Politics

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

Thursday

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Congratulations, Michael Heath

Last night, Michael Heath, The Spectator’s brilliant cartoon editor, won a lifetime achievement award at the Cartoon Art Trust Awards – and what a lifetime. His first illustrations for The Spectator appeared in the mid-1950s, and have long since become a mainstay of the magazine. To mark this special talent, we’ve pasted a selection of his cartoons, from across the decades, below. So congratulations, Michael. And here’s to the next 55 years. 1950s: 11 December, 1959 1960s: 24 April, 1974 1970s: 1 April, 1978 1980s: 3 April, 1982 1990s: 22 March, 1997 2000s: 21 November, 2009

Alex Massie Alex Massie

David Cameron’s Immodest Belief in Government

David Cameron’s response to the Queen’s Speech was, of course, dictated by both convention and political nit-picking. Nonetheless, I agree with Sunder Katwala that it’s rum to see a Conservative leader complaining that the government isn’t proposing enough legislation. A useful reminder that whatever else they may be, Dave’s Conservatives do not take an especially modest or reatrained view of government. On the contrary: if there is a problem there must be a bill and damn the consequences. So Cameron, correctly, identified Labour’s approach as believing that “The answer to every problem is more big government and spending” at the same time as he demanded that the government do more,

David Blackburn

They think it’s all over | 19 November 2009

It looks like curtains for ‘President’ Blair. Every commentator besides Adam Boulton and James MacIntyre, who is possessed of a ruinous gambling streak, have now virtually written off the former PM. Blair has an uncanny knack of winning through against the odds, so I will not call time on his chances quite yet. But with Merkel and Sarkozy united against him, the fat lady is warming up for the main event with a few scales and arpeggios. Where would failure leave Blair with regard to Labour and the election? Staunch Brownite and habitual anti-Blair plotter Tom Watson kicked the habit in September and urged Blair to campaign for the ailing

Peter Hoskin

A phonecall to Kelly looks better than not mentioning expenses

If you want a measure of how disastrous yesterday’s Queen’s Speech was for Gordon Brown, you need only pay heed to two things.  First, today’s news coverage, which is almost universally negative for the PM.  Even the FT, which is usually quite forgiving of Brown, launches an acerbic attack on the “shameless politicking” in the speech.  And that’s before we get onto numerous stories about discontent on the left, as well as unflattering write-ups by political columnists across the political spectrum. The second is David Cameron’s interview on the Today programme this morning.  One of the lines of questioning was whether the Tories had got in touch with Sir Christopher

David Blackburn

Hoist by his own petard

The Queen’s Speech contained some worthwhile bills. Parents will face orders when a child breaches antisocial behaviour rules, and the Flood and Water Maintainence Bill, whilst unlikely to rival the 1911 Parliament Act in the annals of Westminster, is welcome, responsible legislation. I can even see that if you’re that way inclined, which I’m not, Harman’s Equality Bill has something to commend it. The remainder of the programme is a political landmine, presenting benevolences that mask incendiary conceits. Clever politics theoretically, but in the rush to prime the fuses, and with little thought for these bills’ practical application, this incomparable government has blown itself up. The Times reports that Labour

Wednesday

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Even by the standards of Karzai’s government this is extraordinary

The story, ‘Afghan Minister accused of taking bribe’ might seem depressingly predictable. But the accusations in today’s Washington Post are shocking even by the standards of the Karzai government. The paper reports that a US official has confirmed that there is a ‘high degree of certainty’ that the Afghan Minister of Mines took a $30 million bribe from a Chinese company in December 2007 to award it a $2.9 billion contract. It should be noted, that the Minister of Mines strongly denies the accusation. But the timing of this story and its source, a US official, is interesting. It seems to fit with a pattern of efforts to try and

Lloyd Evans Lloyd Evans

A paper-thin Queen’s Speech

Even before the Queen had trundled back to Buckingham Palace, Mandy had let the cat out of the bag. Speaking on BBC News he said of the Gracious Speech, ‘All these laws are relevant … and achievable. It will be for the public to decide whether they want them or not.’  There you have it. The greatest power in the land admits the Queen’s Speech is Labour’s manifesto. The response to the Gracious Speech is an enjoyably ragged parliamentary occasion, full of ancient traditions and even more ancient jokes. Frank Dobson proposed the Humble Address and spoke with pride about his Holborn constituency where the anti-Apartheid movement had been born.

David Blackburn

The Prince is playing politics

Lord Mandelson argues in the Evening Standard that Labour’s legislative programme has the Tories running for cover. The forthcoming debate should prove this thesis to be nonsense. 7 minutes of largely rehashed policies, including all the old favourites – equality, the ‘smarter’ state and so forth, is unlikely to give Cameron sleepless nights. I suspect Mandelson knows this as there is little substance to his argument. The article contains more insinuations than an episode of Midsomer Murders. Mandelson writes:     ‘David Cameron seems to be getting a little rattled. Following his flustered performance at PMQs last week, he seems shocked and disconcerted to be facing a political fight again.’ ‘Seems’

Peter Hoskin

Last chance saloon

So what to make of today’s Queen’s Speech?  Myself, I’m finding it hard to drum up much excitement.  After all, we already know most of its contents (if you want a primer, then check out this excellent Guardian summary article here), and much of it is either underwhelming, unworkable or – as everyone from David Cameron to Michael White has pointed out – self-servingly political on Labour’s part.  Tory peers are saying that they’ll block the proposals, but you’ve got to doubt whether they’ll be enacted before the next election anyway.  All in all, Danny Finkelstein’s analysis is attractive.  As he puts it: “who cares?” But there is one sense

David Blackburn

Things are as they seem

Steve Richards writes a stirring defence for what is likely to be Labour’s last legislative programme. Richards argues that if you suspend your disbelief and ignore everything you have read about current political situation and you will see not a tired, regressive government but a radical political force. ‘Perhaps none of the proposals will be implemented by the election. Maybe they will all turn into dust, but they mark a departure from cautious incremental approaches usually adopted by the Government. The Conservatives’ equivalent proposals have an echo with the mid 1990s, while their Euro-scepticism takes us further back, and their plans for spending cuts to 1981. Yet it is the

Con Coughlin

A special form of disrespect

Barack Obama’s increasing disregard for Britain’s views is no way to treat an ally whose troops have fought side by side with America since September 11, says Con Coughlin Washington It says much about Britain’s rapidly disappearing ‘special relationship’ with America that when I happened to mention to some of our senior military officers that I was visiting Washington, they begged me to find out what the Obama administration was thinking about Afghanistan. It is not just that the transatlantic lines of communication, so strong just a few years ago, have fallen into disuse. There is now a feeling that, even if we reached the Oval Office, there would be

Elliot Wilson

Will Kraft’s plastic cheese smother Cadbury’s heritage?

Elliot Wilson says there are synergies between the takeover protagonists — but it will be sad to see the British chocolate maker swallowed by a bloated US conglomerate When consumer goods giant Kraft tabled a £10.2 billion bid for Cadbury two weeks ago, the outcry was immediate and heartfelt. Here was an American monster buying an iconic British household name, one of our very last independent, home-grown, corporate crown jewels. Some of the resentment was understandable. Cadbury’s heritage is part of our national psyche. Founded 185 years ago by John Cadbury, a Quaker tea-and-coffee trader, the firm’s aims were as much to do with social improvement as with profit. Moreover,

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

Your chance to grade Gordon

The public’s judgement on Gordon Brown will probably come with the general election, but CoffeeHousers may have fun with this webpage in the meantime.  It has been created by the clean-up-politics organisation Power 2010, and will let you grade Gordon Brown in the aftermath of tomorrow’s Queen’s speech.  Naturally, the grades run from A (“Top of the class”) to F (“Brown fail”); you can leave comments; and Gordon will receive a school report in December.  I suppose it’s meant to help close the democratic deficit between Downing St and the rest of the country – but it could just help some folk let off a little steam…

David Blackburn

The liberal centre’s continuing confusion on challenging the BNP

My recent post about the BNP has offended liberals as well as the hard right. Liberal Conspiracy’s Sunny Hundal writes: ‘David is highly confused. This is because he says: “The Spectator has maintained that the party’s domestic policies are inspired by racial supremacist ideology and that its economic policies are like Dagenham – that is, three stops beyond Barking.” Yes, I’ll agree with that. The party’s domestic policies are indeed inspired by a racial supremacist ideology. Which is why people should avoid following those policies right? Except, he does on to say centrist parties “must engage with (and I mean engage with, not shout down)” BNP policies. What a muddle.

David Blackburn

The SNP flees for the hills

Last week, I argued that the Glasgow North East by-election would force the SNP to alter its tactics. The Scottish press are reporting that Salmond will scrap his plans for a straight referendum on independence in favour of a multi-option poll on what further powers Holyrood should assume, short of independence. Such a withdrawal was being mooted before the election but has been accelerated by the scale of the SNP’s defeat and its disintegrating confidence. This concession is seen as the only way the SNP minority government can maintain the co-operation of opposition parties on the issue. Only, according to the Daily Record, they won’t play ball. Opposition parties are

Rod Liddle Rod Liddle

Are we heading for a repeat of 1992?

Much as I hate to provoke, you have to say it’s been a very good couple of weeks for both the Prime Minister and the Labour Party. It is probably true that Labour SHOULD have won the by-election in Glasgow North East, but that is not what tends to happen with extremely unpopular governments these days, not even in Scotland. And Labour won with a certain comfort. Ah, but Scotland is different, you might console yourself (forgetting your glee when the government, for the first time in 50 years, ceased to be the controlling party north of the border.) Well, sure; but in the weeks leading up to the poll,

David Blackburn

Cameron fires a broadside at ‘petty’ Brown

David Cameron has written an apoplectic editorial in the Times condemning Gordon Brown’s partisan hijacking of the Queen’s Speech. Here is the key section: ‘We are mired in the deepest and longest recession since the Second World War, with deep social problems and a political system that is held in contempt. The State Opening of Parliament tomorrow ought to be about radical ideas to deal with this triple crisis. Instead, by all accounts, the Queen’s Speech will be little more than a Labour press release on palace parchment. Don’t take my word for it. As The Times reported yesterday, a Cabinet minister has been boasting about the contents of the

Peter Hoskin

Balls dumps Brown into another lose-lose situation

Things never seem to go smoothly for Gordon.  On a day when the Telegraph carries details of his Whitehall savings programme, the FT has news that one of his closest allies, Ed Balls, is calling for relatively hefty spending increases elsewhere.  Apparently, Balls has asked the Treasury to grant his department – the Department for Children, Schools and Families – real-terms spending increases of 1.4 percent until 2014.  That’s an extra £2.6 billion in total – and goes beyond previous Labour commitments to “protect” schools spending. It’s a brassy move by Balls and one which is sure to aggravate his colleagues.  After all, remember when Labour called Cameron “Mr 10

Martin Bright

Are Big Ideas Back?

I can’t quite decide whether there really is a return of ideas to British politics or whether the political columnists have just grown tired of writing yet another piece about just how bad things are for the Prime Minister this week.  Jackie Ashley’s column in today’s Guardian complements Janet Daley’s in the Sunday Telegraph yesterday. From opposing political perspectives they say the same thing: the two major parties are beginning to develop distinct political visions, which will allow the British public to make a genuine choice at next year’s general election. Ashley suggests that David Cameron’s speech on the role of the state and Ed Miliband’s grasping of the environmental