Politics

Read about the latest UK political news, views and analysis.

Isabel Hardman

The day of the Lords arrives

Lords reform makes its way into the Commons today, but it’s hardly a relief for the whips that after weeks of threats from the rebel camp, the legislation is finally being debated. With tales circulating the House that there are 110 Tory MPs prepared to defy the whip on the programme motion, this could be the first time the Government is defeated on its legislative programme. The BBC’s Norman Smith tweeted this morning that the rebels were being told to vote against second reading rather than the programme motion if they were unhappy with the legislation. But even if, as Paul Goodman argues, not every rebel on that list of

James Forsyth

What Mark Harper isn’t telling us

Mark Harper is touring the broadcast studios at the moment making the case for the coalition’s Lords reform bill. Being Nick Clegg’s Conservative deputy is not an easy job. But there is something particularly disingenuous about one of the arguments that Harper is using.   Harper said On Sunday, as Conservative Home reported, that: ‘It’s been Conservative policy to have a mainly elected House of Lords since 1999. I stood on the last three elections on that manifesto and the Coalition Agreement does no more than ask both the Coalition parties to deliver what was in both of our manifestos’. What this ignores is that in 2007, Harper voted against

James Forsyth

Is Lords reform heading for a slow or quick death?

At the end of last week, Number 10 was optimistic that it and the whips were having some success in limiting the rebellion on the Lords. Some were even suggesting that the vote on the programme motion was winnable, after all. But that feeling has evaporated this morning. First, the weekend ring round by various senior figures did not meet with great success. Second, the ‘dear colleague’ letter signed by 74 MPs means that the programme motion is now pretty much certain to be defeated. Indeed, the rebels number considerably more than 74 when you include the PPSs who are planning to vote against it, the backbench opponents trying to

The problem with UKIP’s opponents

Leafing through a pile of Economists I’ve just caught up on a Bagehot column from last month which inadvertently demonstrates exactly where UKIP’s opponents go wrong. The very final lines of the piece explain: ‘Mr Farage’s real dream is to reshape Britain, by pulling the Conservatives to the right and bouncing Mr Cameron into a referendum on EU membership. If he pulls that off, his insurgency will be no laughing matter.’ It is what is assumed here, rather than what is said, that is most revealing. Why should the prospect of a consultation of the British people on their membership of the EU be so fearful? Surely it could only

James Forsyth

Clegg takes a hammering over Lords reforms

Nick Clegg was standing at the despatch box to move the second reading of the coalition’s Lords reform bill. But the reception he got was reminiscent of what used to happen to Lib Dem leaders at PMQs. He was barracked mercilessly by both Labour and Tory benches while his own benches remained oddly silent, only one of his MPs intervened on his behalf.   Watching the Tory benches during Clegg’s speech it was hard not to imagine a considerable rebellion tomorrow night. At one point, the interventions were coming in so thick and fast that Clegg appeared to be almost ducking at the despatch box. The Tories seemed to be

Nick Cohen

Westminster’s hollow men

In my Observer column today I say that a judicial review into the banking scandal would have achieved little unless the judge could have persuaded the politicians to change the law. As if on cue, Ed Miliband and Ed Balls popped up to demonstrate that they have no desire to change banking law in any way that might make a difference. Their proposals to expand the number of banks and make it easier for customers to switch accounts, amount to more of the same. Instead of five big banks running on taxpayer guarantees, we will have seven big banks running on taxpayer guarantees. Neither Labour nor the Tories is willing

James Forsyth

The Tory troublemaking begins on Lords reforms

One instructive way to think about Tuesday’s vote on Lords reform is, do you want to have proportional representation used to elect people to the Westminster parliament? I suspect that most people on the centre-right would answer no to that question, and with good reason. In the current British system, PR would work against the centre-right’s political interests.   It is for this reason that the term rebel is a bit of a misnomer for those Tories trying to thwart the coalition’s plans for Lords reform. The likes of Andrew Griffiths, an adviser to Eric Pickles when he was party chairman, and Angie Bray, a former Central Office staffer, are

Alex Massie

Scotland needs more immigrants

I’ve written an article for the Scotsman today arguing that Scotland needs many more immigrants. Aside from all the usual arguments in favour of this kind of blood transfusion I should also have said that increasing the number of non-Scots in Scotland is a useful hedge against being governed by, you know, Scots should we ever get around to voting in favour of independence… Anyway, here’s the gist of the damn thing: Though polling data says Scots are about as immigrant-friendly as Londoners – and, therefore, likely to be more relaxed about immigration than people in other parts of the United Kingdom – that still means some 70 per cent

Fraser Nelson

How to solve a problem like the LibDems

I’d like to offer my own solution to the coalition problem that James referred to earlier. First, my theory of what went wrong. At first, the coalition worked well and was radical. Nick Clegg felt that he’d build up his party’s support over time, by proving it could work well in government. This didn’t work, and the (avoidable) tuition fee u-turn sunk Clegg’s credibility. His party started to kick off, especially after AV. So they position themselves not as do-ers, but as restrainers. Their pitch is: ‘we’re the good guys in the coalition, priding ourselves on what we stop these wicked Tories doing’. The coalition then moved from a constructive

James Forsyth

Is the coalition’s time drawing to a close?

There’s long been a certain amount of speculation in Westminster about how long the coalition will last. This topic used to be the sole preserve of those who were sceptics of it; it was a question hoping for the answer not that long. Enthusiasts for coalition, took it as a given that it would last to 2015. But today Matthew Parris, one of the commentators who has been most welcoming of the coalition, writes, ‘I’m close to despair and no longer confident that the coalition can continue even into next year.’   When even the coalition’s friends are saying this, then it is time for the Prime Minister and deputy

Rod Liddle

Rise of the juristocracy

Who should we get to sort out our venal and cavalier bankers? It’s an interesting question. The Labour party wishes to inflict upon them a plague of lawyers, to use Jeremy Bentham’s apt expression, presided over by some bewigged and self-regarding judge. A judicial inquiry, then, which will end up costing the equivalent of a whole bunch of bankers bonuses and then some. The argument seems to be that the government, in preferring the inquiry to be carried out by parliamentarians, is affording the matter too little seriousness. Select committees are all well and good for the minor stuff, but such is the public outrage on this particular matter that

Isabel Hardman

Lib Dems push the boundaries

That the Liberal Democrats might try to scupper the boundary reforms if they don’t get their way on Lords reform has been the talk of the tearooms in Westminster for months. But today the threat comes to the fore as Nick Clegg’s departing head of strategy Richard Reeves warns the Independent that there will be ‘consequences’ if Tory MPs try to block reform of the upper chamber by voting down the Government’s programme motion for debating the legislation. This is what he told the newspaper: ‘There would be broader consequences for the Government’s programme, particularly around political and parliamentary reform. The idea that a failure to deliver a government commitment

Isabel Hardman

‘David Cameron stands for being Prime Minister’

‘What do you think David Cameron stands for?’ a Tory MP asked me recently. Unsure of his point, I burbled something about ‘responsibility’ and couple of other random abstract nouns. The MP shook his head grimly. ‘No,’ he said. ‘I’ll tell you what David Cameron stands for.’ I leant forward, intrigued. ‘David Cameron stands for being Prime Minister.’ It turns out that this MP isn’t the only one who thinks this way about Cameron’s motives. A survey of ConHome readers, published today, found that 50% believed he was only interested in being Prime Minister and did not have a strong vision for the country. The list of questions the site

Fraser Nelson

Anarchy on Question Time

So what did George Osborne tell The Spectator? The words he used to James Forsyth became the centre of a Question Time bust up last night and one that had to be broken up by a Sex Pistol.   Let’s start with Ed Balls’ version. He told the Commons that Osborne impugned his integrity by accusing him of being personally involved in the Libor scandal. Untrue: Osborne had said that those around Brown were involved in Libor. Balls, he said, had questions to answer.  He drew a clear a distinction, and James made this clear in the piece. On Question Time, Alan Johnson tried to play the same trick. His

Isabel Hardman

The battle to be the party of the armed forces

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond has the unenviable task today of announcing a cull of army units as the force is cut from 102,000 to 82,000. The Army 2020 review, the launch of which was delayed beyond Armed Forces Day last weekend, also doubles the number of reservists to 30,000. This leaves it half the size it was during the Cold War era, and the smallest since the Boer War. This is obviously deeply unpleasant for those troops whose units are being abolished. It is also uncomfortable for the Tories, who have long enjoyed the reputation of being the party of the armed forces. Tim Montgomerie tweeted this morning: ‘Biggest tax

James Forsyth

QCs could be the solution to the banking inquiry row

There are, though partisans don’t want to admit it, problems with both a judicial inquiry and a parliamentary inquiry into the Libor scandal and the wider culture it has revealed. A judicial inquiry would drag on and, judging by the Leveson Inquiry, there’s no guarantee that the judge would understand the industry he’s meant to be examining. But, as yesterday demonstrated, the standard of questioning at any parliamentary inquiry is going to be patchy.   John Thurso, a Lib Dem member of the Treasury select committee and one of the most respected MPs, has been out floating a compromise solution. His idea is that the Joint Committee should have the

James Forsyth

Inquiry debate leaves acrimonious atmosphere

Following the vote just now, there will be a parliamentary inquiry into the Libor scandal. Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Treasury select committee, will chair it because Ed Balls has agreed that Labour will participate in it as long as it concerns about membership and the secretariat are addressed; presumably, this means that Labour will argue that as it is a joint committee of both House there should be no government majority on it. The debate, though, has left an atmosphere of acrimony behind. It was noticeable that during the vote, Ed Balls walked past George Osborne who appeared to be trying to engage him in conversation. Also when Nicola

PMQs live — 4 July 2012

Follow our live coverage of Prime Minister’s Question Time on Wednesday 4 July 2012: <a href=”http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php/option=com_mobile/task=viewaltcast/altcast_code=106b0e8835″ >PMQs live – 4th July 2012</a>

Isabel Hardman

The Tory fight for Lords reform

Last night a group of Liberal Democrat and Conservative MPs met to discuss Lords reform. Public outbursts from the Conservative backbench have so far focused on opposition to the bill and the programme motion that the whips are trying to impose on the legislation, but the group of pro-reform MPs, who have informally dubbed themselves the Democratic Majority, are optimistic that the legislation will make a successful passage through the House of Commons. There are 27 Conservatives on board at the moment along all the Lib Dems, standing up the list of 100 MPs that the rebel leaders claim to have among their number. Ringleader Jake Berry, a member of