David cameron

The One Nation sentiments that David Cameron expressed at last night’s Hugo Young lecture have been almost uniformly applauded. Labour’s sneers about Cameron being an uber-Thatcherite are isolated from mainstream. Only Johann Hari dissents, suggesting that because Cameron is an OE and comfortably off it follows that ‘he has never known’ a poor person. Of course, if Cameron were the re-incarnation of Lord Salisbury, then Dave would have ample understanding of, and who knows perhaps even intimacy with, the various retainers, ostlers, scullery maids and farriers in his employ. Patricians have long since retired to enjoy what’s left of their estates, and Cameron’s sentiments are genuine and inflect his politics,

Despite his pronounced Europhile views, a Politics Home insider poll suggests that Clarke can remain in the Shadow Cabinet and join a prospective Euro-sceptic Cameron government. As Clarke is signed up to the Cameron plan, I doubt that Europe is necessarily the problem. Concern arises from Clarke’s apparent unwillingness to fulfil the duties of his brief. One think tank supremo is quoted by Pol Home saying: “No. It isn’t just Europe, it’s his non-fondness to work hard, master a brief, do the hard slog. He likes being on television, but there’s more to being a Secretary of State than that, and plenty of current non-frontbenchers who would work.” This objection

Is David Cameron religious? In the course of his interview with the Evening Standard he provides a clear glimpse of his attitude to religion. He sees it as something that should be advocated with the utmost care, if votes are not to be squandered. He is asked if faith in God is important to him. “If you are asking, do I drop to my knees and pray for guidance, no. But do I have faith and is it important, yes. My own faith is there, it’s not always the rock that perhaps it should be.” Hmmm. Surely praying for God’s guidance is a basic part of Christian faith, and nothing

It’s worth flagging up the minutes of a regional Labour Party meeting, dated 2 November, that have been leaked to Iain Dale. The first stand out passage shows the Labour Party’s reliance on Barack Obama as a source of inspiration: ‘Claude[Moraes MEP] has been to Washington DC where Obama administration key players made it clear they don’t want to have to deal with a Eurosceptic Tory Government here as they want to be able to deal with the EU as a whole.’ Iain argues that the claim has no basis in fact. But, as Daniel Korski pointed out recently, it is clear that the US administration would prefer to work

So David Cameron will let it rest there after all.  And in fairness to him, he can do nothing else. Thanks to the Blair/Brown stitch up, Britain has no options left. It never did. Cameron knows that and today’s speech was just a longwinded way of saying it. He is right not to promise what he calls a “made-up referendum”, that would accomplish nothing other then vent rage. But nor should he kid us all that he is going to renegotiate some powers back from Brussels. That would need the unanimous approval of all other member states, and it would never be granted. If Britain were to repatriate powers, then

The accusations of betrayal being hurled at David Cameron are, for the reasons I outlined earlier, deeply unfair. It is Labour that has broken its promise, not the Tories – a point that the Tories should be shouting from the rooftops. Also, Euro-sceptics should remember that Cameron did keep the pledge he made during the leadership to take the party out of the EPP despite the many siren voices urging him to renege on this commitment.  The whole referendum question, though, is turning into one of trust. Part of the reason for this is that the Tory leadership always seems slightly embarrassed by the issue of Europe. So it is

The Conservative leadership claims that a British Bill of Rights would serve to guide judges in interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights and so give Britain some discretion in how the rights which exist in the Charter — many of which are vague — are applied in this country. But in the new issue of Standpoint the eminent legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg reports that Dominic Grieve, the shadow justice secretary and a firm supporter of the ECHR, thinks that a British Bill of Rights would only be introduced towards the end of a Cameron first term and might well not be on the statue book by the end of

In his column, James asks the key question about Tony Blair’s candidature for President of the European Council: what would it do for the Tories and Britain’s foreign policy. William Hague clearly thinks it would be a bad thing and has been lobbying against Blair’s candidacy.   The Shadow Foreign Secretary is letting his anti-EU, anti-Labour views cloud his judgement. Let me explain. If the Tories win, Labour will be in the doldrums, a shadow of its former self. The idea that the party will mount a challenge to a Conservative government by rallying around an EU-focused Tony Blair is unbelievable. Romani Prodi may have jumped from an EU job

Does Cameron fluff PMQs on purpose? Some theorists say he lets Brown off the hook in order to keep the weakling in his job. I don’t buy that. A politician’s natural instinct makes him want to win every session, every question. But Brown sometimes sneaks through intact because Dave rarely varies his tactics. He doesn’t prepare ambushes. He never ponders what Brown wants to hear least. Today the Tories had a great opportunity. Brown’s recent flip-flop over the training of TA soldiers for Afghanistan was inspired, in part, by Dave himself, who raised the issue a fortnight ago. But Dave’s tone was wrong. He thought he was the point –

David Cameron was in confident form at his press conference this morning. Most of the questions were about the possibility of President Blair and Tory opposition to that. But three other things from the event were worth noting. First, Cameron’s announcement that the Tories will publish their top three or four priorities for each department shows the influence of the Institute for Government on Tory thinking. Michael Bichard, the director of the Institute, was David Blunkett’s permanent secretary at the Department for Education and Employment and Blunkett’s success in this job is largely credited to him and Bichard working out a few priorities and sticking to them. The Tories are