Coalition

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Report: David Cameron will campaign against AV

ITV’s Lucy Manning reports that David Cameron will campaign against AV ahead of next year’s referendum  In one respect, it’s not surprising news: this is what the Tories have always said they’d do.  But given recent rumblings and speculation to the contrary, it’s still worth noting down. If the Tories don’t change their minds before 5 May 2011, the question is how loud and proud that ‘No’ campaign will be.  If Cameron keeps it low-key, then it might win him some goodwill with the Lib Dems.  But, equally, it could leave him stranded between a strong Yes campaign on one side, and more vocal No campaigns on the other –

James Forsyth James Forsyth

A decision fraught with risk

The Coalition’s decision to hold the referendum on AV so early is fraught with risk. If AV is defeated at the ballot box, then Nick Clegg will face huge pressure from elements of his party to quit the Coalition. The argument would go that all the Lib Dems were getting out of staying was providing cover to the Tories on cuts. But if AV passes, then there’ll be some Lib Dems who’ll say that they’ve got the best thing they can out of the Coalition and so they might as well head back into opposition to try and restore the distinctiveness of their brand. On the No side, I expect

Peter Hoskin

Three questions about the AV referendum

So now, thanks to Left Foot Forward and reports this morning, we know: the referendum on an alternative vote system will take place on 5 May 2011, the same day as same day as the English local, Scottish Parliamentary and Welsh Assembly elections.  There are plenty of ins and outs, whys and wherefores – most of which are neatly summarised by David Herdson over at Political Betting.  But here are three questions that pop into my head, and are worth idly pondering on this sluggish Friday morning: 1) Does this strengthen the divide or weaken it?  Holding the AV referendum on the same day as local and regional elections was

Thursday

James Forsyth

Afghan manoeuvres

Ming Campbell’s comments today show that some Liberal Democrats do believe in Fox hunting. Responding to Fox’s speech in Washington yesterday and his remark that Britain would be among the last to leave Afghanistan, Campbell told the Daily Politics that the “intervention was unhelpful, indeed the government thought it was unhelpful.” “It would have been better if these remarks had not been made.” Dr Fox’s allies are less than pleased by Ming’s grandstanding. They take the not unreasonable view that the Secretary of State for Defence has every right to express his views on a war that this country is fighting without being second guessed by a backbencher from the

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

What happened to the Tory manifesto?

During the love-in at the start of the coalition, no one really asked which Tory pledges bit the dust. It becomes relevant now: the Tory pledge to reduce immigration to the “tens of thousands,” for example, was in their manifesto but not in the coalition agreement. Although verbally restated later, it is still seen as being a flexible pledge due to its absence in that document. There is no record of what was dropped, so we at CoffeeHouse have provided one below. I won’t say it’s a rip-roaring read. But for those who think manifestos mean something, it’s good to have on the record. UPDATE: I agree with Mycroft, below,

David Blackburn

A new foreign policy?

An inventive article from Ben Brogan this morning, arguing that a new vigorously Tory foreign policy is emerging. I can be a little slow sometimes, but I haven’t noticed anything new or Tory about Britain’s foreign policy. Brogan records that the Prime Minister has let it be known that British troops will withdraw from Afghanistan by 2015. Cameron said nothing of the sort; he said he wanted British troops out of Afghanistan by 2015, something quite different. Contrary to expectations, relations with Europe are flourishing under the coalition, as pragmatic government has superseded bellicose opposition. William Hague hopes to influence the EU closely. In a speech today, he will attempt

Wednesday

Daniel Korski

PS don’t forget the PPS

In this exchange from the “Yes, Minister” TV series Sir Humphrey welcomes the newly-appointed James Hacker to his department. ‘James Hacker: Who else is in this department? Sir Humphrey Appleby: Well briefly, Sir, I am the Permanent Under Secretary of State, known as the Permanent Secretary. Woolley here is your Principal Private Secretary, I too have a Principal Private Secretary and he is the Principal Private Secretary to the Permanent Secretary. Directly responsible to me are ten Deputy Secretaries, 87 Under Secretaries and 219 Assistant Secretaries. Directly responsible to the Principal Private Secretary are plain Private Secretaries, and the Prime Minister will be appointing two Parliamentary Under Secretaries and you

Max Chambers

Law and order

Along with defence, there’s one other area where rolling back the state doesn’t come naturally to Conservatives: criminal justice. The massive cuts looming on the horizon for the criminal justice system would have been politically toxic for any party to deliver, but for the traditional party of law and order there will be a special discomfort.   Ken Clarke’s speech this morning was much less exciting for the penal reform/abolitionist lobby than the morning papers indicated. Echoing Nick Herbert’s speech to Policy Exchange last week, the Justice Secretary rightly said that that the test of a successful criminal justice system was not simply the number of people you lock up

Peter Hoskin

The case against cutting prison numbers

With all the hoo-haa about Ken Clarke’s plan to reduce prison numbers, it’s worth disinterring the Spectator’s leader column on the subject from a couple of weeks ago.  Here it is, for the benefit of CoffeeHousers: One of the many ludicrous Liberal Democrat policies which Tories enjoyed rubbishing during the general election was their plan to send far fewer criminals to prison. But, alas, it seems that some bad ideas are infectious. Last week Ken Clarke, the new Justice Secretary, suggested that we can no longer afford to keep so many prisoners — so we should sentence fewer, and for shorter periods. Why, he asked, is the prison population twice

Peter Hoskin

About those job losses…

Much ado about the Guardian’s scoop this evening: a leaked Treasury document which forecasts that up to 1.3 million jobs could be lost as a result of the spending cuts in the Budget.  Or, to put it in the words of the document itself: “100-120,000 public sector jobs and 120-140,000 private sector jobs assumed to be lost per annum for five years through cuts.” You can expect Labour to get stuck into these numbers, and the fact that they were previously hidden from public view, with no uncertain relish.  Ed Balls has already described them as “chilling”.  But it’s worth making a couple of points, by way of context: i)

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

The politics of ringfencing

Jean Chrétien, the former Canadian prime minister, has acquired an almost mythic status in certain Tory circles for the way his government cut back public spending in the 1990s. So it’s worth paying attention to his remarks about ringfencing departmental budgets last night. He didn’t quite go so far as to say that withholding the axe would fatally undermine George Osborne’s deficit reduction plan, but he did suggest that it would make the politics of the situation a good deal tricker: “Jean Chrétien, whose tough fiscal tightening programme in the 1990s is seen by the Government as a model for Britain today, warned that everyone always came up with plausible

Daniel Korski

If you were William Hague’s speechwriter what would you want him to say?

“The Foreign and Commonwealth Office requests the honour of your company at a major address by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, The Rt Hon William Hague MP,’Britain’s Foreign Policy in a networked world’.” Thus reads the invitation from the Foreign Office. If emails could be gold-embossed, this one probably would be. The speech on Thursday is the Foreign Secretary’s first major speech in London. Colleagues like Liam Fox and Andrew Mitchell have already kept their speech-writers busy, but until now the Foreign Secretary has only done the odd interview, and one address (in Sarajevo).  He did  however open the European Affairs debate in the House of

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Waiting on AV

Every conversation I have about the durability of the Coalition comes back to the AV referendum. The conventional wisdom is that if AV is defeated then it will be very hard for Clegg to keep his party in. For this reason, people pay extremely close attention to the Tory leadership’s attitude to AV. We are waiting to see if there is even a hint that Cameron is prepared to soften his position on the issue to strengthen the Coalition.   So Danny Finkelstein’s blog this morning suggesting that ‘AV might provide the answer to the otherwise impossible question – if the parties stay together, how can they fight the election

Daniel Korski

A mandarin for the moment

Most people probably greeted Liam Fox sacking of Sir Bill Jeffrey, alongside that of the Chief of Defence Staff in that Sunday Times interview with one word – who? The department’s Permanent Under-Secretary –- or PUS — is a pretty unassuming figure especially sat next to the be-medalled soldiers he works with. Few people outside of Whitehall knew who he was before his defenestration; few will remember his name even today. But there is more at work here than one man’s professional demeanor. Britons, despite being reared on the power of officials by TV shows like “Yes Minister”, do not know and do not care about anonymous power-brokers such as

Peter Hoskin

Hugh Orde’s rhetoric is encouraging for Osborne

Whatever happened to Sir Hugh Orde?  A few months ago, he was threatening to resign over the Tories’ plans for elected police commissioners.  But later, in a speech to the Association of Chief Police Officers, he seems to have come over considerably more cooperative.  On spending cuts, he stresses that police numbers will likely be reduced, but adds that “we fully understand that all will have to share the pain.”  And on elected police commissioners, the worst he can bring himself to say is that “the test is reconciling it with operational independence for policing … we have an absolute right to clarity on how this system will work.”  There

Monday

James Forsyth

First Commons rebellion against the Coalition a small affair

In the last few days, there’s been much speculation about how many Lib Dem MPs would vote against the VAT rise. In the end, only two did—Bob Russell and Mike Hancock. I suspect that the Lib Dem whips will be quite happy that the rebellion was so small. Other Lib Dems with misgivings about the policy are clearly not yet prepared to cross the Rubicon of rebellion. One thing we know is that once an MP has defied the whip in government once, they find it much easier to do it again. Few in Westminster would be surprised if Russell and Hancock began regular rebels. But it will be a relief

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Harman the hawk

Harriet Harman’s response to David Cameron’s statement on the G8 and G20 was noticeable for her attacking the Prime Minister for talking about bringing British troops home from Afghanistan within five years. Her criticism was that talking about withdrawal undermined the troops in the field, she sounded more like John McCain than I ever expected Harriet Harman to. She chose to reinforce her point by using quotes from Liam Fox about the effect that timelines have on military morale. Her use of the Fox quotes suggests that Labour see the Cameron Fox relationship as a weak point in the government. Certainly, Ben Brogan’s blog and Conservative Home’s description of the

Peter Hoskin

Osborne turns his attention to welfare

George Osborne suggested as much in his Today interview last week, but now we know for sure: the government will look to cut the welfare bill even further in October’s spending review, and incapacity benefit will come in for special attention from the axemen. It was, you sense, ever going to be thus. With unprotected departments facing cuts of over 25 percent unless more action is taken elsewhere, the £12bn IB budget was always going to be a tempting target for extra cuts. Particularly as so much of it goes to claimants who could be in work. The questions now are how? and how fast?  The first answer seems clear

Sunday

James Forsyth

The Lib Dems’ toughest week so far

This, in the admittedly short life of the Coalition, has been the most difficult week so far for the Lib Dems. The Coalition agreement had the Lib Dems winning huge concessions from the Tories. Afterwards, all the talk was of Lib Dem negotiating skills, what a good deal that they had won for themselves. But after the Budget, the mood was very different. It is now clear that this is, first and foremost, a fiscally conservative government. One of the problems as Andrew Rawnsley notes in his column is that the Lib Dems are now being depicted as dupes by large sections of the media and the Labour party. However

David Blackburn

Smashing the welfare ghettos

There’s nothing quiet about Iain Duncan Smith this morning. Echoing Norman Tebbitt’s infamous ‘On yer Bike’ comments of 1981, Duncan Smith has vowed to obliterate ‘welfare ghettos’. For once I agree with Ed Balls: Duncan Smith is going further than Tebbitt, much further. The government is planning to move the long-term unemployed out of sink estates and into other areas, possibly hundreds of miles away, where unemployment is negative. Incentives for work and promises of low regional taxes in Northern England, Wales and Scotland were included in the Budget to this effect. This may be manna from Heaven for Balls – the traditional candidate in the Labour leadership contest can evoke the