 100 marginal seats.  Neck and neck – or so it seems. But as Anthony Wells points out over at UK Polling Report, what really matters is which marginals this poll covers, and what the swing is.  In this case, the marginals are those numbered 51