David cameron

On Monday, the government is set to announce its alcohol strategy. It is expected that this will call for a minimum unit price of 40p. As Graham Wilson reports in The Sun, this idea is a personal favourite of the Prime Minister but opposed by several influential members of the Cabinet. These ministers worry that it’ll be seen as the rich man taking away the poor man’s pleasure. Given the media reaction to the pasty tax and the caravan tax, this is a legitimate concern. They also fear that a successful legal challenge to it, which is a distinct possibility, would do further damage to the government’s reputation for competence.

Do pollsters and pundits actually understand how British elections work? I sometimes wonder. Take, for instance, the debate concerning whether or not supporting gay marriage might win the Conservative party more votes than it loses. The Prime Minister says there are polls that suggest it would. Not so fast, retorts ComRes's Andrew Hawkins. He argues: Your letter of 19 October 2012 to The Rt Hon Cheryl Gillan MP states that “a recent poll by ComRes found that 10 percent of current Conservative voters say that the policy [to legalise same-sex marriage] would make them ‘less likely to vote Conservative’ compared with 7 percent saying it would make them ‘more likely to vote Conservative’.

One of Britain’s leading pollsters has written to the Prime Minister to rebuke him for misleading his supporters over whether the Conservative Party would suffer in the polls if they legislated on gay marriage. The Spectator has seen an incredible exchange of letters between the Prime Minister, the former Welsh Secretary, Cheryl Gillan, and Andrew Hawkins, the CEO of the polling company ComRes. Since being sacked in September, Gillan has become one of the Prime Minister’s more vocal critics and recently slammed the government's gay marriage proposals. Responding to Gillan in a letter that was then leaked to the Pink News, David Cameron relied heavily on polling data from ComRes to claim that legalising gay marriage would make more people vote Conservative.

No government ever wants to look like it is in office but not in power. This is why this country’s inability to deport Abu Qatada is causing such concern in Conservative circles. David Cameron will be well aware of the symbolism of the issue. In his conference speech this year, he boasted that “For years people asked why we couldn’t get rid of those radical preachers who spout hatred about Britain while living off the taxpayer……well, Theresa May – a great Home Secretary - has done it – and she’s got Abu Hamza on that plane and out of our country to face justice.” Today, Cameron declared himself ‘completely fed up’ with the fact that Abu Qatada is still here.

The Prime Minister chose his words carefully earlier today when asked if he would be sending his children to private school. Sky News’ eagle-eyed Sophy Ridge reports that Cameron was cross-examined by a pesky school kid at a ‘Cameron Direct’ meeting this morning at the John Cabot Academy in Bristol. Cameron told his inquisitor that he ‘would like’ his children ‘to go to state school’, which is nearly the same thing as saying that they will do. The Prime Minister pointed out that his two children of school age - Nancy, 8, and Arthur, 6, attend state primary schools, which implies that they will continue to do so at secondary level. Only he didn’t quite say that because what he actually said was: ‘That is my intention.

We are now closer to the 2015 election than the 2010 one. We also expected by now to have the coalition’s mid-term review, the document that will set out its priorities for the second half of its term in office. But its publication has now been delayed until January. This is because the debates about what new policies to include in it are still going on. The quad—David Cameron, George Osborne, Nick Clegg and Danny Alexander—met on November 1st to discuss various ideas for it. They were, as I report in the Mail on Sunday, joined by Oliver Letwin and David Laws for this meeting with the Cabinet Secretary Jeremy Heywood also present. Dominating the meeting was ‘earn or learn’.

One issue that is in the background of nearly every political conversation at the moment is the Leveson Inquiry and how David Cameron will respond to its recommendations when it reports in the next few weeks. What Cameron does will do a lot to shape the political and media mood between now and the next election. Cameron is keen not to be seen to pre-judge the matter, hence his warning to Tory Cabinet Ministers recently to watch what they say about it, and is playing his cards close to his chest. But those close to him are well aware that there’s a danger that Miliband and Clegg—who have The Independent reveals been holding talks on the matter—will come out almost immediately for what Leveson proposes. This could leave the Prime Minister looking isolated.

Will David Cameron be denied his veto moment after all? Brussels sources appear to think the European Union budget summit on 22 and 23 November could still be cancelled. A report from Italian wire service ANSA quotes one source saying 'everything indicates that it will be impossible to overcome the British veto' and that cancelling the summit remains an option. This follows reports recently that Angela Merkel was threatening to cancel the summit as it was pointless if Britain was going to veto any increase above one in line with inflation. The German Chancellor had a lengthy dinner with Cameron to discuss the summit on Wednesday night, but their talks haven't stopped the European rumour mill.

The Prime Minister goes on a mid-morning talk show and is forced to respond to a list of alleged paedophiles that the presenter has taken off the internet. If you put this in a political satire, it would be dismissed as far-fetched. But that is what happened when David Cameron went on This Morning. No-one is disputing the seriousness of the allegations involved. But does anyone really believe that the best way to uncover the truth is for the Prime Minister to be handed a list of names that a TV presenter has taken off the internet? Another concern about the coverage of this scandal is the terms that are being used. As no media organisation is confident enough to publicly name any living individual, we instead see suspicion being cast on whole groups of people.

Team Cameron, as my colleague James Forysth points out, are rather pleased with Obama’s victory. Downing Street’s finest have been pushing the idea that Barack Obama’s victory speech echoed, word for word, Cameron’s constant refrain that ‘we are all in this together’ and that the 'inherited economic mess' is slowly being overcome. Dave the Statesman, don’t you know? Obama has his admirers on the Opposition benches, as we know. The Labour Party was out in force at the two biggest victory bashes in central London last night: CNN’s opulent shindig at One Mayfair and the tackier affair at the US Embassy.

David Cameron is using his Middle East tour to remind Gulf States about the tremendous threat Iran’s nuclear ambitions pose to the region. This was something he touched on yesterday in Abu Dhabi during a questions and answers session with students, but expect it to form a very substantial part of his discussions with the Saudis today. After the Israelis, no one is more perturbed by the idea of Iranian nuclear arsenal than Saudi Arabia. The House of Saud worries about Iranian influence expanding into the Gulf and is unlikely to watch such a development with passivity. Rather than develop their own, the Saudis will simply buy one from Pakistan sparking a nuclear arms race in the region. Qatar and Egypt will quickly develop their own programmes.

Nick Clegg and David Cameron still can't agree over the future of the boundary review, and their continuing stalemate led to legislation on individual voter registration being shelved indefinitely in the House of Lords. An amendment to the Electoral Registration and Administration Bill tabled by Labour's Lord Hart and backed by Lib Dem Lord Rennard would have delayed the changes until 2018 - in line with Nick Clegg's pledge of revenge this summer that the review be delayed until after the 2015 election. The problem is that Cameron didn't know about the amendment until his staff read about it on Paul Waugh's blog, and he apparently lost his rag with Clegg as a result.