Politics

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

Hard going for the government

A tough morning for the government at the hands of Tyrie, Fallon and rest of the Treasury Select Committee. Sir Alan Budd apologised for his naivety, Robert Chote described the Budget as ‘regressive’ in the main and the banking levy has been criticised on the grounds that is de-stabilising banks’ capital bases, which will affect lending. The government would prefer silence on these issues but the damage was far from total. Budd was an interim figure and the spat that has developed around him is largely political – there is no question that Budd was ‘nobbled’. Robert Chote deserves his reputation but he is not infallible. And Treasury Chief Economic

Alex Massie

How Many Tories “hate” David Cameron?

Tim Montgomerie has some recommendations for how David Cameron can bolster relations with the Tory right. He should be more polite and conciliatory, throw the right the occasional bone or opportunity to head a policy review, offer a way back for some of those, such as David Davis, who are no longer part of the fold, have better relations with the wider Tory family, consult a bit more outside his own circle and so on. It’s all perfectly sensible even if one’s also left feeling that even if Cameron did all Montgomerie recommends, it would only be a matter of time before the Right grew restless anyway. As Tim puts

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.

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

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

Ed Balls is now a caricature of Ed Balls

Meanwhile, in other Labour news, Ed Balls has just jumped into the deep end without any armbands.  Speaking to the BBC this lunchtime, everyone’s favourite Labour leadership candidate said that he didn’t – and doesn’t – approve of Labour’s plan to cut the deficit in half “through spending cuts.”  As if to underline the point, he added that he’s reluctant to identify cuts until after “this huge risky experiment has been tried on our economy by the Conservatives and the Liberals”.  So he’s got the fiscal insanity and anti-Clegg positions nailed, then. Coupled with Balls’ grandstanding on schools cuts, there’s a gruesome possibility that this rhetoric could boost his appeal

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

Just in case you missed them… | 12 July 2010

…here are some of the posts made at Spectator.co.uk over the weekend. Fraser Nelson praises Cameron’s refreshing honesty on schools. Peter Hoskin wonders if Labour will ever love-bomb the Lib Dems, and watches Miliband and Mandelson declare war on Brown. David Blackburn notes that David Miliband’s attack on Brown confirms his own weakness, and says that the Gove fight-back begins. Rod Liddle doubts that Blackpool is on a par with the Great Wall of China. Alex Massie notes that the government will not be banning…cheese sandwiches. And Melanie Phillips asks who has put Michael Gove on the rack.

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:

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

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

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

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

Charles Moore

The Spectator’s Notes | 10 July 2010

The more you think about it, the odder it is that the only national referendum ever legislated for in this country, apart from the 1975 referendum about whether or not to stay in the EEC, should be about the Alternative Vote. The only party which proposed AV at the last election was Labour, which lost. The Tories campaigned for the status quo and the Liberal Democrats for the single transferable vote. It would be more logical — more proportional, indeed — to put all three versions before the electorate. It would also be more proportional to legislate for a threshold, a substantial fraction which the referendum would have to surmount

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

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.

Alex Massie

To 2015 And Beyond

My word, the Daily Mail is a tender, easily-startled fawn. Here’s James Chapman today: The Prime Minister raised the extraordinary possibility of a non-aggression pact between the Tories and the Lib Dems at the next election as he mounted his strongest defence yet of the coalition. Well, the Daily Mail may consider this “extraordinary”; readers of this blog should not. This is both a logical and necessary step along the road to a second term. This, mind, will be difficult to achieve even with Liberal Democrat support for a second coalition: it will require nerve and guts and luck. But, perhaps, it can be done. The good news is that