Nick clegg

Look at the polls and you’d think that Nick Clegg’s circle would be down in the dumps. But, as I say in the magazine this week, they actually head to Glasgow in good spirits. Why, because Clegg’s position as party leader is secure and another hung parliament remains the most likely result of the next election. If in May 2010, you’d said that Clegg would back a strike on a Middle Eastern country without a UN mandate and then lost a House of Commons vote on the issue with 24 of his 57 MPs not backing him on it, we’d have assumed that he’d have been toast. But Clegg’s position

Nick Clegg gave his monthly press conference today. It might kindly be described as ‘wide-ranging’, which is often code in journalese for ‘not offering very much’. But the Deputy Prime Minister did offer a few nuggets which are worth exploring. The first is that he was very keen to put his name on the list of figures at the top of the Coalition trumpeting the improved economic circumstances. ‘I am not going to use that phrase,’ he said, when asked whether he could see ‘green shoots’ in the economy. ‘I’m happy to use any other euphemism: the clouds are lifting… the sinews of the British economy are starting to strengthen.’

Nick Clegg has this morning added his own voice to those at the top of the Coalition saying they won’t go back to Parliament for another vote on Syria. The Deputy Prime Minister was careful to be clear that he and his colleagues respected parliament’s verdict, and didn’t want to push MPs when they had already made their views clear: ‘We’re not going to keep asking the same question of Parliament again and again. We live in a democracy, the executive cannot act in a way which clearly is not welcome to Parliament or the British people, so we’re not proposing to do so… I can’t foresee any circumstances where we

A muddle and a cock-up. For all the talk of parliament reasserting itself, last night’s vote on Syria showed a parliament that voted, twice, to oppose actions it actually supports. David Cameron has been humiliated but this was hardly a banner day for Ed Miliband either. The House of Commons has, for now, cut off its nose to spite its face. Perhaps surgery can repair the damage. Perhaps it can’t. Because the longer and more deeply one contemplates yesterday’s events the more evident it seems that there were no winners. The government motion was defeated. So was Labour’s amendment. Since these motions were, in essence and in most practical respects,

Their holidays interrupted, MPs are trying to decide what they think about Syria as they return to Westminster for tomorrow’s House of Commons debate on military action. For those trying to make up their minds, and work out what everyone else thinks, Coffee House has compiled a helpful briefing of audio clips from across the political spectrum. Here’s David Cameron sounding like an eleven-year-old boy with a box of toy soldiers: listen to ‘Cameron: Use of chemical weapons ‘cannot stand’’ on Audioboo   Here’s the Labour front-bench being characteristically vague: listen to ‘Ed Miliband: Labour would consider supporting limited action in Syria’ on Audioboo listen to ‘Douglas Alexander: ‘Labour has never

David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband this afternoon gave statements on Britain’s response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria. There were important similarities between the statements which are worth examining. Here is what we learned: 1. The action must be legal. Miliband told the cameras after the meeting that ‘when I saw the Prime Minister this afternoon I said to him that we the Labour party would consider supporting international action, but only on the basis that it was legal’. Meanwhile Clegg and Cameron both insisted that the measures being considered were legal. Clegg said: ‘Any steps we will take will have to be legal. This Government,

A Conservative Home poll, which found that a majority of activists believe that the coalition is good for Britain, is the latest little boost for David Cameron, so says Paul Goodman. The Tories are having a good the summer; confidence is building. Yet there is, as numerous commentators and MPs are keen to stress, some way to go before the party can think of a majority. This means that the Lib Dems, who are likely to hold the balance of power in any future hung parliament, deserve some attention. There is not much meaty polling about the attitudes of Lib Dem activists; but, what there is, is quite telling:   Clegg and Co (or

Everyone in SW1, it seems, has an opinion on this controversial scheme. Most people hate it. The general assumption is that this is a Tory stunt clothed as a government policy. The question is, though, has the van campaign been a successful policy pilot from a presentational point of view? Here are some thoughts: 1). The right-wing press. The Mail is utterly contemptuous. A leading column claims that only one illegal immigrant has stepped forward. The leader goes on to say that voters punish cheap stunts; what people want is action. And if that wasn’t enough, the paper’s front page (below) is uncompromising. All of this will have gone down

If you think the battle in the Tory party over policies can get bloody, spare a thought for the Lib Dems, who have to listen to their members as well as the differing views of their MPs. I write about how Nick Clegg and his colleagues at the top of the party are trying to encourage grown-up decision-making in my Telegraph column today. The problem for the Lib Dems – which they regard as a strength – is that their party structure gives members a great deal of final say over the manifesto content. A manifesto working group, led by David Laws, reports to the Federal Policy Committee, which decides

If a shark stops moving it dies. In the Prime Minister and deputy Prime Minister’s office, they believe that the same applies to the coalition. Their view is that if it is going to make it to 2015, it needs to be doing things right up until parliament is dissolved and the election called. To this end, as I reveal in the column this week, they’ve commissioned Oliver Letwin, David Laws and Jo Johnson to sit down and see what else the coalition can do between now and 2015. One of those involved in the talks says ‘we’re pretty confident we can still do deals on various things.’ The hope

Liberal Democrat leaders are used to having to do more to get noticed than the other party leaders. But it is still striking just how much the Deputy Prime Minister is doing to try and inject himself into the national conversation. Joining Nick Clegg’s weekly phone-in on LBC is a monthly press conference. One of the reasons Clegg is doing all this is to try and drain away the anger created by the compromises of coalition and, specifically, the broken promise on student fees. After 23 press conferences, even the lobby will tire — or so the Lib Dems hope – of asking Clegg about the U-turn on tuition fees,

Both Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg delivered speeches to their party faithful today about being realistic about 2015. Miliband’s speech, briefed as ‘tough’, was the latest in his series of attempts to tell voters that they can trust him: he wouldn’t borrow more than this government… well, no more ‘day-to-day spending’, which is his way of saying he would actually borrow more for capital projects. Clegg wanted to tell his councillors that they can’t see May 2015 as the month when they all get to breathe a sigh of relief and return to their local authority fiefdoms without any of the inconvenience of their party being in national government too.

Ministers are still mulling how they can collect communications data, and while quite rightly the debate about the ‘Snooper’s Charter’ centres on the threat to individual privacy, opponents also forget the threat such legislation would post for the UK’s economic recovery. With good reason this Government has prided itself on being the most technologically friendly ever. Be it via the development of Tech City, the Future Fifty, the Enterprise Investment Scheme, reforming intellectual property or even the Entrepreneur Visa – the Government is ensuring that the UK becomes a place where internet-based start ups and established technology companies want to come and do business. However, there is a risk that

It is easy to make a case for why all three main parties should do badly at the next election. After five years of austerity, who will vote for the Tories who didn’t in 2010? And how will they stop those dissatisfied with the compromises of coalition from sloping off to Ukip? As for Labour, why would the public want to put them back in charge just five years after booting them out? This question has special force given that the Labour leadership is so identified with that failed belief that boom and bust had been ended. Then, there’s the Liberal Democrats—they’ve alienated their left-leaning supporters and lost their status

GCHQ’s use of the US monitoring system Prism is threatening to turn into a major political row. Douglas Alexander is demanding that William Hague come to the House of Commons to explain what GCHQ was doing and what the legal basis for it was. But this controversy is going to have an effect on coalition relations too. It is going to intensify Liberal Democrat opposition to the measures included in the Communications Data Bill. This comes at a time when David Cameron has decided, as he made clear in the Commons on Monday, that the measures in it are needed. In the United States, the Obama administration is pushing back

Andrew Adonis is in the loop. At least that’s the impression you might get from 5 Days in May; his account of the various coalition discussions after the 2010 election. His viperous comments about Nick Clegg suggest he was ‘inside’; but word from the corridors of power says otherwise. A little birdie tells me that Nick Clegg saw neither hide nor hair of his lordship on any of those five days in May.

David Cameron’s Commons statement today contained two blunt warnings. In a significant escalation of the argument over communications data, he warned that ‘we will suffer’ if we don’t make progress on the matter. He also declared that not intervening in Syria could boost extremism and mean that the situation there becomes a ‘tragedy for us too’. On communications data, I suspect that there’s a limit to how much progress he can make with his coalition partners. The vibe from the Clegg camp is that they have no desire to back down on this issue and feel that many of their critics are being opportunistic post Woolwich. However, it was Cameron’s