Steve hilton

The argument in the Cameron circle about what the government needs to do to get back on course has been the story of this week. As I say in the political column, there’s a divide between those who think that this month’s events have been little more than a bit of mid-term blues, and those who worry that they have revealed serious, structural problems that needs addressing if they are not to cripple the government. At a meeting of Conservative Cabinet ministers on Wednesday lunchtime, this divide came clearly into sight. Sayeeda Warsi, the Tory chair, asked for a freer rein to attack the Liberal Democrats, complaining that the Tories

The departure of his senior aide Richard Reeves is a major blow to Nick Clegg. Reeves, a relative newcomer to the Lib Dems, was far less focused on party structures than many of those in Clegg’s circle and instead concentrated on the party’s long term electoral prospects. Reeves’s view was that there was a space in British politics for a party that was classically liberal on economics and socially liberal on other matters. He wanted to turn the Lib Dems into a party that was as comfortable in government as in opposition. There will be those who want to read something political into Reeves’s departure. But based on conservations I

It is a sign of the influence that Steve Hilton has on the Cameron project that there have been more column inches devoted to his departure from Downing Street than there would be to most Cabinet resignations. But even after he heads to California in May, Hilton will still be part of the Cameron brains trust. He is already scheduled to work on the Prime Minister’s conference speech. Hilton has, I understand, been mulling the idea of taking a sabbatical since last summer. His decision to go ahead and take next year off seems to have been motivated by a variety of factors. But those closest to him stress that

Perhaps, the greatest testament to Steve Hilton’s influence in Downing Street is that everyone chuckles when you ask if anyone will replace him. His role in Number 10 as the senior adviser was one he had carved out for himself so that he could work on what he wanted to. It is deliberately designed not to fit on any ‘org chart’, the kind of document that the post-bureaucratic Hilton has little patience for. Hilton was for years caricatured as being not really right-wing. But, in reality, the opposite is true — he was, in some ways, the most right-wing man in Downing Street. Few matched him on subjects like 50p

Political cultures differ. In Iran, for example, hyperbole is expected in all political conversations. So slogans always call for ‘Death to the US’, and nothing less. In Britain, of course, the use of language is more even-tempered, but other rules apply. Blaming the civil service for failure is considered OK, but charging an individual official, even a Permanent Secretary, for the same is considered off-limits. If a minister were to try it, then he’d be accused of trying to pass the buck on towards defenceless officials. But, as Camilla Cavendish points out in today’s Times (£), failure is often also the fault of senior officials who, despite problems in the

Political debate is going to be dominated by the economy between now and the autumn statement. Ed Miliband is trying to use this moment to persuade the public that the Coalition’s economic policies have failed. By contrast, the Tories want to highlight how much deeper trouble the country would be in if it did not have the confidence of the bond markets. The Tories hope that this ‘stay close to nurse for fear of something worse’ approach will eventually deliver an election victory for them in 2015, given how hard Labour is finding it to regain credibility on the economy. As Ben Brogan wrote the other day, this strategy worked

David Cameron summoned all Tory special advisers to Downing Street for a meeting this afternoon. He wanted, I understand, to warn them that too much of the coalition’s internal workings were being briefed out to journalists. He made it clear that he wants an end to process stories appearing in the papers.   Downing Street has been infuriated by recent reports of tensions between Steve Hilton, Cameron’s senior adviser, and George Osborne and is keen to stamp on anything that keeps this — rather misleading — story going. There are also worries about the party being seen as divided again, a return to the old Tory wars stories of the

The long flight from Australia should give David Cameron plenty time to think about Europe, and how it just won’t go away. He didn’t want this battle — not now, not ever. But in the Daily Telegraph today, the first in what will be a weekly column, I lay out the battlefield that awaits him on his return. First, this bailout is not the end. A trillion Euros needs to come from somewhere, and today the Chinese are being tapped up — God knows what we’ll agree to in return. But that doesn’t address what is, as Mervyn King has said, a solvency issue rather than a liquidity issue. And

Westminster, today, is all a-titter about an anecdote contained within this FT article about Steve Hilton. It is, it must be said, a good ‘un: “Mr Hilton’s crusade against employment legislation also saw him suggest that Mr Cameron just ignore European labour regulations on temporary workers, prompting an exasperated exchange with Jeremy Heywood, Downing Street’s permanent secretary. ‘Steve asked why the PM had to obey the law,’ said one Whitehall insider of a meeting in March to discuss the government’s growth strategy. ‘Jeremy had to explain that if David Cameron breaks the law he could be put in prison.'” From there on in, the article rattles through some of Hilton’s

The Foreign Secretary finds himself in the rather unique position today of trying to deal with the consequences of a crisis that he largely predicted. In May 1998, William Hague gave a speech warning that the single currency would lead to social unrest as governments tried to cope with one size fits all interest rates. It is a reminder of how much Hague was swimming against the tide of bien-pensant opinion that Michael Heseltine claimed this prediction was so extreme as to drive the Tories off the centre ground. But what is, perhaps, more interesting than Hague’s vindicated view that the euro, in a crisis, would be the ‘economic equivalent