Conservative party

Given this morning's ministerial resignation, all looked set fair for an afternoon of high drama in the Commons over the EU Withdrawal Bill. In the end, though, the drama was rather quieter, with the government managing to persuade the Remainer rebels to stand down - temporarily - on the matter of a 'meaningful vote'. Chief Whip Julian Smith spent the majority of the debate buzzing about the Chamber, consulting with ministers and backbenchers and also beckoning MPs out of the room in little groups. It is since clear that Smith was negotiating the compromise that Solicitor General Robert Buckland started offering during the debate. Initially, Buckland offered the rebels 'structured discussions' on the matter.

Buoyed by its huge popularity in the opinion polls and the fact that it is managing Brexit so well, the government has decided to further endear itself to the voters by shooting hundreds of thousands of badgers. Its cull of these creatures, previously limited to a few specific areas (where it has been staggeringly unsuccessful), is to be rolled out nationwide. This, then, is what we might call a Hard Brocksit strategy and it was revealed late on a bank holiday weekend in the hope that nobody would notice. But we did notice. It is not known yet how exactly these animals will be despatched. Previously the hunters have sprinkled peanuts in the middle of a field in the dead of night and shot anything which tried to eat them. Cages have also been used.

Amid all the argument in Westminster, everyone can agree on one thing: the country is bitterly divided. The 52:48 divisions of the Brexit referendum are still there, and possibly even more entrenched than during the campaign itself. The result hasn’t been followed by a period of national healing — quite the opposite. Even the cabinet appears to be split along Leave and Remain lines. You would have to go back a quarter of a century to find a time when the two main parties were so far apart. The public, however, shows no sign of deciding which path it wants to choose. The general election resulted in a hung Parliament, and the local elections earlier this month suggest that if Theresa May went to the country tomorrow, the result would be even more inconclusive.

It’s a bit mean to accuse the Tories of cynical expectations management, as Jeremy Corbyn has just done. Their panic was quite genuine. I’ve spoken to a great many Tories over the last few weeks, and none would have been so bold as to predict today’s results. Rallings & Thrasher had expected the Tories to lose 75 seats in aggregate, and so far they’re about flat. Given the awful time that Theresa May has had recently, it’s not a bad result. It was, as Tory chairman Brandon Lewis has said, a ‘reasonable’ night. But the fact that such a close result is described as ‘reasonable’ shows how far things have deteriorated for the Conservatives.

The Home Secretary cut a solemn figure in the Commons today as she attempted to clear up the Windrush immigration mess. After a weekend of torrid headlines and claims the Home Office knew of the problem long before they acted, Amber Rudd tried to make amends. Rudd apologised again before attempting to spread the blame – claiming the current situation (by which Caribbean migrants who came to the UK between 1948 and 1973 have wrongly been threatened with deportation) was the result of successive governments introducing measures to combat illegal immigration. She acknowledged the 'unintended and devastating' impact these errors had had on the families and promised speedy compensation.

Recently, a rather agitated Tory MP came to me and asked why on earth his party wasn't talking more about pensions. It was an important message to voters, he argued, managing to stay agitated about an issue that normally sends people off to sleep. This MP thought that highlighting the importance of a sound economic policy to public sector workers' pensions would be a good way of persuading them that the Conservatives are on their side. He has a good point: the Tories could do with working out how to talk to public sector employees, given their current tendency to vote Labour, and given the importance that many of those workers place on their pensions.

Theresa May’s Home Office record is normally off limits at cabinet. But when ministers discussed the government’s strategy for reducing violent crime on Tuesday, Boris Johnson took issue with what the Prime Minister regards as one of her key legacies: the dramatic reduction in stop and search. He argued that more stop and search was needed to deal with a spike in crime. What went unsaid — but what every-one around the cabinet table was acutely aware of — was that this was the opposite of Mrs May’s approach as Home Secretary. The exchange was pointed. ‘They irritate each other,’ one cabinet minister observed to me afterwards. They also have form on these matters.

Sometimes it is the little details that tell you everything you need to know. So when, as Politics Home revealed yesterday, the chief whip meets Tory backbenchers to assuage their concerns over the transitional arrangements for the fishing industry as the UK edges its way out of the EU and tells them not to worry because, look, “It’s not like the fishermen are going to vote Labour” you know there is something deeply wrong at the heart of the government.  This, remember, is what passes for the government’s intelligence unit. And with leaders like this, who needs enemies? It is not evident whether the ignorance is more startling than the complacency or vice versa but neither appraisal reflects well on Julian Smith, the chief whip.

It's been a rough few months for the Conservatives so last night's launch of Freer made a welcome change. Cabinet ministers and MPs gathered to celebrate the new initiative intended to promote a freer society and a freer economy. Or, Liz Truss's leadership ambitions, depending which way you look at it. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury – and rising social media star – gave a lively speech at the Conrad hotel to kickstart the project. Truss entertained the crowd with anecdotes from her time as a young Conservative, plans to win over younger voters and criticism of a 'po-faced' opposition: Truss's early years: 'They don't want to be told what to do and what to think. That is incredibly important in this modern age.

Today the Conservatives gather for the party's Spring Forum. The annual two-day event is intended to rally the party as they prepare for the year ahead. However, with troublesome local elections around the corner, it won't be all cheer. Happily, the Conservatives' No 1 celebrity supporter has found the time to join them... at least in spirit. Jungle queen Georgia – 'Toff' – Toffolo has spoken to the crowd via video link: [caption id="attachment_10057312" align="alignnone" width="520"] Credit: Paul Scully[/caption] With Conservative chiefs previously blocking proposals to bring Toff into the fold, it seems that the pro-Toff wing of the party has won.

The single most important domestic policy decision that the Conservatives must take is what to do about public spending. After the snap election went so wrong last year, many Tories rushed to blame ‘austerity’. Gavin Barwell, now Theresa May’s chief of staff, said this was one of the principal reasons he had lost his Croydon Central seat. Even the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, admitted that the public was weary of the long slog to balance the books. This belief — that the public has had enough of austerity — explains why the Tories aren’t behaving as governments traditionally do.

There are many things the Conservative party needs to do before it is election fit – whether local or national. There's securing a good Brexit deal, building more homes and repairing the damage done in the snap election – to name a few. As I write in today's i paper, one of the big things brains at CCHQ are currently working on is firing up the party's campaign machine. While the Tories don't have a problem attracting party donors, they do have a problem getting people out door-knocking. One of the many missteps Theresa May made last year was catching her own party’s campaign machine off guard with her decision to call a general election.

It's fair to say that the Conservatives' attempts to use the allegations about Jeremy Corbyn's links with a Czechoslovakian spy have had mixed results. The high point came when Theresa May managed to produce a joke about blank cheques and Czechs at this week's Prime Minister's Questions, and everything else has been competing to be the low point, from Steve Baker's deeply awful interview on the Daily Politics, to Ben Bradley receiving a letter from Corbyn's lawyers. Perhaps there could have been a slightly less ham-fisted way of engaging with the story. Or perhaps it would be better for the Tory party's dignity, if nothing else, if it left these claims well alone.

Theresa May's MPs are now constantly pressuring her to come up with a 'vision' of what she wants to do, whether it be on Brexit or on the domestic front. Those who are more sympathetic to the Prime Minister's caution, though, argue that her vision is constrained by the parliamentary arithmetic. Why try something that just isn't going to get through the House of Commons? One answer would be that May wouldn't lose all that much by trying and failing than she thinks. As I wrote last week, she is currently more in danger of weakening her authority by not trying at all. But another is that the Prime Minister could work with that parliamentary arithmetic to get reforms in place using a cross-party consensus.

It's not a good sign when a party finishes the week with MPs making the same complaints as they did at the start. Yet that is where the Conservatives are now, with the malcontents still fretting that there is no sense of vision or authority from the leadership. One thing that has changed is that the Tory party now seems rather more noticeably split over how MPs should be behaving. There is the camp who say, either privately or publicly, that Theresa May should go because things are only going to get worse under her leadership. But then there are others who are furious with anyone agitating for a change at the top, whether publicly or privately, because they think it is making everything far worse than it should be.