Uk politics

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

Exam result shock: Balls fails

You know how it is.  You start reading an article by Ed Balls – in this case, in today’s Guardian – and, before long, you’ve come across so many deceptions, half-truths and tribal slurs that you decide to fisk the whole thing.  So here is Balls’s article, with my supplementary comments in bold: The first group of young people to have been entirely educated under Labour pick up their GCSE results today. No doubt this will provoke some commentators into even greater efforts to do down their achievements – claiming more young people succeeding must mean exams are getting easier. In the early years of David Cameron’s leadership, the Tories

Wednesday

Daniel Korski

Nobody’s special

In The Times today, Danny Finkelstein defended the most hated profession in contemporary politics – the Special Advisers, or SpAds. Booo, hissss. The case against was (again) laid out by a number of former senior officials, with ex-Cabinet Secretary Andrew Turnbull telling a Lords committee recently that he did not like  SpAds rising to become Cabinet ministers by the time they were 38 “without touching the sides of real life”. Booo. Hisssss. Boooo. But how many of the current Shadow Cabinet do you think have been SpAds in the past? Come on, what do you think? Half? A third? Out of the 28 members of the Shadow Cabinet, including David

Daniel Korski

Libyagate has its roots in Labour’s devolution

One of the oddest parts of Libyagate is what it says about Gordon Brown’s notions of devolution. The Prime Minister does not want to comment on the affair because, we are told, he sees it as a matter for the Scottish government, not the British government. So, if the actions of a devolved but subordinate level of government go against the state’s interests, the leaders of that state should stay mum? That’s certainly not the view taken by successive US administrations; they have often condemned state-level actions, even when the federal government has been legally powerless to do anything in practice. The UK has no written constitution as in the

Peter Hoskin

On August opinion polls…

Do check out Mike Smithson’s latest post over at Political Betting, in which he relays an email he received from Nick Sparrow of ICM.  Sparrow highlights the close fit between August ICM polls in the years before elections and the actual election results themselves: “August 1996 poll suggested that Labour were ahead by 12%. The result – Labour won by 13% August 2000 poll suggested that Labour were ahead by 10% The result – Labour won by 9% August 2004 poll suggested that Labour were ahead by 3% The result – Labour won by 3% August 2009 poll suggests that the Tories are ahead by 16% The result – ?????????”

Tuesday

David Blackburn

Brown breaks his silence

At last, Gordon Brown has something to say about the Lockerbie bomber’s release. He said he was “angry and repulsed” by the welcome the Lockerbie bomber receive in Libya. And he also added: “I made it clear to Gadaffi in July that we could have no role in the release of al-Megrahi”. This doesn’t draw a line under the controversy. As William Hague has argued, the story is now about why it took Brown so long to say those few words and still managed to say nothing. And he hasn’t answered any of the serious questions being asked of the government.

Peter Hoskin

The language of political debate

A great spot by Tim Montgomerie over at ConservativeHome, who highlights this Wall Street Journal graphic on the words that both sides of the US healthcare debate should be using to score a rhetorical advantage.  For instance, it suggests that the pro-Obama team should say “rules” rather than “regulations”, while the President’s opponents should attack the system for being “too profit-driven” and “too bureaucratic”: As Tim says, words have power.  Indeed, over the past decade, the fiscal debate was partially

Peter Hoskin

Man on wire

It’s a fairly quiet day in Westminster, so Chris Grayling’s comparison between Britain and the gangland ghettos portrayed in The Wire is probably getting more attention than it would normally – after all, it’s not like the Tories haven’t majored on the “Broken Britain” theme before now.  But, even so, I think he may have erred in mentioning the acclaimed US TV series.  While superb, it is, don’t forget, the show that the chattering classes love to chatter about.  So, now, much of the coverage is about the TV programme rather than the problems Grayling is highlighting.  As Paul Waugh points out over at his indispensable blog, Grayling’s appearance on

David Blackburn

A very risky strategy

Labour’s attempt to create a new dividing line on cuts is intriguing because it suggests that the government reckons we are pulling out of recession – a message Alistair Darling has been stressing recently. Central to Labour’s argument is that their initial interventions, opposed by the Tories, preserved public services through the recession. By claiming that now is the time to make extensive cuts, beyond mere efficiency savings, suggests that they think the economy is robust enough to survive sweeping public spending cuts. If an economic boom couldn’t save John Major, I doubt a modest recovery will save Brown from defeat. But, if the economy does recover and Brown initiates

Peter Hoskin

Twilight Zone Tuesday: Brown to announce spending cuts

Now this is a turn up.  According to the Independent, Gordon Brown is going to “issue a list of specific [spending] cuts” as part of his Autumn “fightback”.  Here’s how the strategy goes: “Initially, Mr Brown will seek to establish in voters’ minds the key differences between Labour and the Tories – on policy, government intervention to limit the impact of the recession and preserving frontline services. Then he will acknowledge that the Government needs to go beyond the £35bn of efficiency savings it has already promised. The aim will be to show Labour is serious about reducing the deficit, which is set to rocket to £175bn in the current

Monday

David Blackburn

Would Cameron govern differently?

In an episode of Yes Prime Minister, a tobacco mogul asks Sir Humphrey: “Does he carry any clout in Whitehall?” The Mandarin replies: “None at all, he’s only a minister.” The context has changed but the essential truth remains – most Cabinet ministers have no clout in government whatsoever. That at least is the view of four former Sir Humphreys. Lords Turnbull, Wilson, Butler, and Armstrong are quoted in the Guardian saying that New Labour has centralised government around a clique of special advisers. The result? The marginalisation of the cabinet and the breakdown of what they term ‘the efficient and proper conduct of government’. Not even Jonathan Powell denies

David Blackburn

There’s no one like Macavity

Paul Waugh’s spot on: Brown has been reluctant to congratulate England for their Ashes victory because he is so desperate to avoid being dragged into the international furore surrounding al-Megrahi’s release. A Number.10 spokesman described Kenny MacAskill’s release order as a “uniquely sensitive and difficult decision” and one that (surprise, surprise) was taken completely independently of the British government. But, as yet, Macavity’s not here. I suppose I could be doing the PM a disservice. Braying about our Ashes victory would, of course, be uniquely insensitive to our Australian brothers. And besides, giving congratulations is probably someone else’s job.

Peter Hoskin

Confidence returns

One of the most significant news stories of the day comes courtesy of the Institute of Chartered Accountants: “Confidence among business professionals has surged, suggesting the recession is at an end, a survey has said. The Institute of Chartered Accountants’ index of business confidence rose to 4.8 at the end of June, from -28.2 in March, the biggest rise for two years.” Economically speaking, this is encouraging stuff – it’s the view from the frontline of the real economy, after all.  And these types of surveys always tend to have a self-fulfilling quality, as more confident companies adopt the measures – spending, hiring etc. – which are likely to drive

David Blackburn

Cameron must set out health plans

For some time now at Coffee House, we’ve questioned the sense of Cameron’s pledge to increase NHS spending in real terms. And in today’s Independent, a ComRes poll suggests that 62 percent of Tory MPs do not think the NHS should receive guaranteed spending increases. Indeed, their opposition to Mr Cameron’s plans runs deeper: only 33 percent believe the current model of care free at the point of delivery is sustainable. Additionally, the Independent quotes an anonymous Tory MP saying:  “The hope is that we would be more radical on health in office than we say now, that he [Mr Cameron] is anxious not to frighten the horses. But there

Sunday

David Blackburn

Thank God they’re not running a war

Last week, defence maestro Kevan Jones launched his master-strategy to smear General Sir Richard Dannatt. It was ingenious. An FOI request would reveal the General to be a spendthrift, abusing taxpayers’ generosity by lavishing their money on his grace and favour accommodation and on raucous parties for his army mates. To borrow a phrase, there was just one small flaw in the plan: it was rubbish. The Mail reveals that General Dannatt’s grace and favour apartment is a stable block, not a palace, and that he pays tax on it because he views it as a perk. His other claims are modest. Audiciously, Sir Richard secured £19,270.77p in expenses between 2005

David Blackburn

The stench of realpolitik

Suggesting that al-Megrahi’s release was the result of a deal being struck to protect commercial interests should be offensive, but there are a number of questions the government need to answer. First, was al-Megrahi’s transfer a condition of the Blair-Gadaffi Deal in the Desert? On Friday, Saif al-Islam said: “In all commercial contracts for oil and gas with Britain, Megrahi was always on the negotiating table”. The Foreign Office deny this and yesterday Lord Mandelson said: “The issue of the prisoner’s release is quite separate from the general matter of our relations and indeed the prisoner’s release has not been influenced in any way by the British government.” In addition

Peter Hoskin

Gove pushes his agenda

If you can divert your attention away from the Ashes for a second, then I’d recommend you read John Rentoul’s fascinating interview with Michael Gove in today’s Independent on Sunday.  The two most eye-catching passages concern Gove’s “ultra-Blarism” and his thoughts on foreign policy.  The Blairism first: “And when I ask if it is wise to paint himself as a Blairite, given the former prime minister’s latter unpopularity, he says: ‘He’s not as popular as he deserves to be, and he’s emphatically not as popular within Labour as he deserves to be – amazing ingratitude on their part. But if someone were to look at some of the views that

Peter Hoskin

Another Sunday, another set of damaging rumours for Brown

Brace yourselves, it’s leadership speculation time again.  A story in the Mail on Sunday alleges that Alistair Darling has been attacking Brown in private – “I am trying to talk sense into that man…” – before adding this: “Last night there were claims that backers of Home Secretary Alan Johnson – widely seen as the stop-gap leader if Mr Brown quits before the General Election – were secretly canvassing ‘non-aligned’ Labour MPs not closely linked to any potential successor. Sports Minister Gerry Sutcliffe, who ran Mr Johnson’s unsuccessful Labour deputy leadership bid in 2007, was accused of quietly taking names.” Whether true or no’, these rumblings tell you everything you

Saturday

Peter Hoskin

Tories more trusted on NHS than Labour

The Tories will be pleased.  After the #welovetheNHS brouhaha of the past couple of weeks, a ComRes poll in tomorrow’s Independent on Sunday gives them a healthy lead on the NHS.  In response to the statement “The NHS would be safer under Labour than the Conservatives,” 39 percent of respondents said they agreed, while 47 percent said they disagreed.  That’s an 8 point advantage for the Tories. It’s pretty devastating stuff for Labour, but – oddly – comes in one of the Tories’ weakest policy areas.  Let’s hope this encourages Cameron & Co. to think and talk more about health service reform.

David Blackburn

MI6, insider dealing and robbery: it’s another Harold Wilson conspiracy theory

The timing of Harold Wilson’s resignation on March 16 1976 is an enduring mystery and conspiracy theories abound. Had the onset of Alzheimer’s unnerved him? Was he about to be denounced as a Soviet spy? There’s even a preposterous suggestion that Lord Mountbatten gave up his regular lunches with Barbara Cartland to plan a military coup against Wilson. The eminent lawyer, Sir Desmond de Silva, adds a further theory in today’s Times: stolen documents proving that Wilson was involved in insider trading were for sale to continental magazines, and that might have forced Wilson out. Sir Desmond, who later defended one of the alleged thieves, said: “I had known nothing about this burglary. Apparently it

Peter Hoskin

Do the Tories need an “-ism”?

So what overarching theory do Cameron & Co. believe in now?  Is it Phillip Blond’s “Red Toryism”?  Are they still invigorated by “libertarian paternalism”?  Or have they struck on something else?  This week’s Bagehot column in the Economist gives us a useful overview of all the -isms the Tories have gone through recently, before landing on a conclusion that the policy wonks in CCHQ may not like: “The Tories should stop worrying about whether their view of the world works in theory, and concentrate more on generating ideas that will work in practice. They can live without an ideology; what they urgently require is balls.” Bagehot’s take is certainly attractive.