Liberal democrats

Vince Cable’s decision to speculate publicly about a post Nick Clegg leadership race is a significant moment. To be sure, saying ‘I wouldn’t exclude it’ about running for the job is a long way from launching an actual challenge. But it is not the answer that a politician gives if they want to stop all speculation. There’s long been gossip at Westminster that Cable’s interest in the leadership has revived — and this interview appears to confirm that. It is worth remembering that Cable only didn’t run last time because he thought that the party wouldn’t pick another veteran as leader after the Ming Campbell disaster. So, there’s unfulfilled ambition

James Forsyth’s Mail on Sunday column is my first read every Sunday, and it’s choc full of details as ever. Here is his account of the Liberal Democrat reaction to last week’s House of Lords defeat:   On Thursday morning, Nick Clegg and David Cameron agreed a new phase of the Coalition after what one No 10 insider called ‘the Coalition’s Cuban missile crisis’.  Tensions were so high amid the vote on Lords reform that some feared the Coalition would implode, but things have now begun to ease.  Both sides stress ‘this  isn’t back to the rose garden’, and what is needed is not  ‘an idealised romance but cold, hard

Perhaps what most depressed the Liberal Democrats this week was the sense that the two main parties were rejecting the idea of coalition. One described to me how depressing he found it during the Lords reform debate to watch the Labour front bench revelling in every Tory intervention on Nick Clegg. At the top of the Lib Dems, there’s now a real worry that both Labour and the Tories would try and govern as a minority government after the next election if there’s another hung parliament rather than form a coalition. This would lock the Liberal Democrats out of power.  All of this makes Andrew Adonis’ comments in The Times

Tory MPs clamouring for a new relationship between Britain and Europe were given an amuse-bouche today when William Hague announced a review into the impact of the EU on everyday life. The Foreign Secretary told the House of Commons earlier that the review, which will report towards the end of 2014, ‘will present the evidence and analysis’, adding that it would be ‘for political parties to decide on their own policy recommendations’. The Foreign Office is briefing that the audit was not about identifying powers to grasp back from the EU, but many in the Conservative party certainly hope it’s the start of that process if nothing else. A study

The Lib Dem dove has been shot by a well-aimed Tory arrow tonight, and you can bet that more than a few of Nick Clegg’s allies will feel deeply betrayed. The Lib Dems walked on the coals of the tuition fee rises, and for what? The Tory leadership cannot really claim to be giving its full backing to Lords reform. Yes, William Hague was sent on the radio this morning – in theory to urge obedience over the reform. But when the Foreign Secretary started laughing you had the feeling that he did not quite take his mission very seriously. Every Tory MP knows that the whips have given mixed

Mark Harper is touring the broadcast studios at the moment making the case for the coalition’s Lords reform bill. Being Nick Clegg’s Conservative deputy is not an easy job. But there is something particularly disingenuous about one of the arguments that Harper is using.   Harper said On Sunday, as Conservative Home reported, that: ‘It’s been Conservative policy to have a mainly elected House of Lords since 1999. I stood on the last three elections on that manifesto and the Coalition Agreement does no more than ask both the Coalition parties to deliver what was in both of our manifestos’. What this ignores is that in 2007, Harper voted against

That the Liberal Democrats might try to scupper the boundary reforms if they don’t get their way on Lords reform has been the talk of the tearooms in Westminster for months. But today the threat comes to the fore as Nick Clegg’s departing head of strategy Richard Reeves warns the Independent that there will be ‘consequences’ if Tory MPs try to block reform of the upper chamber by voting down the Government’s programme motion for debating the legislation. This is what he told the newspaper: ‘There would be broader consequences for the Government’s programme, particularly around political and parliamentary reform. The idea that a failure to deliver a government commitment

Nick Clegg gave a rather sombre speech to the CentreForum summer reception last night. Addressing the guests from a pulpit in the vaulted cloisters of Westminster Abbey, as the rain poured down outside, the Deputy Prime Minister admitted he felt ‘lobotomised’ in government. It was actually a clumsy attempt to praise the work of the Lib Dem-aligned think tank in helping the party retain its brain by dreaming up new policies when the constraints of Coalition might otherwise prevent it, but it did not go down well with those listening. Andrew Neil tweeted that Lord Steel, who he was standing next to at the event, had rolled his eyes at Clegg’s turn of

Labour’s Opposition day debate tomorrow on Gove-levels might not reveal as much as the party hopes about where Liberal Democrat MPs stand on the Education Secretary’s planned reforms. True, you won’t see a Lib Dem lift so much as a finger in outright support of what Nick Clegg dubbed ‘a two-tier system’ created by scrapping GCSEs and replacing them with two sets of exams, but this might not be the forum for them to launch a rebellion. One key figure on the left of the party points out that ‘it’s not where the decision will be made’, while another MP says Labour’s motions are often so ‘over-the-top’ that they are

What are we to make the split between Danny Alexander and his predecessor as deputy Chancellor, David Laws, over the size of the state? Laws says today it should be 35 per cent of economic output, which is an excellent ambition. In an interview with BBC1’s Sunday Politics today, Danny says 40 per cent. A split? When asked, Alexander said: ‘I think around 40 per cent is the right sort of range to be looking at. It’s only in the last four or five years that we’ve seen the share of the state taken up by spending rising to nearly 50 per cent, as it did in Gordon Brown’s years.” 

Michael Gove has caused a storm this morning, with his proposal to split GCSEs. The Mail has the scoop, but, essentially, this is in a bid to improve standards — Gove plans to replace GSCEs in maths, English and the three sciences, which will be awarded separately rather than as a block, with something similar to the old O-level; he also want more rigorous exams in history, geography and modern languages. Modules are also to be a thing of the past; Gove’s curriculum will be a test of memory as well as a test of understanding. Courses may be completed in 2 years or 3 years (ie, aged 17), depending

When David Cameron reshuffles his top team, one of the questions he’ll have to answer is what relationship he wants between the Conservative party and the coalition government. The Liberal Democrats have a deputy leader in Simon Hughes and a party president in Tim Farron who are quite often used by their leadership to try and put distance between them and the coalition. But there is no one who performs that role for the Conservatives.   Interestingly, Sayeeda Warsi has made clear that she would like to be freer to attack the Lib Dems. I also suspect that if she is moved in the reshuffle, whoever takes on the role

While Jeremy Hunt was casting about, trying to save his political life at the Leveson Inquiry, the Treasury issued its latest u-turn: the expected volte face on charitable giving. Interestingly, the Sunday Times’ Isabel Oakeshott reveals that yesterday she arranged to meet 2 senior Treasury officials this morning, but the meeting was postponed earlier today, which might suggest that the decision to drop the controversial tax change was taken at very short notice. If so, what does that say about the Treasury’s view of unfolding events at the Leveson inquiry? Where, in addition to the pressure on Hunt, George Osborne has been implicated in elements of the BSkyB deal by Hunt

Garlands from all quarters for Michael Gove’s performance at the Leveson Inquiry this afternoon (well, not quite all quarters) — but the most significant thing that the Education Secretary said wasn’t actually related to the media, but to his ministerial brief. When asked about the prospect of profit-making free schools, he replied that they ‘could’ happen ‘when we come to that bridge’. It’s probably the clearest statement that Gove has made, on record, to demonstrate that he’s not averse to introducing the sort of profit arrangements that could give his agenda an almighty boost. The question is: when will he get to that bridge, then? My understanding is that it’s

Nick Clegg did not show his Berlin speech on the Euro crisis to Number 10 or the Foreign Office before releasing it to the media. This is quite remarkable. Up to now, there has been a recognition that while the Liberal Democrats may try and differentiate themselves from the Prime Minister on various things, the government must speak with one voice on the deficit reduction strategy and foreign policy. No credible country can afford to send mixed messages to either the bond markets or foreign governments. Clegg’s freelancing on this issue is a reminder of how Europe remains the biggest ideological fault-line in the coalition. When David Cameron formed the