David cameron

Sarah Vine criticised Ed Miliband in the Daily Mail after the Labour leader posed with his wife Justine in a bare kitchen for a BBC interview. Although the ‘forlorn little kitchen’ turned out to just be his ‘kitchenette’ rather than his main kitchen, Miliband has gone on to insist that it is one he uses. It’s a different story, however, for his rival David Cameron who has taken the opportunity to show off his own shiny kitchen in a video for the Sun‘s new election website. The short film, which documents a day in the life of the Prime Minister, shows Cameron chillaxing in the well-stocked kitchen which is crammed with food, equipment and recipe books. As Cameron also has two kitchens,

The Liberal Democrats sense an opportunity in all this speculation about who the Tories and Labour would do deals with in the event of a hung parliament. They believe that they can position themselves as the responsible party that will keep the country in the centre ground in contrast to the other smaller parties. Today, in his speech to the party’s spring conference, Clegg ruled out joining any coalition that involved the SNP or Ukip. He also tried to use the moment to reinforce voters’ worries about either main party governing on their own. He argued that the Tories would cut needlessly—‘Cows moo. Dogs bark. And Tories cut. It’s in

Was this the day Ed Miliband lost the election? Only two PMQs remain before polling day and the Labour leader used all six questions to ask David Cameron one thing: when might he ask him more questions? Nothing on policy. Nothing on convictions. Just questions about questions. He meant questions outside the House, of course. On telly. That’s the difference, according to Labour. A televised head-to-head debate is nothing like parliament. Except that PMQs is a televised head-to-head debate. To quiz the PM about quizzing the PM is hardly the tactic of a confident popular leader about to sweep to power. But Miliband had made a calculation. Previously, Cameron had

It’s not just David Cameron who is unhappy with the way the Tory manifesto is looking at the moment. James reported at the weekend that the Prime Minister had demanded a re-write, and I have picked up some considerable dissatisfaction in the party at the way the document is being put together. Some departments feel as though they and their advisers have been shut out by the team working on the manifesto. Other lower-ranking ministers with extremely good, detailed ideas for their own policy areas have submitted ideas that have been rejected out of hand, which has left them rather grumpy. This is partly a result of the desire to

I understand that David Cameron has ordered a re-write of the Tory manifesto. Jo Johnson and the Number 10 policy unit, which he heads, had written and submitted a first draft of the manifesto to Cameron. But word has come back that Cameron feels that the tone is not right. As I say in my Mail on Sunday column, he wants a less wonky document. He thinks the document needs a crisper, more political style. The Tory aide Richard Parr has been charged with re-writing it. Parr learned his political trade under Andrew Mitchell and is regarded as having sharp instincts. Cameron is also a fan of his writing. But

The broadcasters have rejected David Cameron’s offer of one seven-way debate before the start of the short campaign. Instead, they are sticking to their plan for two seven-way debates and one head to head between Cameron and Miliband in the short campaign. This means that the debates, certainly in terms of Cameron’s participation, are pretty much dead. Number 10 and CCHQ were insistent that their offer on Wednesday night was final. The Tories’ reason for not wanting to debate is simple: Cameron polls ahead of Miliband on leadership by such a margin that he would have to win the debate by a knock out for it to be worth his

The broadcasters have now said they could be willing to host a TV debate between David Cameron and Ed Miliband on another date if that means the programmes will actually take place. Though this shows willing on the part of the broadcasters, who have messed up the debates with proposals that would inevitably end up mired in a row, it does not make them more likely to happen. It would be easy for any of the parties who feel hard done by, particularly the Lib Dems, to apply for an injunction against the head-to-head taking place on the grounds that they will have no chance to respond to any claims

Two party election policies, two failures to think things through. Or, at least, to engage with realities. First, Labour announces a cut in university tuition fees to a maximum of £6,000. Why? The sum itself isn’t important. For a potential student, £6,000 and £9,000 – or £18,000 and £27,000 – are much of a muchness. If you can pay off one, you can pay off the other. The issue, surely, is whether there should be tuition fees at all. I think not. But then I also think that the number of university places should be cut by about 75 per cent. Second, the Prime Minister announces a bunch of new