Liberal democrats

How Labour and the Lib Dems are attacking the Tories’ marriage tax break

This morning, we’ve already seen the two primary attacks which will be used against the marriage tax break outlined by George Osborne in the Times today.  The first came courtesy of Vince Cable, who said it represents a “derisory” sum of £3 a week for those who benefit from it.  And the second was from Ed Balls – who else? – who labelled the policy as “discriminatory,” because it doesn’t cover every married person, and nor does it account for couples who split.  Or as he rather suggestively put it: “if your husband beats you up and leaves you you get no support.” One thing worth noting is how the

The VAT dividing line is growing deeper

Is this a pledge we can count on?  After the Lib Dems suggested they wouldn’t increase VAT earlier, the Labour Chief Whip has told ITV’s Lucy Manning that his party won’t either.  If so, it’s quite a turnaround from when both Darling and Cable refused to rule out VAT hikes during last week’s Chancellor’s debate. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a LibLab pincer movement against the Tories now: the two parties who seem to have ruled out VAT hikes against the one which is being being slightly more equivocal about it.  As I said earlier, it would hardly be edifying politics.  But the real worry is if it

The hyperbole of Westminster

Campaigns are conducted in poetry, former New York mayor Mario Cuomo once said. This one seems to be conducted in hyperbole. Every party is doing their level best to show that there is a difference, and a big one, between them and their opponents. That’s normal. But to do so, they are stretching good arguments beyond what is sustainable. “Brownies” may be a particular mendacious form of hyporbolic campaigning (and governing),  but there are bound to be a few Tory and Lib Dem exaggerations on display during the campaign. Exhibit A. The Tories say a hung parliament will doom Britain as the markets will react badly to a potentially unstable

What a difference the start of a campaign makes

In last week’s Chancellor’s debate, Vince Cable refused to rule out raising VAT to help fix the public finances.  Now, only a few days later, the Lib Dems are pledging not to do that.  What’s more, they’re saying that the Tories’ plans require a raise in VAT.  And they’ve even got a ‘VAT bombshell‘ poster to drive the message home. There’s more than a dash of Brownite politics about this – the same seasoning I detected in the Tories’ Death Tax poster.  Sure, there have been rumblings that the Tories will raise VAT.  But Osborne & Co. have denied that this is necessarily the case in recent days, and it’s

The context defeats Brown

So, mending our broken politics has been shoved to the forefront of the election campaign – at least for the time being. Brown has just given a speech on the issue, which – if you divorce it from all context – was actually fairly effective. Sure, things like reducing the voting age to 16, or a referendum on the alternative voting system, may not be your – or many people’s – cup of chai. But there were several proposals which, taken in isolation, will probably be as popular as they are sensible: banning MPs from working for lobbying comapanies, for instance. Or giving the voters the ability to recall MPs

Europe as a campaign message … for Labour

As I said earlier, today’s PMQs was all about giving the various parties’ campaign messages a walk around the block.  Cameron’s questions reduced down to “They’ve failed – give us a go”.  Clegg pushed the Lib Dem’s Labservative prospectus.  And Brown droned on about “£6bn being taken out of the economy,” as well as about Lord Ashcroft and “securing the recovery”. In which case, it’s striking that Denis MacShane used a question to denounce the Tories’ alliances in Europe.  Indeed, Peter Mandelson did exactly the same in a speech this morning.  Here’s how he put it: “David Cameron chooses to sit alongside the xenophobes and homophobes in the European Parliament.

PMQs live blog | 7 April 2010

Stay tuned for live coverage of PMQs. 1200: We’re about to start.  Brown is flanked by Harriet Harman and Jim Murphy.  Douglas Alexander, Alistair Darling and Alan Johnson are also on the front bench.  The heavy hitters are out in force… 1201: And here we go, for what could be Brown’s last ever PMQs as Prime Minister.  He starts, as usual, with condolences for fallen soldiers. 1202: The first question is as plantlike as they come: will Brown take £6 billion “out of the economy”?  Brown spins the usual dividing line about investing in frontline services, adding that the Tories would risk a “double dip” recession.  Hm. 1204: Massive cheer

James Forsyth

The scene is set for a bust-up

PMQs today is going to be the last time that Gordon Brown and David Cameron face-off against each other before the debates. Both men will be keen to score pyschological points against the other and to send their troops off in good heart. This means that PMQs will be an even noisier affair than usual. But both leaders will have to remember that if they behave in the debates as they do in PMQs it would be a disaster for them. The aggressive, shouty nature of PMQs would not translate well to the debates. One thing to watch today is what Nick Clegg does. He’s racheting up the rhetoric again,

Clegg blows a golden opportunity

Nick Clegg won’t get many opportunities to sell himself to voters and he has just been demolished on the Today programme. All things to all men, Clegg was all over the place. He couldn’t give an exact answer when questioned about the size of the deficit, and the Lib Dems’ shifting position on the depth of cuts was exposed once again, recalling his autumn wobble on ‘savage cuts’. He also refused to rule out a VAT rise. Similarly, he could not expand on his plans for parliamentary reform beyond labels such as ‘radicalism’, ‘renewal’ and ‘the old politics’. Caught between defending himself from the Tories and attacking Labour, Clegg panicked.

The Tunnel Ridge Fault election

At times the chasm between Britain’s political parties is as great as the San Andreas Fault. Sometimes the difference is more like a small rift, a matter of tone not policy. In this year’s election, the difference between the parties is somewhere in between, like the lesser-known Tunnel Ridge Fault in Eastern California. In part, the appearance of only minor differences may explain why the polls are showing such different things; some predict that Labour will hang on to power, others that the Tories will be able to win. But campaigning will bring out the differences between the parties – and the party leaders – into full view to an

Oh, and the Lib Dems too…

Nick Clegg – who he?  According to a poll this morning, that’s what two-thirds of the country will be thinking when they see the Lib Dem leader on their screens over the next few weeks.  But, regardless, he and his party are worth paying attention to.  Most importantly, of course, because of the possibility of a hung parliament.  But there’s also the matter of the leaders’ debates, in which Clegg will have a bigger platform than he’s ever had before.  You sense that Lib Dems activists think they really matter this time around. So all eyes on Cowley St, where Clegg kicked off his party’s election campaign earlier.  Two things

The Inter-Generational Election

Geoffrey Wheatcroft has kicked off the election campaign with possibly the most depressing article I have ever read about British politics. Jetting off to the States for an academic engagement, the old curmudgeon says he feels no regret at missing an election in which he has lost interest.  This say more about the author of the piece than the election, which promises to be the most fascinating in my adult life. But then I am nearly twenty years younger than Mr Wheatcroft. His central argument is that the Labour and Conservative messages are uninspiring. The Labour government will admit that the situation is dire, but claim it would be worse

Now’s the time

If there’s anything we don’t already know about today, then I’m struggling to find it.  The election will be declared for 6th May.  Brown will make a pitch which bears close resemblance to his interview in the Mirror today: “We have come so far. Do we want to throw this all away?”  Cameron will say that the Tories are fighting this election for the “Great Ignored”.  Clegg will claim that the Lib Dems represent “real fairness and real change”.  A hundred news helicopters will buzz around Westminster.  A thousand blog-posts (including this one) will have headlines to the effect of “And so it begins…”.  And we’ll all read the Guardian’s

Two steps forward for the Tories, one step backwards for the Lib Dems

Last week, the Tories strengthened their tax-cutting credentials with a smart policy on national insurance.  I’m sure you didn’t miss it.  But one part of the recent Tory resurgence is, to my mind, being underplayed: they now have a much stronger message on government waste.  After all, the NI policy is being funded by cutting waste.  And then there was that spoof website which pulled the limelight onto Labour’s wasted spending.  And then there are the interviews in which Tory frontbenchers – such as William Hague today – say stuff like: “If there’s waste in government spending, which the Labour Government says there is, we should be saving the waste,

The Lib Dems attack Labservatism

In this post-expenses election, there is going to be a considerable vote going for the none of the above party. The Lib Dems are clearly determined to try and tap into this vote. At PMQs in recent weeks, Nick Clegg has constantly sought to attack Labour and the Tories as different sides of the same coin. Last night in his closing statement, Vince Cable accused Labour of being ‘in hock’ to militant unions and the Tories to millionaires with their snouts in the trough. The message their trying to get across is clear: they’re both as bad as each other. Now, the Lib Dems have launched quite an effective site

Fraser Nelson

Osborne’s silent victory

I think Osborne’s main victory tonight would be to reassure those who thought him a clueless idiot. The left demonise him, and it’s easy for the right to despair at him too (yes, guilty). But the figure we saw tonight was calm, collected and assured – and I reckon this was his achievement. He allayed fears. Expectations of his performance would have been rock bottom, and he’d have surpassed them easily. He was playing it safe. Vince Cable did his after-dinner speaking comedy act (I met William Hague in the ‘spin room’ afterwards, who swears that some of Cables lines were nicked from his repertoire), and the studio audience loved

Do Debates Really Help the Liberal Democrats?

Well, in one sense, yes of course they do. By putting Vince Cable and, later, Nick Clegg up against their Conservative and Labour peers the Lib Dems are granted a status and respect they never achieve in other circumstances. So in terms of exposure and credibility then yes the debates help the Liberal Democrats. The format helps too: since Labour and the Tories will sensibly ignore the Liberals the third party is rarely tasked with the awkward business of defending its own proposals. Instead it can scamper around picking off the low-hanging fruit dangling from the Labour and Toriy trees. Since, god help us, there’s no shortage of that then

Few fireworks – but solid performances from Cable and Osborne<br />

So now we know what happens when you put three would-be finance ministers into a room, and start asking them questions.  There’s plenty of esoteric language, a good dash of posturing – and next to no fireworks.  Thinking about it, perhaps we shouldn’t have expected much else. Not that the pyrotechnics were completely absent, of course.  Both Cable and Darling rounded on Osborne over the Tories’ national insurance plans, and Osborne hit back with some well-directed attacks on Labour’s own tax and spend agenda – even getting Darling to waver and admit that a “death tax” is no longer on the cards.   But, for the most part, calm and

Chancellor’s debate: live blog

2057, PH: We’ll sign off for now. I’ll be back with a summary post shortly. 2057, JF: Osborne gets his closing statement just right, sounding humble and emphasising this is the voter’s choice. I expect Osborne will be very satsified with his night’s work. 2055, PH: And Osborne has the closing word.  He’s not quite as direct as Cable – saying that the Lib Dems won’t be in government, and that the Tories have “shown, under the leadership of David Cameron” that they’ve got what it takes – but its a neat enough closer. 2054. PH: Punchy stuff from Cable, who says that you can’t trust Labour because they got