Parliament

I understand that Number 10 will lean on Cabinet ministers not to object to what the boundary review does to their seats. This is an intriguing development because at least three Tory Secretaries of State are deeply unhappy with the proposed changes to their constituencies. It’ll be fascinating to see whether Downing Street can persuade them to hold their peace on the matter. Their disquiet reflects broader grumbling throughout the Tory parliamentary party. All sorts of conspiracy theories are doing the rounds. Number 10 needs to move quickly to offer some reassurance to nervous MPs. If the boundary review’s plan is to be made agreeable to the Tory parliamentary party,

The Culture, Media and Sport committee has recalled James Murdoch to give further evidence into phone hacking and James Murdoch’s people are briefing journalists that he is happy to appear. Sophy Ridge reports that the committee had a long discussion about who to recall, but were largely in agreement and there was no vote. In truth, their decision was virtually inevitable after Tom Crone said he was certain that he and Colin Myler had spoken to Murdoch about the ‘For Neville’ email, which suggested that hacking was widespread. Myler has corroborated Crone’s claims.  Committee chairman John Whittingdale has said that Murdoch will be asked to clarify this and other questions.

George Osborne made a firm statement on the Vickers report this afternoon; if he felt uneasy about the proposed abolition of his seat or Natalie Rowe’s latest sally against him it didn’t show. As expected, he accepted Vickers’ proposals “in principle”, giving himself and his coalition partners enough room to manoeuvre within an agreed timetable that is equitable to both parties. Osborne also said that the annual £7 billion burden of Vickers’ capital requirements “should fall on shareholders and the wholesale debt holders, not small depositors or taxpayers.” Politically, it’s imperative that he achieves that objective. There is yet uncertainty on the subject and Barclays sought a clarification earlier this afternoon.

The imminent success of the Libya intervention was, to a remarkable degree, down to Anglo-French cooperation. Though the media has been keen to play up, and even conjure up, rifts and disagreements between Paris and London — and the hyper-active Nicolas Sarkozy can’t help but act first and coordinate later — the fact is that the two states worked closer and better together than they have done for years. Probably not since the Suez operation have the British and French militaries cooperated so closely. But the intervention, even if it is coming to a (deadly and protracted) end did show up a number of deficiencies in materiel and command and

The recall of parliament today offers David Cameron the chance to take command of the current situation. The police might have horribly mishandled the situation on the first few nights of the riots and Cameron’s government might have been caught flat-footed by them. But he now has the opportunity to build on the successful policing of the last two nights and his strong statement yesterday and lead the national response to this crisis. The mechanics of a parliamentary statement allow Cameron to set the terms of debate. He also has the huge advantage of simply being the Prime Minister. The nature of his office affords him the opportunity to speak

Sir George Young has graced the pages of the Daily Mail this morning, arguing that MPs cannot ignore the clamour for a debate on the death penalty, as examined in depth by Pete last weekend. The Leader of the House’s intervention is the greatest indication yet that parliament will discuss the issue for the first time since the passage of the Human Rights Act in 1998. This has not come as a bolt from the blue. A string of e-petitions will mature soon and capital punishment is expected to be near the top of the list, as it always is when the public is asked for its opinion. Young sees this as

Yesterday’s appalling breach of House of Commons security has made the authorities furious – at the person who helped to bring the pictures to the world. He is Paul ‘Gobby’ Lambert, the BBC fixer who owns the voice you normally hear shouting questions at politicians as they prowl about Westminster. Gobby is known and loved by the best MPs, but is seen as an irritant by those who would prefer more deferential treatment. He is the kind of cameraman who sees a story and goes for it: the recent pictures of the Chief of the Defence Staff on targeting Gaddafi was a Gobby special, as were Cherie Blair’s comments on Brown, as was the pie-man yesterday. Gobby ran after the

The phone hacking saga is now moving at such pace it threatens to engulf the political establishment (whether it is a sufficiently serious story to do so is another matter). After Sir Paul Stephenson’s theatrical resignation, timed to upset newspaper deadlines and plotted to embarrass the Prime Minister, attention has now turned to John Yates. Boris Johnson has said that Yates has ‘questions to answer’; and Brian Paddick argues that Yates should fall on his sword too. The Metropolitan Police Standards Committee meets this morning, and, as Laura Kuenssberg notes, it may discuss John Yates’ conduct. Yates’ defence (that he was overseeing 20 terror cases at the same time as

Rebekah Brooks has finally resigned this morning. Her departure was actually expected yesterday, in the morning indications were given that she would quit that afternoon. My understanding is that the thinking at News International was that if she was still in her job when she attended the select committee hearing on Tuesday, she would just be monstered. But this strategy was thrown into confusion when the Murdochs themselves were compelled to attend. But this morning, the decision has clearly been taken that she has to step down before facing parliament. Her departure was in many ways inevitable. But it does remove the last fire break between this scandal and the