Conservative party

I understand that following a meeting in Downing Street this morning, Eric Pickles, the Communities and Local Government Secretary, has been put in charge of dealing with Britain's 120,000 "problem families". In the aftermath of the riots, David Cameron promised to put all of these families through some a family-intervention programme by the time of the next election. This policy, though, was bogged down in the bureaucracy as it cut across so many different departments. Pickles' department will now have sole responsibility for this commitment. It will receive extra budget, with the money coming from education and work and pensions, and staff to deal with this.

If Tony Blair thought that a meeting with Gordon Brown was like dental surgery without anaesthetic, one wonders how David Cameron would describe being questioned on Europe by Bill Cash and Bernard Jenkin. At the liaison committee, the two veteran eurosceptics pushed Cameron on why he was supporting far greater fiscal integration in the Eurozone. Cameron’s answer was, basically, that this was the only way the Eurozone could be made to work. But one can’t help but feel that greater fiscal integration is simply storing up problems for the medium term given that it will do nothing about the divergence in competitiveness between Eurozone members. The rest of the session was dominated by yet more questions about relations between politicians and the media.

George Osborne and Eric Pickles’ joint op-ed in the Financial Times on planning reform is meant to send the message that the coalition won’t back down on the issue. They warn that "No one should underestimate our determination to win this battle". Allies of Pickles are pointing out that these planning proposals are different from the NHS reforms or forestry, both issues on which the government did u-turn, because they are crucial to the coalition’s growth strategy and fully supported by Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street. One other thing that separates planning from the issues on which the government has u-turned is the confidence Numbers 10 and 11 have in the ministers charged with selling the plans.

It has to be one of the most astonishing – not to mention bold and risky – moves ever attempted by a politician, of any colour. This morning Murdo Fraser, the Deputy Leader of the Scottish Conservative Party and clear frontrunner for the leadership of the Scottish Tories, announced plans to disband his own party if he wins the leadership contest. Under his plans, the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party would cease to be. It would be an ex-party. The Conservatives would fight no more elections in Scotland after next year’s council elections. Instead, a new centre-right party would take its place, crucially free from the toxicity which still surrounds the Conservative brand north of the border.

You read it here first – four years ago. The Conservative Party looks like it will finally enact its plans to split, and the Scottish Conservatives will dissolve – at least if Murdo Fraser wins the leadership. The Sunday Telegraph has the news tomorrow: "Murdo Fraser, who is favourite to become leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party, will announce that he plans to wind up the party if he wins a ballot of members next month. He would follow disbanding the party by launching a new Right-of-centre party that would contest all Scottish elections — council, Scottish Parliament and Westminster.

Banking reform has always been one of those issues that was going to test the unity of the coalition. Indeed, it was the subject of the very first inter-coalition wrangle when back in May 2010 George Osborne and Vince Cable tussled over who would chair the Cabinet committee on banking reform.   To date, these differences have been held in check by the fact that the coalition is waiting for the recommendations of the John Vickers-led Independent Commission on Banking. But with the final draft of the Vickers Report being published on 12 September, these splits are starting to open up again.   Cable and the Liberal Democrats would like, at the very least, a strict ringfencing within banks of the investment and retails arms.

There’s a big coalition split coming down the road. Next month the Vickers’ review into banking reform, which is going to suggest a ring-fencing of the investment and retail arms of banks, will come out. The Liberal Democrats — led by Vince Cable — will push for the instant implementation of the report’s recommendations. The Treasury will argue that banks need to be given time to introduce these new rules. The result will be, as one senior Lib Dem source tells this morning’s FT, ‘a big fight’.   The tricky question for Cameron and Osborne is how do they win this argument when there’s a visceral desire for tough measures against the banks?

Traditionally the fact that the Liberal Democrats hold their conference first and still vote on party policy at it has been regarded as a disadvantage. But this year, I suspect that these two things will be in their favour. By going first, they will get to set the terms of debate for conference season. They’ll be able to spike their coalition partners’ guns on a whole variety of post-riots issues. They can make clear that they won’t accept any changes to the human rights act or any government push to encourage marriage. Even better, they can pass motions to this effect. They also will have first crack at setting out on what terms the 50p rate can be ended.

One of the big political issues of the autumn is going to be energy bills. Among Tory MPs, there’s mounting concern that the coalition’s green policies are driving up the price of energy rather than helping to bring it down. They fear that this is both acting as a drag on the economy and adding to the squeeze on family budgets. So, today’s story in The Times about how a carbon trading scheme—started under the last government—has led to households being charged, on average, £120 more than they should have been in utility bills is going to turn up the political heat on this subject.