Politics

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

Clegg keeps them guessing

Yesterday was all Labour, Tories, Labour, Tories.  So, today, enter the Lib Dems.  Nick Clegg has an article in this morning’s Times which, to be fair, is actually quite noteworthy.  His main point?  That the Lib Dems are a party in their own right, and will not be engaging in “under-the-counter deals” with the Big Two: “This year’s general election is likely to be the most open and unpredictable in a generation. So you have a right to know where we stand. I can promise voters wondering whether to put an “X” against the Liberal Democrats that there are no backroom deals or under-the-counter “understandings” with either of the other

James Forsyth

The opening day of the long election campaign is a score draw in terms of media coverage but the big development is that Labour has lost one of its main tax dividing lines

During an election campaign, the press like to obsess about who won the day. Up until 3pm, the consensus was that the Tories had. The media was pointing out just how absurd it was for Labour to criticise another party for having black holes in its fiscal plans. But then came David Cameron’s marriage gaffe which has evened up the coverage on the evening news broadcasts with the Six o’clock news going particularly hard on the issue. Cameron’s credibility is central to the Tory campaign so anything that depletes that is bad news for them. But in the long term, I think the most significant development today is one that

James Forsyth

Why the Tories started with health

The Tories today rolled out the first section of their manifesto this morning, the chapter on health. The reason the Tories started with their plans for the NHS, as they did when setting out their priorities for government last autumn, is quite simple: the leadership thinks that every time Cameron talks about health the party goes up in the polls. Certainly, one of the achievements of Cameron’s leadership has been to cancel out Labour’s traditional advantage on the question of who is most trusted on the NHS; Labour’s lead on this question has been a statistically insignificant one percent in the last two polls on the subject according to Anthony

James Forsyth

The Tories accuse Labour of telling “lies”

The Toryies are busy rebutting Labour’s claim that there is a £34bn black hole in their tax and spending plans. The most striking thing is how strong the language Conservative sources are using is, Labour’s document was described to me as ‘a “dodgy dossier” full of lies’. It is quite remarkable that Labour has the gall to criticise the other side for unfunded spending pledges and the headline Tory objections are fair enough. The document says the Tories would let married couples transfer their tax allowances, when they haven’t committed to that. It also claims that the Tories are pledged to abolishing the 50p rate before the end of the

James Forsyth

The shape of things to come | 4 January 2010

Today is a taste of how politics is going to be until the election: competing Labour and Tory events, claim and counter claim. Alistair Darling kicked off proceedings with an event setting out the supposed £34 billion black hole in the Tory’s plans for the public finances. This took some chutzpah considering how vague Labour’s own spending plans are, there are currently no departmental budgets, and how big the balck hole in Labour’s plans is, remember how Brown implied on Marr yesterday that tax rises on the rich, the National Insurance hike and lower than expected unemployment would be able to take most of the strain of halving the £178bn

Just in case you missed them…<br />

…here are some of the posts made at Spectator.co.uk over the New Year period. Fraser Nelson asks David Cameron not to take voters for fools, and wishes everyone a boozy New Year. James Forsyth reflects on the Detroit bomber’s radicalisation, and debates the tensions in the Cameron circle. Peter Hoskin says that the Tories are struggling to find a line on tax, and believes that it’s not just bankers who will be hanged. David Blackburn argues that Labour has made a terrible mistake in marginalising Mandy, and thinks that ministers should always be ultimately accountable. Daniel Korski makes his predictions for 2010. Susan Hill takes the attack to Harriet Harman.

Endangering impartiality

Labour’s rapid rebuttal service will respond to the Tories’ policy blitz by questioning George Osborne’s spending pledges, of which more later. No objection can be raised against this action except that the government enlisted the Treasury to deliver very detailed costings under the Freedom of Information Act. The Times reports that the Tories are understandably livid: impartiality has been compromised. A spokesman said: “We are concerned at any collusion and abuse of the FOI system which has involved ministers requesting costings of what are complete misrepresentations of Conservative policies, which were subsequently released. We will be asking questions in Parliament about the cost and use of resources involved, not least

Tories struggling to find a line on tax

After the platitudes in David Cameron’s speech yesterday, comes the bluntness of Ken Clarke in today’s Sunday Telegraph.  Interviewed by the paper, the shadow business secretary says that it would be a “folly” to rule out tax rises: “It is something that every Conservative tries to avoid but I didn’t avoid it when I was getting us out of recession before. Coming out of a recession when you have such a severe deficit you can’t rule out putting up taxes.” He’s right, of course.  The mammoth size of the deficit, and the lag before many spending reductions take effect, will mean that the Tories shouldn’t rule out tax rises.  More

Alex Massie

The Myth of Gordon Brown the Eternal Battler

Self-delusion is an important skill in politics. If you can’t convince yourself that what you’re saying is true then good luck with convincing the electorate. Among Gordon Brown’s difficulties is the unfortunate truth that he’s not an accomplished liar. So, for instance, when he tells Andrew Marr this morning that “Everything I have ever won in my life I have had to fight for.” voters can be excused finding this preposterous. True, Brown’s eye-troubles and his battles to help modernise the Labour party have been struggles, but within the context of his own upbringing and political history, Brown’s as much an establishment figure as, in his own very different way

Alex Massie

Rory Stewart’s Long March to the Border

It’s a curious feature of British politics these days that an ex-army, ex-FCO hand educated at Eton and Oxford can reasonably considered a “new” kind of politician. Then again, Rory Stewart isn’t your average Old Etonian. Assuming, as seems likely, he wins Penrith and the Border he seems likely to be the new member of parliament who will be the subject of more envy and perhaps jealousy than any of his peers. So be it. I rather enjoyed his account, published in the Sunday Times today, of the walking tour he’s made of his prospective constituency. There’s much good sense in it and, frankly, one approves of the idea of

Fraser Nelson

Don’t take the voters for fools, Mr Cameron

David Cameron can give rousing, mature, insightful speeches. Yesterday’s was not one of them. It used the word ‘hope’ 7 times and ‘change’ 27 times and that, I suspect, was its entire purpose – because there was precious little content in it otherwise. In the News of the World today, I describe the speech as vapid nonsense. Here’s ten extracts which show why. 1. “It’s because we are progressives that we will protect the NHS…We recognise its special place in our society so we will not cut the NHS; we will improve it for everyone.” Come again? Refusing to cut the NHS reflects its ‘special place’? Herewith the poisoned logic

James Forsyth

Tensions in the Cameron circle over election strategy

There is a fascinating glimpse at the tensions inside the top echelons of the Conservative party in The Times today. Francis Elliott reports that Steve Hilton is trying to veto the appointment of James O’Shaugnessy, head of policy for the party, as head of the Downing Street policy unit should the Tories win the election. Francis writes that tensions between Hilton and O’Shaugnessy have been exacerbated by disputes about what should go in the initial slice of the Tory manifesto which will be published on Monday. O’Shaugnessy is one of politics’ nice guys. But he has been the focus of negative briefing in recent months. Back in early September, I

Brown’s troubles are returning at just the right time for Cameron & Co.

First she loved him.  Then she hated him.  Then she seemed lukewarm towards him.  And, today, she’s gone back to hating him more than ever.  Yes, Polly Toynbee’s latest column is another marker stone in her oscillating relationship with Gordon Brown, and it doesn’t contain any minced words: “Cancel new year, put back the clocks and forget the fireworks. There is nothing to celebrate in the dismal year ahead. The Labour party is sledging down a black run, eyes tight shut, the only certainty the electoral wall at the bottom of the hill. In five months David Cameron will be prime minister and Gordon Brown will be toast. Remember him?

James Forsyth

This election is the most important since 1983. Seldom has so much been at stake

James Forsyth on what promises to be a transformative year in politics Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future‚ as the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Niels Bohr rightly observed. But there are some things one can predict with (almost) total confidence: in this year there will be an election and by next Christmas one of the two main parties will have a new leader. And by the end of the summer, we will know if Britain is likely to tackle the single biggest threat to its prosperity and standing in the world: the gargantuan budget deficit, 12.6 per cent of GDP and counting. The election will divide the year. Until

Martin Vander Weyer

A decade to forget? No, remember Viagra, the iPod and the death of good manners

Martin Vander Weyer’s Any Other Business It’s tempting to label the Noughties ‘the decade to forget’, except that we only get about eight decades each, so it doesn’t really seem wise to forget any of them. It was certainly a decade of nasty shocks — 9/11, the Boxing Day tsunami of 2004 — and of nasty wars and bad politics, beginning with George W. Bush’s disputed election and ending with Gordon Brown’s disintegration before our very eyes. It was a decade of financial madness that began with the bursting of the dotcom bubble and ended with half our high-street banks under state control and our public finances in ruins. And

By marginalising Mandelson, Labour has put itself in a half-Nelson

The Dark Lord’s grip is weakening. Lord Mandelson’s waning status dominated headlines in the prelude to Christmas, and today the Telegraph reports that Harriet Harman, and not Mandelson, will lead Labour’s election battle. Mandelson’s marginalisation is understandable. He has been the government’s fire-fighter, deployed to defend the indefensible and bamboozle voters with a fantasia of figures and the demeanour of the Widow Twankee. As the narrative of recession cedes to that of recovery and the election nears, Labour requires a different style of communicator. Labour considers Harman to be that person, and hope that she will connect with women and middle England. Also, the days when peers fronted general election

Thinking the unthinkable

Woah, hang on there. A Labour and Conservative coalition in the event of a hung Parliament? Crazy talk, surely? But that’s what Martin Kettle devotes his column to in today’s Guardian. It’s only unthinkable, he writes, “until you start thinking about it.” Hm. So rather than dismissing the prospect out of hand, I thought I’d register one particular complaint against it. While many of Kettle’s arguments about the fracturing of the party system and the blurring lines between the main parties make sense, the idea that they might coalesce in the aftermath of this year’s election ignores one crucial factor: the Labour leadership. Let’s just say, for the sake of Kettle’s argument, that Gordon Brown achieves

Fraser Nelson

What a difference two years makes

“Did he know who you were? I mean, not to be disrespectful, but he has been away for two and a half years…” So Five Live’s Phil Wiliams asked David Miliband who was talking about his conversation with Peter Moore who has just been released from Iraqi captivity. Brilliant image. The guy gets out of prison, then there’s a call from this nerdy Blairite bag carrier claiming to be foreign secretary. Yegawds, he’d say, what’s happened? Worse, Gordon Brown had become Prime Minister and irreparably trashed the British economy in the space of 24 months. Britain has now joined Zimbabwe in printing money to fund state spending. At the end

Brown kicks off 2010 with dividing lines aplenty

Clear your diary, invite the relatives over, and huddle around a computer: Gordon Brown will be delivering his New Year’s message – via podcast, on the Downing St website – this evening. Just in case you’ve got other things to be doing, this article in the Telegraph gives you a good taste of what to expect. In summary: dividing lines and optimism. There’s plenty on how the Tories are planning for “a decade of austerity and unfairness” – in contrast to our glorious PM, who predicts falling unemployment, more new businesses and prosperity for all. Indeed, the snippets that the Telegraph carries indicate just how eager Brown is to deploy a green shoots