David cameron

A couple of weeks ago, Kevin Maguire told us that No.10 is thinking about a March or April general election.  And now Steve Richards follows up by suggesting April is most likely: “Speaking to influential ministers and aides I get the impression that their favoured month for an election is next April. In theory they could hold out until June, but that would mean going to the country in the immediate aftermath of the May local elections when Labour is expected to do badly. This option is already ruled out. There will be no June election. Obviously a general election could be held on the same day as the May

After Michael Fallon’s claim last week that the shadow cabinet hasn’t got “the faintest idea” of the commitment necessary to tackle the debt crisis, this anecdote from Benedict Brogan’s column should act as another warning to David Cameron: “Whitehall is gripped by short-termism, yet in a world dominated by the targets culture introduced by Labour, is this any surprise? When ministers themselves prioritise short-term results that can be ready for the Six O’Clock News or the autumn conference, how can the Civil Service hold out for the long view? Take the permanent secretary I know who was asked by Gordon Brown to deliver a 5 per cent real terms cut

There’s a good article in the New York Times today about how little has changed in the way Wall Street does business since the collapse of Lehman—employment in the sector is only down eight percent, Goldman employees will earn on average $700,000 this year and derivatives are still not being traded on an open exchange. Indeed, the new Tory guru Nassim Taleb, the author of The Black Swan, thinks that the system might be riskier now than it was when Lehmans collapsed: “Mr. Taleb warns that the system has grown riskier since last fall. The extensive government support that began after Lehman collapsed will lead investors to assume that governments

A neat little anecdote in Steve Richards’ column this morning: “When David Cameron bumped into Charles Clarke at the end of the summer, the former Cabinet minister told the Tory leader in relation to the attempted coup: ‘Don’t worry… we’ll be back’. Cameron replied to him only half jokingly: ‘That’s exactly what I am worried about’.”

I had the pleasure of chairing the Editorial Intelligence/Policy Exchange/Policy Review/Cass Busines School (Phewee!) debate on the future of the quangocracy last night. I was expecting little common ground between Douglas Carswell, the Tory hammer of the quangos and an audience I thought would be packed with his ideological enemies. But it wasn’t like that at all.  Carswell was a very entertaining turn, describing the House of Commons as “monumentally spineless and useless”. His view was that select committees should be given the job of holding quangos to account, including making them justify their budgets on an annual basis. This, he said, would at least give give MPs something worthwhile to

So what has David Cameron achieved with his speech on “cutting the cost of politics” yesterday?  Quite a lot, judging by this morning’s papers.  The coverage it receives ranges from wholehearted scepticism in the Guardian to front-page celebration in the Daily Mail, but – more importantly, from a Tory perspective – it steals the thunder from Alistair Darling’s public spending speech.  The Chancellor’s innuendo about “nasty Tory cuts” is much less resonant when juxtaposed against the Tory leader calling for cuts in MPs’ perks, whether those cuts are regarded as populist or not. What’s more, Cameron has drawn quotes from Labour and the Lib Dems that may look a little

So was the “rations” video a gaffe too far?  The news has just come in that Alan Duncan has been demoted from the shadow cabinet, going from shadow leader of the Commons to shadow prisons minister.  Having spoken to various Tory sources, I understand that the decision was made in an “amicable” meeting between Duncan and Cameron – where the former acknowledged he has become a “lightning conductor” for public anger over expenses – and that, apparently, Duncan is “relaxed and relieved” to be working under Dominic Grieve. Some people might be surprised at the timing: many expected Cameron to hold off until next year, so as not to rile

Remember that New Statesman article about Obama calling Cameron a “lightweight”?  Well, the Journalist Closest to Obama, Richard Wolffe, has a different take.  Here’s what he told the Today programme this morning, courtesy of the ever-alert Andrew Sparrow: “He had a strong impression, a strong reaction, to both Cameron and Brown. It was right at the end of his foreign trip. And he was really taken with Cameron. He and his aides thought that he had energy and verve, a dynamism that suggested he was a good candidate – remember this was a candidate at the time, not a president. And there was bonding that took place which you might

Looking at the OECD’s latest economic forecast it seems that the UK—unlike the US and the Euro-Zone–will not return to growth by the end of this year. (Although, one can’t help but wonder if Brown will start heralding zero percent growth in the fourth growth). Indeed, the OECD projects that the UK economy will shrink by 4.7 percent over this year as a whole—although the worst appears to be behind us with the rate of shrinkage slowing since the last quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of this year.   As Kevin Maguire suggests today, Labour’s election strategy is likely to be that Britain is not out of the

Few Tories will enjoy looking back on 1974, but they may find it useful to study the second Wilson government and its successor, the Callaghan government, when it comes to the question of Europe.  Back then, we had a government coming to power in the midst of a severe economic climate, and which sought to change the pro-European course that its predecessor had set, including by re-negotiating Britain’s relationship with the EU and by appealing to fraternal parties in France and Britain. However, it ultimately ran into blades of domestic discontent and international indifference. The question is: could this end up being the story of a Conservative government from the

I’ve just re-read Cameron’s article in the Times and it contains one section that might come back to haunt him, should he become Prime Minister. He writes: ‘Many will be disgusted by the suggestion that ministers in Whitehall encouraged al-Megrahi’s release — and did so for commercial reasons. Diplomacy often involves hard-nosed backroom deals. It would be naive to think otherwise. But there need to be lines you are not prepared to cross; values you will not compromise, whatever deal you broker. I believe even to hint that a convicted terrorist could be used as makeweight for trade is a betrayal of everything that Britain stands for.’  I agree with