Coalition

Saturday

David Blackburn

IDS turns up the volume on welfare cuts

Iain Duncan Smith is quietly spoken. His interview with today’s Times (£) is a case in point. The political elite are ‘distanced’ from the people, he says. The Leveson inquiry is there to ‘clean the house’. The job of government is to govern well, not be loved. The ‘omnishambles’ will pass because David Cameron has ‘the capability to pull himself and us all through’. But, amid these placid notes, is a subito fortissimo. The welfare secretary sets himself against George Osborne’s wish that a further £10 billion in welfare cuts be found by 2016. He says: ‘This is my discussion with him… My view is that it’s not [all going

Friday

Peter Hoskin

The Lib Dems start to pile on Hunt

One of the key factors in this Jeremy Hunt business was always going to be the ferocity of the political maelstrom around him. After a slow start, the Tories have sought to calm it down, offering fulsome support for the embattled Culture Secretary. For their part, Labour have been calling for his resignation from the very moment the news broke, with Ed Miliband today accusing David Cameron of ‘organising a cover-up’ to protect his colleague. So far, so party lines. But what about the Lib Dems? It’s noteworthy that one of their number — Simon Hughes, natch — last night called for an independent investigation into the matter (see the

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Fox fires a shot across the aid budget’s bows

As Pete says, Liam Fox’s piece this morning calling for more supply-side reform is broadly helpful to the Chancellor and has been written with his approval. Strikingly, the former defence secretary — who still has a constituency on the right of the party — goes out of his way to back one of the most contentious Osborne decisions, increasing the British contribution to the IMF. But there is one line in the article that carries with it not the air of helpful advice but menace: ‘It must be understood that further reductions in budgets for security, leaving overseas aid untouched, would be met with fury by most Conservatives.’ This is

Peter Hoskin

Osborne’s turning point

As Paul Goodman suggests, there is something significant about Liam Fox’s article for the Daily Telegraph this morning. It’s not that we haven’t heard similar from the former Defence Secretary before — we have. It’s more that his economic prescriptions are being made, we learn from the Sun, with the ‘explicit approval’ of his buddy George Osborne. And what are those prescriptions? Well, the main one is for further spending cuts, and Fox also waxes enthusastic about greater deregulation and about protecting the defence budget (at the expense of international aid). He also has some firm advice for the Lib Dems. ‘They make up only one sixth — not one

Thursday

James Forsyth

Cameron’s diary looks clean

Downing Street was seething last night about allegations that there had been meetings between David Cameron and Rupert Murdoch that it had not declared. They know that any sense that they are trying to cover up just how close Cameron was to the Murdochs and News International would be extremely damaging in the current circumstances. There is enough pain to come for Cameron from Leveson without being acccussed of a cover up too. But the revised evidence submitted by News International does support Downing Street’s version of events. The meetings at issue are only described as ‘possible’ and ‘probable’ and — given that Number 10 has constructed what it is

Wednesday

Fraser Nelson

Balls’s argument is detached from reality

So who killed the recovery? Ed Balls points to a ‘recession made in Downing St,’ and has gone on a victory tour today. ‘I have consistently warned David Cameron and George Osborne for over a year that going too far and too fast on spending cuts would backfire,’ he says. ‘Arrogantly and complacently they ignored those warnings, and the country is paying a heavy price.’ Facts are always the remedy to an outbreak of Balls. The government releases monthly spending figures, which show an increase overall. That’s due to the rising cost of debt and dole, you might say, but strip those two out and you have what the ONS

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Hunt’s special adviser resigns

There’s been a resignation this morning, but it is not Jeremy Hunt’s. Instead, it’s his special adviser Adam Smith. Smith’s departure before Hunt’s Commons statement at 12:30 is designed to put a firebreak around the Secretary of State. In his resignation statement, Smith declares that ‘the content and extent of my contact was done without authorisation from the Secretary of State’. This provides Hunt with his response to any questions about the nature of the text messages between Smith and Frederic Michel. But special adviser appointments are very personal. Secretaries of State talk constantly to their special advisers and it is remarkable that Smith and Hunt never discussed what he

Peter Hoskin

Our economy fell back into recession

Or at least technically-speaking it did. The figures released this morning suggest that the economy shrank by 0.2 per cent in the first quarter of this year, which is the second quarter of shrinkage in a row after last winter’s 0.3 per cent fall. The numbers are tiny, but the politics is huge. It’s a double dip — and you can expect Ed Miliband to mention that fact again and again in PMQs later, with dread accompaniment from Ed Balls and his hand gestures. There are some caveats, of course. This is only a preliminary estimate, so the Office for National Statistics could revise it upwards at some point. It’s

Tuesday

James Forsyth

The Tories start to rally around Hunt

Since I wrote my earlier blog, I have been contacted by Tories who are supportive of Jeremy Hunt. One minister argued to me with eloquence and passion that Hunt was not someone who would do anything improper and that would become clear when he faced Leveson. Another Tory told me that ‘Hunt is an absolute star,’ and that it is crucial that he survives as he is one of Cameron’s more effective ministers. Most backbench Tory MPs I have spoken to this evening are supportive of Hunt. But, intriguingly, among Liberal Democrats there is not the same sentiment. Indeed, one of the most significant lines of the day might well

Peter Hoskin

Hunt: I’m not quitting

Here’s the full statement: ‘Now is not a time for kneejerk reactions. We’ve heard one side of the story today but some of the evidence reported meetings and conversations that simply didn’t happen. Rather than jump on political bandwagon, we need to hear what Lord Justice Leveson thinks after he’s heard all the evidence. Let me be clear my number one priority was to give the public confidence in the integrity of process. I asked for advice from independent regulators — which I didn’t have to do — and I followed that advice to the letter. I would like to resolve this issue as soon as possible which is why

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Hunt’s in real trouble

If anyone doubted just how dramatic the Murdochs’ evidence to Leveson was going to be, then the five hours of testimony today have settled that argument. In the process, they have also turned Jeremy Hunt into the political equivalent of damaged goods. It is now hard to see how he can be Secretary of State when the Olympics open let alone Tory leader one day. The emails that have just been released show just how deep a hole Hunt is in. He and his special adviser seem to have been rather reckless in their interactions with Murdoch and his representatives, they have certainly opened themselves up to criticism. It should

Peter Hoskin

The Hunt becomes the hunted

The Eurocrisis may be nagging at our political class, but it’s got nothing on the Leveson inquiry. Today has been James Murdoch’s turn in the hotseat, and it has produced some of the most explosive testimony so far. There was the claim that, contrary to previous Tory insinuations, Murdoch Jr did chat about the BSkyB bid with David Cameron at that notorious Christmas Dinner in 2010. But topping that is the revelation that News Corp had all sorts of contact with Jeremy Hunt about the bid, mainly via their head of public affairs Fred Michel, as it was simmering along in 2010 and 2011. It doesn’t look good for Hunt.

Peter Hoskin

What good would an annual National Strategy do?

Another set of bad notices for Cameron & Co. this morning, chief among them the Public Administration Select Committee’s report into government strategy. It basically says that there is none: short-term fripperies are indulged at the expense of long-term objectives. Or as the report puts it in one of its most trenchant passages, ‘We have little confidence that policies are informed by a clear, coherent strategic approach, informed by an assessment of the public’s aspirations and their perceptions of the national interest.’ This is a diagnosis that many will agree with, partially if not in full. Most governments could do with more long-term thinking, let alone one that is split

Monday

Peter Hoskin

Is Alexander ushering in Austerity Squared?

23rd April, 2012 — mark it down in your calendars, CoffeeHousers. For, after weeks of froth and fury about tax, today’s the day when the government focused on spending cuts again. In a speech to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, Danny Alexander has announced what are, in theory, a couple of new restraints on spending. First, government departments will have to share information about their spending with the Treasury on a monthly basis, and let Osborne & Co. pore over it. And, second, they will also have to find extra capacity in their existing budgets for unforeseen expenditure, rather than just relying on the Treasury’s central reserve. Alexander described these

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Cameron needs results that match his words

Further to James’s post on the Cameron interview, here’s what jumped out at me: 1. ‘Governments have difficult months. This government came together to dig this country out of the huge economic mess that it’s in…’ This is the official No.10 explanation about the last few months; that it’s the problems of the austerity agenda. As James Forsyth says in his political column in the current magazine, there are strongly-held alternative explanations. 2. ‘We’re not just a bunch of accountants dealing with the deficit…’ Cameron kicks off with this, an interesting phrase as it has been used by those criticising his Chancellor’s economic message. Osborne’s critics says he no agenda

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Cameron tries to return to the big picture

David Cameron is out doing the media rounds today. He wants to, in his words, get back to the ‘big picture’, the argument over deficit reduction. Indeed, Danny Alexander’s speech today saying that departments have to indentify additional saving seems to have been timed to tee up this argument. Cameron’s Today Programme interview, though, was dominated by Abu Qatada, tax avoidance, Lords reforms and whether or not — in John Humphrys’ words — the PM is ‘a bit lazy.’ On Qatada, Cameron was insistent that the Home Office had ‘checked repeatedly’ with the European Court of Human Rights on the deadline. I expect that the Home Office will have to

Friday

David Blackburn

From the archives: Lords reform could kill the coalition

Why is Lords reform such an explosive issue? The subject should induce narcolepsy, but even loyal Tories are threatening to launch a rebellion against it that will make the Maastricht revolts look like child’s play. Subscribers to the Spectator will remember the James Forsyth article which first argued that Lords reform was an irreconcilable difference that was likely to break the coalition partners. In light of the last 24 hours, it’s worth revisiting: Irreconcilable differences, James Forsyth, The Spectator, February 25th 2012  It has become clear over the last few weeks that we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the coalition. Once, the rows between Tories and Lib Dems used to be about

David Blackburn

Cameron remains adamant on Lords reform

Despite last night’s threats, David Cameron remains personally committed to the cause of reforming the House of Lords. The coalition is also resisting calls for a referendum on the reforms, saying that it is ‘not persuaded of a case of having one’. Their view comes despite reports that the joint committee and banks of Tory and Labour MPs want a referendum. The pressure on David Cameron, of course, pulls both ways. On the one hand, his backbenchers are vowing to prepare ‘off the scale’ rebellions that are ‘worse than Maastricht’. On the other hand, are the Lib Dems. In a show of strength that bordered on hubris, Lord Oakeshott said

Thursday

James Forsyth

The depth of Tory feeling over Lords reform

What should worry David Cameron about tonight’s meeting of the 1922 Committee on Lords reform was that it was not just the usual suspects who spoke out against it. The two MPs presenting the case against were members who have never defied the whip: Jesse Norman and Nadhim Zahawi. Those present were particularly struck by some polling data that Zahawi, who used to run YouGov, presented. It showed that when asked what issues were a priority for them zero per cent of the electorate mentioned reform of the Lords. Even when prompted, this number only rose to six per cent. But Zahawi’s polling shows that if reform does go ahead,