Michael gove

In a speech to Policy Exchange today, Steve Hilton—David Cameron’s former senior adviser—will make the case that ‘any intellectual rigorous examination makes it impossible for a Tory moderniser to support staying in the EU’. He argues that Tory modernisation was about trusting people, and that the EU does not; that modernisation was about localism, and that the EU is inherently centralising; and that the EU helps the rich and not the rest. I think there’s much to be said for Hilton’s analysis. (Though, of course, it should be recognised that there are Tory modernisers on both sides of the argument.) But where Hilton is surely right is that the EU

I don’t know if ‘Leave’ supporters will win. With the young abstaining and the old voting in a low-turnout referendum, it is just about possible that they could. But it is already dismally clear how they will react if they lose: they won’t accept the result. Nigel Farage was proud to admit that he would be a bad loser. ‘In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way,’ he told the Mirror. ‘If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.’ The old-fashioned among you might have thought that in any electoral contest the side with the most votes wins. How out of touch

One of the big questions about the EU referendum campaign is whether the Tory leadership is running its campaign in such a way as to make it impossible to stitch the party back together again after the result on 23 June. The Prime Minister’s colleagues concerned with party management who work in Number 10 and the whips’ office are certainly very agitated about the mood in the party, with a number of pro-Brexit ministers appearing to conclude that they have burned their bridges irreparably. This has led their colleagues to worry that there will be a large group of ministers and backbenchers after a ‘Remain’ vote who still try to

Is the Brexit campaign ‘morphing into Ukip’? That’s what Sir John Major will say he fears is happening later. In a speech at Oxford University, he’ll argue that those calling for Britain to leave the EU are ‘fuelling prejudice on immigration’. He’ll also say that: ‘As the leave arguments implode one by one, some of the Brexit leaders morph into Ukip and turn to their default position – immigration. I urge them to take care, this is dangerous territory that – if handled carelessly can open up long-term divisions in our society’. So does he have a point? It’s definitely credible to see how some elements of the leave camp

[audioplayer src=”http://feeds.soundcloud.com/stream/262486539-the-spectator-podcast-erdogans-europe.mp3″ title=”James Forsyth, Fraser Nelson and Isabel Hardman discuss Boris” startat=552] Listen [/audioplayer] After an eight-year detour into municipal government, Boris Johnson has now returned to national politics. The former mayor of London will mark this moment by going on the stump for the Leave campaign. He has some catching up to do: while never far from the public eye, he was absent from the Commons for seven years. Even when back in Parliament after the general election, Boris felt he could not take the cabinet job that was offered to him. But his time at City Hall hasn’t dented his ambitions; quite the opposite. He is the bookies’

There are moments when one wonders whether one is seeing and hearing the same things as others. For me such a moment occurred a fortnight ago when reading The Spectator’s weekly column by our political editor, James Forsyth. James is exceptionally well plugged in to the world of Westminster, but — beyond that — a person of cool and sensitive judgment, so I read what he writes with attention. He said this: ‘[The Prime Minister] is campaigning with no thought for the feelings of those in the party who disagree with him. It is one thing for a leader to disagree with close to half of his MPs and most

Michael Gove has been making his case for Brexit and doing his best to knock the stuffing out of the ‘remain’ campaign. He started the day on the Today programme, spelling out why he thought Britain was best off outside the EU. In his pitch to the nation, he said: ‘I want us to vote to leave the European Union before it’s too late, because that’s the safer choice for Britain. If we vote to stay, we’re not settling for a secure status quo, we’re voting to be hostages, locked in the back of the car, driven headlong towards deeper EU integration.’ The Justice Secretary then gave a speech later

After months of waiting, the Electoral Commission has announced that Vote Leave has been given the official designation for the EU referendum. This means that MPs including Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Frank Field will now become the official faces of the Leave campaign, while Nigel Farage and Ukip donor Arron Banks, who were behind the Grassroots Out campaign, will be sidelined. Britain Stronger in Europe will be the official Remain organisation. Explaining its decision, Claire Bassett, Chief Executive of the Electoral Commission said: ‘Where there are competing applicants for a particular outcome the law is clear, we must designate the applicant which appears to us to represent those campaigning for

A few years back, Mr Steerpike wrote a blog entitled ‘How Danny Finkelstein botched the reshuffle‘ – revealing how those around Iain Duncan Smith were furious to see his future in an expected reshuffle being discussed on Newsnight by the Fink. Our joke: that IDS might well have moved to the Justice department has he not heard the Fink talking about the move as if it were a done deal. Today, in his Times column, Lord Finkelstein repeats this story – except he upgrades it from joke to fact. ‘If it wasn’t for me, Iain Duncan Smith wouldn’t have resigned last week as work and pensions secretary,’ he announces to his

People — nice people, members of the public, concerned voters — keep coming up to me saying, ‘We want to hear the arguments about the EU referendum.’ It sounds a strange thing to want because, since the last years of Margaret Thatcher’s government, the arguments have rarely been out of the news for a week, and jolly boring they often are. But what such people go on to say is that they seek the objective facts and cannot get them from either side in the campaign. They would like some useful fact sheet which answers all their questions. Well, from time to time, papers like the Telegraph and the Times

Surely there is a difference between Mark Carney’s intervention in the Scottish referendum last year and in the EU one now. In the first, everyone wanted to know whether an independent Scotland could, as Alex Salmond asserted, keep the pound and even gain partial control over it. The best person to answer this question was the Governor of the Bank of England. So he answered it, and the answer — though somewhat more obliquely expressed — was no. For the vote on 23 June, there is nothing that Mr Carney can tell us which we definitely need to know and which only he can say. So when he spoke to