Conservative party

Enter Nick Clegg with another self-assured article for a national newspaper. A few weeks ago, it was his defence of the coalition's Budget for the FT that caught the eye. Today, it's his case for welfare reform in the Times (£). These may be arguments, about dependency and disincentives, that you've heard before – but here they're packaged in a particularly clear and persuasive way. Just what's needed as the welfare wars, between Labour and the coalition, spill back into newsprint.   Writing about the article, the Times frames it as "Nick Clegg [putting] himself on a collision course with his party" – and you can see why they might think that.

The announcement, yesterday, of Nick Boles' proposal for a Lib-Con electoral pact conveniently coincided with the opening of an election court hearing into a particularly unpleasant battle between former Labour minister Phil Woolas and his Lib Dem opponent, Councillor Elwyn Watkins. The most serious allegations against Mr Woolas, who won the seat with a 103 vote majority at the last general election, are that he deliberately lied in accusing Mr Watkins of being “in league with extremist Muslims ... and prepared to condone death threats against Mr Woolas,” and that in election pamphlets he falsely accused Mr Watkins of receiving funding from abroad.

Nick Boles proposed electoral pact (£) between the coalition partners would have a clear benefit for the Conservatives, it would make a deal between Labour and the Liberal Democrats after the next election impossible. That is quite a prize for the Conservatives. It would mean that David Cameron would continue as PM as long as the two parties between them held a majority of seats in the Commons. It is less clear what the Liberal Democrats would gain from it. Yes, it would help more of their MPs survive, but it would tie their hands ahead of another hung parliament and massively reduce their ability to claim that they are a distinct political party rather than just an adjunct to the Conservatives.

Boris’s decision to announce today that he is to run again for Mayor of London is intriguing. Many in government circles expected Boris to wait until London’s settlement in the CSR had been finalised before announcing, his candidacy was the best card he had in the negotiation. So his declaration has sparked speculation that Boris and George Osborne have come to a deal. If Boris wins, and he starts as favourite, then what he does in his second term will be fascinating and the best guide to his future plans. If we see Boris becoming an increasingly national figure and championing causes dear to the right—free enterprise, low taxes and Euro-scepticism — it will suggest that he is at some danger of being decapitated by a Frisbee.

The 8.10 Today programme slot this morning went to Nick Clegg. The programme wanted to discuss with the deputy PM the BBC’s finding that those areas most dependent on the state would be hit hardest by the coming cuts, for some reason this statement of the obvious is regarded as news. But John Humphrys, in his haste to interrupt the deputy PM, made some statements deserving of further scrutiny.   First, Humphrys suggested that the cuts will take place before Christmas. They won’t. Unlike the cuts announced in the immediate aftermath of the election, these are not in-year cuts.   Next, Humphrys claimed that the economy is at ‘stall-speed.’ But growth in the second quarter was 1.

Some day soon – unless the coalition has already lost its bottle – a bill will be introduced to 'part-privatise' Royal Mail. It has to be done. But it will be a tough sell, for four reasons. First, the market for the Royal Mail's product is shrinking. It's a big fish, but its pool is getting smaller. It carries 75 million letters a day, but that's down by 10 million just in the last five years. And 87 percent is mail sent by businesses. Apart from Christmas cards, the rest of us now correspond by email. Last year's pre-tax loss was £262m: the reality is that the business is insolvent.   Second, the Royal Mail is decrepit.