Conservative party

Friday

Peter Hoskin

Darling enters election mode

There must be something about stepping back onto Scottish soil that invigorates Alistair Darling, because his Edinburgh speech is one of the most political and confrontational he has delivered for some time.  Sure, Darling is a Labour man, so it’s part of his job to oppose the Tories.  But, compared to his Cabinet colleagues, he’s normally so restrained about it.  Here, though, the gloves are well and truly off. The Chancellor calls Cameron a “real risk to Scotland’s future,” and throws in a dash of Thatcher-baiting (“The Tories … are as out of touch now as they were 30 years ago”).  But, really, there are two passages worth dwelling on,

James Forsyth

There is a massively important principle at stake in Northern Ireland

The Times continues its attack on the Tory policy of trying to field candidates in Northern Ireland today. In its leader on the subject, it declares that the Tories should abandon their efforts and that this is relatively easily done as ‘there is no great ideological cause at issue.’ This is wrong. There is a massively important principle at stake here, a party that aspires to govern the United Kingdom should run candidates in all parts of it. To put it another way, the people of Northern Ireland deserve a chance to vote for the Tories. David raises some valid points about the problems the alliance between the Tories and

Fraser Nelson

The social, moral, and economic case for smaller government

Ten days on and Danny Finkelstein still seems to be upset with me for my Keith Joseph lecture, where I said the Tories risked being ensnared by Brown’s ‘investment v cuts’ rhetoric. For reasons that I’m still not quite sure of, Danny hates the idea of cuts. He may have (and I hope he didn’t) take it personally when I said it was precisely this attitude amongst the Conservatives that created the climate for the fiscal crisis Britain is now facing. Over the last decade, Brown increased spending by 16 percent of GDP (see graph below)- not only faster than any developed country, but faster than any major country of

David Blackburn

The Tories’ meddling is undermining the Unionist cause in Northern Ireland

The Times reports that Owen Paterson, the Tories’ Northern Ireland spokesman, will review the process by which the Northern Ireland First Minister is appointed – by creating a Northern Irish executive and official opposition. The prospect of what Paterson describes as a “voluntary coalition”, presumably between the Unionist parties, has the potential to keep Sinn Fein permanently in opposition. Such a coalition jeopardises Cameron’s neutrality if he becomes Prime Minister, a point that Sinn Fein will exploit. The Conservatives seek to move Ulster’s politics away from sectarianism and into the mainstream, concentrating on public services. That is a welcome aim but their means are ill-conceived, stemming from a misunderstanding of

Thursday

Peter Hoskin

The Cameroons are fleshing out the agenda which may come to define them

If you were going to craft The Most Exciting Speech Ever, then there’s a good chance it wouldn’t contain the phrase “Post-Bureaucratic Age,” and wouldn’t be delivered at the Technology-Entertainment-Design conference.  But – as James Crabtree points out in an great post over at Prospect – there are quite a few reasons to take David Cameron’s speech on post-bureacracy to the, erm, Technology-Entertainment-Design conference, last night, very seriously indeed.  Not least of which is this announcement: “A Conservative government will publish all government contracts worth over £25,000 for goods and services in full, including all performance indicators, break clauses and penalty measures. This will enable the public to root out

James Forsyth

Mandelson: Public sector will face cuts this year

Peter Mandelson gave the Dearing memorial lecture last night and in a section responding to the criticisms of the budget cuts for higher education said:   “Much of the rest of the public sector will receive similar constraints in the course of this year or soon after.” Mandleson has implied this before, most notably on Newsnight the day of the Hoon Hewitt plot. But it is a very different from the message Brown is putting out. We in the press should demand details from Mandelson about what these cuts in financial year 2010-11 might be with the same intensity that we did when the Tories said they would make in

Wednesday

James Forsyth

The separation of powers

If you want to understand what the Cameroon’s are thinking, Danny Finkelstein is essential reading. He used to work with them and he thinks like them, there is almost a mind meld between him and them.  His column today is all about why it would make more sense to actually separate out parliament and the executive and elect the head of state. I’m rather sympathetic to this point of view, but I don’t think the Tories will do anything this radical even if they talk about it in private.   One thing they might well do, though, is have ministers who aren’t members of either the Commons or the Lords.

James Forsyth

The death tax ads are the sort of hardball politics the Tories should play

I must admit to rather liking the Tory death tax ads. They are the kind of hardball aggressive politics that the Tories need to master if they are going to win this election. Are they dishonest? Well, I think in the grand political scheme of things they qualify as fair: Brown won’t rule this out and it is definitely an option Labour is considering so it is fair game. If this attack is out of bounds, then so is most of the dossier Labour produced on Tory spending plans at the beginning of the year. The other thing that really infuriates me about this whole debate is the idea that

James Forsyth

A comic tale with serious undertones

The Joanne Cash affair is the kind of story you couldn’t make up. But once you get beyond the comic details there are a few things worth taking seriously. First, CCHQ has not covered itself in glory during this episode. It was aware of the problem but rather than dealing with it, it attempted to massage the situation. If CCHQ had acted decisively, this problem could have been resolved a fortnight ago without all this publicity and damage to the party. CCHQ’s performance hardly fills one with confidence about whether or not it has done the appropriate due diligence on its candidates all around the country.   Second, it is

David Blackburn

The Tories’ dirty tactics are dispiriting but effective

This death tax levy is gutter politics at its most visceral and it’s thrilling drama. Brown’s and Cameron’s loathing for each other is pure soap opera, and they’re having a right old slanging match. I agree with Pete, it is dispiriting to see the Tories stoop to misrepresenting policies, the show-stopper in Brown’s repertoire. Together with Cameron’s personal attacks, the Tories have surrendered the high ground, but as Iain Martin notes is anyone really surprised? The Tories have been expecting, righty, Labour to fight a grubby election campaign and have decided to fight Brown’s mob with fire. Personal attacks appeal largely to those whose minds are settled, so I see

Peter Hoskin

Has that Tory poster made Brown’s job easier in PMQs?

Yesterday’s Guardian story about a potential death tax would have been perfect material for Cameron in PMQs. Even after Andy Burnham’s denials, there are still legitimate questions to be asked about it. For instance, would the government say that they will never propose the tax? And, if not, how will they pay for their social care guarantees otherwise? Fired across the dispatch box, these enquiries could have put Brown on the back foot. But now that the Tories have jumped the gun, and released that poster attacking a Labour policy which isn’t actually a Labour policy, they’ve rather limited that line of questioning. If the death tax comes up, all

Peter Hoskin

Cameron attacks tax-happy Brown

A strident interview from David Cameron in today’s Express, in which he touches on everything from inheritance tax to not, never, ever joining the Euro. It’s this passage that jumped out at me, though: “Middle Britain has had a wretched time under Labour. This Government has taxed mortgages, marriages, pensions, petrol and travel and raised national insurance and the top rate of income tax. We cannot keep squeezing hard-working families.” Why so noteworthy? Well, off the top of my head, this is the first time that Cameron has referred to the current system as a “tax on marriage”. In which case, you wonder if the Tories are planning to place

Tuesday

James Forsyth

The problem with that David Cameron ad

Labour’s new ad with David Cameron facing both ways highlights what was wrong with the Tories’ opening ad of the year, that one dominated by Cameron’s face. The Tory strategy for the election campaign has to be to try and make it into a referendum on this failed government. But that ad, which emphasised Cameron so strongly, gave Labour an opening to try and turn the election not just into a choice between two parties but into a referendum on David Cameron and Tory policy. Labour’s success in doing this is largely responsible for the Tory wobble. The contrast between Cameron and Brown does work to the Tories’ advantage. But

Peter Hoskin

The Tories’ new attack poster is Brownite politics at its worst

The Tories are keen to hammer the government over the £20,000 “death tax” story which appeared in the Guardian this morning.  And, to that end, they’ve produced the attack poster above.  According to their press release, it will appear in 18 sites across London tonight. At first glance, it’s a strong image with an equally strong message.  So what’s the problem?  Well, only the fact that Andy Burnham this morning denied the death tax claim with the words, “The Guardian story suggests a £20,000 flat levy. I’m not currently considering that as a lead option for reform.”  Sure, the Health Secretary has left himself some wiggle room – he could

David Blackburn

Some Tories are yet to repay their expenses

Bad news for David Cameron in the Standard this afternoon – several Tories have not made expenses repayments that were agreed seven months ago. After yesterday’s success, the last thing Cameron needed was a question over the effectiveness of his Scrutiny Panel, established to go “beyond the letter of the rules”, which he deemed too lenient to placate public anger. Bill Cash is the major culprit exposed by the Standard. He agreed to repay £15,000 for an unacceptable rent/mortgage arrangement, but Commons records disclose that he has only repaid the £429 he claimed on an antique desk. Although the non-compliance of Tory MPs is a problem for Cameron, this isn’t

Peter Hoskin

How should the Tories respond to those Labour guarantees?

If you’re going to take anything away from Andy Burnham’s press conference this morning – apart from his denials about a £20,000 “death duty” – it’s how heavily those Labour “guarantees” are going to feature in the election campaign.  Here we had social care guarantees, cancer treatment guarantees, waiting line guarantees, and even a new website and poster (see above) attacking the Tories for not signing up to the same guarantees.  So far as the government is concerned, it matters not that these pledges have been made before – what matters is the opportunity to draw more dividing lines across the landscape of British politics.  “Caring” versus “cruel”, as far

David Blackburn

Plenty to encourage the Tories in the Populus poll

Well, the Populus poll isn’t all good news for the Tories. As James pointed out last night, they have shed another point and Labour have regained some ground. But, as both Peter Riddell and Mike Smithson note, the Tories can still secure an outright majority on the basis of these figures. The numbers which lead the Times’s frontpage coverage are more encouraging for Cameron & Co. They show that the public are attuned to the Tories’ broad narrative. 73 percent think society is broken; 82 percent think that now is the time for change; and 64 percent believe Britain is heading in the wrong direction. After 13 years in power,

Peter Hoskin

A day to damage Brown?

Contain yourselves, CoffeeHousers.  I know that we’re all really excited about today’s Parliamentary vote on an alternative vote referendum (it is, after all, something our Prime Minister has described as “a rallying call for a new progressive politics”), but it isn’t a done deal just yet.  That “new politics” might still be put on hold. Indeed, things could get messy for Brown in just a few hours time.  You’d expect him to win the vote, what with Labour’s majority and the creeping sense that Downing St very much wants this to happen.  But even the slightest hint of a Labour rebellion, or of Lib Dem disquiet, and the story could

Monday

James Forsyth

The Tories think Brown is their most potent weapon

‘We just need to ram Gordon Brown down the electorate’s throat’ one Tory staffer said to me today when talking about how the party could get back on the front foot. The unspoken thought was that the prospect of five more years of Gordon Brown would be enough to send voters into the welcoming arms of David Cameron.    The Tories are frustrated that in the last few weeks this election has gone from being the referendum on the government to almost being a referendum on them and their plans for government. They are determined to turn the focus back onto Brown, hence Cameron’s aggressive attack on Brown this morning.

David Blackburn

If this is a suspension, what is an expulsion?

Sky’s Jon Craig’s asks one of those questions you wished you had posed: wasn’t Elliot Morley suspended already? Yes, he was, on the 14 May 2009 and with immediate effect. However, showing a fine disregard for the manner in which repeat offenders are usually treated, Labour suspended Morley again for good measure. Seeking a clarification about the initial suspension, Craig was told that Morley had been denied the ‘privileges of the PLP’. What might they be? Subsidised beer and sandwiches perchance? The rumour is that Morley was either re-instated on the quiet or had escaped in the first instance, lending more weight to the sense that Labour’s response to the