James Forsyth is former political editor of The Spectator.
In stark contrast to 2003, when Gordon Brown delivered his Budget on the same day that Baghdad fell, the Treasury is phlegmatic about the Budget being overshadowed by Britain’s involvement in a conflict overseas. But the signs are that this will be, within the obvious fiscal constraints, an ambitious Budget. Tonight, we have had confirmation
The question of whether Gaddafi should be targeted and what the exit strategy should be in Libya are intimately linked. In truth, there is no exit strategy that does not involve Gaddafi’s fall from power. As long as he is there, the threat to those that the international community is now pledged to protect will
The House of Commons has just voted by 557 to 13 to support Britain’s participation in the enforcement of UN Security Council Resolution 1973. This came at the end of six and a half hours of respectful debate rounded off by a speech from the Foreign Secretary that reminded us why he was for so
Discussion of military action brings a different atmosphere to the chamber of the House of Commons: quieter, less disputatious, more consensual. In opening the debate, the Prime Minister took a huge number of interventions including a large number from those MPs who are most sceptical of this intervention. All were heard respectfully and answered respectfully.
The press is currently making great play of an apparent difference between General Richard and Liam Fox on whether or not Gaddafi can be targeted. The whole debate flags up one of the absurdities of international legal convention. If it is legitimate to hit a Libyan tank crew moving on Benghazi, why it is not
Tonight’s news of major explosions in Tripoli shows that the allies are putting little store in the Gaddafi regime’s unsubstantiated claims of a ceasefire. Some of the targets appear, from reports, to have been in the same area of the city as Gaddafi’s barracks and residence. The US military, though, says the allies are not
When trying to understand George Osborne Budgets, you need to bear in mind the mantra that he and his team live by: in opposition you move to the centre, in government you move the centre. It is this desire to move the centre ground that lies behind Osborne’s keenness to merge income tax and national
Reports are coming in that French jets have fired the first shots in the UN-supported intervention in Libya. The coming conflict will determine, in the short term, whether the Gaddafi regime is toppled and, in the longer term, whether the international community rediscovers its appetite for intervention which had been so diminished by the controversies
It was meant to be a routine budget. Now Osborne looks like the government’s last chance ‘The Cameron project is worth saving’, a government insider said to me recently. It was a striking declaration. After ten months in government, the people on the inside are not talking about a bumpy start or a rough patch.
A statement has just been issued by the sponsors of last night’s Security Council resolution, it reads: “Resolution 1973 lays out very clear conditions that must be met. The UK, US, France and Arab States agree that a cease fire must be implemented immediately. That means all attacks against civilians must stop. Gaddafi must stop
What to make of Libya’s declaration of a ceasefire and acceptance of the UN resolution Seen most cynically, it could just be seen as the Gaddafi regime playing for time, using the extra hours to make it more difficult in both military and political terms for action to be taken. Or, it could indicate a
David Cameron was calm, measured and far from messianic as he delivered his statement to the House on the coming action against Libya. He was keen to stress that last night’s resolution ‘excludes an occupation force of any part of Libyan territory.’ However, he did, in answer to a question from James Arbuthnot, agree that
David Cameron deserves huge credit for tonight’s Security Council vote. He has kept plugging away for a no fly zone and has succeeded in moving the Obama administration’s position. Cameron’s decision to have Britain table with the French and the Lebanese a Security Council resolution without the support of the Americans or even having talked
Talk to a Cabinet minister these days and you’ll nearly always get a string of complaints about the civil service. Cabinet ministers have come to see them as obstructionist, problem finders. David Cameron went public with these feelings in his spring forum speech when he announced that there were ‘enemies of enterprise’ within the government
Philip Zelikow, who served on the 9/11 Commission and in both Bush administrations, has a persuasive piece in today’s FT arguing that a no drive zone on the highway from Tripoli to eastern Libya could be as effective as a no fly zone and easier to implement. He says that it could be enforced from
A testy PMQs today with Miliband trying to pin Cameron down on the specific question of whether the NHS is now subject to EU competition law, and Cameron responding by dubbing Miliband ‘son of roadblock’. The exchange revealed that although Cameron is not a details man, something that will cause him problems in time, he
Britain, France and Lebanon’s decision to table a UN Security Council resolution proposing a no fly zone and a bar on flights in and out of Gaddafi’s Libya is an honourable effort to push the international community to move before the window for action closes entirely. Yet as the French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe acknowledged
It now seems almost certain that Colonel Gaddafi will now not only survive in Libya but reassert control over the whole country. With the fall of Ajdabiya, there is no break between Gaddafi’s forces and the rebel capital of Benghazi. The window for international action is shutting rapidly, even if it has not yet closed.
David Cameron’s statement on Libya today reflected his growing frustration at the pace at which the wheels of diplomacy are moving on this issue. In his statement, Cameron warned that ‘time is of essence’ and that Gaddafi staying in power, something Cameron had previously called ‘unthinkable’, would send a ‘dreadful signal’. Time, really, is of
This was the question raised by today’s joint Balls Miliband press conference. The two Eds are very different in both body language and temperament. Balls is the far more pugilistic politician, always looking to dispute the premises of a question and happy to use aggressive language. While Miliband is far more of a conciliator, looking