Conservative party

One of the worst kept secrets of David Cameron’s leadership is that some in the inner circle don’t think much of the members of the shadow Cabinet who are now in Cabinet. What is far more dangerous is when the leader himself lets slip his low opinion of some of his colleagues, as Ben Brogan reports he has been doing lately. This is the kind of behaviour that is bound to cause resentment as this criticism always get back to the objects of it.   At the moment, Cameron can get away with this. He is still seen as the Tories’ primary electoral asset and there is no obvious, or even viable, alternative to him. But when Cameron gets into trouble, this will matter.

Eric Pickles is no longer a genial giant. His speech to the Conservative Spring Forum was the rallying cry that many Conservatives in local government, some of whom will be scrapping for survival in May’s elections, have waited to hear.   ‘Ed Miliband,’ Pickles said, ‘is weaker than Neil Kinnock.’ The Labour leader could not take on his unions and militant councils, the Communities Secretaries said before turning an example: ‘Take Labour-run Camden. Ed Miliband’s local council. His councillors are cutting the Surma Community Centre, coincidentally visited by Samantha Cameron. Yet the council has spent twice as much on its town hall newspaper.

David Cameron’s speech to the Conservative Spring Forum was one of the most Conservative speeches he has given in a long time. It was an address that was meant to reassure the party during what looks set to to be this government’s most difficult year. The Tory leader opened with a list of policy pledges delivered and they were all distinctively Conservative policies: making work pay, the EU referendum lock, teaching British history in schools, freezing council tax, capping immigration and doubling the operational allowance. There was further crowd pleasing material in a substantial section of the speech which attacked AV.

George Osborne’s speech to the Tory spring conference today showed the classic left-right way in which he wants to frame the political debate about the economy ahead of the Budget on the 23rd of March.  In a move straight out of the election-winning centre-right playbook of the 80s, he attacked Balls and Miliband as “Two left-wing politicians who don't understand anyone who wants to get up and get on, anyone who want a better life for their family, anyone who want to create wealth, and start a business, and create jobs, and leave something to their children.

The decision on News Corp's take-over of BSkyB has thrust Jeremy Hunt into the spotlight. The culture secretary is many Tories' bet to be the next leader of the party. Hunt is ambitious even by political standards: during the Brown bounce he canvassed opinion as to whether he should stand in the Tory leadership contest that would follow an election defeat, and has a John Major like ability to make factions in the party feel like he is one of them. Add to this, a good television manner and one can see why people think he'll go far. One of the odd things about politics is that there is no heir apparent to Cameron in the Tory party. Hague used to be considered the obvious emergency replacement. But that is no longer true.

Do head over to ConservativeHome, where Tim Montgomerie has put together a comprehensive guide to the revamped Downing Street operation. I won't spoil its considerable insights here, except to highlight this: "An analysis of papers sent to Downing Street and the Cabinet Office has revealed that just 40% are directly related to the Coalition's programme. Roughly 30% come from the Whitehall bureaucracy and another 30% from the EU." James makes the point in his latest politics column that Tory ministers are becoming more and more Eurosceptic as they face the EU in government. That pile of European directives in the in-tray must just be getting too much.

Over at Comment Central, Danny Finkelstein has written a post saying that it might not be in the best interests of the No campaign for Cameron to campaign heavily against AV. His argument is that the No campaign’s best hope is to run as a spiky, anti-establishment effort. I think this is true but that the No camp has rather forfeited this chance by appointing Margaret Beckett as its president and having a former Labour MP front its launch. If the No campaign is going to be use so many politicians as spokesmen for it, it might as well have one of the most able ones involved. Second, and most importantly, Cameron’s presence on the trail would highlight Nick Clegg’s absence.

Given that David Cameron will have a tougher fight than perhaps any postwar Prime Minister other than Thatcher, it’s a bit unfortunate that his team doesn’t like political combat. Losing to Rachel Johnson over forests last week exposed major weaknesses, and sent a message to the government’s enemies: that these guys have pretty poor political combat skills. Now word is out, the cuts protests in Liverpool today will be the first in a series of challenges. Cameron, too, is stung by the avoidable mistakes of the last few weeks – and is reshaping No.10 to account for them. Some changes are great, some less so, others downright worrying. Here's my overview: 1. The Big Society. Cameron has started from first principles.

Now here’s a shock: something to trump the relentless tedium of the Cricket World Cup. The AV referendum. Labour MP Jim Murphy held his constituency surgery in a large supermarket today and it was well attended, but no one asked about the referendum. Murphy ruefully tweeted: ‘the public are so out of touch with today’s politicians.’ But it is odd, or at least it should be, that the nation’s second ever plebiscite has inspired only indifference; then again, electoral reform is not a subject to quicken the pulse. Even the campaigners are resigned to expect scant enthusiasm for their cause. The campaign is days old and already its emphasis has shifted from principle to personality.

A very dangerous precedent has been established today over the forest fiasco. Caroline Spelman earlier gave the most extraordinary interview on Radio 4's PM. "We got it wrong," she said in the Commons. "How so?" asked Eddie Mair. She wouldn’t say. As he kept asking her, it became increasing clear that she didn’t think they got it wrong. They conducted the U-Turn because they were losing the media war.   Really? Is that all it takes to defeat Cameron's government? A decent two-week campaign with a couple of celebs? The forest policy was a good one: why do we need state-run timber farms? Not that this argument was ever aired. They government just sat mute, and was beaten up by Rachel Johnson and her brilliantly mischievous campaign.